1 / 25

LCWD Board Meeting January 14, 2014 1680 Carneros Avenue, Napa

Los Carneros Water District. LCWD Board Meeting January 14, 2014 1680 Carneros Avenue, Napa. Today’s Presentation. Present the Recommended Project – Then and Now Discuss the Modeling Effort Present the Preliminary and Final Design Scopes and Status

oneida
Download Presentation

LCWD Board Meeting January 14, 2014 1680 Carneros Avenue, Napa

An Image/Link below is provided (as is) to download presentation Download Policy: Content on the Website is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use and may not be sold / licensed / shared on other websites without getting consent from its author. Content is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use only. Download presentation by click this link. While downloading, if for some reason you are not able to download a presentation, the publisher may have deleted the file from their server. During download, if you can't get a presentation, the file might be deleted by the publisher.

E N D

Presentation Transcript


  1. Los Carneros Water District LCWD Board Meeting January 14, 2014 1680 Carneros Avenue, Napa

  2. Today’s Presentation • Present the Recommended Project – Then and Now • Discuss the Modeling Effort • Present the Preliminary and Final Design Scopes and Status • Discuss Construction Management Expectations • Present Next Steps

  3. Alternative 5 Future was the Recommended Project • Served majority of District/acreage – 5,619 ac • Lowest cost alternative • Addressed most severe groundwater area – Los Carneros Ave. • Eliminated District storage and pumping • Incorporated a water management strategy

  4. Alternative 5 Future Pipeline Route

  5. September 2012 Changes: • SCWA/SVCSD will be sending recycled water to the Napa Marsh and some parcels within District boundaries for a limited time • This change affected just over 1,000 acres • New project definition: Parcels connecting to the SCWA pipeline are removed from the LCWD system, lines are resized for the reduced demand • Alt 6A was the updated recommended alternative • Now, it’s a modified Alt 6A

  6. Alternative 6A Selected by the LCWD Board in December 2012

  7. Alternative 6A – Then…

  8. Basis of Design – Now…

  9. Irrigation Assumptions

  10. Hydraulic Design Criteria

  11. Hydraulic Model Demonstration

  12. Preliminary Design Scope • Finalize Alignments (Carollo) • Surveying (Mountain Pacific) • Potholing (Nielson Construction) • Geotechnical Investigation (RGH) • Corrosion Investigation (JDH Corrosion) • Funding Summary Assistance (Carollo) • Environmental Services (Bowker and Brown)

  13. Survey Status (Mountain Pacific) • Topographic Surveys are Complete • Utility Surveys are Complete • Resolved datum conflicts between new survey and Stanly Ranch topography.

  14. Potholing Status (Nielson Construction) • Potholing Activities are Complete • RW Pipeline will be crossing: • Two 26” Steel High pressure Gas lines • One 24” Steel High pressure Gas line • Two 16” Steel High pressure Gas lines • One 12” Transmission Gas Main

  15. Geotechnical Status (RGH) • Geotechnical Borings are Complete • Soil Testing is Complete • Draft Geotechnical Report Delivered – to be considered mainly for pipeline design and installation conditions.

  16. Corrosion Investigation Status (JDH) • Chemical Analysis is Complete • Draft Corrosion Report Delivered • Soils are severely to mildly corrosive – this was expected

  17. Environmental Status (Bowker and Brown) • Initial Study and Mitigated Negative Declaration (IS/MND) – released Dec 2013 • Publically noticed for 30 days: Dec 19 – Jan 21 • Review on line at District’s web page and Napa County Library • To date: 1 Comment Letter received from Caltrans – traffic and encroachment

  18. Funding Status • Submitted 2 of 4 SRF low interest loan packages – general and technical (1/10/14) • Financial, and environmental packages to follow next • Last year grant funds were available too and distributed among the loan applicants – no additional application is needed • When the financing is approved, the SWRCB staff also look at grant funds available and apply what they can

  19. Construction Management Considerations/Expectations • Only one buried utility - gas • River Crossing – have obtained the bridge drawings from the County • Culvert Crossings – will develop a few standard details • Consider environmental considerations • Pavement considerations

  20. Historic crossing should use raised depth crossing

  21. Culvert crossings will require a combination of deep undercrossings and concrete encasements

  22. The contractor needs to be maintain responsibility for utility coordination

  23. Protecting trees will be a potential issue for the contractor

  24. Final Design/Next Steps • Develop preliminary plans, specs, details (75% complete) • Design Coordination w other Agencies (NSD, SWRCB, County, etc) • ROW Acquisition/Permitting assistance • Funding application assistance • Bid Phase services • Timing: Jan – May 2014

  25. Thank You! Questions…

More Related