EXHIBIT Q2
AVONDALE'S ACT 537 PLAN (BOOK 2) ACT 537 PLAN BOROUGH OF AVONDALD CHESTER COUNTY. PENNSYLVANIA
SBWAGE FACILITIES PLAN FINAL DOCUMBNT
MAY 1999 Revised APRIL 2000
rvith .Approval Correspondcncc from Chester County Plannin g Commission Chester County Hcalth Dcpartment, the Memorandum of Understanding rvith DEP regarding florys and tlre DEP Approval letter and Rela ted Correspondcn ce
SSM File No. 5685-005 Copyright(2001)Spous, Stevens and McCoy, Inc. Prefacc
Approval Correspondencc follorving thc April 2000 Submittal:
Chcstcr County Planning Commission lctter of Junc 19,2000 - Chcstcr County Hcnlth Dcpartment letter of June 2712000 $'. :i " Mcmornndum of Understnnding dated Dccembcr 19, 2000 regarding Servage Florvs, ^ rvith Resolutions of Acceptance from Avondale llorough and New Garden Township DEP Approval of the Act 537 datcd March 9, 2001, and related correspondence. Ttr{E CT-,T]NTY GF CFlf,STER COMMISSIONERS: PLANNING COMMISSION Kare4, L. Martynick, Chairman Government Services Center, Suite 270 Colin A. Hanna 601 Wesuown Road Andrew E. Dinniman P.O.Box 214'7 West Chester, PA 19380-0990 6t0-344-6285 WILLIAM H. FULTON, AICP FAX: 610-344-6515 Executive Director June 19,2000 JU$l A:r Mr. Robert McCue, President 6'{ tr Avondale Borough Council P.O. Box 250 Avondale, PA 1931I 't ' i'-'x::l$ "" "s1' Re: Boroush of Avondale Act 537 Plan
Dear rVlr. McCue:
The Chester County Planning Commission has rerriewed the revised Draft 537 Plan dated April 2000. The revisions in this draft were in response to comments received by the Borough from the various reviewing agencies including the County Planning Commission to your initial submission of a draft Plan in February 1999.
In our leffer of April 19, 1999, we raised two major issues regarding the initial draft: one, regarding the manner in which the estimated fuh.re capacity needs were determined; and two, the consideration of altemative disposal solutions "outside" the boundaries of the Borough.
In reviewing of the document and the accompanying cover letter from Spotts, Stevens and McCoy, Inc., we aclcrowledge that those two issues have been considered and included in the revised Plan. We also aclanowledee that our several other more technical comments have been addressed, as well.
We are pleased to see that there have been discussions befween Borough and London Grove Township officials regarding the possibility of sending some of the effluent from your lreafment facility to the Township's spray system if it is expanded in the future. We encourage you to continue this discussion. Should the Township and the Borough wish to pursue this approach, such a project would be eligible to apply to the Counfy for a grant to assist in the purcbase of land to be used for spray fields.
Thank you for the opporfunity to revicw this rcvised draft Plan. If you have any questions regarding these comments, please do not hesitate to call us.
, Futtnn, AI{,f Director
WHF/WWC/kp cc: Glenn Stinson, PADEP Ralph DeFazio, Chester CounFy Health Dept. Rebecca Brownbeck, Borough Council Secretary Thomas Srnith, P.E., Spotts, Stevens lnd McCoy, Inc. THE CUT]NTY OF Ctr1ESTER
Karen L. Martynick, Chairman 601 Westtown Road, Suite 2gg Colii A. Hanna P.O.Box 2741 Andrew E. Dinniman West Chester, PA 19380-0990 FAX: 610-344-5934
SewageAVells 610-344-6526 Certified Food Manager 61C344-5938 Food/Insti tution 6 10-344-6689 Solid Waste Mgr./Recycling 610-344-5937 Laboratory 610-344-@39 Weights & Measures/Consumer Affairs 6 t0-34rt_6150 En gi neeri n g/Public Warer 610-344-6231
June 27, 2000
IvIr. Robert McCue s' Avondale Borough Cor.rnc il r$\3$ e Avondale, Pa. l93l I
RE: Borough of Avondale Act 537 Plan
Dear lvlr. McCue:
The Chester County Health Department has reviewed the draft Act 537 Plan noted above. ffis draft is dated May 1999, revised April2000, by Spotts, Stevens and McCoy. This Department on April 20,2000 received a copy of this draft plan
Essentially, this draft revision addressed the comments. from all'reviewing agencies after . submission of the original draft, The Chester County Health Department is satisfied with the response and has no objection to the approval of this version of the plan.
Thank you for the opportunity to review this final draft.
Environmental Health Superviso r
CC: CCPC PADEP I Thomas R. Smith, P.E., Spotts, Stevens and McCoy/ File \ ORIGINAL RESOLUTTON NO. 00-12-03 (Non-Legislative)
AVONDALE BOROUGH CH ESTER COUNTY, PENNSYLVANIA
A RESOLUTION OF THE BOROUGH OF AVONDALE, GHESTER GOUNTY, PENNSYLVANIA, ACKNOWLEDGING AND ACCEPTING A PROPOSED MODIFICATION TO AVONDALE BOROUGH'S ACT 537 SEWAGE FACILITIES PLAN DATED MAY 1999 AND REVISED APRIL 2OOO.
WHEREAS, Avondale Borough prepared and submitted to the Commonweatth of ;
Pennsy|vaniaDepartmentofEnvironmenta|ProtectionanAct537SewageFaci|itiesP|andated
u, May 1999, revised as of April 2000; and
WHEREAS, after April 2000, additional flow data dealing with average and peaking flow factors to Avondale's Wastewater Treatment Plant became available to Avondale Borough; and
WHEREAS, this additionaldata can supplement Figure V-1 following page 44 in Avondale I
Borough's Act 537 Sewage Facilities Plan; and ,
WHEREAS, on December 5, 2000, representatives of Avondale Borough and the !
Commonwealth of Pennsylvania Department of Environmental Protection met to discuss this additional data and, after such discussion, a "Memorandum of Understanding'was prepared by
Thomas R. Smith, P.E. of Spotts, Stevens & McCoy, on behalf of Avondale Borough; and
ClCorel\omco7\AVONOALF\ORClAcl537 ResDluliondoc WHEREAS, a copy of the afore-referenced 'Memorandum of Understanding" is attached
to this Resolution as Exhibit "A" and incorporated by reference; and
WHEREAS, the ''Future Maximum Monthly Flow" as stated in that Memorandum is identified
to be 650,000 gallons per day, and the "Future Annual Average Flow" as stated in that
Memorandum of Understanding is stated to be 500,000 gallons per day; and
WHEREAS, Avondale Borough deems it in its best interest to modify the Act 537 Plan which
it has submitted to the Commonwealth of Pennsylvania Department of Environmental Protection
in accordance with the "Memorandum of Understanding" attached as Exhibit'A'.
NOW,THEREFORE, this lgthdayof December2000 itis hereby RESOLVEDthatAvondale
Borough, Chester County, Pennsylvania, accepts as a modification to its Act 537 Sewage Facilities
Plan the "Memorandum of Understanding" attached to this Resolution as Exhibit ?", subject to the
condition that the "Memorandum of Understanding" is also accepted by the Commonwealth of
Pennsylvania Department of Environmental Protection.
BE lT FURTHER RESOLVED, that a copy of this Resolution, as certified by the Secretary
of Avondale Borough shallbecome partof Avondale Borough'sAct 537 Plan dated May 1999, as
revised April 2000, and as further amended by this Resolution.
ADOPTED this 19'n dav of December 2000,
ATTEST: AVONDALE BOROUGH COUNCIL
BY; ANN C. BUSH, Avondale Borough Avondale Borouoh Council
C iicr'rl',Olf ce7\qVOtJOAt FiOQi)1.4.,15:17 R.nDlLrli.n ($. ,RESOLUTION T{O. 5C{
WHEREAS, the Borough of Avondale prepared a Sewage Facilities Plan which incorporates substantial input from the Supervisors of New Garden Township regarding present and future flows originating in New Garden Township; and
WHEREAS, the Board of Supervisors adopted Resolution Number 493 on June 12, 2000 endorsing the Sewage Facilities Plan; and
WHEREAS, the Sewage Facilities Plan was officially submitted for review to the Department of Environmental Protection by letter dated June 28, 2000 prepared by SSM acting in its capacity as engineer for the Borough of Avondale; and
WHEREAS, the Department of Environmental Protection has completed a preliminary review of the submission and has raised certain questions regarding the basis for computing present and future flows; and
WJIEREAS, {ufr4g a meeting held on of Envirortmorttal F.iolection, the Borough ng flowswasdiscussed at length and an un
WHEREAS, in concert with that understanding the flow analysis and computations were revisited and revised to reflect the approach decided upon at said meetingi and
WHEREAS, the revised flow figures must be incorporated officially in the Sewage Facilities Plan.
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED that the B adopts as an amendment to the Sewage Facilities Plan I explanation contained in a MEMORANDUM OF UND by reference which sets forth among other things the facility as 500,000 gpd and the maximum monthly flow has been revised to include the cost of expanding the maximum monthly flow and said analysis is attached h is hereby adopted by the Board of Supervisors for inco
This RESOLUTION shal I take effect immediately.
Dated: January 9,2001
NEW GARDEN TOWNSHIP BOARD OF SUPERVISORSI
ley, Jr..
Norman S. Nunn
I, Joan F. Kellcher, Secrctary of New Garden Townslrip, hcreby certify that the foregoing is a tnre and con'ect copy of RESOLUTION NLMBER ao5 adopted this 9th day oiJanuary, 2001 by Lhc Boirrd of Superv'isors of New Garden Townshin.
A]"fES1': SEAL: F. Kelleher, Secretaty " MEMORANDUM OF IJNDERSTANDING BOROUGII OF AVONDALE ,., ACT 537 PLAN MAY 1999, REVISED APRIL 2OOO
This memorandum is issued following a meeting with the Department of Environnrental Protection Water Management on December 5, 2000, where the average and peaking factors regarding flows to the treatment plant were discussed.
Additional flow data has become available to supplenrent Figure V-1, following page 44 in the Act 537 Sewage Facilities Plan. That Figure recommended an expansion to 0.5 MGD, with continuing infiltration / inflow corrections to take care of peaking flows beyond 0,5 MCD.
WASTEWATER FLOWS AT AVONDALE, AND THE TERMINOLOCY CONCERNING A PLANT EXPANSION IS TO BE CLARIFIED AND AMENDED AS FOLLOWS:
Flows under consideration in tlris memorandum are from January 1996 to September 2000. Please refer to the attachment for the flow rates for this period. The ratio of the average 3-month mariimum to annual average flow rate has been determined to be 1.3 as shown during the period 1997 and 1998. Because of a diversion of flows by New Garden from Avondale on August 21, 1998, the more current flows during 1999 and 2000 are being qsed to determine a treatrnent plant base flow upon whiclr to base a plant expansion. The terminology regardiug plant flows wiJI be defined as follows:
Current Annual Average Flow 346,000 gal per day (2000 data) Three Month Max Peaking Factor L3 (1997-98 data) Current Maximurn Monthly Flow 450,000 gal per day " (346,000 x L3) Future Additional Average Flow 200,000 gal per day (Act 537 plan) Future Maximum Monthly Flow 650,000 gal per day (500,000 x 1.3) Future Annual Average Flow 500,000 gal per day (650,000 / 1.3)
The basis of design of the various components of the Wastewater Treatnrent Plant will be in accordance with tlre Domestic Wastewater Facilities Manual (copy attached) as follows;
Desiqn llow Parameter Flow Rate Aoplication
Annual Average Flow 500,000 gal per day Act 537 Plarrning NPDES Allowable rnass loading
Maxirnurn Monthly Flow 650,000 gal per day Overall hydraulic Design Chapter 94 Hydraulic Capacity. Monthly average flow (NPDES)
/L- /f. tr
EXHIBIT h 2x ! Avondale WWTP Expansions Pennvest'Cost Opinion Pre-Design Design Construction Total TRS 12-12-00 Administrative $ 2,000 $ 1,000 $ 3,000 Legal $ 4,000 $ 6,000 $ 10,000 Financial/Accounting $ 10,000 $ 12,000 $ 22,000 Interest ($1, 1 20kx5% at 1 l2l $ 8,000 $ 20,000 $ 28,000 Engineering Planning (Act 537) not elig. $ Pr+Design Services $ 2,000 o 2,000 Design' $ 90,000 q 90,000 Bidding' $ " 6,000 c 6,000 Construction Services' $ 34,000 $ 34,000 Surveys (part of design) " Inspection 12,000 s 12,000 *a 1:4;q+#6rirs2iE:itq::$e'i;*r"t6*tq ';k;r"' PefmitS .iii:;g;*#r a;1;il*{}:*v,rirk.4 i:.+?!a.,*- 4F.Mn,{-Fdir-?id.i#i!a{i;qii4*+..rir;iSnEi
Construction $, 830,000 $ 830,000 Contingency 83,000 $ 83,000 , Other (intermun negotiations) Totals $ 18,000 $ 117,000 $ 985,000 $ 1,120,000
1,120.000 Avondale Sewage Facilities Planning prepared 3-21-00 (added Exp#3 12-12-O0l Expansion #1 Expansion #2 Expansion #3
Wastewater Treatment P lant 140000 gpd expansion 200000 gpd expansion 350000 gpd expansion Construction Costs $ 600,000 $ 670.000 $ 830,000 Project Ccsts $ 810,000 $ 904,500 $ 1,120,500
Sewer lnfiltration/lnflow Corrections MH31-'16;MH3-70 MH31-14;MH3-66 Normal Maintenance Construction Costs $ 265,000 $ 168,000 0 Project Costs $ 318,000 $ 201,600 0
Costs 1 1,106,100 1 120,500 Total Project $ ,128,000 $ ," $ ,
ll' Wastewater Treatment Plant Pennvest; 3.5% at 25years 49,143 $ 54,876 $ 67.981
Avondale at 95,000, or 68% 33,417 Nerv Garden at 45,000, or 32% q 15,726 i: Avondale at 155,000, or 77.5o/o 42,529 New Garden at 45,000, or 22.5Yo 12,347
Avondale at 305,000, or .B7Yo 59,143 New Garden at 45,000, or .13oh 8,E37
Sewer l/l Corrections Pennvest: 3.5% at 25 years c 19,293 $ 12,231 'o
Total Avondale Annual Share + 68.436 $ 67,107 $ 59,143 Total New Garden Annual Share + 15,726 $ 12.347 $ 8,837
Avondale Unit Cost at 400 EDU $ 171 I 168 $ 148
Note: Expansion #3 to provide treatment for Max Monthly Flow qf .550MGD
: ' 555 North Lane 19428
€*'-r, *'-'i"^"' :.-, ".- " 6l 0-832-6130 ,ri ./ Fax: 610-832-6133 "116*."..,." I,."".'
Rei, Act 537 Plan Update .{PS Id. 45845, AUTH Id.48260 Avondale Borough New Garden Township Chester County
Dear Ms, McAleer:
. We have completed our review of your municipality's updated of,Ecial sewage facilities plan entitled "Act 537 Plan, Borough of Avondale, Chester County, Pennsylvania, Sewage Facilities Plan" as prepared by Spotts, Stevens, and McCoy, [nc., dated May 1999, and supplanental information dated August 6,1999, October 6,2000, and January 18, 2001, The review was conducted in accordance with the provisions of the Pennsylvania Sewage Facilities Act.
Approval of the Plan is hereby granted.
The Plan provides for the upgrade and expansion of the Avondale wastewater treatment facility from 300,000 gallons per day annual average flow to 500,000 gallons per day annual average flow. The allocation of this expanded treatment capacity is 281,750 gallons per day for Avondale Borough and 218,250 gallons per day for New Garden Township.
The Plan's primary source of funding is PennVest. The cstimated cost of the upgrade and expansion is $1,120,500.00, The Plan's implementation schedule indicates completion of conskuction by March 2003. The secondary source of funding indicated is a combination of upfront tapping fees and conventional loan or municipal bond issue.
_\ L/1 An Equrl Opportuniry Employer www.dep.state.pa.us Printed on Rc If you have any questions, please contact John M. Veneziale of this office. Sincerely, Chester County Plaming Commission Chester County Health Deparhent New Gard€nTownship Spotts, Steve,ns and McCo%Inc. Government Specialists, trno. Mr" Veneziale Ms. Moore Ms. Crrant Planning Section Re 30 vi ronmental Protection Lee Park, Suite 6010 555 North Lane $;; Conshohocken, PA 19428 ,,44,? 01 2Dl/ Southeast Regional Office 610-832-6130 Fax: 610-832-6133 Ms. Joan F. Kelleher, Secretary l'lAR.1 2 2ri0l New Garden Township !' I r:'V,'--itlSi 8934 Gap Newport Pike -,lO'i1S, ,-. rr, ! Landenburg, PA 19350 .,1:l S.dcCtili; ird')r' ,i :l *1q ? ';:4; i 4 Y-'d'L;t';' Re: Act 537 Plan Update APS Id. 45845, AUTH Id. 48260 Avondale Borough New Garden Township Chester Countv Dear Ms. Kelleher: We have completed our review of your municipality's updated official sewage facilities plan entitled "Act 53ll Plan, Borough of Avondale, Chester County, Pennsylvani4 Sewage Facilities Plan" as prepared by Spotts, Stevens, and McCoy, Inc., dated May 1999, and supplernental information dated August 6,1999, October 6, 2000, and Jaauary 18, 2001. The review was conducted in accordance with the provisions of the Pennsylvania Sewage Facilities Act- Approval of the PIan is hereby granted. The Plan provides for the upgrade and expansion of the Avondale wastewater treaknent facility from 300,000 gallons per day annual average flow to 500,000 gallons per day arurual average flow. The allocation of this expanded treatment capacity is 28 1,750 gallons per day for Avondale Borough and 218,250 gallons per day for New Garden Township. The Plan's primary source of funding is PennVest. The estimated cost of the upgrade and expansion is $1,106,100.00. Thc Plan's inrplernentation schedule indicatcs cornpletion of construction by March 2003, The secondary source of funding indicated is a combination of upfront tapping fees and conventional loan or municipal bond issue. /-;: r\,-/r' An €qurl Opportuniry Employer wlwv,dep.s t.r te.pa. us Pnntrri r:n Rrycled P,rper if/ Ms. Kelleher . -2- t!f,t 0 .t it:;t If you have any questions, please contact John M. Veneziale of this office. Sincerely, cc: Chester County Planning Commission Chester County Health Departnent Avondale Borough Spotts, Stevens, and McCoS Inc. Government Specialists, Inc. Mr. Veneziale Ms. Moore Ms. Grant Planning Section Re 30 SSM March 13,2001 Mr. John M. Veneziale Pennsylvania Department of Environmental Protection Lee Park, Suite 6010 555 North Lane Conshohocken PA 19428 Re: Act 537 Plan Update APS ID. 45845, AUTH ID.48260 Avondale Borough and New Garden Township Chester County, PA SSM File 5685-005 Dear John: Thank you for your letter of Approval of the Act537 update submitted on behalf of both Avondale Borough and New Garden Township, but please allow me to clarify the project cost matter on the letter to New Garden Township,'and further to explain the'cost allocations between '' the municipalities. The total estimated cost of the upgrade and expansion is $1,120,500, as conectly indicated in your Avondale approval letter. This cost was rounded to $ 1,120,000 in the Pennvest Application, since all costs therein were rounded to the nearest thousand. The Act 537 Cost Table comparing three expansion scenarios shows the cost distributed to the two municipalities on the basis of flow. In all cases, New Garden lbwnship had requested 45,000 gal per day of the expansion, with the remainder being for Avondale. In the selected expansion of 350,000 gal per day, the New Garden share is l3%, and the Avondale share, at 305,000 gal per day, is 87%. This equates to $145,000 as New Garden Township's share, and $974,400 as Avondale Borough's share. The Cost Table "bottom line" shows this as annual costs to Avondale and New Garden at $59,143 and $8,837, respectively. At this point in the project time-line, all costs are best estimates, with presumed construction bids, an eqnivalent loan arrangement for both municipalities, and an assumed 3.5Yo project funding rate and a25 year length of borrowing period. Spotts, Ste.rens and lvlcCoy. Jnc. 3-11 Pl; \\lyor.rissirrq Bcrrlevlrd P,O- 3trx i:.iC7 il,:;rdirlg PA l9trl0 0-lQ7 tel: t:lll62l ZCO') f,rv:5 0 i/u 6i50 Oliires irr Ichrlh V,illry ,lrid Rcadjrlq; l)A ) March 13,2001 Page2 Iohn M. Veneziale SSM File 5685-005 Ifyou have any questions, please feel free to call. Very7^* truly yours, Thomas R Smith, P.E. Senior Project Manager torn.sm ith(@Ssm eroup. co m cq*, Borough of Avondale James J. Marlowe, II, Esq. Government Specialists, [nc. t"i..M: :1 '! j'- lll 1' BOROUGH OF AVONDALE CHESTER COUNTY,,PENNSYLVANIA . " ACT 537 SEWAGE FACILITIES PLAN TABLE OF CONTENTS INTRODUCTION TO THE APRIL 2OOO REVISION Project Schedule Resolutions of Adoption L PreviousWastewaterPIanning'..,,,,|.$,']-.|1Jl1:.'},''i''J...J''}'.':!l\..t'*r3|.1,!.'*.'g!f!':-"i!r..''?y,|};i;}5+.f','|:4?$i|'i}"}$x II. Physical and Demographic Analysis Using Written Description And Mapping...... 6 n. Existing Sewage Facilitigs in Planning fu€8or'..**ro'.o.r+""?!,'.r.,f...r-^o,r?,{.r.crrr).e:.a.:t:rr:r:,alrr*.rrnr;r.i}rsro"r*n'..o....1 6 ry. Fufure Growth and Land Development ,...... r.'..in.rN*.rf ii.+r.!.rrj.!i?e*.ei:.r4{.,*}Frr..s xsws=.*vtttttt-t+y-az;*26 V. Identifr Altematives To Provide New Or Improved Wastewater Disposal Facilities ...... ,...... 44 VI. EvaluationofAltemativeS....'...... 'rii;.lir.i''it.i9']iaii9}ir>..l:i!qiy.+?;!r'|i:..);:.;ci1.,a'it..i!5.-*:ii'.f;i'3f3.i7'!ii{r-&i;*.3i!-; vu. Institutional Evaluationj;*r{iri[,.iaris*,rr.;.*r*!{itr;**,ilr;i.{;jir;iijiir.ilirrj}+i.n;i;.;ri./i 69 vn. Justification For Selected Technical and Institutional Altematives"nr,.;.,,,r.r;i4i:;;.{+:.i i;ir ';:i*+et74 BOROUGH OF AVONDAIE CHESTER COUNTY. PENNSYLVANIA . ',.. ACT 537 PLAN APPENDICES LIST Appendix No, Contents I Zoning Map 2 Land Resources Map 3 Water System Map 4 "' Water Resources Map 5 Sewage Collection System Map 6 Process Flow Diagram 7 Existing Land Use Map 8 Protected Municipal Lands Map 9 Vacant Parcel Analysis l0 New Garden Township Sewage Collection System Map l1 New Garden Township Flow Data 12 New Garden Township Zoning Map l3 New Garden Township Public Sewer Service 14 Conespondence and Comment on the April 2000 Revision ' 15 Proof of Public Notice ACT 537 SEWAGE FACILITIES PLAN BOROUGH OS'AVONDAT,E CHBSTER COUNTY, PENNSYLVANIA INTRODUCTION TO THE APRIL 2()OO REVISION The April 2000 revision to the Avondale Act 537 Plan of May 1999 was prepared to address review comments by New Garden Township, the Chester County Planning Commission and Health Department, and the Department of Environmental Resources. This Revision differs from the May 1999 Edition in the following areas: 1. Evaluation of Infi ltration/Infl ow Information gathered during the year 1999 on treatment plant flows indicated that the May 1999 recommended expansion of 120,000 gallons per day was based on an overly optimistic projection of infiltration/inflow corrections made in 1998. Early in 1999, flows were back above 300,000 gal. per day, and they did not go significantly lower until the summer drought of 1999. Tropical storm Floyd caused a peaking weekly average in September of 407,000 gallons per day, following which the flows again continued above the 300,000 gal. per day level. This edition of the Facilities Plan recognizes the difficulty in removing infiltration inflow, and compares altemate plant expansions of 140,000 and 200,000 gallons per day with applicable levels of infiltration/inflow removal. These proposed levels of treatment plant expansion are based on actual flows during 1999. 2. Gromh in Avondale Borough A survey of vacant lots in Avondale was performed, and is included in this edition. It has been determined that an approximate 31,000 gallons per day can be expected from future growth, as compared with the 33,000 projected in the May 1999 edition. a Financial Planning This edition of the plan describes PennvesL as the preferred funding source. Following a meeting with Pennvest at Avondale in November 1999, it is now believed that their interest in this project, along with the influx o[ funds from the Crowing Greener initiative, demonstrate that this is the best way to fund a wastcwater treatment project in Avondale. An alternate sourcc of funding would bc thc privatcly placed rnunicipal bond issue. ii 4. Spra.I- Inigation Although spray inigation was not selected as the treatment altemative, there have been initial discussions with London Grove Township engineers on a possible long-term spray inigation solution. Viability would depend upon the treatment requirements of the receiving stream. A possible future solution to a capacity issue may be sharing treatment plant capacity with London Grove for access to spray inigation fields. 5, A separate volume for Plant Capacity Study, Toxics Reduction Evaluation Report, and r.aw data from Infiltration Reportt , These reports, which were included as Appendices in the May 1999 Edition, remain ; available upon request, but have not been included in this Edition for ease of mailing, t handling, and review 6, A revised project schedule has been prepared and is included on the following page. April I1,2000 Thomas R. Smith, P.E, tv Avondale Wastewater Treatment Plant Expansion Project Schedule prepared 3-21-00 Submit Amended Act 537 Plan to DEP, and Other Reviewers 15-Apr-00 Receive DEP and other approvals of Act 537 Plan 15-Aug-00 Meet with DEP and Submit Part 1 NPDES for increased flow 15-May-O0 Receive Part 1 NPDES Permit 15-Sep-00 Request Pennvest L.N,P,and Begin Project Design '15-Sep-00 Submit Water Quality Mgt. Part 2 Application 15-May-O1 Apply for Pennvest Funding 15-May-01 " Receive Pennvest Fundinq 15-Jul-01 Receive Part 2 Construction Permit 15-Aug-01 Advertise for Bids 01-Sep-O1 Receive Bids, Evaluate, and Award for Constr. 0 1 -Feb-02 Begin Construction 1S-Apr-02 Complete Construction 1 5-Feb-03 Begin Operations of Expanded Facility 15-Mar-O3 RESoLUTToN No. oA - 05 - o I RESOLUTION FOR PLAN REVISION RESOLUTION OF THE COUNCIL OF**&n4Ale* BOROUGH (city), Chester COUNTY, PENNSYLVANIA (hereinaft er "the municipal ity"). WHEREAS, Section 5 of the Act of January 24, 1966, P.L. 1535, No.537, known as the "Pennsylvania Sewage Facilities Act," as amended, and the Rules and Regulations of the Department of Environmental Protection (Department) adopted thereunder, Chapter 71 of Title 25 of the Pennsylvania Code, requires the municipality to adopt an Official Sewage Facilities Plan providing for sewage services adequate to prevent contamination of waters and/or environmental health hazards with sewage wastes, and to revise said plan whenever it is necessary to meet the sewage disposal need of the municipality, and WHEREAS, Spotts. Stevens and McCov. Inc. has prepared a which provides for a sewage facilities in a portion of Avondale Borough, and The altemative of choice to be implemented is and expansion of the wastewater plant from 0.3 mgd to 0.5 med. The key implementation activities/dates are WHEREAS, Avondale Borough finds that the Facility Plan described above conforms to applicable zoning, subdivision, other mruricipal ordinances and plar:s and to a comprehensive program of pollution control and water quality managenrent. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED that the Council of the Borough of Avondale hereby adopt and submit to the Department of Environmental Protection for it.s approval as a revision to the "Official Plan" of the municipality, the above referenced Facility Plan. The municipality hereby assures the Department of the complete and timely irlplementation of the said pliur as required by law. (Section 5, Pennsylvania Sewage Facilities Act as amcnded). I, Secretary, Borough l, herdbf 'certify oing is a true Resoltrtion No. ,CT{J' OS - o l adopted AU'IHORIZED SIGNATURE -) 7i':, l<_- lV, -.___ ' fi ":, (1 .1 t'\-,., I' RESOLTJTION NO. RESOLUTION FOR PLAN REVISION WHEREAS, Section 5 of the Act of January 24, 1966, P.L, 1535, No. 537, known as the "Pennsylvania Sewage Facilities Act",- as "amended, and the Rules,and Regulations of the Department of Environmental Protection (Department) adopted thereunder, Chapter 71 of Title 25 of the Pennsylvania Code, requires the municipality to adopt an Official Sewage Facilities Plan providing for se\\'age services adequate to prevent contamination of water and/or environmental health hazards associated with sewage wastes, and to revise said plan whenever it is necessary to meet the sewage disposal needs of the municipality, and WHEREAS, Spotts, Stevens and McCoy, Inc. has prepared on behalf of the Borough of Avondale, with input from New Garden Township, a Sewage Facilities Plan dated May 1999 last revised April 2000 which provides for sewage collection and treatment facilities to serve the Borough of Avondale and an allocation of treatment capacity in said facilities to serve portions of New Garden Township, and WHEREAS, the selected alternative to be implemented is expansion of the existing wastewater treatment facility from its present capacity of 0.3 mgd to 0.5 mgd in order to adequately treat and dispose of current and future volumes of sewage originating in both Avondale Borough and New Garden Township, and MIEREAS, the key implementation activities and dates are described in the Sewage Facilities Plan including a completion date of March 15,2003, and WHEREAS, the Sewage Facilities Plan describes current sewage flows and the allocation of present and future sewage treatment capacity between the Borough of Avondale and New Garden Township as well as the allocation of costs between the two municipalities with respect to construction of the expanded waste water treatment facility, and WHEREAS, the Supervisors of New Garden Township find the Sewage Facility Plan described above confionns to applicable zoning, subdivision, other local ordinances and regulations and to a comprehensive progranr of pollution control and water quality nlanagenrent as each of the foregoing relate to New Carden Township. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED that the Supervisors of New Garden Township hereby endorse and adopt the aforesaid Sewage Facilities Plan with respect to the interests of New Garden Township set fortlr tlierein and concur rvith submission of the Servage Facilities Plan by the Borough of Avondale to the Department of Environmental Protection for its revierv and approval as the Official Sewage Facilities Base Plan Update Revision of New Garden Township with respect to those geographic areas within New Garden Township described in said Sewage Facilities PIan which now are or in the futurc nray be served by the Avondale Borough waste water treatment facility. I, Joan F. Kelleher, Secretary .of New Garden Township, hereby certify that the loregoing is a true copy of RESOLUTION NUMBEF. 't'f Z adopted this l2tr'day of June, 2000 bv tlrc Board of Supcrviso.rs of Ncrv Cardcn Township, ? A'TTEST: StrALl Kelleher, Secretary .,. !, vl I INTRODU"CTION I. PRE\4OUS WASTEWATER PLAI{NING .- .! .. '".;A '; Avondale Borough has completed individual planning studies for past projects at its wastewater treatment facility, but an Act 537 Plan has never been completed. Following is a compilation of other relevant studies that have been completed. A. Identify and briefly analyze all existing wastewater planning, l" Has been previously undertaken under the Sewage Facilities Act (Act 537). As indicated above, there have been several planning activities related to wastewater management in Avondale Borough. Not all of these were necessarily based on Act 537 planning, but, they all addressed wastewater management in and around Avondale Borough. . The Chester County Water and Sewer Master Plan (1970) This 1970 document was compiled to provide a guide for the future of Chester County water and sewer systems. This County plan was also designated to serve as the Act 537 Plan for any municipality which elected this option. It has so served as Avondale Borough's Act 537 Plan since 1970. The plan used a very thorough analysis of many factors that affect plaruring on a countywide basis, Some of these factors included: population, economy, land uses, transportation and utilities. The plan also addressed the counfy's geology, soils (reviewed for limitations on on-lot systems), surface water, water pollution control facilities, and implementation and administration. Avondale Borough is mentioned as being the designated treatment facility for its own wastewater, as well as that from a portion of New Garden Township. . New Garden Township's most recent Act 537 Plan also designates Avondale Borough as the facility for treatment of wastewater flows from the southwest portion of the Township. 2. Has not been carried out according to an approvcd implcmcntation schedulc contained in thc plans. This section does not apply since Avondalc Borough has not previously comnleted an Act 537 Plan. 3. Is anticipated or planned by applicable server authorities Avondale Borough has been under a sclf-imposed moratorium for sewer connections since 1988 because of"recurring excessive flows beyond the NPDES permit for the wastewater treatment facility. The facility is permitted for 300,000 gpd, but that limit has been exceeded on arl arurual average basis for a number of years. New Garden Township has also, as an interim measure, diverted flow from Avondale to a newly constructed wastewater plant - their "East End" plant. Therefore, no wastewater planning has been completed by either municipality with respect to allowing new sewer connections. 4. Has been done through official plan revisions (planning modules) and addenda. Because of the existing moratorium on sewer connections, no planning modules are being accepted for processing by the Borough. A limited number of modules are being accepted from New Garden Township, as allowed by DEP, to partially re-establish the flows directed to the East End facility. B. Idcntify and Bricfly Summarize All Municipal and County Planning documents Adopted Pursuant to the Pennsylvania Municipalitics Planning Code (Act 247) Avondale Borough: This plan was adopted in 1993 and sets forth recommendations for providing for open space and recreation and preserving environnrental resources r.vithin the Borough. Avondale Borough: Zoni q g _O-r.dinance The Borough first adopted a zoning ordinance in 1963, Since that time, the ordinance has been amended several times with the most recent change being adopted in 1987. The ordinanc€ was extensively zunended and revised in 1996 to incorporate the protection of environmentally sensitive areas rvithin the Borough. Avondale Borough: Subdivision and Land Development Ordinance Thc Borough first adopted a subdivision eLnd land dcvclopment ordinance in 1976. Extensive amcndments ard revisions to this ordinancc r.vcre adoptcd in 1996, Avondale Borough: Comprchensive Plan 'fhe Comprehcnsive Plan is a guideline for future devclopmcnt of land in thc Borough, with provision for community facilities and a traffic circulation system. The Comprehensive Plan is comprised of a statement of Community Development Objectives, which are goals for future development within the Borough; a Land Use Plan;.,a Communi.ty Facilities Plan; a Circulation.Plan; a plan for meeting the housing needs of present and future residents of the Borough; a statement of the interrelationships among the plan components; a discussion of short and long-range plan implementation strategies; and a statement indicating the relation'ship of existing and proposed development of the Borough to development and plans in adjoining municipalities, to the objectives and plans for development in the county, and to regional trends. These components of the Comprehensive Plan are mandated by the Pennsylvania Municipalities Planning Code. The Land Use Plan component of the Comprehensive Plan establishes general categories of future land use and, within residential categories, establishes ranges of densities and types of dwellings which are expected for those areas. Following adoption of the Comprehensive Plan, the policies established in a Comprehensive Plan are usually implemented through provisions of the Borough Zoning Ordinance and Subdivision and Land Development Ordinance and additional actions of the Borough Planning Commission and Borough Council. The Comprehensive Plan is intended to serve as a policy statement which guides the preparation of land use regulations and actions of Borough officials. Prior to preparation of the elements of the Comprehensive Plan itself;, certain background studies were made to provide a basis on which to make the decisions on land use, community facilities, and circulation. Studies have been done on regional setting, Borough history, natural features, population, housing and economic characteristics! community services and facilities, circulation, and existing land use. Chester County: LandscaEs - Managing Chanee in Chester Counw Prepared by the Chester County Planning Commission, this 1996 policy document establishes objectives for the preservation ofnatural resources, and the avoidance of sprawl in Chester County municipalities. This document supercedes the 1988 Chester County Land Use Plan. In Landscapes, Avondale Borough is characterized as an Urban Land. lq AII land usc plans and zoning maps rvhich idcntify rcsidcntial, commercial, industrial, agricultural, recrcation:rl, and opcn spacc arcas. The existing land use and future land use elements of the Comprehensive Plan identifo residential, commercial, industrial, agricultural, recreational, and open space areas. The Zoning Ordinance provides for each of these uses and closely minors the land use pattem. "l Zoning or Subdivision Regulations that establish lot sizes predicated on sewage disposal methods. A-copy,of the Borough Zoning Map is included in Appendix l. Most of the Borough is zoned R-l or R-2, residence districts. Single family detached dwellings are the primary permitted land use, on a lot of a minimum size of 8,400 square feet. Maximum building area on R-l is 30%. Several blocks in the center of the Borough are zoned R-2. In the R-2 district, single family, two family and multiple family dwellings are permitted at a density of 6,000 square feet per unit. Maximum building area is 40o/o, and ma: Commercial and Industrial zoning are found in the areas of West State Street, First Avenue, the southem portion of Pennsylvania Avenue (Route 41) and Baltimore Pike, Because of the extent of the Borough's sewage collection system, all new development must be connected to public sewers. 3. All limitations and plans related to floodplain and storm rvater management and special protection (Chapter 93) arcas. The zoning ordinance contains a provision that no construction or development shall take place with any identified floodplain area of the Borough- The provision not permitting development within floodplains helps to preserve the conidors along White Clay Creek, Indian Run, and Trout Run. The hydric soils, wetlands, high yield aquifer, and linear features found within the floodplain will be afforded some protection. The ordinance also gives protection to the hydric soils, wetlands, high yield aquifer, and linear features outside the achral floodplains. The portion of White Clay Creek within the Borough has Trout Run and Indian Rur as tributaries, as well as a tributary with tvvo tributaries, a tributary with one tributary, and two tributaries without tributaries. White Clay Creek is designated for protection of cold water fishes (maintenance and propagation of the family Salmonidae and fish food organisms) and standard water uses by DER, and subject to DER standards for pH, dissolved oxygen, iron, tcnrperature, dissolved solids, and bacteria. The U.S. Ceological Survey of White Clay Creek indicatcd generally moderate biological conditions. White CIay Creek is an interstate stream, because it drains to Dclarvare, and the Delaware River Basin Commission (DRBC) has established water quality criteria for dissolved oxygen, temperature, pH, phenols, tlueshold odor number, synthetic detergent, radioactivity, fecal coliform, total .. -- dissolved.solids, turbidity"and effluent quality. The DRBC has indicated that the sfieam should be maintained in a safe and satisfactory condition for public and industrial water supplies after reasonable teatment; agriculhral water supplies; maintenance and propagation of resident game fish and other aquatic life, and trout; wildlife; and recreation. The Chester County Water Resources Inventory Study of the Clay and Elk Subbasin, indicates water demands on the White Clay Creek watershed should be more than adequately met by available water supply, based on analysis of reserve supplies. U" PITYSICAL AND DEMOGRAPHIC ANALYSN USING WRITTEN DESCRIPTION AND MAPPING A. - - Identification - ,of planning,-,. -. area, . municipal .. boundaries, Sewer Authority/i\4anagem en t A gency service area boundaries. The Borough is located in the southeastern portion of Chester County. The Borough is bordered on the east, north and south by New Garden Township and on the west, north and south by London Grove Township. Both Townships have experienced population growth over the past ten years and are expected to continue to grow. The population of London Grove grew from 3531 to 3922 (n ll.lyo increase) from 1980 to 1990. New Garden experienced an increase of l3.4Yo, from 4790 to 5430. During the same period, Avondale grew from 891 to 954 persons, for an increase of 7.t%. The Borough is traversed by PA Route 4l which runs southeast and northwest. PA Route 4l is a major highway which runs from Delaware, where it connects with Interstate 95, to U.S. Route 30 at Gap, PA. The former U.S. Route I enters the Borough from the east and combines with PA Route 4l through the Borough and then splits and continues toward West Grove Borough. The Borough is approximately 4 miles from the Delaware state line, approximately l8 miles from Gap, PA approximately 35 miles from Philadelphia, approximately 33 miles from Lancaster, approximately 60 miles from Baltimore, and approximately l5 miles from Wilmington, DE, During future years, it is expected that Avondale will experience only limited development pressure. During the 1960's, a U.S. Route I bypass was constructed which has directed east-west traffic away from the Borough. There is currently a study underway to determine feasible altematives for the relocation of north-south traffic on PA Route 4l away from the Borough. If and when PA Route 4l is relocated a substantial amount of traffic may also be directed away from the Borough. The combination of the Route I bypass and Route 4l bypass rvould result in Avondale no longer being traversed by heavily traveled major highways. B. Identificationofphysicalcharactcristics Avondale Borough is a small residential community in Chester County rvhich was incorporated as a Borough in 1894. It is within the Piedmont Province of the Appalachian Highlands. The County is part of a land oIgently undulating to steeply rolling country that stretches from the Hudson Itiver to Ceorgia, sandwichcd between the Atlantic Coastal Plain and the Blue Ridge. It is underlain primarily by deeply weathered, old, hard, complex crystalline rocks. The main rock structure and most ridges tend to follow a northeast-to-northwest pattern. The character of the Borough is generally residential with limited commercial activity. With some exceptions, most of the housing was constructed prior to World War II, is historic in nature, and was built to serve as a commercial center for the agricultural -community in this part of Chester County. * At present, the major industry in Avondale and vicinity is in mushroom growing, packaging, and distibuting. In the Chester County Landscape Policy, the Borough has been considered to be urban, with respect to established land use. [t is unlikely this will change in the funue. In that regard, there are presently l.l dwelling units per acre of ground,2.79 persons per household and 1908 persons per square mile. C. Soils-Analysis with description by soil type and soils mapping show areas suitable for in-ground onJot systems, elevated sand mounds, individual residential spray irrigation systems, and areas unsuitable for soil dependent systems. Show Prime Agricultural Soils and any locally protected agricultural soils. The Land Resources Map is contained in Appendix 2 and indicates areas of steep slopes (slopes greater than l5%), as indicated by the Soil Survev. Chester and Delaware Counties- Pennsylvania, and prime agriculnual soils (Capability Units I, II, and III), from Soil Survev. Chester and Delaware Counties. Pennsylvania. Steep Slopes There is one large area of steep slope within the Borough, found between Church Street, Route 41, State Road (Baltimore Pike), and the eastem Borough line. Land use essentially consists of several large lot residential properties. Several smaller areas of steep slope are located in the following areas of the Borough, including (l) western portion of the Borough, at the northern Borough boundary, (2) west of Indian Run near the historic farmstead, and (3) north of Miller Drive. Areas which have slopes greater than l5% have severe limitations to development. In general, this land is too steep for residential subdivisions and cultivation. Development of steep slopes can result in hazardous road conditions, costly excavation, erosion and sedimentation and storm water runoff problems. These slopes are quite prone to erosion, and protection of them is particularly important for water resource protection when watercourses are nearby. (The White Clay Creek is nearby). Development should be limited, vegetative cover maintained to the greatest extent possible, and erosion controls instituted. Without absorptive vegetation, runoff can rapidly erode the slopes. Notwithstanding the fact that the Borough is a longstanding comntunity, prinre agricultural soil types are found throughout most of the Borough. The capability classification of the United States Department of Agricultue is a grouping of soils to show, in a general way, the suitability for most kinds of ,, farming. The-classification is based upon limitations of the soils, the risk of damage when they are used, and the way they respond to treatment, Soils are classified according to degree and kind of permanent limitation, without consideration of major and generally expensive land forming that would change the slope, depth, or other characteristics of the soils; and without consideration of possible but unlikely maj or reclamation proj ects. The soils included within the prime agricultural soils delineation are Class I, II, and III soils. Class I soils have few limitations that restrict their use. Class II soils have some limitations that reduce the choice of plants or require moderate conservation practices. Class III soils are those that have severe limitations that reduce the choice of plants or require special conservation practices, or both. There are five other capability classes, that are not designated prime agricultural soils. The prime agricultural soils are soils which generally should be the best soils for farming zurd which should be retained for agricultural purposes when possible. Typically, the best farmland is also land conducive to building activities. While some of the prime agricultual soils within the Borough are still farmed, most of the area in the Borough has long ago been converted to housing. The construction of Avondale Borough preceded the agricultural preservation programs developed since the 1960s. The areas not designated as prime agricultural soils generally are comprised of slopes greater than l5%o, are wet, or are severely eroded. D. Gcologic Featurcs - (1) Identification through analysis, (2) mapping and, (3) their relation to existing or potential nitrate-nitrogcn pollution and drinking water sourccs. Include areas where existing nitratc-nitrogen levels are in excess of 5 mg/|. Most of the Borough, and the entire central portion of the Borough, is Cockeysville Marble. Exclusions include areas in the far norlhern portion of the Borough, along the westem boundary of the Borough, in the southeast corner of the Borough, and the wooded and steep sloped areas in the eastern portion of the Borough. The characteristics of Cockeysville Marble, as described in "Groundwater Resources of Chester County, Pennsylvania", are given below: RBLE Description - Typically a medium to coarse-grained, white to light blue-gray colored marble, often banded with flakes of golden brown phlogopite. Bedding - Well bedded in thick beds. - Fracturing - Joints have a blocky*pattem; well developed; moderately abundant; regular; moderately spaced; open and usually vertical. Weatherins - Moderately resistant; slightly weathered surface; shallow in depth; smooth, sandy-textured, large blocks result from long, continued weathering; overlying mantle is variable in thickness. Topoqraphy - Low, rolling valleys; natural slopes are gentle and stable. Drainage - Good surface and subsurface drainage. Porositv - Joints and solution channels produce a secondary porosity of medium to high magnirude. GroUndw#eg - Yields of up to 1000 gallons per minute or more are obtainable. - Blasting required; bedrock pinnacles may be encountered; es with rotary equipment. Cut-Slope Stability - Good cut-slope stability; able to stand in near vertical cuts. - Good quality foundation for heavy struchres; thorough pinnacle investigations should be made, . - Good source for road material, riprap, building stone, embankment faCing anci ntt. The Cockeysville Marble is important for two reasons. First, it can be a source of substantial groundwater of relatively good quality. As noted above, groundrvater yields of up to 1,000 gal./min. or more are obtainable. Porosity is of medium to high magnitude. Second, there is higl'r potential for groundwater pollution. Cockeysville lvlarble is calcium carbonate and is subject to solution by a weak carbonic acid tfuough chemical interaction with air and water. The carbonic acid solution works to dissolve rock, forming underground solution channels and possibly sinkholes. Storage of water car occur in these solution channels, giving the potential for large water felds. However, pollutants may also move through the underground solution channe ls. Because of the potential for pollution of the groundrvater, the use of on-site sewage disposal within the Cockeysville formation should be discouraged and potentially hazardous materials should not be stored where they could enter the groundrvater system. Fortunately, the Borough is served by a public sanitary sewer system. Care must also be taken in the removal of groundwater, which could result in collapse of rock and formation of sinkholes. While portions of the area of Cockeysville Marble are used for agriculture or are in parkland, much of the area - has been developed. Frachues are areas of high gtoundwater yield because storage can occur there. As is the case with Cockeysville Marble, fractures are areas where groundwater is also more susceptible to pollution, as pollutants can travel through frachues at a greater speed and distance. Fractures are indicated in a north/south direction in the center of the Borough (at the northern tip of the Borough in the vicinity of the White Clay Creek); in a north/south direction in the south central po(ion of the Borough in the vicinity of Route 4l and Trout Run; and in an easVwest direction across the cenhal portion of the Borough in the vicinity of State Street, First Avenue, White Clay Creek, and Church Street. E. Topography-Depict slopes that are suitable for conventional systemsl slopcs that are suitable for elevated sand mounds; slopes that are unsuitable for on- lot systems Not applicable. All new development within the Borough would be connected to the public sewer system, E, Potable Watcr Supplies-Identification through mapping, description and analysis to include available public water supply capacity and aquifer yicld for groundwater supplies. The existing water system is an outgrowth of a private system installed in the early 1900s. At that time, water was pumped from the quarry in the southern portion of the Borough to an open m€Nonry reservoir located on the hill southivest of the Borough in London Grove Township. The pumping station was located adjacent to the present sewage treatment plant site. Service was provided on a request basis and not all homes in Avondale were supplied by the system. The system was purchased by the Borough in the late 1950s and improvements and extensions were made to the distribution system. At that time, the decision was made to change the source of supply and the first well, known as Well No. l, was developed in 1960. In 1961, Well No. 2 was developed and added to the system. Well No. I originally produced 170 gpm; however, its output has been reduced to 130 gpm to eliminate the periodic turbidity problem created at the higher pumping rates. Well No. 2 produces 170 gpm with no deterioration in water quality. The wells are manually operated and pumped on altemate days. Over the years the rvells have proven to be very reliable, as evidenced by only a slight drop in static rvater level without a reduction in output during drought conditions. t0 ,,.", The system is operated in compliance with the existing state and federal regulations ' relating to public water supplies. -The existing storage-facility is a.420,000 gallon covered reservoir constructed in 1901 which "floats" on the system. That is, the wells pump directly into the dishibution system with the excess water filling the reservoir. The reservoir is 70 feet square by I 1.5 feet deep with a concrete bottom and brick walls. The reservoir was provided with a hypalon cover in 1968. As originally installed, the distribution system consisted of 3 and 4 inch pipe. Over the past 20 years, the Borough has installed 6-inch lines in various locations to improve the hydraulic capabilities of the system, as well as replaced the majority of the service taps to eliminate leaks. In addition, the water system has been extended to previously unserved portions of the Borough. The Borough has established the policy that service will not be provided beyond the Borough boundary. Presently, all Borough residents desiring water service have been connected to the system. A pian of the water system is contained in Appendix 3. Current water consumption in the Borough averages about 130,000 gpd. The Borough's cu:rent supply sources are more than adequate to meet fuhre supply requirements. G. Wctlands-Idcntify wetlands as defined in Title 25, Chapter 105 by description, analysis and mapping. Include National Wetlands Inventory mapping and potential wetland areas per USDA, SCS mapped hydric soils. Proposed collection, conveyance and treatment facilities and lines must be located and labeled, along with the identified wctlands, on the map. The Water Resouces Map located in Appendix 4 indicates watershed boundaries, 100-year floodplains, wetlands, hydric soils, the high-yield aquifer within the Borough (Cockeysville Marble) and linear features (fractures). The high-yield aquifer and linear feahues constitute the important geologic and hydrologic features within the Borough. In addition, the stream corridors have been indicated and stream order classification given. Drainaee Basins Drainage basins are indicated for Trout Run, Indian Run, and White Clay Creek (East Branch), the three streams within the Borough. The Chester County Open Space and Recreation Study classifies the White Clay Creek as a major sfeam within Chester County. Indian Run flows through the westenr portion of the Borough. Trout Run flows through the southeast portion of the Borough, and White Clay Creek through the central portion of the Borough, with the confluence east of Indian Run Road. The White Clav Creek florvs southwardlv into Delaware. il Floqdplains The 10O-year floodplain from the Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA) - Flood.Insurance Rate Map is indicated for each stream. - The floodplains for Trout Run and Indian Run typically range from 100 to 200 ft. wide until the southem portion of the Borough, where the steams meet the White Clay Creek. The floodplain for the White Clay Creek ranges from 400 to 800 ft. and then narrows at the railroad tracks. South of the railroad tracks the width of the floodplain for the three streams ranges from 700 to 900 ft. in width. Floodplains are areas adjacent to watercourses which are covered by water during times of flooding. A 100-year floodplain is the area which has a lYo chance of being flooded during any one year, and which is typically used for regulatory purposes. It is best if the floodplains are not developed, because development within the floodplains results in a danger to persons and property. If development occurs within the floodplain, this may constrict the area over which flood waters may flow, resulting in increased damage upsfieam from baclavater and increased flood damage downstream because of resultant increased flood velocities downstream. Outdoor storage of materials within floodplains is not desirable because of the possibility of the materials entering the stream when flooding of the banks occurs. Care must be taken in disnubing areas along watercourses because increased sedimentation within the steam (increased depositing of soil within the stream) can occur. The mnoff can erode steam banks and channels. If sedimentation is increased, filling of stream beds can occur, which could cause flood waters to cover a larger area, meandering of streams, and choking of life within the stream detracting from the aesthetic value of the sream. It is desirable to keep pervious surfaces on stream banks, as opposed to imperious surfaces such as paved areas. As surface runoff of water moves toward streams, water can be absorbed into the ground if the surface is pervious. Increased absorption can result in replenishment of groundwater and also in decreased flood peaks because less water reaches the stream from the surface of the land. Inadequate supply of groundwater can result in an inadequate flow of water to the stream during dry months. The inabilily to sustain stream flow ca.n rnear a greater concentration of pollutants at periods of low flow. Agricultural activities practiced along streams should be practiced with care Increased tillage and use of the soil can increase the sediment concentration and runoff reaching streams. Animal excretions can result in increased bacteriological concentration in runoff, pesticides can rcsult in incrcased undesirable chemicals in runoff, and fertilizer and manure can increase nitrate concentrations in runoff. As the Borough is served by sa.nitary sewer system, there does not have to be concern about on-site sewage disposal systems within the Borough. On-site selvage t2 ,,,. disposal systerns should not be located within areas subject to flooding because of the danger of contamination of the stream and the groundwater because of the proximity of the stream and the presence of the high water table. There may not be .an adequate, distance-between"the-on-site facility and surface water to permit renovation of sewage effluent prior to its reaching the stream. In some instances, soils found in the floodplains are very porous and the movement of sewage effluent is too rapid to allow for the renovation of the effluent prior to reaching the groundwater table or the steam. In other situations, the soil near the surface may be sah.rated with water or become readily saturated with sewage effluent, resulting in effluent remaining near or rising to the surface of the land. When flooding occurs, sewage effluent could then contaminate the surface water. The efficiency of filter fields of septic tanks can be impaired or destroyed as a result of flooding. Agriculture is the predominant land use along the floodplain of the Indian Run. The Borough sewage treatment plant site is located at the intersection of West State Street and Indian Run Road and undeveloped Borough land is located along the railroad in the northwestern portion of the Borough. An abandoned quarry owned by the Borough, several residential lots, and a commercial lot along Indian Rur Road in the southwest portion of the Borough are also located within the floodplain. Industrial, agriculnral, commercial, and residential properties are located within the Trout Rwr floodplain in the southern portion of the Borough. The floodplain of the White Clay Creek, in the central portion of the Borough, contains the Borough park, agricultural land, limited commercial land, and the Borough wastewater treatment plant. Wellands The wetlands shown on the Water Resources Map are from the National Wetlands Inventory, prepared by the Office of Biological Services, U.S. Deparment of the Interior, Fish and Wildlife Service. The wetlands inventory was prepared by stereoscopic analysis of high altitude aerial photographs, with the wetlands identified on the photographs based on vegetation, visible hydrology, and geography. A detailed on the ground and historical analysis of any site may result in a revision of the wetland boundaries, and it is possible that small wetlands and those obsctued by dense forest cover may not be identified. Wetlands are indicated atthree locations to the west of the Indian Run, between the White Clay Creek and New Street, along the bank of Trout Run, between Trout Run and Route 41, and in the vicinity of the confluence of White Clay Creck and Trout Run. The latter area is of substantial size. In general, the wetlands areas are currently in agricultural land use. Wetlands are areas that are inundated or saturated by sLtrface or groundwater at a frequency and duration sufficient to support, and that undcr normal circumstanccs l3 . do support, prevalence of vegetation typically adapted for life in sanrated soil conditions. During on-site investigation, wetlands can sometimes be identified when they are saturated with permanent or semi-permanent standing water and ." contain common wetlands plants such as cattails and willows. If wetlands can not be identified by hydrophytes (plants adopted to life in saturated soil conditions), soils may be investigated to determine whether wetlands are present. Hydric soils mapping can be used to identiff potential wetlands sites. Hydric soils are discussed below. To try to put wetlands into less technical terms, often sites adjacent to streams, low lying land that remains wet for considerable periods of the growing season, land that can not be farmed because it is too wet or can only be farmed every few years, or low-lying land that can only be developed by filling are likely to be wetlands. Wetlands can be areas rich in plant growth and animal habitat. They often serve as breeding places for many organisms. In addition to providing a home and a source of food for organisms, wetlands can protect water sources and can help keep water soruces clean by acting as natural hlters and removing pollutants such as bacteria and sediment from water. This occurs as plants growing in and around wetlands trap pollutants. Wetlands store water which can replenish groundwater and surface water supplies. In general, no developmental activity or placement of fill material may occur rvithin wetlands without obtaining a DER permit, Hydric Soils I{ydric soils are also indicated on tlre Water Resources Map. The hydric soils have been mapped from the Soil Survey. Chester and Delaware Counties. Pennsylvania and Hvdric Soils of Pennsylvania by the U.S, Department of Agriculture Soil Conservation Service, and indicate areas of potential wetlands. Hydric soils are developed under conditions sufficiently wet to support the grorvth and regeneration of hydrophytic vegetation and are soils that are saturated, flooded, or ponded long enough during the growing season to develop anaerobic conditions (an anaerobic situation is one in which molecular oxygen is absent) in the upper part. Criteria for identifring hydric soils include somewhat poorly drained soils that have water table less than 0.5 ft. from the surface for a significant period (usually a week or more) dwing the growing season; are poorly drained or very poorly drained and have either water table at less than 1.0 ft. from surface for a significant pcriod during the growing season if pcrmeability is equal to or greater than 6.O"/hr. in all areas rvithin 20", or have water table at least 1.5 ft. from the surface for a significant period during the growing scason if permeability is less than 6.0"4r. in any layer within 20"; soils that are ponded for long duration (from 7 days to I month) or very long t4 i duration (greater than I month) during the growing season; or soils that are :' frequently flooded for long duration or very long duration during the growing season. "i :ri , "tl4 ; :: " 4. Two areas of hydric soil are indicated west of the Indian Run generally in the ; vicinity of the wetlands, however, extending over a greater area. These areas are cunently used for agricultue. A large area of hydric soil is located in the vicinity of Trout Run. Existing land uses : include agricultural, industrial, commercial, and residential. park An area of hydric soil is located in the Borough along the White Clay Creek 1 between First Avenue and Church Street. A larger area of hydric soil is located east , of the White Clay Creek in the northeast comer of the Borough. This area has been ', developed forresidential purposes. i Futue extensions to the existing sewage collection system would most likely be constructed by individual land developers who would be required to obtain any and all necessary permits for encroachment upon existing wetlands. l5 EXISTING SEWAGE FACILITIES IN PLANNING AREA il. :;t Identify, map, and describe municipal and nonmunicipal, individual, and * " ; corrmunity.sewerage systems in the planning.area. 1, Location, size, and ownership of treatment facilities, main intercepting lines, pumping stations, and force mains, including their size, capacify, point of discharge. Also includc the name of the receiving stream, drainage basin, and the facilities. The Borough of Avondale sanitary sewer system serving the Borough of Avondale consists of approximately 14,500' of 8" diameter and 7,000' of 10" diameter sewers, flowing to the treatnent plant located in the southwest area of the Borough. The plant is located in the Borough of Avondale and discharges to the Indian Run Creek. The treatment plant was built in the late 1960s. Originally designed as an activated sludge plant using the contact stabilization process type, it was later modified to be a conventional activated sludge process. PA DEP approved a plant upgrade on May 5, 1993. This upgrade included the addition of flow equalization and aerated sludge holding tank. Also completed as part of the project was the conversion of the existing digesters to aeration tanks and modifications to the existing clarifiers. The plant has a permitted hydraulic capacity of 300,000 gpd. The permitted organic loading is 550 lbs/day. The Borough facilities operate under NPDES permit PA0025488. The allocated capacity of the treahnent plant is divided between Avondale: 126,750 gpd, and New Garden Township: 173,250 gpd. Ne* d*aen Township sewage flows enter the Borough from the southeast, and are metered at two locations. One metering manhole is located on Route 41. The other meter is located in the railroad interceptor. A map depicting the Borough's sewage collection system is located in Appendix 5. ,, A narrative and schematic diagram of thc facilitics basic trcntmcnt proccsscs including thc facility's NPDES pcrmitted capncity, and thc Clcan Stream Law pcrmit numbcr. Flow enters the plant at the wet well inside the control building, The wastewater is pumped from the wet well through a biu screen and a grit removal device. The flow is discharged to the aerated equalization tank. From the equalization tank it is pumped to a conventional activated sludge process. l6 The activated sludge process is a biological process used to remove the : organic load from the wastewater. The activated sludge process is separated into two parallel treatment trains. Each train is broken into three cells. The : ,. !. .first,cell",has..diffused aeration, while. the second and third cells have l mechanical aerators. Flow leaves tle aeration cells and enters the clarifiers. Each train has its own squarc clarifier. The clarifiers are used to separate the inert and biological solids from the wastewater. The forward flow exits the clarifiers and enters the Chlorine Contact Tanks (CCT). The flow is disinfected in the CCT. The firral effluent is discharged l to lndian Run Creek. Bio-solids removed from the clarifiers are trarsferred to either the aerobic digester, gravity thickener, or retumed to the head of the aeration tanks. The digester is used to destroy the volatile fraction of the bio-solids. The thickener is used to remove the excess water from the solids. Excess bio- solids are disposed off-site by a licensed hauler. The effluent discharge requirements of NPDES Permit PA0025488 for the wastewater treatment facility are as follows: Discharqe parameter ti$LtA$gS FIow Report Only i CBODs 25 mll l Total Suspended Solids 30 mg/l \ AmmoniaasNitrogen 2.0mg^ (5/l through 10/31) i Ammonia as Nitrogen 6 mgll (l l/l through 4/30) Fecal Coliform 200 colonies/lOO ml Dissolved Oxygen Min. 2 mg/l pH 6-9 standard units - Total Residual Chlorine 0.75 mg/l until 6-30-99, 0.6 mg/l thereafter Copper 0.045 mg/l Zinc 0,40 mgll Lindane 0.00006 mg/l 4,4'-DDD 0.000001 mg/l Diazinon 0.00091 rng/l Malathion 0.0022 ntgll : process is in Appendix A schematic diagram of the shovrn 6, . IIl1 3. A description of problems with existing facilifies, including existing or projected overload under Title 25, Chapter 94, or violations of the NPDES permit, Clean Streams Law permit, or other permits, rules, or .regulations of.the Departmcnt. a. Avondale Borough As noted earlier, the Avondale wastewater treatment facility has clronically exceeded its hydraulic loading of 0.3 mgd as authorized under its current NPDES permit. The average annual flows for the last several years are noted below. Year Average Flow 1993 0.346 mgd 1994 0.318 mgd 1995 0.282mgd 1996 0.452mgd t997 0.373 mgd r 998 0,333 mgd 1999 0.284 mgd Despite the hydraulic flow limit exceedance, the wastewater treatment facility is still able to operate efficiently. The concentration limits for the required NPDES testing parameters are met most of the time during hydraulic overload events, but obviously, the mass loading limits are not. Aside from the problem of excessive infiltration/inflow, the treatment facility is in good operating order. In January 1997, Avondale Borough, at the request of PA DEP, prepared a Capacity Study for the wastewater treatment facility. The purpose of this study was to dehne the capacity of the facility based on the capabilities of the individual treatment units. The study concluded that the treatment facility was subject to excess flow due to inflow and infiltration (VI), and that this excess flow should be removed to improve performance, The study also recommended that the aeration capacity, clarifiers and the chlorine contact tank would have to be upgraded to ultimately expand treatment capacity. A copy of the capacity study has previously been submitted to the Department, and is intended to serve as the oft-rcial evaluation of thc operation and perfornrance elficiency of the Borough's rvastewater treatment facility. Except for infiltration/inflow, the Borough's sewage collection t8 system is in good operating order. There iue no records indicating that surcharging or backups have ever occurred. The collection system is constructed of vitrified clay pipe, and consists of -.".approximately 7,000 linear feet of 10" pipe, and 14,500 linear feet ' of 8" pipe. There are no pumping stations within the system. In April 1997, Avondale Borough, at the request of PA DEP, completed a comprehensive I/I study of its entire collection system. Inflow and infiltration (l/l) is unwanted flow that enters a sewage collection system. Inflow is that rainfall that enters the collection system directly through downspouts, storm sewers, and sump punp connections. Inflow can also enter the system through broken vents, traps, and cleanout connections on laterals. Infiltration is that groundwater that enters the system through cracks and joints of the sewer system. I/I increases the hydraulic loading to a sewage facility and therefore has the potential to upset operations. The purpose of the report was to determine the source of the I/1. The report used past findings and new investigations to locate the sources. The investigations included a statistical review, night-time inspections, plugging and weiring, smoke testing, and portable flow metering. In light of the results of the I/l study, the Borough retained a contractor in April, 1998 to effect repairs upon the sewage collection system. The contractor's work was completed in October, 1998, and was partially successful in reducing the amount of I/l r.vithin the collection system. Corrective measures for infiltration/inflow ale continuing. Avondale is currently (April, 2000) installing a liner in 1,200 feet of the 10" diameter main leading into the treatnrent plant. In addition to the repairs made within the sewage collection system, the Borough also initiated an inspection progriun to identifu homes which had connected sump pumps. To date, nearly 90% of the homes within the Borough have been inspected. b. NeW G ard e q-Ip Ji'n ship- Reprcsentatives of Avondalc Borough and New Garden Township met in May of 1998 with representatives of the Dcpartmcnt of Environmental Protection (DEP) to discuss numerous issues related to tlle Avondalc Waste Water Treatment Facility. One of thc outcomes of that meeting was a contmitment by Nclv Gardcn Township to conduct an analysis of Inflltration and InUor.v (l & I) l9 entering that portion of the New Garden Township collection system tied to the Avondale collection system. Some time earlier, an evaluation of I & I had been undertaken by Avondale which included a portion..of the shared interceptors within Avondale that corurect with the Route 41 Line and Railroad Line in New Garden. Those results were reported separately by Avondale. It is important to note the I & I evaluation was performed nrior to redirecting a portion of the New Garden flow from the Avondale facility to the East End facility. The overall system flows referenced in the report are now different as a result of the change, however, conclusions regarding I & I remain valid when taken in the proper context. Dwing the period July 7 through July 23, 1998 numerous flow measurements were taken throughout the New Garden collection system. The results of the evaluation are contained in a report prepared by GTS Technologies, Inc. titled "Evaluation of Infiltration/Inflow (I&f Occurrence and Magnitude, Emanating from New Garden Township, and its Effect on the Hydraulic Load in the Avondale WWTF." A'copy of the report is included as Appendix t2. The conclusion reached in the report is that approximately 12,000 gpd of infiltation could be attibutable to the New Garden collection system which includes both the Railroad Line and the interceptor portion of the Route 4l Line. Since the Route 4l Line is a force main within New Garden, it is assumed that no infiltration exists in that section of the collection system. During the study period, the total flow from New Garden to Avondale was 120,250 gpd, therefore,I & I represents l0% of the flow. The conclusion reached is that New Garden is not contributing a significant amount of I & I to Avondale. In the interest of completeness, additional flow measurements should be taken to establish the amount of I & I remainins in the Railroad Line since the diversion 4. Dctails of schcduled or in progrcss upgrading or cxpansions of trcatmcnt facilities and thc anticipatcd complction datc of thc improvemcnts. Discuss any remaining reserve capacity and thc policy concerning the allocation of rcscrvc capacity- Also discuss thc compatibility of thc rate of growth to cxisting and proposcd rvastcrvatcr treatmcnt facilitics. Allocation of flow at the Avondale wastcrvate r treatment facility is govemed 20 (;/ by a 1968 Agreement between Avondale Borough and New Garden Township. The agreement defines the responsibilities of each of the respective municipalities with regard to operation, maintenance, monitoring, .and"post=sharing. "Following,is a delineation of the flow allocation among the two municipalities. " The Agreement defines an Equivalent Dwelling Unit (EDLJ) at 350 gpd. t New Garden Township currently has an allocation of 495 EDUs, or 173,250 gpd. This allocation represents 58% of the total treatrnent facility capacity, t Avondale Borough currently has an allocation of 362 EDUs, or 126,750 gpd. This allocation represents 42o/o of the total treatnent facility capacity. It should be noted that as of August 21, 1998, New Garden Township diverted a portion of its wastewater flow then treated by the Avondale facility to a new New Garden Township Wastewater Treatment Facility (NGTWWTF), the "East End" facility. Based upon actual flow metering records, it has been determined that New Garden Township has reduced its flow to Avondale by approximately 77,000 gallons per day, which means that New Garden Township's average daily flow (in 1998) had been reduced flom approximately l3l,000 gpd to 54,000 gpd. New Garden Township has indicated that it intends to replace the diverted flow with additional connections from within the same service areas over the next several years. Avondale has already begun to process planning modules for these replacement connections as they are submitted. During 1999, the flows related to the Avondale Wastewater Treatment Plant were measured by Govemment Specialisis, Inc. of Oxford, PA. A graph of 1999 weekly flows, rvhich they prepared, is included on the following page (Figure III-I). This graph illustrates the flows from New Garden Township, Avondale, and the total plant flow. During 1999, the flows averaged: Avondale Borough: 222,611gal. per day New Garden Township'. 63,043 gal, per day Total WWTP: 285,714 gal. per day The graph clearly indicates the decreased flows during the state-widc drought emergency between June and September, as well as the flow increase during tropical storm Floyd on Septembcr 16, 1999. The graphs also show that the plant hydraulic capacity of 300,000 gal. pcr day was exceeded during several weeks in 1999. 2l ['igurc lI I I .I999 WEEKLY FLOWS 1999 Flows to Avondale Wrsfervafer Treatnrenf plant Avondale I NGT Combined , NGT Route 41 I NGT Railroad Actual Flow VErsus Treat|nent Plant Actual Flow 400,000 380,000 360,000 340,000 320,000 300.o00 280,000 o 280,000 t 240,000 uJ o- 220,000 zU' 200,000 o '| 80,000 J 160,000 (9 140,000 '120,000 100,000 80,000 60.000 40,000 20,000 0 DaU analysrs treoercd by GovEmment SDecialbb, lhC '" 5. A detaited dcscription of operation and maintenance requirements of the municipality for on-lot systems and the status of past and present . -.,"cofipliance with .these -requirements and any .other requirements relating to sewage management programs. Avondale Borough does not have a sewage management plan in effect because of the small number of on-lot sewage disposal systems that are presently active within its municipal boundaries. There are currently 309 active sewer accounts within the Borough for its population of 1,031 residents. Borough records indicate that there are only l0 homes served by on-lot disposal systems, which means lhat 97Yo of all residences are served by public sewer. Neither the Borough nor the Chester County Health Department has any record of malfunctions associated with these systems; however, it is typically very difficult to identifu a malfunctioning system unless a complaint is received from a neighboring property, or the owner of the malfunctioning system comes forward to the Borough, or the Chester County Health Department, to obtain a permit to repair the system. At the present time, it is not anticipated that a formal wastewater manag€ment plan and education ptogram will be required for those areas of the Borough that have onlot sewage disposal systems, As the existing sewage collection system is extended within the designated sewer service and growth area, homes with on-lot systems will be connected where feasible. In the interim, provisions that might be considered would be established frequencies for pumping of septic tanks; regulation of plumbing fixtures (i.e., installation of low-flow shower heads and faucets, etc.); and, promulgation of prescribed annual maintenance procedures for on-lot sewage disposal systems. 6. Disposal areas, if other than strcam dischargc, and any applicablc groundrvater li mitations. There are no such disposal areas within the Borough boundaries. 22 B. "' Using DEP's manual titled I'Sewage Disposal Needs Identification Guidance", identify, map, and describe areas that use individual and community on-lot :..i r sewage disposal and, unpermitted collection and disposal systems ("wildcat" sewers, borehole disposal, etc.) and retaining tank systems in the planning area including: l. The types of systems in use. As previously noted, there are only l0 homes within the Borough limits that use on-lot disposal systems. These homes are basically scattered in the corners of the Borough boundaries where it was not feasible or cost-effective to install sewers when the system was originally constructed. The homes are located as noted below: . Ellicott Avenue, south of PA Route 4l 2 homes . Church Avenue, north of PA Route 4l I home F' Baltimore Pike, north of PA Route 41 3 homes . Unnamed private street near Church Avenue 3 homes . West State Street. west of PA Route 41 I home There are no other unpermitted, or "wildcat" sewers within the Borough. No sewage holding tanks are in use. ,, A sanitary surrey complete with a dcscription of documented and potential public health pollution, and operational problem (including malfunctioning systems) with the systems, including violations of local ordinances, the Servage Facilitics Act, the Clean Stream Law, or regulations promulgatcd thcreunder. Not applicable. The completion of a sanitary survey was not a requirement in the approved Plan of Study for this Act 537 Plan. 3. A comparison of thc types of on-lot sewage systems installed in an area with the types of systems which are appropriate for the area according to soil, geologic conditions, topographic limitations scwage flows, and Titlc 25, Chapter 73 (relating to standards for scwagc disposal facilitics). (Reference - Titlc 25, $71.21.a.2.ii.C). None of the on-lot sewage disposal systems within the Borough is located within the defined hydric soils areas. However, much of the Borough is subject to a seasonal high groundwater table, which could potentially affect the operation of an on-lot sewage disposal system. Despite the good drainage characteristics of the prevailing Cockeysville Marblc formation, a broad statement can be made that the soils within the Borough are generally unsuitable for on-lot systems. Moreover, all future lots to be developed 23 within the Borough will be served by public sewers, so the installation of additional on-lot sewage disposal systems is really of no concern. '..4, - , An individual water supply survey to identify possible contamination by malfunctioning on-lot scwage disposal systems consistent with the PA DEP Sewage Disposal Needs Identification Guidance manual (Reference - Titlc 25, $71.21.a"2.ii.B). An individual water supply suwey was not a requirement of the approved Plan of Study for this Act 537 Plan. Borough records indicate that there are only five homes that are not served by public water because of their distance from existing water distribution mains. The Borough's water supply meets all applicable federal, state, and local requirernents for drinking water. C. Identify wastewater sludge and septage generation, transport, and disposal methods. Include this information in the sewage facilities alternativc analysis including: 1" Location of sources of wastewater sludge or septage (Scptic tanks, holding tanks, wastewater treatment facilities). (Refcrence - Titlc 25, $71.71). The major sludge generating facility within Avondale Borough is the wastewater treatment plant. This sludge is taken to another rvastewater treatment plant for treatment and disposal. The plant produces approximately 250,000 gallons per year of thickened sludge. Septage generated from the few remaining on-lot disposal systems is the responsibility of the respective homeowners. The amount of septage generated within the Borough can be calculated based on the following assumptions: " Septic tanks are pumped every three years . The average septic tank capacity is 900 gallons " Ten homes use on-lot disposal systems Using these factors, the annual septage production for tl-re Borough isi 10 homes x X 1 Punrrr Out home 3 ycars : 3,000 gallons ofseptage pcr year 24 Present disposal methods, locations, capacities, and transportation methods. (Refereuce - Title 25, $7f.71). -:r ;;.- ;Presently, sludge generated by the Borough's wastewater treatment faeility is removed from the plant by a licerued sludge hauler. The hauler uses a proper$ sized tank tmck for removal of the sludge and ransport to the disposal facility. Septage from thq remaining on-lot disposal systems is removed by haulers selected by the respective homeowners. 25 b. New Garden Township --Flow from New Garden Township enters Avondale at two locations; the Railroad Line and the Route 4l line. These are shown in Appendix 16. Connected to the Railroad Line are 92 residential units and 15 commercial units. The commercial units are designated as such based on the physical use of the space and not the strength of the waste. Data is presented in Appendix 17 which establishes the average daily flow from the Railroad Line as 22,753 gpd. Based on the above, the average daily flow for all connected units is 213 gpd. lf one assumes an average daily flow per residential connection of 200 gpd then the average daily flow per commercial connection is 290 gpd. Both 200 gpd for residential connections and 290 gpd for commercial connections seems reasonable allowing for the type of commercial connections that are serviced. The residential units connected to the Railroad Line are located primarily along a section of Newark Road, Pine Street and Reese Street in the southwest and west sections of Toughkenarnon plus a few along Old Baltimore Pike. The commercial connections are, for the most part, facilities related to mushroom growing or processing. In addition, there is a truck trzursport company and a number of small retailor office type units connected. Connected to the Route 41 Line are 49 residential units. 63 commercial units and I institutional unit. The commercial units are designated as such based on the physical use ofthe space and not the strength of the waste. The institutional unit is New Garden Elementary School, Data is presented in Appendix 17 which establishes the average daily flow from thc Route 41 Line as 29,604 gpd. Based on the above, the average daily flow for all connected trnits is 262 gpd. If one assumes an average daily flou' per residential connection of 200 gpd and an actualflow of 2,673 gpd for the school then the average daily flow per commercial connection is 274 gpd. Both 200 gpd for residential connections and 274 gpd for commercial connections seems reasonable allowing for the type of commercial connections that are scrviced The residential units connected to tlie Route 4l Line are located, for the most part, along Route 4l frorn just east of Penn Green Road to the Torvnship/Borough boundarl. The commercial connections are scattered along Route 4l from thc former llewlett Packard f'acility to Penn Grecn Road. A maior section of the fornrer Flewlett-Packard LI'11 building has been demolished which results in those previous active connections now being considered reserved capacity. The remaining portion of the building and some ground has been sold to a light .",r' manufacfuring company that is currently contibuting about 8,167 gpd to the Route 41 Line. Other commercial connections are mushroonr industry related plus a few retail establishments. In addition, New Garden Elementary School is connected as mentioned above. ) Land use designations established under the Pennsylvania Municipalities Planning Code, including residential, commercial and industrial areas. Include a comparison of proposed land use as allowed by zoning and existing sewage facilities planning. a. Avondale Borough ZontngOrdinance A copy of the Borough Zoning Map is included in Appendix I of this report. Following are the base districts for the Borough: R-l Residential District R-2 Residential District FD Flexible Use District TC Town Center District C General Commercial District I Industrial District The majority of the Borough is zoned R-l and R-2. The maximum lot coverage is 35% in the R-l district and 50% in the R-2 District. The zoning ordinance contains a general provision that prohibits development within any identified floodplain. In addition to the base district provisions, certain land areas are subject to additional provisions for the purposes of environmental protection. These provisions rclate to flood hazard, wetland protection, steep slopes, woodland, and Carbonate geolo gic formations. The environmental protection standzuds containcd within the zoning ordinance are designed to: Conserve the natural resources of thc Borough ao t6 Fulfill the goals of the Borough Open Space, Recreation and Environmental Resource Plan, and the goals of the Borough Comprehensive Plan - Establish performance standards which apply to uses which may dishub sensitive natural resources, including, but not limited to, floodplain, steep slope, woodland, wetland, and high-yield aquifer areas ,' lmplement the provisions of the PA Municipalities Planning Code, Section 605(2) Existing land use pattems have a great influence on the Fuhre Land Use Plan, but also affect circulation within the Borough and demand for community facilities and services. An existing land use map is included in Appendix 7. The categories which have been mapped include One Family Residential. This has not been broken down into densities, so this may include land with several dwelling units per acre or land in large parcels but used for residential purposes. Residential with accessory apartments is also shown. This would typically be a dwelling which was designed as a single family dwelling which now may have a few apartments within the building. Multiple Family Residential is a building which is devoted to apartment usage. Residential and business in combination are those buildings which serve as a residence but also have a commercial operation within the building. Commercial land is land used solely for commercial puposes. Industrial land is that land used solely for industrial purposes. Agricultural land is used for farming purposes, and may contain a farmhouse. Public and quasi public uses include Borough land and those owned by civic and religious groups and other government organizations. Open land is land which is not developed and not used for agricultural purposes. ^!.') The most predominant land uses within the Borough are One . Family .,-Residential and Agriculhral. The greatest concentrations of one family homes are fotrnd in the central portion of the Borough, in the northeast corner of the Borough east of Church Street, and in the southwest comer of the Borough in the vicinity of Miller Drive. The remaining area east of Church Street and the area between Route 4l and the railroad are designated One Family Residential, however contain only several dwelling unis and do contain potential for further development. Aericultwe Agricultual Land uses are generally found along the watercourses within the Borough, including the White Clay Creek, Indian Run, and Trout Run. They are also found south of AvondaleAlew London Road and east of Ellicott Avenue. Those areas along the watercourses have severe limitations for building because of flooding and the presence of other water related resources. Because of slopes, the agricultural lands along the London Grove Township boundary and south of AvondaleA.,lew London Road also have limitations to development. The area east of Ellicott Avenue has more potential for development. Industrial There are two major industrial uses within the Borough, Edlon Industries along West State Street and the railroad tracks and West Chester Manufacruring along Route 4l and Ellicott Avenue. A quarry is operated along Old Baltimore Pike. .Commercial Commercial land uses are concentrated along Route 4l between Second Avenue and Ellicott Avenue and along Old Baltimore I'ike. Additional commercial uses are scattered along the southern portion o[Route 41, Wcst State Strcet, the northern portion of Pennsylvania Avenue, and the eastcentral porlion of the Borough. Commercial uses range from thosc seruing the day to day necds of the Borough rcsidents, such as the banks, sandwich shop, candy store, grccnhousc, and hardware store in the central portion of town and thc ttses 30 found at the WaWa-Dominos center at Old Baltimore Pike and Chtuch Steet, to those uses serving needs of highway travelers such as the vehicle service stations along Old Baltimore.Pike and Route 4l south of West State Street. Multiple Family Residential The largest apartment complex within the Borough is found south of First Avenue. In addition, buildings which have been converted for apartment usage are found along Route 41 and Old Baltimore Pike. Residence and Business in Combination These uses are found along Pennsylvania Avenue in the vicinity of 2nd and 3rd Avenues. Residential with Accessory Aparnnents These uses are also found along Pennsylvania Avenue, where single family residences may have a few accessory apartments. Pennsylvania Avenue is still a very attractive street from the northern Borough boundary to 2nd Avenue because of the trees along the street and the attractive homes, initially built as single family detached dwellings. Ovcr time, there has been conversion from use solely as singly family dwellings to commercial uses, residential rvith accessory apartments, residential and business in combination, and multiple family residential. A concem of the Borough willbe to maintain the attractive character of Pennsylvania Avenue. Public and Ouasi Public The Public and quasi public land uses include the Borough Hall, the sewage treatment plant and quarry along Indian Run Road, the additional Borough land and recycling center along Pomeroy Avenue, the Borough park, the five churches'uvithin the Borough, the Grange, and firchouse, Open Land A relatively small area of open land is indicatcd bctwecn Trout Run and the Octoraro Railroad in thc soutltcastern portion of the Borough. 3l b. New Garden Township The zoning districts in New Garden that are or could be in the futue served by either the Railroad Line or the Route 4l Line include portions of the R-l District (Residential District), FVC District (Highway/Commercial District), C/l District (Commercial/lndustrial District), the C/I-2 District (Conrmercialflndustrial Limited District) and the U/D District (Unified Development District). A copy of the New Garden Zoning Map is included as Appendix 18. R- I District (Residential District) Provide for residential development at a densiCy that maintains a rural, open character ard continues to rely upon on-site facilities. Allow opportunities for flexibility in design through the use of lot averaging and clustering provisions. Provide for adequate housing opportunities by allowing a variety of housing choices. Encourage the preservation ofagricultural land and open space through clustering and other design options. FVC Dishict (Hiehway/Commercial District) Provide opportunities for the development of convenient, well planned office and retail centers within the Township. Ensure compatibility with existing and future development C/l District (Commercial/lndustrial D is tri ct) Designate an area within the Township for modern, well-planned commercial and industrial uses. Promote land use compatibility with existing commercial and industrial dcvelopment. Accomrnodate future commercial and industrial uses in an area suitable for such development. E,ncouage uses that are compatible with existing commercial and industrial uses and the general character of the district. Promotc a unified approach to development in order to better coordlnate uses in the district. Ensure the safety and well being of the community through the proper regulation of commercial and indr"rstrial activities. JZ UD Distict funified Developme4t District) Provide for urnified land planning which maintains the efficiency of the circulation system and limits the number of direct access points to arterial roads within the Township. Establish access management for the Limestone Road and PA Route 4l conidors. Conserve environmental resources which are sensitive to development. Encourage the retention of permanent open space within a master plan for development. Provide an opportunity for campus-type development which requires a tract size larger than what typically serves individual uses. Published population projections and housing construction projections are not available for the limited segment of the Township which is the focus of this plan. The data that is available is forNew Garden as a whole. The area surrounding the Railroad Line is primarily the rvestern section of Toughkenamon and the Old Baltimore Pike conidor west of Toughkenamon. The majority of Toughkenarnon and the area south of Toughkenilnon along Newark Road is or will be in the future served by the East End Facility and not by Avondale. The result is that relatively small sections of R-l zoncd property and H/C zoned property are possible candidates to be served by public sewers extending from the Railroad Line. Within this potential development area zre nurnerous natural features constraints that limit development. In addition, the parcels of land are relatively small, just a few acres, except for one large tract lvhich is held in a trust. Consequently, the projected new sewage flow ftom this area over the next five and ten years is minimal. Based on zoning, natural features, lot size, environmental constraints and other development limitations, the projected new sewage florv lrom this area of New Garden is approximately 19,798 gpd. The area surrounding the Route 4l Line is oriented toward commercial growth since Route 4l is a major transpoflation conidor running through the Township. Residential dcvelopment has and will continue to be oriented or-rtsidc thc commercial conidor and be scrviced by individual on-lot systems or in the future possibly by commurity systems or a new mLrnicipal systcm. Thc Ncw Gardcri Township building and park are locatcd along Route 4l and occr.rpy a significant amount of land thcrcby e liminating it lroni 33" development. There is also a church located along Route 41 that owns a large tract of land on which a small school might be built in ten years or so. The former Hewlett-Packard site is one remaining - area .that holds.rsignificant development potential and for which sewage capacity is already reserved. There is also a large tract that is under agreement of sale to the Kennett Consolidated School District that is to be developed in two or three phases over a period of years. Based on zoning, natural features, Iot size, environmental constraints and other development limitations, the projected new sewage flow fromthisareaofNewGardenisapproximatelyl0l,095gpd. 3. Future growth areas with population and EDU projections for these areas using historical, current and future population figures and projections of the municipality. Discuss and evaluate discrepancies between local, count5r, state and federal projections as they relate to sewage facilities. ^. Avondale Borough Projections As noted earlier, Avondale Borough has a current population of 1,031 persons, based on 1997 Borough records. Population projections for the Borough, as compiled by the Chester County Planning Commission, are presented below: Year Population I 990 954 l99l 980 r992 1,010 I 993 1,030 1994 1,070 r99s 1,090 1996 1,120 2000 1,150 34 The projections compiled by the Chester County Planning Commission are probably too optimistic with regard to the Borough's near-term population. It is unlikely that the Borough has gained 119 people in one year to meet the projection for 2000, especially without the addition of more housing units. In light of this, it appea$ that a more reasonable population projection would be: Year Population t999 1,040 2000 1,050 2005 1,150 2010 1,200 2020 1,240 The above projections take into accourt available land for development, as well as the projected revitalization of vacant property within the Borough. The Borough should be able to adequately manage and accommodate this level of growth without suffering significant consequences. This is in contrast to areas where the population has exploded and the municipality was unable to avoid the serious adverse consequences. Moreover, the Borough's population has already been as high as 1,127 (in 1970), which shows that existing infrastructure can meet the needs of the projected population. EDU Proiections lt was previously noted that the Borough has ceased to accept reservations for sewage capacity at the wastewater treatment facility since the implementation of the connection ban. It should also be noted that the Borouglt does not presently hold any sewer reservation fees for the purchase of future available capacity. I lowever, it has maintained an "unofficial" list of propcrty owncrs that would like to purchase capacity when it becomes available. The Borough's position is that this list is probably a more accurate tool for projecting residential future sewage flows than the standard nrethod of assuming a number of EDUs per acre based on the allowed use per the current zoning. It is unclcar horv existing commercial and light industrial parcels will be devcloped, as well as what potential sewage capacity may be wanantcd. Thercfore, it will bc assunied that 2.5 EDUs per acre will be rcquired. Proceeding with this methodology, following are the Borough's ISDU projections flor future connections: J) . Existing Allocation Summary " Total Allocation at Treatment Facility 362 EDUs I Total Connected EDUs as of l0-31-98 394 EDUs . Available EDUs from Existing Allocation (32) EDUs . Projected Future Allocation Needs Part I - Calculate Capacity Requircd for Nerv Connections within Avondale Borough ,Funre,Neeas ES*imates . In order to address the estimated future needs of the treatment facility, a vacant parcel survey has been conducted .i for the Borough of Avondale, as suggested by the Chester County Planning Commission. The vacant lot map is ; attachedasAppendix9.IntheanalysisthefoIlowingissues were addressed: I . The projected amount of possible EDUs in Avondale Borough . The projected growth of Avondale Borough . The population growth projection I To assist in addressing these issues, a zoning map of : Avondale Borough was compuued to the vacant lots for reference.PotentialgrowthtueaSwerethusaddressed. After careful review of the Avondale Borough zoning map, ' in conjunction with the vacant lot survey, the projections lor ,, ) future connections are as follows: Residential 102 EDUs Commercial 5 EDUs Light Industrial . 8,,E,P,JJ; Total I 15 EDUs JO Please note for light industrial parcels it is assumed that a factor of 2.5 EDUs per acre is required, this is consistent with the number used in the Plan. The flow value for future " EDUs to be connected to the facility is 275 gpd, Therefore, the flow to be generated by funue connections is: 115 EDUs x275 gpd per EDU = 31,625 gal. per day This number is slightly less than the previously projected number of l2l EDUs that showed an increase of 33,275 gpd. Since the Borough is already operating over its available allocation, any amount of growth within the Borough will affect the facility's abitity to serve its customers. It is true that significant growth is not likely to occur within the Borough of Avondale. However, the vacant lot analysis shows there is a growth potential. There have also been inquiries about reservations for sewage capacity since the connection ban, although no formalities have taken place. This also shows a need for capacity increase within the Borough. Population growth projections show a consistent increase over the next 1, 5, l0 and 20 years, although it is important to note that depending on the timing of additional liousing units, the population increase could occur in a shorter period of time. For example, if a housing development were to be built in the Borough consisting of 45 homes, assuming a 2.5 person household the population would increase by I l2-5 people within months. Therefore, it is imperative that the capacity of Avondale Borough be increased to allow for the proper treatment and disposal of an approximate 31,000 additional gallons per day of wastewater, Part2 - Calculatc New Capacity Rcquircd to Rcplace thc Portion of Ncw Gardcn Torvnship's Capacity that is being Utilizcd by Avondalc Borough Background information: I " Existing New Gardcn Torvnslrip (NG'D Capacity Allocation = 173,250 gpd 2.. Existing Avondalc Capacity = 126,750 gpd 3, Avondale ha^s becn, and still is using capacity at the 37 .g ,, ['Jffi::iT'"i.?ffi"'l':rtrJ"i',::il':l ; necessary to "make NGT' whole," that is, to "Hi'T:provide ' . enough capacity to ensure that NGT is fully able to i utilize its allocation. The graphs of the 1999 sewage flows presented in , Section III serve as a practical basis for expansion. Any expansion must restore the 173,250 gallons per day flow allocation to New Garden Township; during 1999, actual flows from New Garden peaked at j 96,019 during the heavy rains of September 24t, but, l on average, maintained flows between 67,000 and I 80,000 gallons per day (say 73,250 gal./day). As a l "base" need, then, approximately 100,000 gallons per day capacity must be added by Avondale to restore : the capacity to New Garden Township. b. New Garden Township The areas within New Garden that are being served by the Railroad i Line and the Route 4l Line were described in a previous section of this plan. A summary description of future gro*th areas and , potential connections was also provided. . Present Data: Mts"SJang 1998 29,604 gpd From 8/21198 to 12125198 I 1999 27,367 gpd From l/1i99 to l2l3ll99 Since no changes of significance have occuned with respect to the I Route 4l Line customer base, the present flow is not significantly : different than earlier flows. Rellroad Lin"g, 1998 22,753 gpd From 8i2ll98 to 12125198 1999 35,676 gpd Frorn llll99 ro l2l3ll99 'Ihe present flow reflects the result of having shilted flow lrom Avondale to the East End facility. The data collectcd in 1998 establishcd thal'17,040 gpd of florv on average has been removcd front Avondalc ald is norv bcing trcated 38 at the East End facility. Data will continue to be collected and analyzed in order to closely monitor flows as replacement connections are made. 1k 1 " It is important to note that Avondale and New Garden had established zur understanding that new connections are to be made to the system on a replacement flow basis equal to the 77,040 gpd which was removed from the Avondale system until such time as additional capacity is made available; however, DEP has established a ruling limiting the replacement flow to 25,000 gal. per day if there is no plant expansion or other method to handle excess flows. Finally, New Garden is currently using only 24Yo of its allocated capacity in the Avondale facility while Avondale is using l31.2% of its allocated capacity. This point becomes particularly significant when projecting funre capacity needs forNew Garden, Future Projections: Capacity purchased and owned by New Garden in the Avondale facility lT,25A gpd Current Railroad Line use (1999) 35,676 gpd Current Route 41 Line use (1999) 27.367 gpd Available for use before allocations I10,207 gpd, say I 10,000 Capacity purchased and reserved for the Hewlett-Packard properry (60 EDU x 350 gaVday/EDU) 21,000 gpd Capacity projected for the new school (1600x25) 40,000 gpd Capacity for projects on the waiting list (143x350) 50.050 gpd Available for use after allocations (l,000) gpd The calculations are based on 350 gpd per EDU which is contained in the Agreement between Avondale and New Garden. The 25 shown above represcnts 25 gpd per pupil. Both values are significantly higher than figures currently used for e stirnating purposes. If the values are adjLtsted to morc reflcct the actual avcragc New Garden florvs, the following results are derived. 39 Available for use before allocations 110,000 grd Capacity purchased and reserved for the Hewlett-Packard property (60x3 00) 18,000 gpd -Capacity projected for the new school (1600x15) 24,000 gpd' Capacity for projects on the waiting list (143x300) 43.000 gpd Available for use after allocations (83x300) 25,000 gpd Based on the calculations above, the remaining capacity available for unidentified uses (after allocations) will approximate 25,000 gpd. For purposes of this section of the plan, a value of 3 00 gpd, which is typical of other New Garden flow being processed by Avondale, has been selected. The result, therefore, is that 25,000 gpd or 83 EDU's remain for allocation to as yet unidentified uses. This capacity is in addition to what is available and identified for specific uses. Appendix 13 is a map of the geographic area within New Garden Township that is to be serued by public sewers with treatment provided by the Avondale Borough treatment facility. Based on the analysis above, there are certain issues which become very clear. t, Avondale must provide enough new capacity to meet its groMh projections plus the equivalent of what it is cunently using of the New Garden allocated capacity (100,000 gpd). 2. New Garden curently owns enough capacity to provide for certain identified future uses to include projects on the waiting list. 3' Projections indicate that up to 25,000 gal.lday may bc available for New Garden residential growth. The menrbers of the Board of Supervisors and Sewer Authority do not feel there is a compelling need norv to ,request new capacity above the current 173,250 gpd purchased and owned by Ncw Garden, however, the Board of Supervisors and Sewer Autlrority are willing to discuss purchasing new capacity in thc rangc o[ 45,000 gpd if such capacity can be purchascd at a rcasonablc pricc. c, Summary of Projcctions Avondale Borough will rcquirc 31,000 gpd of additional trcatmcnt capacity to meet its future needs bascd on anticipatcd dcvclopmcnt 40 activity. tn addition, 100,000 gallons must be provided as replacement flow for New Garden Torvnship. In addition, New Garden Township has indicated that it may purchase 45,000 gpd. A final tabulation of flow projections is noted below: Existing Facility Capacity 300,000 gpd Existing Avondale Borough Allocation 126,750 gpd Existing New Garden Township Allocation u.3,?5p gpj TOTAL 300,000 gpd Projected Avondale Borough Additional Allocation 3l,000 gpd New Garden Township Replacement Allocation 100,000 gpd Projected New Garden Township Additional Allocation 45,000 gpd Excess Capacity for I/l Flows 24.000 qpd TOTAL ADDITIONAI ALLOCATION 200,000 gpd New Wastewater Treatment Facility Capacity 500,000 gpd In order to meet the projected need for new sewer comections, the wastewater heatment facility will have to be expanded to treat an average annual flow of between 440,000 and 500,000 gallons per day, depending upon L{ removal. The rationale for the plant expansions and options for meeting this requirement are outlined in Section V of this study. 4. Zoning and/or subdivision rcgulations; local county or rcgional comprehensivc plans; and cxisting plans of a Commonrvcalth ngency relating to the dcvelopmcnt, usc, and protection of land and watcr rcsourccs with special attcntion to: Public ground/surface watcr s uppt ics Recrcational water usc G roundwater rechargc ft reas Industrial watcr usc Wctlands The protection of land and water resources is controlled in Avondalc Borough through the Zoning zurd Subdivision ordinances. Thcse ordinances are in general agreement of the goals sct forward in the "Chester County Plan, as well as Landscapes Conrprehensivc Plan Policy Elenrcnt." Areas that stand out flor protection are thc arcas adjoining the watercourses within the Borough, White Clay Creek, Indian Run, and Trout Run, In addition to containing 1OO-year floodplains, hydric soils, wctlands, thc high alAl yield aquifer, and linear featwes, these areas have a high probability for the presence of prehistoric archaeological sites and prime agricultural soils. Any . wastewater treatment plant .construction must be cognizant of regulations governing these sensitive issues. The Protected Municipal Lands Map in Appendix 8 indicates land that is permanently protected from encroachments which could effect environmentally sensitive areas. Within the Borough these include the Borough-owned tracts, including the Borough park along the White Clay Creek, the Borough sewage treatment plant site along the Indian Run, the Borough property across the Indian Run Road from the sewage treatment plant site, and the Borough Hall and Borough property along Pomeroy Avenue and the railroad tracks. There are no conseryation easements, Agriculhrral Security Areas, nor registered historic districts within the Borough. The Borough park and properties along Indian Run Road do afford some protection to the White Clay Creek and Indian Run steam corridors. Negds Assessment On the Water Resources Map found in Appendix 4, 100-year floodplains, hydric soils, wetlands, the high yield aquifer, and linear features have been identified. These resources are all found rvithin the conidors of the White Clay Creek, Indian Run and Trout Run. The areas of high yield aquifer cover a large portion of the Borough, and are also found outside the stream corridors. The high yield aquifer (Cockeysville Marble) is an area of potential water supply, but also an area in rvhich the groundwater is particularly vulnerable to pollution. A nrajor goal of the Borough is to protect the quantity and quality of surface and groundwater rvithin the Borough by protecting the water resources within the Borough. Floodplains are an important resource because they serve as areas where groundwater and surface water supplies can be recharged by the absorption of water. Protectitig floodplains from development can dccrease flood peaks and stornr water runofland protect stream banks and channcls. Pcrsons and property within floodplains are subject to potcntial harnr froni flooding. Wetlands serve as bufler arcas for streanrs, brceding places ior organisms, sources of food lor organisrns, and aninral habitats. In addition, they serve to replcnish and to protect groundwatcr and surface watcr supplics by absorbins water. The hydric soils arc area-s thal have not bcen idcntiflcd as +LA1 wetlands, but are potential wetlands. The linear features (fractures) a-re areas of potential water supply and areas where the gror,rndwater is particularly susceptible to pollution. In order to protect the quantity and qualiry of surface and groundrvater, the Borough will adopt mitigative meesures to preserve the water resources contributing to growrd and surface water supplies and quality. Because the hydric soils, wetlands, floodplains, fracftues, and portions of the high yield aquifer are found along the watercoluses, if the stream corridors are preserved from development the Borough's goal can in large be accomplished. Ways of protecting the stream corridors are through designation of the conidors for presewation and the establishment of buffers along the streams through preservation of hydric soils, wetlands, and floodplains. .. The high yield aquifer (Cockeysville Marble) is an area whcre groundwater resources can be polluted. Portions of the formation can be preserved via preservation of the stream conidors within the Borough. If development would occur in portions of the Cockeysville Marble outside the stream corridors, safeguards to prevent pollution of the groundwater have been established. This includes requiring developer recognition and study of the carbonate areas and having certain protective procedures and standards applicable to the area. f,. Scwage planning to provide adequate rvastcwatcr trcatmcnt for thc municipality. This planning must bc relatcd to both thc live and tcn year future planning pcriods and be bascd on grorvth impacts on cxisting and proposed wastcwatcr collcction trcatmcnt facilities. As noted earlier in this section, it will be necessary to expand tlre Borough's wastewater treatment facility to a capacity of up to 0.500 mgd to accommodate future growth within the Borough and Nerv Garden Township. This Act 537 Plan addresses all relative sewage planning as related to both the five and ten year future planning periods for the respective municipalities. 43 f tl V^ IDENTIFY ALTERNATIVES TO PROVIDE NEW OR IMPROVED WASTE- wnf rR DISPoSAL FACILITIES The Borough of Avondale faces challenges regarding sewage,disposal. The specitic issues include the following: 1," The WWTP is rated for 0.300 mgd. Over the past five years the WWTP has seen average monthly and average annual flows greater than 0.300 mgd, directly related to infiltation and inflow. This has resulted in eflluent violations of their NPDES permit for parameters to include flow and Total Suspended Solids (TSS). Please note that the violations are based on the mass limit. The effluent concentrations are typically within the permit requirements. The Borough must maintain an active sewer rehabilitation program, to include sewer re-lining and manhole repair to bring down I/I flows. 2- An examination of sewage flow pattem during 1999 (see Figure V-l) shows that even during the drought emergency conditions of the summer of 1999, flows from Avondale Borough (not including New Garden Township) did not drop significantly below about 190,750 gpd, or 64,000 gpd above the allocation of 126,750 gal per day. Presuming that an I/I program is successful in flow reduction equal to the very low flows during the drought, a minimum expansion required for the treatment plant can be calculated as follows: Avondale Present Flows 190,750 Avondale Future Flows 3 1,000 New Garden Present Allocation 173,250 New Garden Future Flows 45,000 Total Flow Requirement 440,000 Present Plant Capacity 300,000 Plant Expansion Requirement 140,000 A further examination of Figure V-l reveals that the 1999 Avondale sewage flow normally is in the range of 250,750 gal per day, or 124,000 above the allocated capacity. Presuming an I/I program which only reduces significant occasional spikes in flows, a reasonable plant expansion can be calculated as follows: Avondale Present Flows 250,750 Avondale Future Flows 3l,000 New Garden Present Allocation 173,250 New Carden Future Flows 45,000 Total FIow Requirement 500,000 Present Plant Capacity 300,000 Plant Expansion Requ irement 200,000 44 Figure \'- I 1999 WEEKLY FLOWS da a- -0, tL/) _r, --A.y& I ;' t;ii;:; * a - 1999 Avondalc (Onty) Flow's to Wastewater Treatment Plant f,xprnsion #? to 500,000 gpd Expansicn #l to 440'000 gpd 126.750 gPd Allocaiion De€ anarys6 re9a/ed by eov6ahonlSpecialists, Inc Both of these alternatives will be evaluated to determine the most cost effective method ofaddressing the flow exceedences. A treatment plant expalsion can best be put in place by keeping the present plant in operation, and constructing a second plant to operate in parallel with the existing plant. Fortunately the existing plant has an equalization tank from which the flows can be separated to flow either to the existing plant or a newly constructed plant. SSM performed a Capacity Report of the existing plant in February, 1997, and found that the limiting unit processes were the aeration reactors, the clarifiers, and the chlorine contact time (tank volume). Additional capacity for these units processes can be preconstructed by a manufacturer within a "package plant" and assembled at the site. We have been in contact with a manufacturer's representative, who has provided budget prices for a package plant of both 140,000 gpd and 200,000 gpd. In both cases, the plant consists of two circular tanks, with an inner clarifier sectioir, and aeration tankage surrounding in an annular ring. The cost comparisons are shown as follows: Plant Expansions (Construction Costs) Item 140.000 snd 200,000 epd Equipment $214.000 $249,000 Erection 75.000 75,000 Paintins 35.000 40.000 Contingency 36,000 36.000 Subtotal 360.000 400.000 Excavation 60.000 70,000 Site Work 20.000 20.000 Concrete Slab 40.000 60.000 EleCtrical 80.000 80.000 Continsency 40.000 40.000 Subtotal 240.000 270.000 Total $600,000 $670.000 In each case, the concept for the plants is a steel package plant, delivered to the site and established at an elevation wherein florv is directed by gravity to the plant from the equalization basin. This rneans that excavation will be required so that the tank will be half-buried in the ground. The tank wall (rim) would above the flood plain and not subject to flooding. An outbuilding would be provided to house blowers and controls, A< The plant expansion requirement must be balanced out rvith corrective inflow/inflow measures, the idea being that the smaller plant expansion of 140,000 gpd will require more extensive I/I corrective measures, and vice-versa. Total project costs includes both a plant expansion and aneffective Ifl rehabilitation program. Currently, the Borough of Avondale is lining a 1,200 foot reach of sewer pipe which leads directly to the treatment plant. All things considered, the cost of this work is about 'reasonable $65 per foot. Expanding this unit price to I/l corrective measures, a program of about 4,000 feet of lining would be required for the 140,000 gpd expansion, while about 2,500 ft of lining would be required for the 200,000 gpd expzursion. Table V-I, following, shows the cost comparison between the two alternatives. Total project costs are shown, along with a distribution between Avondale and New Garden users, based on the Avondale need to restore New Garden flow allocations, and each communities requests for future capacity. The lower of the two costs is for the larger plant expansion of 200,000 gpd. This result presumes that an NPDES application will result in similar treatment requirements for either altemative, and that the larger flow will not need to be treated to a higher level. 40 Avondale Sewage Facilities Planning prepared 3-21-00 Expansion #1 Expansion #2 Wastewater Treatment Pla nt 140000 gpd expansion 200000 gpd expansion Constructlon Costs q 600.000,00 rt 670,000.00 Project Costs 810,000.00 $ 904,500.00 Sewe r Infiltratio nilnflpw Corrections MH3'l-16;MH3-70 MH31-14;MH3-66 Construction Costs $ 265,000.00 168,000.00 Project Costs $ 318,000.00 201,600.00 q Total Project Costs 1,128,000 00 1 ,106,100.00 Wastewater Treatment Plant Pennvesl; 3.5% at 2Syears $ 49.142.70 54,876.02 Avondale at 95,000, or 68% $ 33,417.04 New Garden at 45,000, or 32To $ 15.725,.66 '155,000, Avondale at or 77.Sfo $ 42,528.91 New Garden at 45,000, or 22.50/. $ '12,347.'t0 Sewer l/l Corrections Pennvest: 3,5% at 25 years $ 19.293.06 $ 12,231.07 Total Avondale Annual Share $ 68 435 76 67,107.09 Total New Garden Annual Share D 15,725166 a 12,347.07 Avondale Unit Cost at 400 EDU ) 171.09 $ 167.77 O t't +s=e@- |.9(! \'31 P!! -. l) :+ aFl >< (h v) A Conventional Collection, conveyance, Treatment, and Discharge Alternatives 1. . , The potential for regional wastewater treatment. The Avondale WWTP cunently serves as the regional WWTP for the Borough of Avondale and portions of New Garden Township. This plan maintains the WWTP cunent status as regional wastewater facility. There is no economic or operational reason to create a new facility or alter any of the existing relationships. B.o The use of individual sewage disposal systcms including individual residential spray irrigation systems. Spray inigation i, u t*o step process used to treat sewage. Wastewater is collected and transported to a primary treatment system. The influent to the system is processed to remove organic content and insert solids. In addition the wastewater is disinfected prior to discharge. Typically the systems used for primary teatrnent are identical to those used in conventional wastewater treatment. After the sewage is treated, it is pumped to a spray network. The treated effluent is sprayed over a field or forested area for absorption into the soil. The effluent receives additional keatment as it percolates through the soil and enters the groundwater. Two tlpes of spray irrigation systems could be considered for use within the Borough. One would be a comprehensive system that would spray all of the Borough's treated sewage. The second would be small individual systems that would be built to service newly developed land where feasible, while existing sewage flows would continue to be treated and discharged at the existing sewage treatment facility. Within an urban area such as the Borough, it would be extremely difficult to provide the necessary isolation distances to operate individual spray inigation systems. The use of such treatment systems rvould also depend heavily upon the type of development that would occur on a vacant parcel, as this would dictate the amotrnt of land that could be reserved for sprafng, in addition to the installation of the treatment facilities. Since most of the remaining undeveloped land is zoned as residential, it is unlikely that any potential developer would sacrifice saleable land for use as a spray field. However, the Borough may consider such alternatives for implementation providing that issues such as safety; operation and maintenance; and, reliability are properly addressed by the land developer. There are no portions of the Borough that have been designated as mandatory spray irrigation areas within this plan. A1 The remaining spray irrigation alternative is to spray a portion, or all of the Borough's effluent. This altemative is not being considered at this time; however, this system will remain subject to discussion with London Grove Township, who is possibly expandjng their spray irrigation site to the west of Avondale Borough. 1", Land Requirements - Spray irrigation is a land intensive method of disposing of sewage. Assuming a wastewater flow of 120,000 gpd (10 year projection based on new EDUs from Avondale and New Garden) and an absorption rate of 1.0 inches/week/acre (typical value used for the soils tlpes found in southem Chester county), the necessary land for disposal would total 30 acres. There is no area in the Borough that could contain all of the acreage required without negotiations with London Grove or New Garden Township for a shared use of their facilities. This is especially pertinent when regional sewage treatment facilities exist. 2. Cost - Spray inigation systems have increased in number over the last decade. Data has been collected on their cost of construction. The data shows that they are more expensive than conventional systems with the same capacity. General estimates show their construction cost in the order of $13 per gld of capacity. Therefore for a 120,000 gpd system the conshrction cost would be $1.6 million. It is estimated that the land needed for the facility would total 35 acres including absorption area and facilities area. Typical fair market value for agricultural land in the area is approximately $9,000 per acre. The land acquisition costs would be $315,000. The estimated total cost for spray inigation would be $1.9 million or $15.80 per gpd. This does not include the cost to add a new collection system or modify the existing. These prices are not consistcnt the cost of about $10 per gpd to modifu the existing facilities, 3. Operations - Spray inigation systems cannot apply treated effluent to absorption areas over the entire year. Specifically during colder months, when the ground freezes, alternative disposal methods are required. The wastewater must then either be retained or sent to another facility for disposal. If a rctention tank is used, it must be large enough to hold several days or even weeks worlh of sewage. A tank this large would firrther increase the construction and land acquisition costs. If the sewage is sent to another facility, operations cost would increase. 48 C. The use of small florv sewage treatment facilities or package treatment facilities : to serve individual homes or cluster of homes. Thisaltemativerequirestheconstructionofseveralsmalltreatmentplants.Itis estimated that two such facilities would need to be constructed to service the l Borough of Avondale and New Garden Township. This altemative is not being considered for the following reasons: 1. Operations and Maintenance - These treatment facilities would require constant operations and maintenance. The Borough currently does not have i thestaffneceSSarytodothis.Therearenoplanstoincreasethestaffto levels necessary to do this in the future. 2. Land Use - This altemative would require the Borough to acquire multiple ) lotstoconstructthesefacilities.ThisisnotanefficientuseofIarrd considering existing facilities exist. This is not compatible with the regional i planning for the area. , 3. Existing Facilities - There are existing facilities in the Borough that can service areas that need servage disposal. D. The use of community land disposal alternativcs This altemative is similar to the previous alternative. Treatment facilities are constructed to service larger numbers of EDUs. The treated sewage is discharged to , either a larger drain field or larger sand mounds. This altemative would require the . construction of multiple units to accommodate the entire Borough. This Alternative l is not being considered for the following reasons: 1o Operations and Maintcnancc - These treatment facilities would require I conStantoperationsandmaintenance.TlreBoroughcunentlydoesnothave the staff necessary to do tliis, There are no plans to increase the staff to levels necessary to do this in the future. 2. Land Use - This alternative would requirc the Borough to acquire multiple lots to construct these facilities. This is not an efficient use of land considering wastewater facilities exist. This is not compatible with the regional planning for the area. 3. Existing Fncilitics - There arc existing fhcilities in the Boror.rgh that can service areas that nced sewage disposal. For tlicse re asons this alternativc is not bcing considercd at this trmeo 49 E. The use of retaining tank alternatives on a temporary or permanent basis. Retaining tanks are installed subsurface to hold sewage. On a regular interval pumper trucks empty the tanks. This alternative would require the Borough to install multiple tanks for large collection or single tanks to service individual users. This altemative is not being considered for the following reasons: 1* Operating Costs - It is estimated that Avondale and New Garden will generate 200,000 gpd of wastewater. The typical disposal and transportation costs for septage and wastewater is $0.05 per gallon. This would calculate to be an operating cost of $10,000 per day or approximately $3,6 million per year. 7 Existing Facilities - There are existing facilities in the Borough that can service areas that need sewage disposal. 3* Management - This altemative would require the Borough to add staff to manage proper disposal and insure the proper maintenance of the system. The Borough does not have staff nor is it planning to increase staff to manage a retaining tank altemative. F, Servage management programs to assure the future opcration and maintcnance of existing and proposed sewage facilities. The Borough of Avondale does not have an existing sewage management plan. As noted earlier, there are only l0 homes within the Borough that are served by on-lot systems. The need for a joint municipal sewage management program for both Avondale and New Garden is not required. With the expansion of the WWTP the Borough of Avondale will be nearly 100 percent sewered. New Garden has an independent sewer ordinance. Both municipalities retain jurisdiction over their residents and commercial interests. Both municipalities have no desire to share those jurisdictions. G. Nonstructural Comprchcnsivc Planning Altcrnntivcs that can bc undcrtakcn to assist in meeting cxisting and futurc scwage disposal nccds including: l. Modification of cxisting comprchensivc plans. The Borough of Avondale completed its cornprelrcnsive plan in 1993. The plan supports the Chester County Comprehensive Plar. Bascd on tltc Avondale Comprehensive Plan land use dcsignations and ordinances have been modified. Specifically, the prime agricultural land in the Borough has been reclassified as residential. 50 The Borough has recently made changes to their sewer ordinances. They have changed those ordinances dealing with industrial wastewater. These changes limit the quality of the wastewater .industry discharges to the WWTP. Under the ordinance Industry must discharge wastewater with the : same characteristics of domestic sewage. This ordinance was created to deal with Diazinon, a pesticide used by local mushroom growers. As the TRE prepared by SSM in 1997 indicated, the WWTP has been challenged to meet eflluent requirements pertaining to Diazinon. Since the industrial wastewater ordinance was created Diazinon I has not been seen in either the influent or effluent in any appreciable quantity. H. A nonaction alternative which includes discussion of both short-term and long- term impacts on: l. Water Quality/Public Health The short-term impact of the no-action altemative on water quality/public health would be essentially the same as the current condition. That is, no new connections would be allowed to the sewage treatment plant. The long{erm impact would be/ that development within the Borough would be stifled. 2. Grorvth potential (residential, commercial, industrial) ; The Borough of Avondale is predominantly built-out, but there remains the occasional lot and property for redevelopment. A vacant lot analysis r determined the commerciaUindustrial land available. A no-action alternative would limit this srolvth. 3. Community Economic Conditions It is important to the Borough's economic condition to maintain a balance of residential, commercial, ild industrial development. The no-action altemative could likely severcly rcstrict such developmcnt. 5l .:: 4. Recreational Opportunities There is no evident short-term or long-term impact on recreational :? . ,.opportunities by the no-action altemative. * 5. Drinking Water Sources It is reasonable to utssume that the continued use of the remaining onJot systems would negatively affect drinking water sources. Although the majority of the Borough is serviced by public water, the sor.rce of this water is local wells. On-lot systems may negatively affect this public water system. 6. Other Environmental Concerns A no-action altemative will have little or no impact on other environmental C0[COil5r 52 vI. EVALUATION OF ALTERNATIYES A. Technically feasible alternatives identified in Section V of this checklist must be evaluated"for consistency with respect to the following: l. Applicable plans developed and approved under Sections 4 and 5 of the Clean Stream Law or Section 208 of the Clcan Water Act. The Avondale Borough wastewater treatment facility is the designated treatment facility for the identified service area within this Act 537 Plan Study. The decision to upgrade and expand the facility to accommodate additional growth within the service areas is consistent with the policy objectives of the Chester County Planning Commission as identified in the Chester County Comprehensive Plan. The proposed action also is consistent with the Department's policy regarding the minimization of the number of treatment facilities which discharge effluent directly to surface waters. 2. Municipal Wasteload Management Plans Developed Under PA Code, Title 25, Chapter 94. Chapter 94 of the Rules and Regulations for the PA Department of Environmental Protection (DEP) concerns municipal wasteload management. As stated in the second section of the Chapter, its purpose is "..to require the owners and operators of sewage facilities to manage wasteloads discharged to the sewerage facilities in order to accomplish the following objectives: (l) prevent the occurrence of overload sewerage facilities; (2) limit additional extensions and connections to an overloaded sewer system or a sewer system tributary to an overloaded plant." The expansion of the wastewater treatment facility will bring tlre Borough back into compliance with the Chapter 94 requirements, as the expansion will eliminate the hydraulic overload that has been experienced. The expansion will also allow the acceptance of current and future connections, while maintaining compliance with the NPDES permit conditions. J. Plans Dcvelopcd Under Title II of the Clcan Water Act or Titlcs II and VI of the Water Quality Act of 1987 There is no Title II Clezur Water Act or Titles II or VI Water Quality Act of 1987 plans that address Avondale Borough. the countywide 1970 plan (see Section LA.l.) indicates very generally that Avondale Borough should be the regional treatment facility for its own sewage flows, as wcll as those from the New Garden Township service area. 53 4. Comprehensive Plans Developed Undcr the Pennsylvania Municipalities Planning Code. Act 247, the Pennsylvania Municipalities Planning Code, is the state legislation which defines the authority of most Pennsylvania municipalities in the area of local planning and development regulation. The Plaruring code specifically empowers municipalities to create, adopt, and implement four different planning tools: the Comprehensive Plan;the Official Map; the Subdivision and Land Development Ordinance; and the Zoning Ordinance. The Comprehensive Plan is not, strictly speaking, an ordinance. Instead, this document is a reference serving two functions. First, it is a collection of data on the existing status of land sues, facilities and services, the transportation network, population, Iocal economy, municipal finances, and natural features. Second, it is a policy statement by the Borough expressing its goals in the areas of land development, facilities and services, and the transportation network. Avondale Borough completed its first Comprehensive Plan in 1993, and is cunently in the process of updating selected portions of the document. Following is a brief sunmary of the goals and objectives of the Comprehensive Plan as they relate to future land use: A major goal of the Future Land Use Plan is to preserve the environmental resources of the Borough. To accomplish this, the corridors of the White Clay Creek, Indian Run, and Trout Run have been designated stream conidor protection. These areas should be left in open space in order to preserve the water resotuces fbund in these corridors. The major wooded area within the Borough has been designated Woodland Protection-Low Coverage Clustered Residential, to permit only limited development and clearar-rce of the wooded area. This area is particularly vulnerable because of the steep slopes. The other areas of identified steep slopes within the Borough, found in the western porlion of the Borough, have been designated Steep Slope Protection-Low Coverage Clustered Residential. Only limited development and grading of these areas would be permitted. In both the Woodland Protection and Steep Slope Protection areas development which occurs should be clustered on the areas of least slope to leave the remaining areas undeveloped. The Borough is basically a residential community, zurd the Borough wishes to maintain the character of the existing residential neighborhoods. Cenerally consisting of single f).unily detached areas at medium density, development within and adjoining these existing neighborhoods would also be single family detached development at nredium densities. There is 54 limited land available for residential expansion. A planned development residential area has been designated in the southeast corner of the Borough where a mixtr.ue of single family, two family, and multiple family development could occur. Pennsylvania Avenue is a very scenic conidor because of the trees lining the road and the attractive properties, generally single family residential in appearance, along the road. The appearance of Pennsylvania Avenue will be encouraged by encouraging single family residential use except south of 2nd Avenue, where conversion to commercial use would be permitted provided the appearance of the structwes were not significantly altered. Such commercial development would fit in with the existing neighborhood oriented commercial development which is found along Pennsylvania Avenue and West State Street in the center of town. Potential for additional commercial development in the center of town is limited because of the lack of vacant land, circulation conditions such as narrow slreets, and difficulties in providing for off-street parking. It is expected that in the furure most new commercial development will occur along Old Baltimore Pike, where larger parcels will be available and sufficient off-street parking could be provided. Expansion of existing industrial areas is limited by sunounding land use and the prcsence of stream corridors. Provision has been made for offrce development, limited industrial uses, and planned commercial uses in the southern portion of the Borough between Ellicott Avenue and Route 41. Given the corridor problems of Route 41, it will be necessary that any future development which would occur along Route 4l have limited and planned access to the road. Another pertinent aspect of comprehensive planning within the Borough can be found in the Chester County Planning Commission policy element, "Landscapes". Following are relative goals and objectives form this document that support the expansion of the Avondale wastewater treatment facility, and in turn, the revitalization of the Borough. 55 PolicvNumber Description . .Maintain, 1.1.6 " and upgrade existing sewer and water facilities to address problems, and support revitalization and development activities r.1.9 Protect and restore urban historic and natural resources t.2.2 Direct additional development to areas with infra- structure capacity 1.2.1 Encourage infill development among existing developments based on infrastruchre capacity and environ-mental constraints 6.1.2 Maintain or expand existing sewer and water facili- ties to snpport development in urban and suburban landscapes 6.t.3 Restrict the extension of sewer and water facilities in rural and natural landscapes These policy elements are consistent with the Borough's objective to expand its wastewater trealment facility to allow additional development on appropriate parcels of land within its borders. The Chester county Planning Commission also encourages the land application of treated wastewater whenever feasible, but lack of available land and cost make this option prohibitive. It should be noted that these policy elements are also supported by the Borough's zoning and subdivision/land development ordinances. It is also important to ensure that the proposed developmemt within New Garden Township that will generate florvs to the treatment plant are consistent with these policies. The northeastern portion of tlre Borough is bordered by land in New Garden Township zoned R-l Residential. The basic permitted uscs are single family detached dwellings on one acre lots and agriculture. In the vicinity of Old Baltimore Pike, land within New Garden Township is zoned FVC Flighway Commercial, where offices, retail stores, banks and shopping centers are permitted by right and restaurants, hotels and motels and recreational uses by special exception. Land south of the railroad tracks to Route 4l is zoned R-1 Residential. Land from Route 4l to Ellicott Avenue is zoned Cll-2, Commercial/lndus-trial Limited. Research and laboratory uses, offices, assembly, fabrication and manufacturing uses, warehousing, and non retail commercial activities are 56 permitted. Therefore, the development of these areas is consistent with the regional planning vision for the area. f,. ." Antidegradation requirements as contained in PA Code, Title 25, Chapter 93,95, and 102. The protection of Pennsylvania's surface waters is regulated through the antidegradation requirements, as contained in Pennsylvania Code Title 25, Chapters 93, 95, and 102. These will be complied with through proper permitting and approvals, An amended or new NPDES permit will likely be required to implement the expansion at the Avondale facility, and the permitting process will act as a check on water quality standards (Chapters 93 and 95). There is no anticipated change in the location of the discharge point for the facility. The existing discharge point for the Avondale facility is to lndian Run, which is a tributary to White Clay Creek. It is classified for protection of cold water fishes and standard water uses under Chapter 93. Expansion of the Avondale facility will maintain consistency with these designated uses. Construction of the addition to the heatment facilities will have a temporary impact at the facility site. A soil erosion and sedimentation control plan will be submitted to the Chester County Conservation Distict in accordance with Chapter 102. 6,' State Water Plans Developed Under The Water Resources Planning Act. The State Water Plan ''vas developed by the Department of Environmental Protection to be a comprehensive management tool for guiding the conservation, development, and administration of water resources and the lands which affect those resources. The Plan is made up of nineteen subbasin reports covering the entire state. Avondale Borough lies completely within Subbasin 3: Lower Delaware River. The summary introduction of the Subbasin report includes a statement which, although in reference to the subbasin as a whole, is also true of Avondale Borough. "Subbasin 3..water resources have played an important part in its development, and continued prosperity will depend upon how well the region can harmonize its needs with the water resources available. The basin originally became a center of population, trade, and manufacturing because waler was available for consunrption, transportation, and power. The basin's water resources are currently heavily used and several area sources are developed to their maximum limits. Therefore, conseryation must be an integral part of any solution to the future water needs of the subbasin. " 57 I Pennsylvania Prime Agricultural Land Policy Contained In Titte 4 of the Pennsylvania Code, Chapter 7, Subchapter W. This land policy orders a:rd directs "the prevention ,,of the irreversible conversion of prime agriculhral land to uses that result in its loss as an environmental or essential food production resource. The land policy specifies the definition of prime agricultural land as "prime", "unique", or "of state or local importance". As previously noted, much of what is now developed land within the Borough would be considered prime agricultural land. However, because of the Borough's designation as an urban center, remaining farmland has been zoned mainly for residential use through development reserve. It is logical, and consistent with the goals of the Chester County Planning Commission to encourage development adjacent to existing urban areas to mitigate sprawl. Therefore, remaining areas of prime agriculnral soils will not be considered as a resource to be protected because of the limited developable land outside of the stream corridors, the availability of public sewer and water, and the Borough's existing nucleus of community facilities and existing development, 8. Countywidc Storm Water Plans Approved By the Department Under the Storm Water Management Act The Storm Water Management Act requires each county in Pennsylvania to prepare and adopt a stonn water management plan for each watershed in the County. These plans must dssess projected land development patterns in the watershed and the potential impact of that development upon the quantity, velocity, and quality of runoff. Projected development in the flood hazard areas must also be analyzed. This plan must be considered during the development of sewage treatment facility plans, for the ability to provide sewerage will have an effect upon the development potential of a given area. The Boroirgh's zoning ordinance and its subdivision and land development ordinance would generally support the goals of such a plan, but at the present time, Chester County does not have an adopted plan in place. 9. Wetland Protection Undcr PA Code, Titlc 25, Chapter 105. Wetlands are described as areas that are inundated or saturated by surface or groundwater at a frequency and duration sufticient to support, and that under normal circumstances, do support a prevalence of vegetation typically adapted for Iife in saturated soil conditions, including swamps, marshes, and bogs. In addition to the prevalence of hydric flora, the presence of hydric soils and evidence of hydrology at the surface (i,e., wct or spongy conditions) are additional criteria considered for wetland designation. Wetlands include, but arc not necessarily limited to, swamps, marshes, and 58 bogs. Wetland preservation has been identified as a way to provide for natural flood control, flow stabilization of streams and rivers, improved water quality, and aquifer recharge. I ',' Wetland types are defined according to the ecological system which they support. Five broad categories has been established: marine (ocean system), riverine (river system), lacautrine (lake system), palustrine (marsh system), and eshrarine (estuary system - dependent upon the variations in salinity which characterize the waters at the limen of fresh- and salt-water). The wetlands within the Borough are protected from development through the zoning and land development ordinances. Within the site of the existing sewage treatment facility, there are no identified wetlands that would prohibit the expansion of the facility. 10. Protection of Rare, Endangered, or Threatened Plant and Animal Species as Identified by the PA Natural Diversity Index (PND[) In recent years, there have been both state and federal laws and regulations implemented to protect the habitat of rare, endangered, and threatened species. These laws and regulations require municipalities to assess the impact of a proposed sewage facilities planning altemative may have on a protected species. The Department of Conservation and Natwal Resources, Bureau of Foresty, maintains the "Pennsylvania Natural Diversity Lnventory" (PNDD. This database contains site specific information about the Commonwealth's rare, endangered, or threatened species. Municipalities or their consultants may access this systcm when evaluating various sites for sewage facilities. A request for a PNDI search was filed, and a response received (refer to Appendix l5). The response indicated that PNDI has no record of occurTences of rare, threatened, or endangered species within the area and, therefore, does not anticipate any impact on such species. ll. Historical and Archcological Resource Protcction under P.C.S. Title 37, Scction 507, relating to cooperation by Public Officials rvith thc Pcnnsylvania Historical and Muscum Commission. This 1978 Act requires municipalities to cooperate fully with the Pennsylvania Historical and Museunr Conrmission in the preservation, protection, and investigation of archaeological resources. Municipalities are required to notify the Commission when a specific site is under consideration and request the Commission to render a detennination of the impact on archaeological or historical resources that could occur if the sewage facilities are constructed on that site. 59 , B. Provide for the Resolution of Any Inconsistencies in Any of the Points i Identified in Section \lI.A. of this checklist. : " ,There are,no inconsistencies in any of the points identified in Section VI.A. l C. Evaluate alternatives identified in Section V of this checldist rvith rcspect to applicable water qualify standards, effluent limitations, or other technical, |egislative,orlcgalrequirements(Reference.Title25,$7|.2|,a.5.iiD. The two altematives selected in Section V discharge sewage to an existing permitted location, however, the flow will increase from the current 300,000 gpd to 440,000 i gpd or 500,000 gpd, depending on the alternate treatment option selected. Both the i altemates project that the new NPDES permit will provide for secondary treatrnent. : If more stingent discharge requirements are needed, then the cost of construction : and/or operation should be re-evaluated to confirm feasibility. , D. Provide cost estimates using present worth analysis for construction, financing, on-going administration, operation and maintenance and user fees for alternatives identified in Section V of this checklist. Estimates shall be limited to areas identified in the plan as needing improved sewage facilities within five (5) years from the date of this of plan submission. : The following Table VI-l shows the present worth analysis. The present worth i analysis was performed in accordance with PENNVEST Procedures, using a Project i Life of 20 years, no salvage value, zurd an interest rate of 6.815Yo. i 60 Of the two altemates, the second, providing for a plant expansion of 200,000 gal.lday is recommended for the following reasons: l, Plan's Objectives - The larger expansion meets the plan's objectives. This option provides the additional capaciry at the WWTP to cover the elusive nature of infiltration/inflow mitigation. This option provides for growth and protects land resouces by doing so. 2. Meets Regional and Comprehensive Planning Objcctives - This alternative meets the objectives set down in previous planning. One of the main objectives of the Landscapes is to revitalize and contain urban areas. This option allows for rational growth in the Borough. Development on the remaining Iand in the Borough is a form of revitalization and compatible with the area interests. 3. Managcment - This option relies on existing facilities and instinrtions. By doing so little to no modifications are needed to existing relationships, billing structure or operating agreements. This Option is readily institr,rted and managed. 4. Economics - Although the 140,000 gpd expansion was shown to have a lower present worth than the recommended 200,000 gal.lday expansion, the difference between the altematives is less than3Yo, an insignificant arnount, considering the early stage of estimating and the contingencies built into the estimates. Considering the level of engineering detail that is still needed, these numbers are considered equal. 5. Opcrations and Maintcnance - 1 Eo Provide an analysis of the funding mcthods availablc to finance cach of thc proposcd alternatives evaluatcd in Scction V of this chccklist. Also providc documentation to dcmonstrate which altcrnativc lnd financing sclrcmc combination is thc most cost-cffectivc; and a contingcncy financial plan to bc used if thc prcfcrred method of financing cannot bc implcmentcd. Thc funding analysis shall be limited to arcas idcntifierl in thc plan as nccding improvcd scwagc facilities rvithin fivc ycars from the datc of thc plan submission. nal Loan. Depending on the amount of money which is needed, the Borough could pursuc a municipal bond issue or a conventional loan. In general, a municipal bond issue is used when a large sum of moncy (approximately $2,000,000 or more) is required. A conventional loan is used when less money is required. 62 There are several types of municipal bonds, Some boncts are taxable and some are tax-exempt. However, the general classification of municipal bonds usually refers to tax-exempt bonds. The following tluee types of 1. I mwricipal bonds are generally used in financing public works: l. General Obligation Bonds are tax-free bonds that are secured by the pledge of the full faith, credit, and taxing power of the issuing agency. This type ofbond is backed by all ofthe taxes on real estate and personal property within the jurisdiction of the issuing agency. It involves minimum risk to the investor and, therefore, requires a lower rate of interest than other types of bonds. 2n, Dedicated Ta,r Bonds are payable only from the proceeds from a special tax and are not guaranteed by the full faith, credit, and taxing power of the issuing agency. Examples of special dedicated taxes are the special assessments against a property which is adjacent to and the principal beneficiary of the improvement, and gasoline taxes used to finance highway construction, 3, Revenue Bonds are payable from revenues derived from the use of the improvement such as tolls, sewer bills, or rents paid by the users of the improvement and do not otherwise represent an obligation of the issuing agency. Revenue bonds are not ordinarily subject to statutory or constitutional debt limitations. They are often issued by commissions, authorities, and other public agencies created for the specific purpose of financing, constructing, and operating essential public projects. Typically, municipal and revenue bonds are sold to an investment banking firm who then resells the bonds to individual investors. The advantage of n'runicipal bonds to the investor is theirtax-free status. A bond discount (a percentage of the total bond issue) serves as the inveslment banker's commission. Before bonds are sold, they may be rated on the basis of risk to the investor by a rating agency such a Standard and Poor's and Moody's, The higher the rating, the lolver the risk to the investor and, consequently, the lower the interest rate that must be paid on the bond. The legal instrument which sets forth the rules which must be observed by the issuing agency is the Trust Indcnture. 'l'he Trust Indenture is prepared by the Bond counsel and must be printed along with the bonds, 63 A Trustee is required to administer the bond issue and ensure the terms of the Trust Indenture are observed. These requirements result in an Annual Trustee fee. sl*j " 1 | -. Current interest rates on a}}-year term (repayment period) vary from 4.25% to 6.0Vo- The longer the term, the lower the annual debt service (repayment) and the higher the total zrmount of interest that must be paid. Investment bankers indicate that it does not pay to extend the term beyond 25 years because the interest rate increases dis-proportionately. The following are the advantages of municipal bond issue funding: l. This program affords long-term fixed rate financing 2. Tax-exempt municipal bonds are in high demand. 3. There is a local investment opporhurity. 4. Municipal credit is established. 5. Avondale Borough retains flexibility for future bonowing. 6. The financing approval period is shorter than with PENNVEST. The following are disadvantages of municipal bond issue funding: l1 Market interest rates are higher than ma.ximum PENNVEST interest rates. 2. Municipal guarantee is usually required. J. A Reserve Fund is generally required. 4. There are trustee fees, Bond Counsel fees, and costs for preparing a Trust Indenture. 5. Issuance costs are higher than with the PENNVEST program. 64 ,PENNVEST was formed by the Commonwealth.of Pennsylvania, with the legislative intent to recognize that the health of millions of citizens of the Commonwealth is at risk due to substandard and deteriorated water and wastewater systems; also to protect the environment of Pennsylvania. Some areas of the Commonwealth have to limit their economic and population growlh due to their water supply and sewerage systems being outmoded and overloaded, PENNVEST recognizes that financing of water and sewage projects is frequently not available at affordable rates and, therefore, PENNVEST will assist in financing projects which protect health and promote economic development in Pennsylvania at affordable rates. The PENNVEST Authority may receive money from sources including the followins: t" State firnds appropriated to PENNVEST, including the Growing Greener initiative 2, Federal funds appropriated to or granted to PENNVEST 3. Proceeds fiom the sale ofbonds PENNVEST Authority establishes a Water Pollution Control Revolving Fund which is administered in accordance with the Water Quality Act of 1987. PENNVEST's Board may also establish nonrevolving funds and accounts. Repayments of loan principal together with interest are deposited with PENNVEST in revolving funds or nonrevolving funds fi'om which PENNVEST repays its indebtedness. Criteria for obtaining assistance are established as follows: I Whether the project will improve health, safety, welfare, or economic well-being of the people. 2" Whether the project will lead to an effective or complete solution to thc problems of the systenr and bring it into compliance with state and fecleral regulations. .) J. The cost-elfectiveness of the proposed project in comparison with other alternatives including other financial and physical altematives. 65 4. The consistency of the project with state and regional ',' reSourcemanagementandeconomicdevelopmentplans. 5., Whether the applicant has demonstrated its abiliry to operate I and maintain the project in a proper manner, ; 6. Whether the project encourages consolidation of water and wastewater systems where consolidation enables customers to be most effectively served. 7,Theavailabilityofothersourcesoffundsatreasonablerates to finance all or portions of the project. Grants are made only when PENNVEST determines that the financial condition of the recipient is such that repayment of a loan is unlikely and : that the recipient will not be able to proceed with the project without a grant. Lozurs are made by PENNVEST according to terms PENNVEST deems i appropriate including current market interest rates and the economic distress ofthe area the project serves. Loans are granted to entities who agree to have their system operators participate in continuing education courses developed by PA DEP, Under certain circumstances, PENNVEST may make funding available to l financethoseactivitiesurdertakenpriortoapplicationforconstruction financing (e.g., feasibility analyses, engineering design, etc.) If so, all definitions,provisions,restrictions,procedures,andautlrorizationsthatare enumerated in the Act and in these regulations apply in the same manner to l advance fi.rnding assistance as they do to construction financing assistance. : When it is determined that Avondale Borough intends to pursue a 'i. PENNVEST loan for feasibility analyses, design or constnrction, steps r should be taken immcdiately to place the project on the PENNVEST list through your representatives in State govemment. Even so, application for PENNVEST funding to cover construction costs cannot be made until final design is complete. A PENNVEST application is reviewed simultancously by adnrinistrative, technical, financial, and legal staff in several offices in ordcr to spcedily ' process the application. A look at the advantages and disadvantages of PENNVEST funding is . helpful in determining its applicability to this project. l 66 The following are the advantages of PENNVEST funding: t.$ A pre application meeting with PENNVEST was held on November 22, 1999, PENNVEST and DEP will work together to assist Avondale in funding the project. Interest rates are in the range of 3.2-4.0% for a20-25 year term. 2. The program management is greatly influenced by PA DEP, and PA DEP is the same agency which approves Avondale's Act 537 PIan, J" The issuance costs are relatively low compared to issuance costs of a Municipal Bond issue. +" There is no negative arbitrage associated with this program, PENIWEST interest rates are so low that, in almost all cases, interest is eamed durine construction. The following are the disadvantages of PENNVEST funding: t, The program was conceived to assist communities with higher than average unemployment rates and lower than average family incomes so this proposed service area might not fit well into the eligibility criteria. 2 The application process may be lengthy due to there being only three PENNVEST Board meetings each year and an increasing backlog of applications to be processed. a J. There is much competition for the lolv interest funding. 7. Environmental soundncss and compliance with natural rcsources planning and preseruation programs. The chosen alternative complies with natural resources planning and preservation programs as illustrated in Section VI of this document. The installation of the proposed collection system will adhere to all federal, state and local regulations. The necessary permits will be obtained as needed. t]. Dcsignate and dcscribc the capital financing plan choscn to implcmcnt thc sclcctcd altcrnntivc. Dcsignate and dcscribc thc chosen back-up financing plan" Iror planning and estimating purposes PENNVEST funding was used for calculations in this document. ot C. Analyze the need for immediate or phased implcmentation of each alternative proposed in Section V of this document. .The WWTP has had a history of exceeding the effluent criteria over the last five years. Increased hydraulic loading due to I/I has caused a majority of these exceedances. Although several steps have been taken to eliminate the IA, the average hydraulic load still remains close to 0.300 mgd. The WWTP needs to be upgraded with respect to capacity. Construction projects work on an economy of scale, The unit prices for large projects are typically lower than those of smaller projects. If construction at the WWTP is going to be undertaken, it is befter to complete it all at one time. For these reasons a phased approach is not recommended for the upgrade of the WWTP. D. Evaluate administrative organizations and legal authority necessary for Plan inrplementation. The Borough of Avondale has an existing Borough Council and an Authority. These instirutions have administered the needs of the WWTP, negotiated agreements with other municipalities, borrowed money for projects and maintained the billing for sewer services provided. This will not change with the implementation of this Plan. They have the legalAuthority to perform these tasks, 68 vIL INSTITUTIONALEVALUATION A. Provide an analysis of all existing wastewater treatment authorities, their past , actions, and present performance'including: The daily operation and maintenance of the Avondale Borough wastewater treatment facility, as well as the wastewater collection system, is currently the responsibility of Avondale Borough Council. In 1966, Borough council formed an Authority for the purpose of financing and constructing a sewage collection system and wastewater treatment facility to serve the Borough, as well as a portion of New Garden Township. The relationship between the Council and the Authority is a "lease back", by which the Authority owns and leases the sewer system to the Borough. In 1997, the Borough placed the Authority on "inactive" status, with the reservation to activate it when necessary. The responses in this section are directed to both Avondale Borough Council and the Authority and their ability to implement the proposed project, as it is unknown whether the Authority would be utilized. 1. Financial and Debt Status The Borough cunently has no debt and, therefore, no debt service. The Borough is the guarantor of a loan to the Sewer Authority for improvements to the treatment facility that were undertaken in 1993. That contingent obligation was $400,000, and is classified as lease rental debt. The current debt service for this obligation is $60,736 per year until 2003. In addition, the Borough has an outstanding principal balance of $461,000 in a2O year obligation that will be retired in 2016. This debt was undertaken to finance engineering studies and capital projects for the wastewater treatment plant and collection system. ) Available staff and administrative resourccs. Staffing for Avondale Borough presently consists of a part-time secretary, a part-time treasurer, and one parttime employee in the streets department. The water and sewer systems are operated on a full-time basis by a private contractor, Miller Environmental, Inc, The Borough recently signed a l0- year contract with Miller Environmental Inc. for continuation of these services. Their duties include daily operation and maintenance of facilities; recordkeeping and rcporting; and provision of recommendations for improvements as needed. J. Existing legal authority to: a. Implcmcntrvastcwatcrplanningrccommcndations. b. Implcmcnt systcmwidc opcration and maintcnancc activitics. 69 Set user fees and take purchasing actions. d. Take enforcement actions against adoptcd ordinancc violators. Negotiate agrccments with other parties. Raise capital for construction and operation and maintenance of facilities. The legal authority to implement and provide the above requirements is vested with Avondale Borough and the Avondale Borough Authority through the following ordinances, agreements, and acts: i) The Authority is organized under the provisions of the Pennsylvania Municipalities Authority Act of 1945 (see Ordinance Chapter). The act provides for the incorporation as bodies corporate and politic of "Authorities" for municipalities, counties, and townships; prescribes the rights, powers, and duties of such Authorities; authorizes such Authorities to acquire, construct, improve, maintain, and operate projects, and to borrow money and issue bonds therefor; provides for the payment of such bonds and prescribes the rights of the holders thereof; confers the right of eminent domain on such Authorities; authorizes such Authorities to enter into contracts with and to accept grants from the Federal Government or any agency thereof; confers exclusive jurisdiction on certain court overrates; provides for health center projects; and provides for the financing of projects through loans by the Authorities. ii) Avondale Borough has the ability to implement wastewater planning recommendations under the provisions of the Pennsylvzrnia Scwage Facilities Act (Act 537) enacted by the Pennsylvania Legislatwe in t966. B. Provide an analysis and description of the various institutional alternativcs nccessary to implcmcnt the proposcd tcchnical alternativcs, including: l. Necd for new authoritics. The Avondale Borough Authority is incorporated pursuant to an Ordinance of Avondale Borough, and is existing undcr and approved by virtue of the Pennsylvania Municipalities Authorities Act of 1945, approved May 2, 1945,P.L.382, as amended and supplentented. 'I'ownship Neither the Borough nor Nerv Garde n has discr,tssed the formation of a joint municipal authority for this project. The Borough Authority has a 3O-year history of successfully managing the opcration of its sewagc 70 collection and wastewater treatment systems. Moreover, the 1968 Agreement between the two municipalities defines procedures for cost- sharing on capital projects, and it is anticipated that these procedures will be used to. implement the proposed project .to expand the capacity of the wastewater treatment facilities. The success of this arrangement is illustrated by the construction of the original collection and treatment facilities, as well as the most recent upgrade project in 1993 which involved the installation of a flow equalization tank. 2. Functions of existing and proposed organizations (sewer authorities, ctc.) The Avondale Borough Authority owns and maintains the sewage collection system and the wastewater treatment facility. The Municipal Authorities Act of 1945 prescribes the rights, powers, and duties of such Authorities heretofore or hereafter incorporated; authorizing such Authorities to acquire, construct, improve, maintain and operate projects, and to bonow money and issue bonds, and prescribing the rights of the holders thereof; conferring the right of eminent domain on such Authorities; authorizing such Authorities to enter into confracts with and to accept grants from the Federal Govemment or any agency thereof; conferring exclusive jurisdiction on certain courts overrates; providing for health center projects; and providing for financing of projects through loans by the Authorities. Cost of administration, implementability, and thc capability of thc authority to react to future needs. The cost of providing administration to the proposed altemative will be reflected within the Borough's proposed budgct. No nerv institutional requirements are necessary to implement the proposed altemative in regard to cost of administration. The capability o[ the Authority to react to ftrturc needs is provided by the Municipalities Authorities Act of 1945. Avondale Borough and Avondale Borough Authority have long, sr.rccessful, established histories and have all tlre institutional requirements in placc to be able to react to future needs. -ltt C" Dcscribe all necessarX administrative and legal activities to be complcted and adopted to ensur€ the implementation of the recommended alternative. including: Ii Incorporation of authorities or agencies. None is required. 2. Development of all required ordinances, regulations, standards, and intermu nicipal agreernents. Ordinances and Resolutions: Boflr Avondale Borough and New Garden Township already have existing ordinances and resolutions in place that cover: setting rates and charges for the sewer system; providing for collection and placing of liens; regulating the discharge of sanitary sewage and industrial wastes; and requirements for connections to the sewer svstem. Standardstt: Both municipalities have long ago adopted standard specifications relating to the construction of installation of sewage collection systems, These standards are consistent with those prescribed in the Department's Domestic ,\Vastewater Eacilities lvjanua!. Intermunicipal A greements : As noted earlier, operation of the sewage treatment facility is govemed by the 1968 Agreement betrveen Avondale Borough and New Garden Townshio, J. Description of activities to provide rights-of-lvay, eascmcnts, and land transfers. The expansion of the sewage treatment facilities will not require the acquisition of rights-of-way, easements, or land transfers. The treatment facility is surrounded by Borough-owned property, so expanding beyond the current footprint will not be a problem. Individual developers will be required to obtain ncccssary easements and rights-of:rvay as needed for future extensions to the sewage collc-ction system. The Borough would not accept dedication of any sewer linc rvithout d ocumentation of required easements. 1.\ 4. Adoption of other municipal sewage facilities plans. n , ",.^ New Garden Township has-passed a resolution adopting the Borough's Act 537 PIan as it relates to the expansion of the wastewater treatment facility. 5. Any other legal documents. None required. 6, Dates or time frames for Items I to 5 above on the project's I implementation schedule. See implementation schedule in Schedule A at the beginning of this I document. D. Identify the chosen institutional alternative for implementing the chosen t wastewater disposal alternative. Provide justification for choosing the spccific ', altcrnative. The chosen institutional altemative for implementing the selected wastewater treatment altemative is to maintain the existing institutional arrangements in place. As previously stated, the Borough has organized at Authority under the provisions l of the Pennsylvania Municipalities Authority Act of 1945. The Authority presently owns and maintains the wastewater collection and treatment facilities and will do likewise in the future. The Borough and Authority have enacted ordinances to i require connections, to set rates, and to accommodate other necessary administrative functions for the sewer system. The existing institutional iurangements have been l functioning for many years with respect to the sewer system and are capable of : iniplementing the chosen sewage alternative. Furthermore, the Borough and the ; Authority cunently have adequate staff and administrative resources to implement i the chosen altematives. aat) AVONDALE BOROUGH O/rcster eoun ty, Pennsyluania N_e-w Gardcn Torvnship a,/ -5/ 3to/ R-1 f, I t^-li Itr !,L FD FD ?'-*:.--+ Grove Township Neu' Galien 'Iownship l I It ZONING MAP I R- 1 Residential Districl 0 200 400 601 s00 R-2 Residential District #-J Flexible Use Districl Soilo in tcel FD -*-_ry - TC Town Center District C General Commercial District lASilJ,\rr UP0nlt0 l$r5 LtAt fllepAn(0 ly alIISi[n C0UNIy FLnflr]lilG iiil.lnllSSlfJ[ 1-q95 I lndustrial Districr ;,;jr'.' l+:' :::l tixi & giN j lti|il , :; y';:' 't:, '.. ." ,r4a' ' ,1 1, tu..: t't :r:4., t:.: tlitttll,i i. I '. :;,*" .:2"" i:.itt'tt'l ':j.'Y ,t' . t:;.t.., , ,E, : :. .:a,itii!::' ',ti,:;;l ',.t)ri::; (Ylw 1lstlsJ 'Eilliln@ feYt*vlto oNY cr.rarc llltq 8:llscrlp t! uil9'lf,ts l$uJ 'ElEn|c qfiv I'l s3do'ls, tr:S Ers,,o .,fi9"ff,!f;ir$tm,trffiS$ sros tvurutnctuev 3 ntud ff::3 ^!/\u!i rrrs 3$tdv& ' d${sltAot N:io#l A4 dIHSr 0r Noiln -;iiiinli :aorP toosr vtNvA]ISNNtd'AINflOC U3lSlHS HsnOHOS ItVoNOAV dVW SSSUNOSSU INVT J^, WATER SYSTEM MAP {"s TY4 I c = a a ,t. \il *1 Jirsrua,r6i flsouvs ^\3N - r": - ...', t:,nl: , ,,',4?:. llii 'izi/'l<: ,,.1j ". : ...1', i., :t., ' |ta,;:. "'i:: ;,r'01,,..; lllti; .' ' :"'l'.i : li"r,,r ';'nlatz :j;rii: ,,,,ti t/l:/ ' '':.:i. i:.,, . .lt:. . .:r1:.. - .. .:... '"".' :?t..ti|,...:.: . ,:....;,i,1,,.. :' . :".:,'.1.2 ." ,.;'..1":1:;;,11i',.,t,i '.t. .,. ., ...41:'.. - tt,ltt.;.ai) '': . .,"1 a '....,i,,'.,','1,.':,;iil t...:.::,..,.,.:',,,,,1.t,i,,1.i:.:/::;:' 4g"t I .| h" a W.'4 K {WJK S, ':,::1...... : .': ; 'i:' i11i 1t:fu'7, :::')11,, ,:itli;; .t r:///i. ttt:);t(t' WATER RESOURCES MAP AVONDALE BOROUGH CHESTER COUNTY, PENNSYLVANIA ei Ddtc Scal Fr=-E- sd a J a lOO YEAR FLOODPLAIN (FROT FET.A FLOOO IN$,R^,ICE RA.TE YTP) uvhor^ cnl Q (frloll sdl sun\iEl cllEsiER Al{D DELAWARE colJLl?|Eg, Pllltlgll-v lll^ ANo Hyoflc qrLs oF PE}{tlStLVAlllA BY U$A Sil COf|SERVAT0a{ SAMCE) UTETLANDS (norJ rAnO$AL IEnX{DS lNt/EtlrDRl0 HIGH VELD AQUIFER (cocr{EYsulrf r,lR8lr FRor. o€SlB cdrNw o€ol.oCY i.APs) st BMlNoR DRAINAGE EASINS (rnor lrAruRrL B|\mo{r.elr P|INNING) (^ll filn Er:ir aRAraol lliloi eASr ^N0 m hinE sro-aa Jm 9A5l{ To olY vAJn EAsl{) LINEAR FEATURES (FRACTURES) (rnou mano *ArE REsoURcfs oF cl{B'rEn cour{rY, PDINSIw Nl^) . :.,t :: .:, -,i .': i,-,. :.:::,j:..i1:'1i.1,.:,,.. .,..:':llt:::: .. :.,..:, | ... ,q #t)ffi" # .t:3. k 3" e'4 'rx fiF,W &{}&:: e.Lffi{:T${}F{ ffi s'g,'$i lYtlaf,l{4.{ {} t -t' ,', ' ' , , .... :, ....||.|....,, ,iii':' it4nA ";I. ; Alg$,[t.frg{K€t trl o t; oI it o It r 94*i.4*s'.' TRAJN 1 i_:L if 8AR SCREEN CHLORINE FLOW EOUAUZANON 'ilr: CONTACT METER TANK TANK $ :ji, i 1.; cE-! t2 cE-L IJ ,1f'' L__ _Iti i 4.3"-___t i' nes,zwes I' PUMPS , t t *-l---.*- !s aj!, uL&lii -- AERAIION TANK ----t { ELOWERS t l SLUDGE TMNSFER PUMP OIGESTER qr--q;F.r r SLUDGE REMOVED FROM L,-* +:s 5 q:.* *,-. *.* **:* J -.:-* - - DIGESTER BY VACUUM IRUCK LEGEND ---..+ W^STEWATER FLOIV {;*:\r+,*i SLUDCE FLOW ----S&--- SUPERNATI}JT FLO\| A- AIR - CHLORINE OR POLYYER SOLUTNil OIRECITOil OF FLOW SUAUERSIBLE PUMP C€MIRIFIJC^T PU}IP 5804-OOO-A-001 :^;t )'r?)ia.' '''''' '.1" ...-..... ': ,itiilr; ti" '.!. 1i.t1i . /:aa . ' :l::t":' lr.:t': :. : ',::,,t;;;:::,. .l,):.:l;:4./..'. '':';:l:: i:'t. :, /'.:,.t,.. ;' ::: 1.: ": :t ;:.. ,... :..,i,;,:i,:,; ': ,t::t j.\';",J,1.. , , '.i t,r:;:,.tt:,/,' ,:,, ,,...i,t.4j1,1 ,:,''.;;'/1"1'..1i :,.1:ir':, ":;,1.11"1.t ; ,,.| . .\ 1,.,t' : :,L1:,/ii,1 | ':'lti t,.il. ; . t,,)',i,:.;,',';.,,,: ,' :':i:,:::':,i .1,,1,1;l: ,::, r1.;1:,1.: ".('.,,., iuF$q * 7 ,: -r\f!.r!!)14aatt .. a:.1 . ::, '.' 11 ':t. t.;t..rj^.. '.1,..,:',:1,' ,' '/.;;t:; ,,..,t ',,,ti',,,.,,' ,.::,,. 1t1t1; ' . .: )iri 1:i:t: ... .:'11.11 ,.:,r: a..,,' ,:,,,1 1::..1.:.11: :.. : '.:::t/,:, I .i. I u"' lj EXISTING LAND USE MAP AVONDATE BOROUGH CHESTER COUNTY, PENNSYLVANIA 6DVE flT,NSI{P lcv GaRlrx Tov|asl{P Lfi{llll ldlF--*s4$4+ -\h' & s:+rit.ti i .a . 4" l., N l:/ z( g u n qI 4z E "-\\, t' ,t LOI{D'DJ ITMSilF ICV GIR!€N TIV^SHIP E - E FfltrY FIIE{TIIL EE - EIEru V]I* trrISY rm$fln qrarc sD^t! -&rur&Ym O r:l=!==d a a ffi -rs4r&NrrcNd|mrd -d I -m E -rx'!fl[ [:-.r,!El -tFl.IE @ -rusulr|ru E#l -ms PROTECTED MUNICIPAL LANDS MAP AVONDALE BOROUGH CHESTER COUNTY, PENNSYLVANIA ulrx ett,3 sl[p 16, ah&t ttlxi{F Gffil -mrar- FE--rCIiFIAI J --a - I I I J APPENDX 9 VACANT PARCBL ANALYSIS AVONDALT IJUKUU 1hestcr 1ountY, PennsY{unnitr Nerv Garden Torvnshio London !'":Tll'n'tl - - { - fit-r_EN 4 I t7 ld I J ts o d l-' 7-r- l4 I? IH \\. t;' ,l +* v- (e t\- R-'f \t4$- *{ tr ItJ 1rl t rt' i- i a. I 2,' I (lrtve 1'orvrrshi p Nerv Garden I I I VACANT PARCEL ANALYSIS ^t ,a I fi- 1 Residential District VACANI'I,ANDS 0 ?00 {00 600 600 R"2 Residential District i'.'...... ffi-.._ a__.....!E I FE Flexible Use Disirici SrelP in Frrl l,\\\N\\g\t*:lJ" ife Town Cenler District C General Commerclal Dislrict 0rr5t t,taP uPoAl€D l9_c5 lndustrial Dlstrici rrlp Pfit?A9tO 0r cgEsltfl coltltt PIiilflllc cotlllls910ll l996 I APPEI\IDD( TO NEW GARDEN TOWNSHIP SEWAGE COLLECTION SYSTEM MAP !' .\. -\ /- -t\ ! nl sA' "-',':-,:j-.'r t, \ \ o,>tT I --/ \\ tPlf \ tr'lZ ! o Tr lz sF\: l9 s -F tI; b,\ ,u. L o os, 4. z aV o b Z N. o t{ p t o a { 2 s H o I I P z o z I nt 1;e /" f? D lil i I z I iil Ot" *l -l o(-1 :l ;'r r I co ':> c $- o o iz frl I .l 0 o i- t:1 tA I rtl o r -.tl I z o u -E6] CENr[fi o CE, 51 z II a- rl ol'l UNION -{ S ? u o rrl I -{t 6z (h FIt n rtr+ FI €:r { rrlr { a't lz {2 'ttoi |.?-' Lrfvlit ai: ':tFflA' tao. I gtvlslol{ l'.ls 'il*e- @nrHtrf,loN TO M,H. t o I $ I I -\^- t ,/' 2' =-' >l!8 //"'- flr -/ i"z 8 'o \1 --'!J. r - : \ il! ,,'.1wv?<' ' //I ' / ' i! ,, ',^ Y 13-y--9',,6q=' ll -, ;f ,'/:p' .\ t C a. =.& e 1i il i irl 'fl ll ,irrl fr I I ,.Yatclr r rr,- APPENDIX 11 NEW GARDEN TOWNSHIP FLOW DATA NEW GARDEH TOWNSHIP P4e t WEST ENO FLOW ANALYSIS.It99 ueter nasdims Tcdil Flw Percenlaqs Fb!, __ Averaoe R!!!,_lYech(syDavs. Planl Ht al RR Awn Plant Al4'l RR Avon Plant Rf 41 RR Ayon Phnt c Fll al Roule 41 Forc€ Maln t{R = Ralroad Gravfty Malo Avoo - Avondale Borough Plant = Avordale WWTP 1225t98 6359 63,741,2y) 43,601,760 5e9,722,O00 4;i01;-i9 900r d3.93t,{@ 43.698.000 531.277.000 r91.150 91.2{0 t.272.6t0 t.t55.000 12.3% 5 9% 8l g% lDo 0y' 27,307 13.034 181.801 2e?.143 0 1 (18 !g lo0a 6r.123.520 ..3.805.160 533.011.coo 'tE6,r?O 109.160 1.15E.720 r.76.1,000 fr.f% 62.h ezTca 100 clt 28,017 1s,594 206,389 252.000 193,635 100,200 1,365.665 1,659,500 1{ 27,66? 14.314 195.095 237,Q71 arl/151tst 9015 6r,33,{,770 13.925.700 59,7 n.00o 206.250 t?C,5{0 t.343.?10 1.670,000 t 2 r% 7 .?1/, 80.4% 100 0% 2S,re4 17220 191,8E7 238,571 'r97,640 106.960 1,358.180 1,663,000 2l 2A.263 15.283 1€4.026 237,571 6{.5{.!,078 L.1.095.3?0 534,901.S00 ?09.340 169.620 l,El 1.0E0 2,rst.000 9.6% r,7% 82.7.h 1€O O.S 29.900 24,?31 258126 312.A57 200.705 1?2,UO 1,471.405 1.794,?50 28,672 17.5?0 2'10,201 256.3e3 q a : r:-: 'c 96:3 6..j55.2S0 {'r 2e? 2.i0 5i9.026.6C0 212.270 t86.9?0 1.725.860 ?,r25.000 100% &81{ 8120A r30 0% 30,3t7 26,703 246,55t 303,571 203,008 135,496 1 ,522,296 r,860,800 35 29,001 19.357 2'17,171 265,829 0205/99 gr:.3i I 61.9?0.326 44.{3?.0!0 5{i 103.000 l1{.030 15.r.7I0 1.708.200 2.07?.000 10 3$i t 5% 63 ?% r00 c:;, ,57a 22,fi0 er{.02€ 206,?ra oa.!45 |lr.7!! r.55!2t0 1,496..3 12 292ar' .ta,Z15 plpn 21Op7A o7t1?t9E .{,5Mt36 sl,roriaa r.355,.!o r,002_000 Tiri |zl!a 100orr 27,630 2t.674 236,490 280,000 203,417 1,r0,567 t,567,873 1,9r1,E57 25,050 20,0E',1 223,982 273,172 02i 1!:': :c3,1 65.3J3.i90 {r 7eO.650 5.15.?{0.000 zuJ.olu 17r.920 r.759.{60 2.135.000 9.s% 6.1'A 82.1"ra | 00.0% 29.089 24.560 251.351 30s,000 203.,043 114,486 1,591,821 1,939,750 29,063 20,U1 227,1A3 2n JOr ,i:rie99 9L':7 65.i83.:60 1{.?O5.3?0 5{7.36€.O00 2r4.570 r{{.7?0 t.766.710 2,1 ?8.000 t0 1% 6E% E3_1% 100,0% 30,653 .20,674 252.673 304,000 201.679 144,312 r,61r,{76 r.9M,687 4.210 m,Us 230,211 280.095 il1,o5J!t s5.775,.1{ 45,978.8?0 5"19..t36.000 r 92.060 r 73.500 1.70?.4,10 2,0d8.000 c39{ 8?.3% 100 01i ?7,437 24.786 243,206 295,129 10 203,417 117,11'.|'1.620,572 1,971,400 70 29,060 2r,059 23t,5t0 281.529 ii1aii r0;1 65.93t.330 .r5.i49.1 !O 55t.58r.@C 215.0r0 r70.?.t0 l.?58.850 2, | {5.000 t0. |% 7.9./t 62-O.h r00 c% 30,844 2,t.320 231,2U 306,42e ll 20,r.558 1a9,486 1,533,'143 1,997.t82 77 a.2a 2r.355 233.305 283,683 f,a I S.;t €6 ZO2.03C 4s,457.864 553.805,OOO 2 r'r.500 m6,750 r.Bo3.l50 2.224,OOO 8t,1% r 00 0i! 30.2'f 4 8,E21 257.879 317.t't4 ?0s,132 154,125 1.647,360 2,006.9t7 29.305 22,061 235.337 286,702 a ci {) ,.. a '4 6) 6) 6 ro @ Pn di @ o il' Or ol{l ol N @ IXt- Plla @ ol o !{ o{ f, a @ N Pl Ol o o o 0 o o 6 ,D _6 { '6 .u, -o .@ Jrl i! u q c) rt :l _@ 'r o ! N 0 n 6 D b gsl a '@ i! ;e q N o o I o o o o E is BA N -o 'r 'o -o o o{ i;r ii o '9 'o 'o 'q @ o o u = Fg o or o o o o I o o a-6A N '@ P !e 'o @ ! a' o 6 @ 9 a dl 'o 'oo 'o 93 o o o o o g o e o o o 0 Pi @ @ o o 6 I 90 94 N i, I al s^, bC P-l &t-3l 'h 6 !., o 4to N p @ g I I !e .te i.e s f s g "lE { E" !o a o I I o I q b o sle'l{ ie l: :l ;t I !l I o a o o I a o b o il s s s I i;lrl 1 rrl N N N NQ N N N N9 F p6 N N@ N u6 N NO N .B N NA N rB -B @o o @o o .o o@ 6 o@ q oo o O- O -@'N .@N -o {N -oU >rl'';l -r'@ L -o:r '@! 'o iL 'o -@L -a '{'N '6 '--o L'N L L'o { 6@ O @@ { @o N - @{ o rN o ql> @q oo o oa o !o 56 0 aq@ oo olI N 6- l* a N@ O N@ O NF @ N! @ N{ O NO 5 N0 0 -B o oo.B o{ {5 0 o{ o o@ o o{ @ @u @ _@ o -@-! -lt -6_0 '- 'N'O 'N '@ -@L 'N 3[i 'oL '-. '@'o 'o'o '6 i$b '{ a 'o'o '6L i {'@ q oo ! NO ! Q0 0 oo o @i { ON N JN O oo o o@ ! oN @ oo o !o o il; IE pr p'l N p'o N p'o N p'o N.O N N.O N p'o N N.O N N ro'l N N ae d{' o ?lI o{ o AO O 50 { -'i r@ o {o o oN o NO @ NO _OA o{@ o a{ sh 'O 'o'N _o '@o 'o'! -@ 'o --- 'O -6-O "@'o 'N i'N a 'o-o 'o -I< '@A iv 'o{ @q o N@ @ @o N @@ q 6{ { oo o oo a o{ o 60 @ o@ lO! Q@ !o o ra o N@ { NJ @ {F { @o @ @N O P{lo N N N J.' N' N N N F .f, p-o N_O @ N'O A N_O O NO @ N9 @ NO d Il N.O N N N.O N N.O N NO N {o o @o N @o @ @@ { @! ! @o { @@ o @o o @@ o .oJ, I {o @ GO N -@-@ -- .d lj -- -6 'o't 'b 'o'o 'o =al i'o i! 9J n @N O N o: o oo o b'o 'oL L -l @6 a oo { -@ oo J {o o rO N oN o 90 { N{ O @o !o o{ a or o@ -o { oo @ oo 1 2r2{f99 NEW GARDEN TOWNSHIP Page 3 WEST ENO FLOW ANALYSIS.I9'O Atta Porlo'd L!eter R€dimE Tolol Fbw Porcontaoe Ftff AveGoe Flow Yleek(rlrDsvs Calendar .hdlon Weef(s) Dsyt RI4T RR Planl Rl al RR Awn Planl Rt 41 RR Arcn Pilnl Rl41 RR Avon Ptant o Rt 1'l = RorJls { | ForT,e Main RR = RefrBd GrawY Maln Ar,on AwMale Boro.Jgh Plant = Avondale WWTP o&'r 1/99 I t62 68.468.7,1O {8.58t.950 57E,740.0@ 197,040 251.110 1,326.E50 1.777.000 11.1% 14.1% t0{,.0% 28,1,19 ss.873 r89.E36 253,E57 ?,1 re6,979 207,353 1,b38.055 2,042,417 r66 2E.t40 29,626 23..000 ?91,711 arf"': $,!8 9169 64,5??,260 d8.83?,35i? 560,{6g.OO0 180.0?0 255.aoo t,?02.5s0 1.??E.o00 r0,4% t4 gl,6 74 8% 100 0% 55,?6l.2OO lnr rt rclg .GC&.d 8fl5) 'Tol, b* r (gt 572r6o{E.a66.7a01. (55Frr,lBf526l:ll)l 25.717 36.486 164.65/a 246,657 55.337.700 ts6.30o an9.304 1,62423A 2,O?3,UO 175 28,043 29.901 232'0.U 280.977 0v2s/99 s176 55.522.c0o 49.O7O22o 582,1.11,000 185.200 232,670 1.234,930 1.673.000 11.1% 13.$% 7s.0% 100 0% 2A,157 33.267 179,276 239.000 195.873 210.210 1.610.032 2.0-t6.r15 '182 27.962 30,030 230.005 2E8,0le o7/0z"99 5s.715,E00 49.339.760 583,877,0@ r92.SO 269.540 | 273,560 1,736,000 11.1% 15.5% 734"t 100.0% 27.557 3E,506 18f,937 24e,000 re5,763 212.407 ,|,597,570 2,005.74'r t89 27,966 30,344 72A,n1 280,53a [71,1!j]S g 190 55"9S5.9C0 *9.633,6r0 5&5,616.C00 t60"100 !93_611 t.325.050 r.799.O00 r00% 15,3% 737% ?5.729 {1.979 169.2S3 257,000 195.204 2',t5.316 1.587.837 r,998,357 ?7,686 30,759', 226,A3a 285,4a0 Lr,16/99 9t97 56,0S0 3n0 49.888.990 5ts7.12:,C00 r9{.{00 235.380 r"?t7.?.?0 r.647.000 I l 60A 14 3?6 73 s'/" 27,f71 33,626 t?3.E89 235.286 195,176 216,008 1,575.057 1.986,2'll 203 27.86? 30.E58 n5,OO8 263.749 ::r:igE ;103 t 56.?0,r,?00 50.r34.{10 58E.96r.000 196.930 265.a20 t.t75,&5O 1.E33.OOO 120% 15.2Ve 7J 8Q,6 100 0% 7 66.5t6.09O (Rt.t 'rc.Gdd /no) 'lor.l !tu . (562O1.2AC:6,090,1O1. (66,669.r2o58"3t6.001 28.t33 37.917 r67,S50 234,000 66.659.1m 30 195,235 217,655 1,561.?4,1 1,97{,633 .act3|.0922!'10.232'0oo 50.1!8,870 5r0.5,1i.oo0 ter.tto 162.a!5 r,130,t90 tJtt,000 r2,tt t63x ?1.!!( t000ra 27,393 37.491 161,541 226,48 3l 195,122 219,1(x| 1,Vf,A12 1,9€2,065 27,815 3t,300 2?1,1N 280,295 a c'irr'139 !: : e 6S 0.2.ta0 s0.&{8.r{0 53r.s55_000 r91.270 251,210 956,{60 l,409,o00 l3,6ca r7.8% 60.604 27,324 35.896 138,066 201.286 195.002 z,oj06 't,529.674 1,e44,761 27,A57 31,111 21A,525 2n,826 08/1399 9225 69.?35.970 50,tt96,38o 5$3.{?E,000 19,t,830 248.240 1.027.930 1,at r,000 t3 2% 16.9% 69.9% r00 0% 27.633 35.463 146,E47 210.'lil3 r94.S97 220,$58 r,5t.t,469 I,S30,{2a 27,837 31,565 216,353 2f5,7f5 0s,?q1!9 5?3? 69.125,120 51.136.5"aC 555.02?.000 r66,t50 240.r59 1,17.,690 t,603.oco rt.796 15.0% 26.879 34,309 "t6t.6r3 2?9,000 194,795 221,5?.3 1,50{,476 r,920,194 ?7.826 3r.846 211.925 27a.399 O I lr ol Y^ (-t qi 1:. ? ! BI t-r 6 al @ pl l- lo I I Ll a. @ ct \ I 6'l €l EI Olr I;B ltu i N N N olol" E- ! u - ! a N gl1;l rlit { n-l o a .o 'o cr 8cl @ U' hj a o 'u _o :l hr '@ e o o Or ol=l a q E o c o 5l< to 6 u o lo v -6 _to -6 .Do 'n '6 -t- Al l 6 Dlfi 4 o .N -@ '@ '@ iJ 'u o tf I l" 6 o o gt 0 o o I N .N I G o !l -o 'N -F 'o 6 gl n vl ol q ol ! @ "€{ '6 'o o o =l o o I o o a o I 4l N N @ a N o .tJ o @ Ji! -p 'q ;A 'o @ D n ct I o o o o Bi{ : I B- r oN I o a 6 _o { '@ 3l '(" 'o qu I.r ieoo ^ 19 n> o o r-= 19 lu 'o ,6 _@ o -6 i$ = b' o @ @ N I N 3'i ;i ? '6a I .N !J o 'o ! I ' F? 8 o I o 6 o o I I o o a o sl o o o o o ai :s t s_l N NO O N@ O N@ N N@ O N@ O ru6 o N@ O N @o N@ N N@ @ 60 0 a@ o 6@ O o@ o ,N {o -oo -q'- 'o 'q'E .6 Jo -@ -o ,@-@ 'o- 'o '@ '@'o '@ '@ir til i qo o L'N i, oo 5 oo a ro o q ro Q{ N @{ Or { o oo o {o @ NO O o -! ilr N N N N N N N .! 5 N N oB ! a NO oN o oN O AO @ do o oo @ N @o :--o .a .!_o .o '@-o '@ 'o'o 'o .oN -@ 'o -q 'o '@'o '@ @ eo N oa o @o o oo o i'E oo a @@ @ @q { o@ @ oo o oN a AQ { {o o @ @r oj o iix t{ ro'q N p'o N p'o N N.O N N.6 N - ro'q 6 N LN r@ ro a @! f a@ @ 9N N Ol @@ o @o & o1 a _N .0_5 .@ a .- NO O -o'q atg '- 'o -o'{ -{ 'o -o -q o@ N 'o i) @N 6 'N'@ L'@ 9e @ l.,! oo a @o @ d@ o oo o 60 0 O co ol :${ oa a @o o a{ a N N@ oj { a@ p Iti p'o O N@ @ ru-o n N @o ru'o N u'o N.@ N N-@ @ o N'@ @ N@ O N-@ 0 NA !o u ql oo o QO O o{ } 90 N a5 0N @ oo s o@ 6 NO N 05 ! [email protected] -@ .. !e-@ -@ oo o 'N'o 'e !o { -oi L 'o-o L L NO :-b :. @@ o Q5 U GO 0 {@ 60N G@ N ro ! @{ u @o rO { u@ a oo @ oo @ -o o 6@ { N {{ @o o C,l a ll rl = u_l l 4 ,i t. clSI o- t^ j;l: U-) ! 3l I tl ql }J o el" r16 - ol , 5l olII 6' ! :l .0 -o qfl--l G) br @ o q' 3:l -D -9 !l ir o @ ol t6 to o 6 !lorli -il 'o -@ IB o a e a o e rc gl ql o' o I o. rl ir o dl 'c -5 'o -l o o o o o n u N N gJ 'o ,ql I 'o ! E o e o o € m o q) o) { o -o p3 ! N o l4 oo o o s lo T> U t; Oc >rQ {B 's br '6 _@ N T lr 6 N fi o _9F 'o 'o ) 6 o o o o I go o o I o I o il N >s ;! ;t s 3l I I o) o I N o alT ! = @ s >. s a: c l:- { { @ lot6 ! € Ol o o, 6 o a N :r it i9 .e sli I T]I o I o 5l o o -l s :< !l N N N NO N NO NOor oO NO O NO O r ;. _o,@ -{ -@-a -@ '@-o '@ '@ 'O{ >JJ 'o'o 1: - DATE RAIL ROAD LINE ROUTE 4I LINE 8/21/98 40,737,900 (meter reading) 60,011,150 (meter reading) l/2/98 17,486,150 (meter reading) 52,785,790 (meter reading) 23,251 ,7 50 (gallons processed) '7 ,225,360 (gallons processed) (33 weeks) (33 weeks) 704,598 (gallons per week) 218,950 (gallons per week) 99,793 (gallons per day)(233 days) 31,010 (gallons per day)(233 days) Note: From ll2/98 through 8121198 all flow went to Avondale. 12125198 43,604,760 (meterreading) 63,741,250 (meterreading) 8l2l/98 40,737,940 (meterreading) 60,011,150 (meterreading) 2,866,860 (gallons processed) 3,730,100 (gallons processed) (18 weeks) (18 weeks) 159,210 (gallons per rveek) 207,228 (gallons per week) 22,753 (gallons per day)(126 days) 29,604 (gallons per day)(I26 days) Note: Flow had been diverted to the NGTWWTF during this period and continuing. Summary: Rail Road line before diversion :99,793 gallons per day average. Rail Road line after diversion = 22,753 gallons per day average. Decrease in flow to Avondale = 77,040 gallons per day average (77.2% decrease), Route 4l line before diversion : 31,010 gallons per day averagc. Route 4l line after diversion = 29,604gallons per day average. Decrease in florv to Avondale : 1,406 gallons per day average (4.5% decreasc). NOTE: There was no flow diverted from the Route 4l line. The difference is not statistical ly signifi cant. COMPARISON CHECK pased on actual Avondale meter readings through l2l}Slggl Main meter reading on ll2/98 = 41 1,394,000 Main meter reading on8l2l/98 = 502,175,000 Total gallons processed during 33 weeks : 90,781,000 Average gallons processed per week total = 2,750,939 Average gallons processed per day total = 389,618 (100%) (233 days) Average gallons processed per day total for New Garden Township = 130,803 (33.6%) Average gallons processed per day for Avondale : 258,815 (66.4%) Note: From ll2/98 tlvoughS/21/98 all flow went to Avondale. Main meter reading on 12125/98: 529,722,000 Main meter reading on8/21/98 = 502,175,000 Total gallons processed during l8 we eks : 27,547 ,000 Average gallons processed per week total = 1,530,389 Average gallons processed per day total : 218,627 (100%) (126 days) Average gallons processed per day total for New Garden Township = 52,357 (24.0%) Capacity purchased by New Garden Township : 173,250 Present use:30,2Yo of purchased capaciry Average gallons processed per day for Avondale = 166,270 (16.0%) Capacity purchascd by Avondale = 126,750 Presentuse:131.2%o Note : FIow had been diverted to the NGTWWTF during this period and continuing APPENDIX 12 NEW GARDEN TOWNSHIP ZONING MAP tl / l" -^,1, * / ) I \ ,'1' l t] L ZONING MAP BESIDENTIAL DISTRICT R-2 RESIDENTIAL DISTRICT cll COMMERCIAL/I NDUSTRIAL Zoilifl! adoplod 1 997 Pscel map prepared^4arch bt Ohesler Ccunty COMMERCIAL/INDUSTRIAL LTD. Pl6nnlilg Commtssron,l9So clt-2 iteviscd Oclobor 1989 Hlc HIGHWAY/COMMEfiCIAL UNIFIED DEVELOPMENT t'ltW EAR0Eil I0WNSlllP UD GHESIERC[!UI'IIY PENIISYTVANIA BP BUSINESS PAIIK rq | | -;---'-''--800 0 800 t600 ,400 R-3 TOUGHKENAMON RESIDENTIAL D ISTTT ICT , ,t1, " i;g i I ,)'I APP THE COT]NTY OF'CHESTER COMMISSIONERS; PLANNINC COMMISSION Karen L. Martynick, Chairman Govecnment Services Center, Suite 270 Colin A. Hanna 601 Westtown Road Andrew E. Dinniman P.O.Box 2747 West Chester, PA 19380-0990 6\0-344-6285 WILLIAM H. FULTON, AICP '{1 'Ft. FAX: 610-344-6515 Executive Director illjr June 19,2000 t];I$ii;[:[v JUs'?,7 Mr. Robert McCue, President Avondale Borough Council P.O. Box 250 Avondale, PA I93l I Re: Borough of Avondale Act 537 Plan Dear Mr. McCue: The Chester County Planning Commission has reviewed the revised Draft 537 Plan dated April 2000. The revisions in this draft were in response to comments received by the Borough from the various reviewing agencies including the County Planning Commission to your initial submission of a draft Plan in Febn:ary 1999. ln our letter of April 19, 1999, we raised two major issues regaiding the initial draft: one, regarding the manner in which the estimated future capacity needs were determined; and two, the consideration of alternative disposal solutions "outside" the boundaries of the Borough. In reviewing of the document and the accompanying cover letter from Spotts, Stevens and McCoy, Inc., we acknowledge that those two issues have been considered and included in the revised PIan. We also acknowledge that our several other more technical comments have been addressed, as rvell. We are pleased to see that there have been discussions between Borough and London Grove Township officials regarding the possibilify o[sending some of the effluent from your trearment facilily to the Torvnship's spray system if it is expanded in the future. We encourage you to continue this discussion. Should the Torvnship rnd the Borough wish to pursue this approach, such a project would be eligible to apply to the Counly for a grant to assist in the purchase of land to be used for spray fields. Thank you for the opportunily to review this revised draft Plan, If you have any questions regarding these comments, please do not hesitate to call us. Executivc Director WtlF/WWC/kp cc: Glcnn Stinson, PADEP Ralph DeFazio, Chcster Counry Flcalth Dcpt. Rebecca Brownbeck, Borough Council Secrctary " Thomas Smith, P.8., Spotts, Stcvens and ivlcCoy, Inc. THE COUI\TY OF CHESTER Karpn L. Martynick. Chairman 601 Wesuown Road, Suire 288 Colin A, Hanna P.O.Box 2747 Andrew E. Dinniman West Chester, PA 19380-0990 FAX: 610-344-5934 Sewa gellVel ls 6 I 0-34,1-6526 Cenified Food Manager 610-344.J938 Food/Instirurion 6 | 0-3a4-6689 Solid Wasre Mgt-rRccycling 6l0-344-593? Laboratory 610-344-6439 weights & Measures/Consumer Affajrs 6 I 0-344.6 I j0 Engineering/Public Warer 610 -344.623: Jwre27,2000 Mr. Robert McCue Avondale Borough Council Avondale, Pa. l93l I RE: Boroughof Avondaie Act 537 Plan Dear Mr. McCue: : The Chcstcr County Health Department hss reviewed the draft Act 537 Plan noted above. This draft is dated May 1999, revised April2000, by Spotts, Stevens and McCoy. This Department on April 20,2000 received a coPy of this draft plan Essentially, this draft,revision addressed the comments from all reviewing agencies after zubmission of the odgiDal draft. The Chester County Health Department is satisficd with the response and has no objection to the approval ofthis version of the plan. Thark you for the opportunity to revierv tltis frnal draft. RalphE DeFazio Environmental Health Supervisor CC: CCPC PA DEP Thomas R. Smith, P.E., Spons, Stevens and McCoy File a-t v- ESSM a i;: April 19,2000 William H. Fulton, AICP, Executive Director The County of Chester Planning Commission Government Services Center, Suite 270 bol+m Westtown Road P.O.Box2747 West Chester PA 19380-0990 Re: Borough of Avondale Act 537 Plan Revised April 2000 - Your review copy SSM Project 5685-005 Dear Mr. Fulton: Transmitted herewith is a revised copy of an Act 537 plan for the Borough of Avondale. The Introduction to this edition explains the differences from the original Act 537 submitted for your review, and on which you commented by letter of April I 9,1999. I trust that this revision rvill address your comments and you can support the methodology and conclusions, specifically the following: A. Regarding future needs estimates, a vacant parcel analysis rvas performed, and a vacant parcel analysis is included as Appendix No 9. As a result, the needs of the Borough have been reduced from 33,000 gal per day to 31,000 gal per day, as a projection that could occur at full development of the tacant parcels in accordance rvith present zoning requirements. which is not to say that this development is actually planned. Pnrdence in design, though, would allorv for the eventuality of thesc connections at some time in the future. B Regarding the discussions on alternative disposal possibilities and the investigation of spray inigation as an alternative, SSM believes lhat spray inigation is a most likely alternative when it is conceived as a w'hole treatment process from the beginning. In the case olAvondale Borough, a treatment plant exists and spray inigation would become an "add-on". It may be that spray irrigation rvill beconre economical in the future, should a streanr discharge require tertiary treatment, or some other restriction were placed on a stream dischargc. We have been in contact rvith the London Grove engineers, r,vho are considering a spray irrigation application sornc nriles rvcst oI Avondale, and they may consider an agreement rvith Avondale to exchangc treatnlent capacity for spray irrigation capacity, but this, at prcsent, renrains just a possibility. SPO I f S. 5 f EVtNS ar';cj ;\'l cCOY; lrri Chester County Planning Commission " April 19, 2000 -il Page 2 Thank you for your earlier comments to improve the quality and accuracy of the Act 537 Plan. : We have incorporated your cornments where appropriate. Please consider this your review copy. It is presently also being reviewed by the Borough of Avondale, the County Health Department, and New Garden Township. SSM intends to a final copy of this plan, including incorporate all review comments into the adopting ,, resolutions, and submit it to the Department of Environmental Resources as an official copy of I an Act 537 Sewage Facilities Plan for Avondals Borough. i Very truly yours, f,n"*U6 cc$ Avondale Borough Nerv Garden Township Dept. of Environmental Resources. ACT s37 a"ouoi" FACTLTTIES BOROUGH OF AVONDALE'LAN CHESTER coUNtY, PENNSYLvANIA INTRODUCTION TO THE APRIL 2OOO REVISION The April 2000 revision to the Avondale Act 537 Plan of May 1999 was prepared to address revierv cornrnents by New Garden Township, the Chester Counfy Plaruring Commission and Health Department, and the Department of Envlironmental Resources. This Revision differs from the May 1999 Edition in the following areas: L Evaluation of Infiltration/lnflorv Informatio ant flolvs indicated that the May 1999 day was based on an overly optim e in 1998. Early in 1999, flows not go significantly lower until the su d a peaking weekly average in September of 407,000 gallons per day, follorving lvhich the flows again continued above the 300,000 gal. per day level. This edition of the Facilities Plan recognizes the difficulty in removing infiltration inflorv. and compares altentate plant expansions of 140,000 and 200,000 gallons per day rvith applicable levels of iniiltration/inflow removal. These proposed levels of treatrnent plant e.xpansion are based on actual llows during 1999. 1 Grorvth in Avondale Borough A survey of vacant lots in Avondale rvas performed, and is included in this edition. It has been determined that an approxintate 31.000 gallons per day can be expected lrom future grorvth. as compared rvith the 31,000 projected in the fvlay 1999 edition, J Financial Planning This edition of the plan describes Pennvest as the pret'ened funding source. Following a nreeting rvith Pemvest at r\vondale in November 1999, it is now believed that their interest in this project, along rvith thc irr'flux of tunds ltom the Growing Greener initiative, dcnronstratc tliat tlris is tlrc bcst lvay to iulrd a lvastewatcr treatment project in ,tvondalc. r\n alternate sourcc oi lunding would be thc privately placed municipal bond l ss uc. +. Spray Inigation Although spray irrigation was not seleeted as the treatment alternative, there have been initialdiscussions with London Grove Township engineers on a possible long-term spray imigation solution. Viability would depend upon the treatment requirements of the receiving stream. A possible t'uture solution to a capacity issue may be sharing treatment plant capacity with London Grove for access to spray irrigation fields. A separate volume for Plant Capacity Study, Toxics Reduction Evaluation Report, and rarv data from Infiltration Reports Thcse reports, rvhich were included as Appendices in the May t999 Edition, remain available upon request, bttt have not been included in this Edition for ease of mailing, handling, and review. f 6", A revised project schedule has been prepared and is included on the tbllowing page. April I l, 2000 Thomas R. Smith, P.E. '., r Avondale Wastewater Treatment Plgnt Expansion Project Schedule prepared 3-21-00 Submit Amended Act 537 Plan to DEP, and Olher Reviewers 1S-Apr-00 Receive DEP and other approvals of Act 537 Plan l5-Aug-00 Meet wrih DEP and Submit Part 1 NPDES for increased flow 15-May-00 Receive Part 1 NPDES Permit 15€ep-00 Request Pennvest L.N.P.and Begin Project Design 15-Sep-00 Submit Water Ouality Mg[ Part 2 Application 15-May-01 Apply for Pennvesl Funding 1S-May{1 Recerve Pennvest Funding 15-Jul.01 Receive Pad 2 Construelion Permit 15-Aug-01 Advertise for Bids 01-Sep-01 Receive Bids, Evaluate, and Award for Conslr. 01-Feb-02 Eegm Constfudllon 15-Apr-02 Complete Construction 1 5,Feb-03 Begin Operations of Expanded Facility 1S-Mar-03 ESSM .4. April 19,2000 Mr, Ralph DeFazio, Supervisor Bureau of Environmental Health Prolection The County of Chester Health Department Govemment Services Center. Suite 295 601 Westtown Road P.O.Box2747 West Chester PA 19380-0990 Rd; Borough of Avondale Act 537 Plan Revised April 2000 - Your review copy SSM Project 5685-005 Dear Mr. DeFazio: Transmitted herewith is a revised copy of an Act 537 Plan for the Borough of Avondale. The Introduction to this edition explains the differences from the original Act 537 submitted for your review, and on which you commented by letter ofJune 14, 1999. I trust that this revision will address your corrunents and you can support the methodology and conclusions, specifically the following: A. With respect to your questions on future flo'"vs, a vacant parcel analysis was performed, and a map is included as Appendix No 9. As a result of this analysis, the needs of rhe Borough have been reduced from 33,000 gpd to 31,000 gpd, as a projection that could occur at full development of the vacant parcels in accordance rvith present zoning i requirements, which is not to say that this development is actually planned. Prudence in design, though, would allolv for the eventuality of these connections at some time in the l [uture. B. The on-lot systenr locations are described in the text, but not yet sho',vn on a map. We , agree lvith your strong recomnrendation that plans for connecting these renraining on-lot facilities be part of a facilities plan. The Borough is in the process of correcting two such instances near the intersection of Church Street and Thircl Avcnue as part oIa separatc road reconstruction proj ect. C. We believe the continuous reporting on reintrocluction of scrvage from New Garderr which was carlier diverted to a new treatment facility slrould bc part of thc annual Chapter 94 Report to the DIIP, not part of a Sewage Plan, which tcnds to servc nrorc of a planning firnction, than a monitoring function Sf OIlS. SIEVENS,rnrl r\l cCOY lrrc " n -"' ,, .i r: I,1 ',t, Ralph DeFazio April 19, 2000 ChesterCounty Health Department Page 2 D Further to altemative disposal possibilities and the investigation of spray irrigation as an altemative, SSM believes that spray inigation is a rnost likely altemative when it is conceived as a whole treatment process from the beginning. In the case of Avondale Borough, a $tj inigation would become an "add-on". It may be that sPrqf. ' ical in the future, should a stream discharge require te riction were placed on a stream discharge. We have Grove engineers, who are considering a spray irrigation application some miles west of Avondale, and they may consider an agreement with Avondale to exchange treatment capacity for spray irrigation capacity, but this, at present, remains just a possibility. PIease consider this your review copy. It is presently also being reviewed by the Borough of Avondale, the County Planning Commission, and New Garden Township. SSM intends to incorporate all review comments into a final copy of this plan, including the adopting resolutions, and submit it to the Department of Environmental Resources as an official copy of an Act 537 Sewage Facilities Plan for Avondale Borough. Very truly yours, z^*&"a- cc{ Avondale Borough New Garden To"vnship Dept. of Environnrentah Resources. ACT 537 SEWAGE FACILITIES PLAN BOROUGH OF AVONDALE CHESTER COUNTY. PBNNS]'LVANIA INTRODUCTION TO THE APRIL 2OOO REVISION The April 2000 revision to the Avondale Act 537 Plan of May 1999 was prepared to address review comments by New Garden Township, the Chester County Planning Commission and Health Department, and the Department of Environmental Resources. This Revision differs from the May 1999 Edition in the following areas: l. Eva luation o f Infi ltration/lnfl orv on treatment plant flows indicated that the I.ga*b,ns per day was based on an overly c6fici:ti0rds. made in 1998. Early in 1999, and";dro.y $iil not go significantly lower until Floyd caused a peaking weekly average in gallons per September "of 407,000 day, following which the flows again continued above the 300,000 gal. per day level. Tbis 'O$'ttle Farilities Plan recognizes the get'lf irt g infiltration in te plant expansions of l#,ff0: lons per day w ltration/inflow removal. Threse of treatment pl actual flows during 1999. ) Growth in Avondale Borough A survey of vacant lots in Avondale rvas perfonned, and is included in this edition. It has been determined that an approximate 31,000 gallons per day can bc expected from future gro\\4h. as compared with the 33,000 projected in the May 1999 edition. 3 Financial Planning This edition of the plan describes Pennvest as tlie pret'erred funding source. Following a nreeting rvith Pennvest at Avondale in November 1999, it is norv believed that their interest in this project, along rvith thc influx of tirnds tiom the Grorvirrg Greener initiative. demonstratc that this is thc bcst rvay to fund a \\'astewater treatnlcnt project in Avorrdalc. An alternate sourcc ol'firnding rvould be thc privately placed rnunicipal bond i3sue, + Spray Inigation i:' Although spray inigation rvas not selected as the treatment altemative, there have been initial discussions with London Grove Township engineers on a possible long-term spray irrigation solution. Viability would depend upon the treatment requirements of the recciving stream. A possible future solution to a capacity issue may be sharing treatment plant capacity with London Grove for access to spray irrigation fields. A separate volume for Plant Capacity Study, Toxics Reduction Evaluation Report, and i rarv data tiom Infiltration Reports , I Thcse reports, which were included as Appendices in the May 1999 Edition, remain available upon request, but have not been included in this Edition for ease of mailing, t handling, and review. I 6"5 A revised project schedule has been prepared and is included on the tbllowing page. r\pril I l, 2000 Thomas R. Smith, P.E. Avondafe Wastewater Treatment Plant Expansion Project Schedule I €. prepared 3-21-00 Submit Amended Act 537 Plan to DEP, and Other Reviewers 15-Apr-00 Receive DEP and other approvals of Act 537 Plan 15-Aug-00 Meet with DEP and Submit Part 1 NPDES for increased flow 15.May-00 Receive Part 1 NPDES Permit 15-Sep-00 Request Pennvesl L.N.P.and Begin Project Design 15-Sep-00 Submit Water Quality Mgt. Part 2 Applieation 15-May-01 Apply for Pennvest Funding 1S-May-0'l Receive Pennvest Funding 15-Jul-01 Receive Part 2 Construction Permit 15-Aug.01 Advertise for Bids 01-Sep-01 Receive Bids. Evaluate, aod Award for Constr. 01-Feb-02 Begrn Conslruction 15-Apr-02 Complele Construction 1 5-Feb-03 Begin Operations of Expanded Facility lS-Mar-03 trSSM **r).-ri#l'-l March 2,1999 Ms. Becky McAIeer, Secretary Avondale Borough I l0 Pomeroy Street P,O. Box 247 Avoldale PA l93l I Re;, Public Comment Period for the Borough's Act 537 Plan SSM File No. 5685-005 Dear Becky: Attached to this lener is a legal notice that should be advertised in the Daily Local ilerys in the legal section beginning March 8, 1999. Please ask the newspaper to provide you rvith a notarized proof of publication irotice rvhen they send you the advertising invoice. Also enclosed are two copies of the Borough's Act 5i7 Plan. One should be made available for review by the public during normal business hours. The second copy is for use by the members of Borough Council. Please call me if you have any questions regarding any of the above items. Very truly yours, Darryl A. J Project Manager DAJ:clm Enclosures SnOTTS. STEVENS and lvlcCOY, Inc ,tl ' "b r rr.laj rr ff NOTICE ur, To the residents and taxpayers of Avondale Borough, Chester County, Pennsylvania. The proposed Act 537 Plan for Avondale Borough will be available for public inspection for a period of 30 days beginning March 8, 1999 at the Borough Municipal Building located at I l0 1 Pomeroy Street, P.O. Box 247, Avondale PA l93l l. The proposed plan examines the feasible ! alternatives for the possible upgrade and expansion of the Borough's existing wastewater treatment facility.".The existing facility serves both the Borough of Avondale, as wellas a portion of New Garden Township. !. .r Anyone wishing to inspect the plan may do so during the Borough's regular business hours. I Written comments regarding the plan may be submined to the Borough at the above-referenced ' address during the 30 day comment period. Robert N. lvlcCue, President Avondale Borough Council ] f i * il t t h I t Proof of Publication of Notice in Daily Local News ,t n, Under Newspaper Advertising Act No. 587, Approved May I 6, 1929 ,il, State of Pennsylvania sr.' 19 99 .t, Counry of Chester { {*..*rerm, the Daily Local News Company, a corporation, of the County and state aforesaid, being duly affirrued, deposes and says that thc Daily t^ocal News..a ncwspaper of general circuladon. fl published at 250 N. Bradford Ave., West Chestcr, PA" Counry and State aforesaid, was established Novcmber 19, 1872,and Incorporated Deccmber ll, 19ll, sincc which datc the Daily l-ocal News has becn rcguJarly;sucd i'l.said county, and that the printed noticc or publication attached hcreto is cxactly thc sasre as printed and published in tbc il, regular editions and issues of the said Daily L-ocal News on the following dates March 8 Affiant further deposes that he/shc is the propcr person duly authorized by tlre Daily News Company, a corporation. r publishers of said Daily Local News, a newspaper of general circulation, to verify thc foregoing statcmcnt undcr oath, and thac afhant is not interested in the subject rnatter of thc aforesaid nodce or advertiscmcnt, aod that all r allegations in the foregolhgstatements as to time, place and charactcr of publication are true" tl COpy OF NOTICE OR PUBLICATION affirmed to and subscribcd before me this 8th H t'{arch il My Commission Expi rcs'; ilt Statcmcn( of Advcrtising Coss Borough of Avondale H P.0. Box 247 Avondale, PA L9llI To DAILY LOCAL NEWS COMPANY. Dr. il For publishing the noticc or publication uuchcd hercto on thc ebove surcd dues...... - , ,.. ..., .{"-,*-*- nt ... $ Probatin g sllnc...... P u b l is h e pls &oeeipt lo*r A.dyr*i*-i:u g. C o sts Thc Drily [-r:cal Ncws Comprny. r corpocrrion, fl$]k(qrs.,oF$*.IfliiJ..y,I,AC4'f.Icws, a ncwsprpcr of gcncral circuhtion, hcrcby .# acknowlcrJgcs reccipt of rJre aforcsaid nocicc and publliAnimcortJt*nd,caCifitttlptthesemc hes bccn duly paid. DATLY LOCAL NEWS. a Corporrtion, Publishcn of DAILY LOCAI NEWS, r ncwspap