8'11 BERGEN COUNTY, NEW JERSEY I COMPREHENSIVE PLAN . { ( 1'-
SEWER FACILITIES Final Report
REPORT Nol2 June I 9 70
County Planning Board, County of Bergen, New Jersey BERGEN COUNTY, NEW JERSEY
COUNTY COMPREHENSIVE PLAN REPORT
SANITARY SEWER FACILITIES - FINAL REPORT
The preparation of this report was financially aided through a Federal grant from the Urban Renewal Adminis tration of the Department of Housing and Urban Development, under the Urban Planning Assistance Program authorized by Section 701 of the Housing Act of 1954, as amended.
The remainder has been financed by local funds and by an appropriation of the State of New Jersey as part of the Cooperative Governmental Planning Program.
REPORT NO. 12 June, 1970
BOARD OF CHOSEN FREEHOLDERS PLANN I NG BOARD FRANK A. BUONO, JR., DIRECTOR JAMES R. SUTPHEN, CHAIRMAN WILLIAM D. McDOWELL, DEPUTY DIRECTOR WAL TER MARUT BERNARD A. SCHWARTZ, VICE-CHAIRMAN WILLIAM D. McDOWELL JUNE M. CLARK HARRY RANDALL, JR. F. WILLIAM BALLOU, SECRETARY MATTHEW J. BINDER FRANKLIN H. COOPER KEVIN J. McDERMOTT FRANK A. BUONO, JR. JOSEPH A. CARUCCI HENRY L. HOE BEL VICTOR M. WILLIAMS EDWARD R. RANUSKA FREDERICK W. BRANDT
prepared by ELAM AND POPOFF ENGINEERING ASSOCIATES GLEN ROCK, NEW JERSEY
COUNTY PLANNING BOARD, COUNTY OF BERGEN
29 Linden Street, Hackensack, New Jersey SUMMARY OF REPORT
INTRODUCTION
The accelerated growth of population, commerce and industry is rapidly leading to the emergence of Bergen
County as the most populous county in the State. The
County Comprehensive Plan was initiated to provide orderly, logical and economically sound development within the
County. An essential element of such a plan is the estab lishment of adequate facilities for the collection and disposal of sewage from within the County.
PURPOSE AND SCOPE
The purpose of this study is to develop feasible alternative solutions to provide adequate sewerage facilities for all the municipalities within Bergen County for the study period (to the year 2010) and to recommend the best and most economical one for adoption by the Board of Chosen
Freeholders as a master sewerage plan.
The scope of the study includes:
1. Evaluation and analyses of existing sewerage
facilities.
2. Establishment of the future needs for wastewater
collection and disposal within the County.
3. Studies of alternate solutions to establish the
most economical and effective wastewater systems
for all municipalities in Bergen County on a
S-l multi-municipal, regional and Countywide basis, and development of General Plans for the recom mended systems, including integration of existing wastewater facilities with the proposed General Plans. DESCRIPTION OF STUDY AREA The study area investigated in this Report comprises all of Bergen County which, because of its proximity to New York City, has been classified by the Regional Plan Association as one of the "inner ring" counties which lie within a 15-25 mile radius of Times Square. Within the County there are seventy individual munici palities ranging in area from South Hackensack, covering only half a square mile, to Mahwah, which encompasses 25.7 square miles. Population densities among these municipalities show a wide variation. The rural density of 0.5 persons per acre in the northwestern portion of the County and the metropolitan density of 30.0 persons per acre in the south eastern section are clear indications of the County's diverse development character. The County contains nine natural drainage basins, excluding a small area west of the Ramapo Mountains which constitutes a part of the Wanaque River Basin. The Hacken sack, Ramapo and Saddle Rivers are the principal drainage
S-2 basins which, in combination, drain 56% of the entire
County.
Industry in Bergen County provides a primary source of employment for the northeast section of the State and is approaching the lead in the State for industrial estab lishments and employment. By far the largest number of industrial establishments are located in the southerly section of the County, roughly below Route 4. Well over half the industries and two-thirds of the employees are located in this area. The central section of the County accounts for approximately one-third of the industries and one-quarter of the employees. The northern section has sparse industry and, with the exception of the Ford Motor
Company plant in Mahwah, employs a small percentage of the work force.
Insofar as future expansion of industry, it may be considered that growth in the southern section is dependent upon development of the Hackensack Meadowlands, that the central section is exhibiting the most rapid of growth, and that the northern section, containing most of the remaining open land, has considerable growth potential.
Centers of commercial developments have occurred along the major transportation routes, primarily Route 3, 4, 17 and 46, the Garden State Parkway and the New Jersey Turnpike.
8-3 To this must be added the proposed Meadowlands develop ment which could make Bergen County the center of business second only to New York City in the metropolitan area. Such pronounced growth may only be accomplished with adequate facilities for the disposal of wastewaters. LAND USE AND POPULATION
Estimating future land use is essentia~ to the predic tion of future population, commercial and industrial develop ments, which, in turn form the basis for estimating the sewerage facilities to be required over the study period. The limiting factor to future development is the suit ability of the land in terms of topography, soil conditions, low lying lands subject to flooding and swamp areas. The Meadowlands in the southeastern portion of the County is the largest single area whose physical character istics place serious constraints on development. In fact, the primary limitation, poor soil conditions which do not permit proper surface drainage and give poor structural or pavement support, is compounded by a flat topography with less than a 1% slope. These two factors, in conjunction with the problem of tidal flooding, have resulted in impedi ments to development which have proven economically unten able until very recently when reclamation of this area for domestic, commercial and industrial use has become economic ally justified due to its strategic location in the heart of
S-4 the metropolitan area. The Hackensack Meadowlands Commis sion has an estimated projection of some 175,000 jobs being created in the Meadowlands District.
It is anticipated that the northern region of the
County, which presently has the least amount of develop ment and the least amount of physical limitations, will absorb a major portion of the County's future population growth and urban development. This region could provide the areas required for the future single family, low den sity type of development.
Population projections are necessary to insure that the design provides sufficient capacities for all potential users, during the study period, to estimate the timetable for staged construction, and also to determine the finan cial feasibility of each phase of construction.
Projections indicate that the County population will increase to approximately 1,450,000 by 2010, an increase of over 55 percent from the present population. The follow ing tabulation shows projections by County Sectors:
S-5 SECTOR POPULATION (THOUSANDS)
1970 1980 1990 2000 2010
Central 326 367 401 430 453
Northern District 145 166 187 207 227
Northwest Bergen 141 172 203 236 266
Pascack Valley 69 87 106 125 142
Southeast 121 139 154 167 175
Southwest 133 152 167 178 186
Total County 935 1,083 1,218 1,343 1,449
DESIGN CRITERIA
Sewage discharged into the major sewer system presently serving the County are recorded on a 24-hour basis. These records have been evaluated in terms of per capita flow rate to form an accurate guide in determining future flows.
In unsewered areas, which will be provided with sewers in varying stages over the next forty years, the per capita flow rate has been derived from flow rates experienced in existing systems in similar areas throughout the County.
Accordingly, the following average daily flows have been used for design of new sewerage systems:
Domestic Wastes - 100 gallons per capita per day
Industrial Wastes - 2,000 gallons per industrial
acre per day
Commercial Wastes - 1,000 gallons per commercial
acre per day
S-6 The quality of the sewage is a most important factor in the design of sewage treatment facilities. The two most important parameters are the 5 day BOD and the suspend ed solids. Based upon the State requirements, records from existing systems, design of the sewage treatment facilities includes organic 5 day BOD loading of 250 ppm and a suspend ed solids loading of 270 ppm.
Sewer Systems
The alignment of all sewers has been predicated upon the advantageous use of the natural ground slopes to pro vide gravity flow at minimum depths. The pipes have been designed to provide the carrying capacity required for the peak flows estimated for the year 2010.
Pumping Stations
Pumping stations have been utilized where the economy of the capital costs of deep gravity sewers is outweighed by the total annual costs over the design period for pumping the sewage and where the topography precludes the use of gravity sewers.
Permanent stations have been designed to remain in service for the entire study period and sized to accommodate the mechanical equipment required for the estimated 2010 flow. The initial mechanical equipment installed will have sufficient capacity to handle the estimated flow for a
S-7 ! I d 11
ALT ERNATE I (SEE PLATE 19) r ALTERNATE 2 (SEE PLATE 19)
<>
<>;, , LEGEND i EXISTING : i BERGEN COUNTY SEWER AUTHORITY SEWAGE TREATMENT PLANT i SEWAGE PUMPING STAT IO N / FUTURE SEWAGE PUMPING STATIO N
TRUNK SEWER 1 FUTURE TRUNK SEWER E XTENTIO N J FORCE MAIN / NORTHWEST BERGEN COUNTY SEWER AUTHORITY SEWAGE TREATMENT PLANT ~ SEWAGE PUMPING STATION • TRUNK SEWER FUTURE TRUNK SEWER EXTENTION FORCE MAIN CARLSTADT - EAST RUTHERFORD -RUTHERFORD JOINT MEETING SEWAGE TREATMENT PLANT Ill!! SEWAGE PUMPING STATION • I TRUNK SEWER / PASSAIC VALLEY SEWERAGE COMMISSION / SEWAGE PUMPING STATION • i TRUNK SEWER !
PROPOSED :
SEWAGE TREATMENT PLANT ~ SEWAGE PUMPING STATION • TRUNK SEWER ! FORCE MAIN---~- i RAMAPO VALLEY SERVICE AREA SADDLE RIVER SERVICE AREA 3 23 ) HACKENSACK MEADOWLANDS S ERV~E AREA ALTERNATE 1 COUNTY PLANNING BOARD, COU NTY OF BERGEN PASSAIC VALLEY SEWERAGE AUTHORITY SERVICE AREA (SEE PLATE 2 3 ) HACKENSACK, NEW JERSEY
The preparation of this report was financially olded through 0 Fed eral Qrant from the Deportment of Housing and Urban Development, under th e Urbon Plannin g Assi stance Program authorized by Section 701 of the Housing Act of 1954 as amended
The remainder has been fi nanced by lo cal funds and by an appropriation of the Slole of New Jersey as pori of the Cooperativ e Gov ernmentol Plannin g Program .
6000 0 6000 12000 18000 feet ~~-~-~-~-~~~~~~~; ~~~; ~~~I C: OMPREHENSIVE SEWERAGE STUDY \J BERGEN COUNTY> NEW JERSEY r RECOMMENDED SERVICE AREAS ~ AND m MAJOR FACILITIES EcAM AND POPOFF CD ENGINEERING ASSOCIATES MAY, 1970 period of fifteen to twenty years from the time of construc tion. All other elements including the wet well, dry well, piping, etc. will be sized for 2010 flow. Sewage Treatment Plants Records indicate that all wastes discharged to the sewers are amenable to present secondary or tertiary treat ment methods utilizing biological degradation of the organic material present in sewage. All sewage disposal plants will meet all the requirements of the New Jersey State Department of Environmental Protection and, where applicable, other agencies having jurisdiction over potable water supplies in the area. The site for each plant shall be of sufficient size to accommodate the units required for the year 2010. Initial facilities to be installed shall have sufficient capacity to treat the estimated average sewage flows for a period of 10 to 15 years after completion of construction and be readily and economically adaptable to future expansion for the average flows anticipated at the end of the study period. Each plant shall be hydraulically designed to pass peak flows of 2.5 times the average design flow without over topping or flooding any units. EXISTING SYSTEMS AND FACILITIES Approximately 80 percent of the population and 40 per cent of the land area within the County are served by 44
S-8 existing sewerage systems. The remaining 20 percent of the population, or over 180,000 people, had individual sewage disposal systems.
Nine of the 44 are major systems, with 3 regional,
2 joint meeting and 4 municipal serving all the population and, with the exception of the Ford Motor Company, all the major industry in the County. The remaining 35 have small treatment plants, generally of the packaged type, serving primarily schools, shopping centers, apartment houses, restaurants and local industries.
The presently sewered areas and jurisdictional bounda ries of the nine major systems are shown on Plate 15.
The largest service area is that of the Bergen County
Sewer Authority which has jurisdiction over 45 municipalities that lie generally in the Hackensack River Basin. In 1968, it served 32 of these municipalities, treating almost 50 percent of all the sewage generated in Bergen County.
The second largest service area is that of the Passaic
Valley Sewerage Commissioners where full or partial service is provided to 11 municipalities lying within the Passaic
River Basin. In 1968, it's facilities treated approximately
37 percent of all the sewage generated in Bergen County.
The initial sewerage facilities of the Northwest Bergen
County Sewer Authority, completed in 1968, provides full or partial service to six Northwest municipalities. Six other systems provide full or partial service to a
S-9 LEGEND BERGEN COUNTY SEWER AUTHORITY JURISDICTIONAL BOUNDARY PRESENT SERVICE AREA SANITARY SEWERS UNDER CONSTRUCTION !0W/& AREAS PLANNING a. DESIGNING SANITARY SEWERS fi~~~~~~~~~~ J NORTHWEST BERGEN COUNTY SEWER AUTHORITY i JURISDICTIONAL BOUNDARY ! PRESENT SERVICE AREA / NORTH ARLINGTON - LYNDHURST JOINT MEETING SERVICE AREA /
WOOD-RIDGE SERVICE AREA
PASSAIC VALLEY SEWERAGE COMMISSION SERVICE AREA FAIRLAWN MUNICIPAL SER VICE AREA CARLSTADT - EAST RUTHERFORD - RUTHERFORD JOINT MEETING SERVICE AREA
COUNTY PLANNING BOARD, COUNTY OF BERGEN HACKENSACK, NEW JERSEY
The preparation of this report -as finoncially aided thro uOh 0 Federal oron, from the Department of HousinO and Urban Development, under the Urban PlonnlnQ As sistance ProeJrom authorized by Section 701 of the Housing Act of 19 54 as amended .
The remainder has been financed by Iocol funds and by on appropriation of the State of New Jersey 01 part of the Cooperative Governmental Plonnin9 ProOrom.
-u r 6000 a 6000 12000 18000 feet l> 1iii1oo!~-Iiii_~-Iiii""~I;;;; __~~~t.' ___I -t COMPREHENSIVE SEWERAGE STUDY IT'I BERGEN COUNTY, NEW JERSEY PRESENT SEWERED AREAS AN D JURISDICTIONAL BOUNDARIES ELAM AND POPOFF ENGINEERH3 ASSOCIATES MAY ,"70 total of 12 municipalities in different sectors of the County.
As of January 1, 1969, the majority of the Northwest sector, about one-half of the Pascack Valley and Northern
Valley sectors and the Hackensack Meadowlands were the four major regions in the County still served by individual disposal systems.
The ensuing section, Master Plan, indicates, within the context of County-wide planning, how these systems may be maintained, modified, integrated or otherwise incorporated to assure that the needs of the entire County are met in the best and most economical manner.
MASTER PLAN
Considering the growth projections, the concepts con
cerning the design and construction of sewerage systems and
the water quality standards of the receiving streams, the
proposed regional sewerage systems to serve Bergen County
consist essentially of service areas encompassing the river
basins of the Saddle River (Saddle River project); the
Ramapo River (Ramapo River Project) i and the Hackensack
River (Bergen County Sewer Authority and Hackensack Meadow
lands District).
The limits of the proposed service areas and the major
facilities required are shown on Plate 18.
The projected average daily flows from these facilities
are summarized as follows:
S-IO PROPOSED REGIONAL SEWERAGE SYSTEMS PROJECTED AVERAGE DAILY FLOWS-MGD SUMMARY
Regional Slstem 1970 1980 1990 2000 2010
Bergen County Sewer Authroity 49.0 74.0 90.0 100.0 110.0
Hackensack Meadowlands 8.4 14.8 23.6 25.9 28.1 District (Bergen Co. Only)*
Ramapo River Project 2.5 3.8 6.2 9.1 11. 3
Saddle River Project 34.0 39.6 45.8 50.6 55.3
*Includes flows presently discharging to existing treatment facilities -
A description of each proposed system including Service
Area, projected flows, sewer system and treatment facilities follows:
Bergen Countl Sewer Authority
The service area of the Bergen County Sewer Authority covers 45 municipalities in the eastern half of Bergen
County. The greater part of the service area lies within the Hackensack River drainage basin with smaller portions falling within the Passaic River and Hudson River drainage basins. Presently, 32 municipalities are discharging sewage to the Authority's treatment plant in Little Ferry.
As shown in the preceding summary table, sewage flows are expected to more than double from the present 49 mgd to 110 mgd by 2010.
There are two major trunk sewers, the Hackensack Valley
Trunk Sewer, which is the primary trunk line in the system
S-ll 'and carries a majority of the sewage flow to the treatment plant, and the Overpeck Valley Trunk Sewer, which originates in Cresskill and conveys the sewage from all or part of nine communities in the service area. All of the future flows from the Northern Valley and Pascack Valley will discharge to the Hackensack Valley Trunk Sewer.
The adequacy of the trunk sewers has been determined by using the estimated average daily flows multiplied by a factor of 2.5 to give peak flows which were then compared with sewer capacities. On this basis, the entire length of the Hackensack Valley Trunk Sewer appears adequate for flows expected by 1990. For study period flows (2010) there appears to be a deficiency in the capacity of the
Trunk between the Northeast Branch and the Southwest Trunk.
The entire length of the Overpeck Valley Trunk Sewer will have insufficient capacity to carry the estimated 1990 flows. In addition, it appears that the 60-inch segment of the trunk, between Cedar Lane and the Cliffside Park inter connection, is in need of immediate relief since projected peak flows in the early 1970's exceed the capacities of this line.
The Authority's sewage treatment plant, located in
Little Ferry, has a design capacity of 50 mgd and a hydraulic
capacity of 2.5 times that amount. The average daily flow to the plant in 1969 was 46.75 mgd and it is estimated that
S-12 the 1970 flow will be just about 49 mgd, or near design capacity. The Authority, cognizant that average daily flows were approaching plant capacity, instructed their consulting engineers in the late 1960's to proceed with the design for expansion of this plant to 75 mgd. Upon comple tion of construction of this expansion, the plant capacity would be sufficient to handle flows expected by about 1980.
Under present regulations of the Department of Environ mental Protection, the discharge from the plant exceeds the requirements for BOD removals and residuals in the Hacken sack River.
Ramapo Valley Service Area
The proposed Ramapo Valley Service Area consists of
Oakland, Mahwah and those sections of Franklin Lakes and
Ramsey within the Ramapo River drainage basin.
The present population within the Service Area of approximately 27,600 is expected to increase to over 69,000 by the year 2010. With an expected growth of this nature it is prudent to construct sewerage facilities in stages to provide for present and immediate future (10 to 15 years) conditions with sufficient flexibility to be readily expand able to serve the 2010 needs.
Average sewage flows within the Service Area are expected to increase from 2.5 mgd in 1970 to 3.8 mgd by
1980 to 6.2 mgd by 1990 to 9.1 mgd by 2000 and 11.3 mgd
S-13 by 2010.
The proposed facilities include a primary trunk system which follows the Ramapo River from the northern boundary of Mahwah to the southern boundary of Oakland, and sub-trunk systems which follow the major tributaries of the Ramapo
River. Two alternate solutions have been proposed to dis pose of the collected sewage from the Service Area.
Alternate 1 - The trunk sewer would be constructed along the Ramapo River and would terminate at a pumping station near the southern boundary line of Oakland between the Ramapo River and Valley Road. The sewage would be discharged to a neW treatment plant to be located just south of the Pompton Lakes-Wayne municipal boundary between the Pequannock and Ramapo Rivers, a distance of approximately
2 miles from the pumping station. Plant effluent would outfall to a point below the confluence of these two rivers and also below the Passaic Valley Water Commission's potable water intake north of Jackson Avenue bridge.
Alternate 2 - The system would consist of the same pattern of trunk and sub-trunk sewers required under Alter nate I but would terminate at a treatment plant located in southern Oakland, designed for tertiary treatment, with effluent discharge into the Ramapo River just downstream of the plant.
S-14 The State Department of Environmental Protection is presently studying the entire Passaic Valley basin and will designate the location of all treatment works in the Valley, including the proposed facility in the Ramapo River drain age area. Their decision in this matter is expected in the near future.
As previously discussed, the sewerage facilities should be constructed in stages with the first stage con sisting of the initial facilities required to satisfy the sewerage needs for the next ten to twenty years after com pletion of construction. However, trunk lines, interceptors, pumping station structures and treatment plant sites are sufficiently sized to handle anticipated 2010 flows. Suc ceeding construction stages would include extending trunks and interceptors, increasing pumping capacities and expan sion of treatment facilities.
The proposed Stage I sewerage facilities for the
Ramapo Valley Service Area would consist of the Masonicus
Brook Sub-Trunk Sewer, the Darlington Brook Sub-Trunk
Sewer, a portion of the Caille and Pulis Brook Sub-Trunk
Sewer, the Ramapo River Trunk Sewer and a treatment plant designed to treat an average daily flow of 5.0 mgd. It is anticipated that these facilities would be constructed during 1972-1974 at an estimated construction cost of about
S-15 $9,400,000 for Alternate I and $9,300,000 for Alternate 2.
The tentative schedule of future stages of construc
tion to complete installation of all facilities for the
collection and disposal of the sewage generated in the
Valley for the entire study period as follows:
The Intermediate Stage, which would include expansion
of the treatment plant to a design capacity of 8.0 mgd, is
tentatively scheduled for 1990-1992 at an estimated construc
tion cost of $2,800,000. The Second Stage construction
would complete the installation of the trunk system by
extending the Caille and Pulis Brook Sub-Trunk Sewer to
Franklin Lakes and expand the plant to serve the entire
Ramapo Valley Service Area at an estimated construction
cost of $2,800,000.
Total project costs including contingencies and develop ment costs, and annual costs for both Alternates are given
in Tables S-l and S-2. Included in the Tables are estimated
costs with and without financial aid from governmental
agencies. As may be seen, there would be sUbstantial
reductions in all costs with full participation from the
Federal and State grant programs.
S-16 TABLE S-l RAMAPO VALLEY PROJECT PROJECT COST ESTIMATES
INTERMEDIATE ITEM STAGE 1 STAGE STAGE 2 Alternate 1 . Alternate 2 Alternate 1 or 2
Construction Cost $ 9,411,000 $ 9,317,000 $ 2, 8 27,000 $ 2,790,000
15% Contingencies 1,409,000 1,398,000 423,000 420,000
Total Estimated Construction Cost $ 10,820,000 $ 10,715,000 $ 3,250,000 $ 3,210,000
25% Development Allowance 2,710,000 2,685,000 810,000 800,000
Total Project Cost (Current Prices-1970) $ 13,530,000 $ 13,400,000 $ 4,060,000 $ 4,010,000
Eligible for Grants (90%) $ 12,177,000 $ 12,060,000 $ 3,654,000 $ 3,609,000
Maximum Grant (80%) 9,741,000 9,648,000 2,923,000 2,887,000
Minimum Local Share (20%) $ 3,789,000 $ 3,752,000 $ 1,137,000 $ 1,123,000
8-17 · TABLE S-2 RAMAPO VALLEY PROJECT ANNUAL COSTS
WITHOUT FINANCIAL AID
ALTERNATE 1 ALTERNATE 2
1974 1984 1994 2010 1974 1984 1994 2010
Debt Service $ 812,000 1,142,000 1,620,000 2,000,000 804,000 1,133,000 1,609,000 1,987,000 Operation & Maint. 201,000 277 , 000 509,000 664,000 279,000 404,000 505,000 658,000 Total Ann. Cost 1,013,000 141,900 2,129,000 2,664,000 1,083,000 1,537,000 2,114,000 2,645,000 Cost/mg 930 780 730 630 990 840 720 630 Cost/Service Conn. 125 100 95 80 130 110 90 80
(J) I ~ 00 WITH MAXIMUM 80% FINANCIAL AID
Debt Service 227,000 319,000 453,000 553,000 225,000 317,000 450,000 550,000 Operation & Maint. 201,000 277,000 509,000 664,000 279,000 404,000 505,000 658,000 Total Ann. Cost 428,000 596,000 962,000 1,217,000 504,000 721,000 955,000 1,208,000 Cost/mg 390 330 330 290 460 390 330 290 Cost/Service Conn. 50 40 45 35 60 50 45 35 Saddle River Service Area
In determining the extent of the Service Area for the proposed Saddle River Project consideration has been given to continued use of the Northwest Bergen County Sewer Authority's treatment plant at Waldwick to serve the Ho-Ho-Kus Brook Sub-Basin. Therefore, two service areas have been evolved result ing in two alternative solutions for the collection and disposal of wastewaters from the Project Area. The Service Area under Alternate 1 consists of the communities or parts of communities within the Saddle River and Passaic River (upstream from its confluence with the Saddle River) drainage basins, with the exception of those municipalities in the Ho-Ho-Kus Brook Sub-Basin. The Service Area under Alternate 2 includes all the communities or parts of communities within the Saddle River and Passaic River (upstream from its confluence with the Saddle River) drainage basins including those municipalities in the Ho-Ho-Kus Sub-Basin. Sewage flows, projected for the Saddle River Project on the basis of anticipated point of discharge, have resulted in dividing the Service Area into three segments: the upper reach of the Saddle River; Ho-Ho-Kus Brook Sub Basin; and the lower reach of the Saddle River presently discharging to the Passaic Valley Sewerage Commissioners system. The projected flows from each segment is given in Table S-3.
S-19 TABLE S-3 SADDLE RIVER PROJECT PROJECTED SEWAGE FLOWS-MGD SUMMARY
SECTION 1970 1980 1990 2000 2010
UPPER REACH OF SADDLE RIVER 0.2 0.3 1.8 2.4 3.4
LOWER REACH OF SADDLE RIVER 30.1 33.0 35.5 37.8 40.0
TOTAL FLOW - ALTERNATE 1 30.3 33.3 37.3 40.2 43.4
HO-HO-KUS BROOK SUB-BASIN 3.7 6.3 8.5 10.4 11.9
TOTAL FLOW - ALTERNATE 2 34.0 39.6 45.8 50.6 55.3
S-20 Alternate 1 - The proposed sewerage system consists of the Passaic River Trunk Sewer, Saddle River Trunk Sewer and wastewater disposal facilities. The Passaic River trunk will eliminate three siphons and the East Paterson
Pumping Station presently used to discharge sewage flows from the communities in Bergen County to the Passaic Valley
Sewerage Commissioners trunk system, and also relieve the
Commissioners trunk system. The Saddle River trunk would eventually eliminate the discharge of municipal sewage to the Saddle River, with the exception of the Northwest
Bergen County Sewer Authority discharge from the Waldwick plant to the Ho-Ho-Kus Brook tributary.
A pumping station, located at the downstream terminus of the two trunk lines, has been structurally and hydraulic ally sized for flows expected by the year 2010 with the initial installation of mechanical equipment sized to dis charge the flows expected by the year 1990.
After careful consideration of several alternative methods of disposing of the pumping station discharge, the two most promising were selected for further analysis.
The first consists of constructing a waste treatment plant at the confluence of the Saddle River and Passaic River and discharging treated effluent to the Passaic. The second consists of installing a force main from the pumping station and discharging the sewage on the west side of the Passaic
S-2l River into the trunk system of the Passaic Valley Sewerage
Commissioners.
Alternate 2 - The proposed sewerage system is similar to the system under Alternate 1 except that flows from the
Ho-Ho-Kus Brook basin are included. This results in a larger sized Saddle River Trunk Sewer from the confluence of Ho-Ho-Kus Brook and the Saddle River to the terminus at the pumping station, an increase in the size of the pumping station and additional treatment capacity to accommodate the increased flow.
Due to existing conditions in this Service Area, a program of staged construction was considered most feasible to reduce initial costs, make optimum use of existing treat ment facilities, provide service fo~ those communities requiring sewerage facilities at this time, while sizing the system to accommodate future flows from the upstream communities as the need developed.
Under Alternate 1, the treatment plants at Ridgewood and Fair Lawn would remain in service until completion of second stage construction.
Under Alternate 2, the Fair Lawn, Ridgewood and North west Bergen County Sewer Authority treatment plants would remain in service until completion of second stage construc tion.
S-22 The two alternates have essentially the same limits for Stage I sewer construction and similar disposal facili ties since both would treat the same quantity of sewage through the Stage I period.
Ultimate sewage flows under Alternate 2 would differ from those under AJternate 1, since they would include discharges from the Ho-Ho-Rus Brook tributary area under
Stage 2 construction.
From its outfall at the treatment facilities, located near the confluence of the Saddle and Passaic Rivers, the
Saddle River Trunk Sewer would be installed to a point in
Saddle Brook where the last manhole would be constructed with a capped stub for ready removal upon extension of the sewer under Stage 2. The trunk would be sized for the peak daily flow expected in 2010 which, under Alternate 1, would be 46.9 mgd, and under Alternate 2, 73.6 mgd.
The Passaic River Trunk Sewer will be constructed in its entirety and sized for the peak daily flow expected in
2010 of 40.0 mgd. It would be of the same size under both alternates.
The tentative schedule for Stage 2 construction calls for extension of the Saddle River Trunk from its terminus to Upper Saddle River by about 1992, to serve the remainder of the basin communities and, under Alternate 2, construc tion of the Ho-Ho-Rus Brook Trunk Sewer at that time to
S-23 receive the discharge from the Northwest Bergen County
Sewer Authority system.
Construction and project costs for Alternate lA, including the sewage treatment plant, and for Alternate
IB, including the pumping station and discharge to the
P.V.S.C. system, are given in Table S-4.
Annual costs including bond amortization and operating and maintenance costs are given in Table S-5 together with the cost per million gallons processed and estimated cost per service connection unit to assist each municipality and individual user in determining their annual costs for this service.
In a like manner, costs have been estimated for the facilities to be constructed under Alternate 2 (A and B) with the figures given in Tables S-6 and S-7.
As may be seen, the costs to be incurred by the Passaic
Valley Sewerage Commissioners for upgrading their Newark plant to provide sufficient treatment to meet regulatory agency requirements and to relieve their existing trunk sewer, where flows are rapidly approaching capacities, are undetermined. By the County constructing the proposed
Passaic River Trunk, the Commissioners trunk sewer would be relieved of some 40 mgd design flow and as a result, all communities on both sides of the River benefiting from this should participate in the costs incurred.
S-24 TABLE S-4 SADDLE RIVER PROJECT COST ESTIMATES
STAGE 1 STAGE 2 ITEM ALTERNATE NO. lA ALTERNATE NO. lB ALTERNATE NO. lA ALTERNATE NO. lB
Construction Cost $ 27,325,000 $ 9,385,000 $ 13,950,000 $ 6,450,000
15% Contingencies 4,100,000 1,400,000 2,050,000 970,000
Total Estimated Construction Cost $ 31,425,000 $ 10,785,000 $ 16,000,000 $ 7,420,000
25% Development Allowance 7,855,000 2,695,000 4,000,000 1,850,000
Total Project Cost Ul I (Current Prices-1970) $ 39,280,000 $ 13,480,000 $ 20,000,000 $ 9,270,000 N U1 Maximum Grant 80% $ 31,425,000 $ 10,780,000 $ 16,000,000 $ 7,420,000
Minimum Local Share (20%) $ 7,855,000 $ 2,700,000 $ 4,000,000 $ 1,850,000
ALTERNATE NO. lA - WITH SEWAGE TREATMENT PLANT
ALTERNATE NO. lB - PUMPING STATION & DISCHARGE TO P.V.S.C. SYSTEM TABLE S-5 SADDLE RIVER PROJECT ANNUAL COSTS ALTERNATE 1
WITHOUT FINANCIAL AID
ALTERNATE 1A ALTERNATE 1B*
1975 1992 2010 1975 1992 2010
Debt Service 2,357,000 3,941,000 5,586,000 808,000 1,497,000 2,083,000 Operation & Maint. 593,000 735,000 760,000 40,000 62,000 68,000 (j) I Total Annual Cost 2,950,000 4,676,000 6,346,000 848,000 1,559,000 2,151,000 tv Cost/mg 325 340 400 95 110 140 0"1 Cost/Service Conn. 40 43 52 10 14 15
WITH MAXIMUM 80% FINANCIAL AID
ALTERNATE 1A ALTERNATE 1B*
Debt Service 47l ,000 788,000 1,095,000 162,000 299,000 416,000 Operation & Maint. 593,000 735,000 760,000 40,000 62,000 68,000 Total Annual Cost 1,064,000 1,523,000 1,855,000 202,000 361,000 484,000 Cost/mg 115 110 120 22 26 31 Cost/Service Conn. 15 14 15 3 3 4
* Annual costs do not include charges by P.V.S.C. TABLE S-6 SADDLE RIVER PROJECT COST ESTIMATES
STAGE 1 STAGE 2 ITEM ALTERNATE NO. lA ALTERNATE NO. lB ALTERNATE NO. lA ALTERNATE No. lB
Construction Cost $ 27,855,000 $ 10,830,000 $ 21,295,000 $ 8,030,000
15% Contingencies 4,145,000 1,620,000 3,195,000 1,200,000
Total Estimated Construction Cost $ 32,000,000 $ 12,450,000 $ 24,490,000 $ 9,230,000
25% Development Allowance 8,000,000 3,110,000 6,110,000 2,310,000
Total Project Cost (Current Prices-1970) $ 40,000,000 $ 15,560,000 $ 30,600,000 $ 11,540,000 en I N -...J Maximum Grant 80% $ 32,000,000 $ 12,450,000 $ 24,500,000 $ 9,230,000
Minimum Local Share (20%) $ 8,000,000 3,110,000 6,100,000 2,310,000
ALTERNATE NO. 2A - WITH SEWAGE TREATMENT PLANT
ALTERNATE NO. 2B - PUMPING STATION & DISCHARGE TO P.V.S.C. SYSTEM TABLE S-7 SADDLE 'RIVER PROJECT ANNUAL COSTS ALTERNATE 2
WITHOUT FINAN~IAL AID
ALTERNATE 2A ALTERNATE 2B*
1975 1992 2010 1975 1992 2010
Debt Service $ 2,400,000 4,627,000 6,394,000 $ 934,000 1,848,000 2,462,000 Operation & Maint. 593,000 805,000 900,000 40,000 73,000 90,000
U) Total Annual Cost 2,993,000 5,432,000 7,294,000 974,000 1,921,000 2,552,000 I 330 315 360 105 110 125 I\) Cost/mg CO Cost/Service Conn. 40 40 35 15 15 15
WITH MAXIMUM 80% FINANCIAL AID
ALTERNATE 2A ALTERNATE 2B*
Debt Service $ 480,000 924,000 1,277,000 $ 187,000 356,000 492,000 Operation & Maint. 593,000 805,000 900,000 40,000 73,000 90,000 Total Annual Cost 1,073,000 1,729,000 2,177,000 227,000 429,000 580,000 Cost/mg 140 100 110 25 25 30 Cost/Service Conn. 15 15 10 3 3 3
* Annual costs do not include charges by P.V.S.C. Hackensack Meadowlands District
The Hackensack Meadowlands District is a mostly vacant
18,000 acre area of marshes, meadows, and salt water marshes
along the Hackensack River in Northeastern New Jersey.
The District stretches eight miles from Ridgefield to
Kearny near the point where the Hackensack River flows into
Newark Bay.
Although the urban development that surrounds the
Meadowlands is among the most concentrated in the United
States, the Meadowlands has experienced only random develop ment at its fringes and in small isolated pockets within.
The opportunities and valuable potentials inherent in
this part of the State led to the Hackensack Meadowlands
Reclamation and Development Act of 1968. Under this Act,
administration and planning of future development in the
Meadowlands is vested with the Hackensack Meadowlands
Development Commission.
All lands within the District have been classified
into Planning Areas or Development Areas.
The Planning Areas contain approximately 10,000 acres
and were delineated as such primarily because of their large
size, the uncertainty of future land use and because they
are practically undeveloped at the present time.
All other District acreage outside the designated
S-29 Planning Areas have been classified as Development Areas.
It was felt that present land-use options of the Commission could not be realized in this particular part of the Meadow lands because its proximity to the surrounding developed property has predetermined the land use character.
Sewage flows for the study period have been estimated for the District and are divided into the various sections within the Headowlands and the contiguous communities as shown on Table S-8.
A major, centrally located water pollution control facility should be provided to receive all wastewater from the residential, industrial and commercial establishments to be constructed in the District during the ensuing years, plus presently sewered areas uncommitted to any other regional wastewater treatment facility.
The facility may be constructed in stages with the initial stage to be installed at the earliest possible time to accept sewage flows from the presently sewered areas.
Succeeding stages would be constructed as required to accommodate future development in the District.
Several alternative solutions have been analyzed and the following three are considered the most feasible for the disposal of sewage from the Meadowlands District.
S-30 TABLE S-8
HACKENSACK MEADOWLANDS DISTRICT PROJECTED AVERAGE DAILY FLOWS-MGD
SECTION 1970 1980 1985 1990 2000 2010
Bergen County
(l)B.C.S.A. 2.40 5.00 6.30 7.70 8.80 9.50 (2 ) N . A . - L-J . M. 1.50 2.30 3.00 3.35 3.55 3.70 (3)C.-E.R.-R.-J.M. 3.45 5.00 6.45 6.60 6.75 6.90 (4) C . &E . R. S . A . 1.00 2.50 4.20 4.40 4.90 5.55 (5) Meadowlands ----1.25 1.50 1.85 2.45 Sub-Total 8.35 14.80 21.20 23.55 25.85 28.10
Hudson County
North Bergen 2.00 3.00 4.00 4.25 4.50 4.75 Secaucus 0.50 2.00 2.50 3.00 3.50 4.00 Meadowlands 2.00 6.00 7.00 9.00 11.30
Sub-Total 2.50 7.00 12.50 14.25 17.00 20.05
TOTAL 10.85 21.80 33.70 37.80 42.85 48.15
(l)Bergen County Sewer Authority (2)North Arlington-Lyndhurst Joint Meeting (3)Carlstadt-East Rutherford-Rutherford Joint Meeting (4)Carlstadt and East Rutherford Sewer Authorities (Presently discharge to B.C.S.A.) (5)Undeveloped Area
8-31 Alternate 1 - Treatment Plant and Outfall to the Hackensack River
The treatment plant should be built in stages with the initial stage designed to accommodate the flows from the presently sewered areas in, or contiguous with, the District with sufficient land and major hydraulic elements, such as the outfall, pipes, channels, etc., sized for flows antici- pated by the year 2010. A description of the treatment plant facilities is not included herein since this area is presently under study by the Commission and their report will include a detailed description of the elements of the plant.
Alternate 2 - Pumping Station and Discharge to the Passaic Valley Sewerage Commissioners System
This alternate contemplates a main pumping station which will accept all the sewage and pump it through a force main to the treatment and disposal works of the Passaic
Valley Sewerage Commissioners in Newark.
The feasibility and economics of this scheme would be greatly enhanced if the new treatment plant under study by the P.V.S.C. becomes a reality. This plant would be loca- ted in the vicinity of the border between Clifton and
Passaic and sized to accommodate the future flow from the area in the Commissioners jurisdiction above this point.
Construction of this plant could relieve the trunk sewer
S-32 downstream and the existing treatment plant in Newark to
the extent that sufficient capacity would be available to allow Meadowlands District flow to discharge to the system, without the construction of additional trunk facilities.
It should be noted that an act of the legislature would be required to accomplish this solution since the sewage is generated outside the Passaic River Basin and the
jurisdiction of the Commissioners.
Alternate 3 - Pumping station and Discharge to the Bergen County Sewer Authority System
This alternate contemplates a main pumping station which will accept all the sewage and pump it through a force main to the Bergen County Sewer Authority treatment and disposal facilities. In this case, the facilities of the Authority would have to be substantially increased to accommodate the anticipated flow from the District during the study pericd.
In considering the alternate solutions for treatment and disposal of the wastewaters from the District no attempt has been made to estimate the costs since it is the intent of this analysis to indicate the degree of the pollution problem in the Meadowlands District and to sug- gest feasible alternate solutions to cope with it. Being a very special section of the Metropolitan area, lying within the borders of two counties, practically undeveloped
S-33 due to extremely poor soil conditions and subject to tidal flooding, determination of the best and most economical solution of its sewerage disposal problems are justly a special study and beyond the scope of this Report.
ADMINISTRATION
The Service Area of the Bergen County Sewer Authority should be operated as at present with the Authority perform- ing all administrative functions.
The Hackensack Meadowlands Service Area should be administered by the Hackensack Meadowlands Development
Commission.
The Authority method is considered the most favorable for implementation of the Regional sewerage systems for the
Saddle River and Ramapo Valley Service Areas and the Board of Chosen Freeholders should consider one of the following
,--~ entities for the administration of the Ramapo Valley Pro- ject and the Saddle River project:
1. Two new Authorities be created; the Ramapo Valley
Sewer Authority and the Saddle River Sewer Authority.
Under this scheme, the existing Northwest Bergen County
Sewer Authority would be dissolved.
2. Expansion of the Northwest Bergen County Sewer
Authority's present jurisdictional boundaries to include all the municipalities in the Saddle River Service Area
S-34 with the exception of those participants in the Passaic
Valley Sewerage Commissioners system.
3. Creation of the Ramapo Valley Sewer Authority
(this would require the Northwest Bergen County Sewer
Authority to release those municipalities in the Ramapo
Valley Service Area presently in its jurisdictional bounda
ries) and the inclusion of all the municipalities in the
Saddle River Service Area in the Northwest Bergen County
Sewer Authority, with the exception of those participants
in the Passaic Valley Sewerage Commissioners system.
4. Other combinations of the above.
It is our opinion that the proposed projects are sound
engineering solutions to the pollutional problems in the
Ramapo River and Saddle River basins and that the final
selection of the administrative mechanisms to operate
them should be made by the Board of Chosen Freeholders
after consultation with their legal advisors because of
the ramifications involved in dealing with the political
and quasi-political agencies owning and operating the
existing facilities in the affected areas and possible
deletions, amendments and additions to the laws as pre
sently written regarding these agencies.
The design and construction of local and lateral sewer
systems can be best undertaken at the Township, Town or
Borough level. Local systems require management and opera tion that are separate from that of the regional systems.
S-35