caldwell county regional water and wastewater planning study

More documents

Recommendations

Info

2. The Martindale Regional Facility Area – This service area willinclude Martindale and the area west of Lockhart. It is expectedthat this segment of SH 130 will bring development and growth.3. The Luling Regional Facility Area – This service area will includeLuling and the area north of Luling. This service area will alsoinclude the portion of Caldwell County that is in the San MarcosDrainage Basin.4. The Peach Creek Regional Facility Area – This service willinclude the Peach Creek Drainage Basin areas in Caldwell County.This area is not expected to develop at significant rates. This areawas established in this study for the purpose of providing a facilityin every drainage basin represented.13.5 Wastewater Collection System OptionsRegional facilities and decentralized systems, which include package treatmentfacilities and OSSF’s, were considered in the evaluation of wastewater treatmentfacilities. The recommended facilities were based on:1. Population projections developed in this study2. Wastewater return flows were based on 150 gpcd of water3. 68% return flow rate4. Wastewater treatment would be provided for 100% of population5. Service plan does not include individual connections (lateral)13.5.1 On-Site Sewage Facilities (OSSF) / Septic SystemsUpon evaluation of septic systems use in the county, septic systems were notconsidered to be an appropriate alternative to serve a growing community.Installation of these systems in an already impaired watershed could prove to beKlotz Associates Project No. 0972.000.000January 201013-6Caldwell County Regional Water and Wastewater Planning StudyFinal Report
more costly financially and environmentally in long-term planning. Discharge ofthese systems cannot be monitored and evaluated on a regular basis to ensure thedischarge meets standard requirements. Homeowners, in most cases, are notconcerned or aware of problems until the issues become visible. Remediationefforts due to the contribution of failing OSSF’s are unnecessary if appropriateplanning measures are implemented to limit these systems. Larger lot sizes andbuffer zones can decrease the loads imposed by OSSF.Development of more stringent ordinances and preferences should be establishedto regulate private sewage facilities. The county has a position to take on thesesystems in areas expected to develop. Provisions need to be made for privateowners in isolated rural areas that are not planning to develop the property and arenot within 300 feet of a sewer line.13.5.2 Regional Treatment FacilitiesRegional treatment facilities have traditionally been implemented in regionalplanning efforts. Economies of scale have been the motivating factor for the“bigger is better” selection rationale. Larger treatment facilities do provide costeffective solutions for wastewater treatment. Communities typically have anexpectation of safer and better quality standards due to the municipal oversight.Federal regulations and funding have also been oriented toward centralizedcollection and delivery of point source discharges.The regionalization of wastewater systems for the county does provides thebenefit of minimizing the number of decentralized systems, including OSSF.Minimizing the number of point source discharges have the additional benefit ofensuring regulation and monitoring by municipalities or river authorities.13.5.3 Decentralized Treatment FacilitiesMultiple treatment facilities within a service area can be described asdecentralized systems. The Turner Crest WW treatment facility is an example of aKlotz Associates Project No. 0972.000.000January 201013-7Caldwell County Regional Water and Wastewater Planning StudyFinal Report
Page 1 and 2:
CALDWELL COUNTY REGIONAL WATERAND W
Page 4 and 5:
C O N S U L T I N G E N G I N E E R
Page 6 and 7:
Page 8 and 9:
Page 10 and 11:
Page 12 and 13:
Page 14 and 15:
Page 16 and 17:
flows without impacting environment
Page 18 and 19:
viable for Caldwell County are wate
Page 20 and 21:
parameters and needs. For purposes
Page 22 and 23:
SECTION 1INTRODUCTION1.1 Background
Page 24 and 25:
A Grant Application for a Regional
Page 26 and 27:
1.4 Participants and SponsorsThe Ca
Page 28 and 29:
SECTION 2CALDWELLL COUNTY CHARACTER
Page 30 and 31:
Construction for segments 5 and 6 o
Page 32 and 33:
Watershed and Peach Creek Watershed
Page 34 and 35:
2.4 Certificates of Convenience and
Page 36 and 37:
Klotz Associates Project No. 0972.0
Page 38 and 39:
GRAPH 2-1Lockhart, Texas Monthly Av
Page 40 and 41:
Page 42 and 43:
Page 44 and 45:
water quality in the county. Finall
Page 46 and 47:
SECTION 4GROUNDWATER4.1 Groundwater
Page 48 and 49:
efore 1953. Deterioration in water
Page 50 and 51:
loose sand. The sand tends to be fr
Page 52 and 53:
4.3 Groundwater Conservation Distri
Page 54 and 55:
Page 56 and 57:
support the efforts of PCCD. The di
Page 58 and 59:
SECTION 5SURFACE WATER5.1 GeneralSu
Page 60 and 61:
GRAPH 5-1Caldwell County Total Surf
Page 62 and 63:
GRAPH 5-2TWDB- Caldwell County Hist
Page 64 and 65:
SECTION 6POPULATION6.1 Population P
Page 66 and 67:
GRAPH 6-1TWDB Population Projection
Page 68 and 69:
GRAPH 6-3Texas State Data Center Po
Page 70 and 71:
TABLE 6-2Planning Study Population
Page 72 and 73:
Page 74 and 75:
7.1.2 City of LockhartThe City of L
Page 76 and 77:
Neiderwald. The service area in Cal
Page 78 and 79:
purchase capacity of 6.0 MGD. The a
Page 80 and 81:
Lockhart. The plant is capable of d
Page 82 and 83:
In 1994 GBRA began operating the Ci
Page 84 and 85:
7.3.5 Sweetwater Utility, LLCSweetw
Page 86 and 87: TABLE 8-1Caldwell County - TWDB His
Page 88 and 89: Municipal water demand projections
Page 90 and 91: applicable. A “P” in the Region
Page 92 and 93: the modified TSDC Scenario 1.0, sho
Page 94 and 95: GRAPH 8-3Caldwell County Survey Res
Page 96 and 97: GRAPH 8-4Caldwell County Yearly Wat
Page 98 and 99: espectively from the information pr
Page 100 and 101: TABLE 9-6Caldwell County Projected
Page 102 and 103: 10.3 United States Environmental Pr
Page 104 and 105: 10.4.3 Source Water ProtectionSourc
Page 106 and 107: 10.6.1 E.coli PotentialIt is estima
Page 108 and 109: TABLE 10-4Estimated Loadings from U
Page 110 and 111: Klotz Associates Project No. 0972.0
Page 112 and 113: The proposed GBRA Mid-Basin Project
Page 114 and 115: 11.1.3 Lower Guadalupe Water Supply
Page 116 and 117: the maximum available groundwater f
Page 118 and 119: An ASR is a viable solution. Ground
Page 120 and 121: The water conservation strategy is
Page 122 and 123: SECTION 12REGIONAL WATER PLANNING12
Page 124 and 125: TABLE 12-2Caldwell County Water Sup
Page 128 and 129: 12.3.2 DistributionThe water will b
Page 130 and 131: 12.4 Water System Cost EstimatesVar
Page 132 and 133: 300272GRAPH 13-1Caldwell County OSS
Page 138 and 139: decentralized system providing sewe
Page 140 and 141: Unfortunately, the simplicity of O&
Page 142 and 143: associated costs. Efficient and fun
Page 146 and 147: 14.3 Water Quality Concerns and Sou
Page 148 and 149: wastewater plant return flows. The
Page 150 and 151: 14.6 Recommended Load ReductionsLoa
Page 152 and 153: 14.7.2 Water Quality Development Or
Page 154 and 155: 14.8.3 Vegetative Filter StripsVege
Page 156 and 157: Use constructed wetlands to capture
Page 158 and 159: 14.12 Implementation Recommendation
Page 160 and 161: Type II reclaimed water is defined
Page 162 and 163: Pollutant loading to streams from e
Page 164 and 165: Future growth in Caldwell County wi
Page 166 and 167: 14.12.4 OSSF Annual Inspection and
Page 168 and 169: Water Quality Monitoring Program -
Page 170 and 171: execute strategies. Local, state, a
Page 172 and 173: the environment. Funding for the pr
Page 174 and 175: the watershed organizations should
Page 176 and 177: water or groundwater to meet future
Page 178 and 179: Mid-Basin Project and associated fa
Page 180: C O N S U L T I N G E N G I N E E R
Page 191 and 192:
APPENDIX B
Page 193 and 194:
APPENDIX B0 / ?% '(0 ;6 ) , 6
Page 195 and 196:
APPENDIX B ) ) ) B C * (
Page 197 and 198:
APPENDIX B &# ! % 44' # (0 5#
Page 199 and 200:
APPENDIX B # %# '(=. )1. )@. )
Page 201 and 202:
Page 203 and 204:
Page 205 and 206:
State WellNumber6702902670290567029
Page 207 and 208:
Page 209 and 210:
Page 211 and 212:
Page 213 and 214:
Page 215 and 216:
Page 217 and 218:
Page 219 and 220:
Page 221 and 222:
APPENDIX EThe tables presented in t
Page 223 and 224:
APPENDIX EWaterUserGroupTABLE 7PROJ
Page 225 and 226:
APPENDIX ERules of the Gonzales Cou
Page 227 and 228:
APPENDIX EAVERAGE QUEEN CITY OR SPA
Page 229 and 230:
Historical Water Use Summary by Cou
Page 231 and 232:
Historical Water Use Summary by Gro
Page 233 and 234:
Page 235 and 236:
UseCodePriority DatePriority Month,
Page 237 and 238:
CountyName1 = Anderson 52 = Crane 1
Page 239 and 240:
WRNoWRTypeWRSeqAPPENDIX GTCEQ SURFA
Page 241 and 242:
APPENDIX HWATER CONSERVATION MEASUR
Page 243 and 244:
APPENDIX HWater Rate StructureAn in
Page 245 and 246:
APPENDIX HLeak Detection and Repair
Page 247 and 248:
Page 249 and 250:
APPENDIX I• The cities of Kyle, L
Page 251 and 252:
Page 253 and 254:
Management MeasureSeptic System Ins
Page 255 and 256:
Outreach ActivityAgricultural Progr
Page 257 and 258:
APPENDIX KWhereas the parties to th
Page 259:
Page 265 and 266:
RESPONSE TO WRITTEN COMMENT BY JOHN
Page 267 and 268:
APPENDIX MCaldwell County Regional
Page 269 and 270:
Page 271 and 272:
Page 273 and 274:
Page 275 and 276:
Page 277:
APPENDIX NTEXAS WATER DEVELOPMENT B
Page 282 and 283:
APPENDIX NKlotz Associates, Inc.Res
Page 284 and 285:
APPENDIX NKlotz Associates Response
Page 286:
show all

caldwell county regional water and wastewater planning study

Create successful ePaper yourself

Delete template?

Save as template?