Loading...
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.
Home
My WebLink
About
2016/09/26 - ADMIN - Agenda Packets - City Council - Study Session
AGENDA SEPTEMBER 26, 2016 6:00 p.m. TOUR OF WATER TREATMENT PLANT #1 – 2936 Idaho Ave. S. (See attached map for details.) 7:00 p.m. STUDY SESSION – Community Room Discussion Items 1. 7:00 p.m. Future Study Session Agenda Planning – October 10, 2016 2. 7:05 p.m. Debrief of Eastman Nature Center Tour in the Elm Creek Park 3. 7:50 p.m. Carpenter Park Regional Stormwater Improvement 8:35 p.m. Communications/Updates (Verbal) 8:40 p.m. Adjourn Written Reports 4. August 2016 Monthly Financial Report 5. Public Art Update – 4800 Excelsior & Central Park West Auxiliary aids for individuals with disabilities are available upon request. To make arrangements, please call the Administration Department at 952/924-2525 (TDD 952/924-2518) at least 96 hours in advance of meeting. Council Tour of Water Treatment Plant One (WTP1) We’ll be starting on the east side of the pressure filter building and ending on the north side of the GAC filter building. Parking is best on Jersey or Idaho near the respective driveway. We’ll end here We’ll start here Meeting: Study Session Meeting Date: September 26, 2016 Discussion Item: 1 EXECUTIVE SUMMARY TITLE: Future Study Session Agenda Planning – October 10, 2016 RECOMMENDED ACTION: The City Council and the City Manager to set the agenda for the regularly scheduled Study Session on October 10, 2016. POLICY CONSIDERATION: Does the Council agree with the agenda as proposed? SUMMARY: At each study session approximately five minutes are set aside to discuss the next study session agenda. For this purpose, attached please find the proposed discussion items for the regularly scheduled Study Session on October 10, 2016. FINANCIAL OR BUDGET CONSIDERATION: Not applicable. VISION CONSIDERATION: Not applicable. SUPPORTING DOCUMENTS: Tentative Agenda – October 10, 2016 Prepared by: Debbie Fischer, Administrative Services Office Assistant Approved by: Tom Harmening, City Manager Study Session Meeting of September 26, 2016 (Item No. 1) Page 2 Title: Future Study Session Agenda Planning – October 10, 2016 OCTOBER 10, 2016 5:30 p.m. – Police Department Tour 6:30 p.m. – Special Study Session – Community Room Tentative Discussion Items 1. Future Study Session Agenda Planning – Administrative Services (5 minutes) 2. PLACE Update – Community Development (45 minutes) Update on the development plan including the revised site plan and financial assistance from the City. 3. MAC Update w/ Executive Director Brian Ryks & Commissioner Lisa Peilen – Inspections (45 minutes) An opportunity to meet new the new Executive Director and a brief update on MSP and airport noise. There will be time for questions and discussion. 4. Naming & Branding of Outdoor Rec Facility – Operations & Recreation (45 minutes) Consultant NemerFieger will present final choices for names for the outdoor recreation facility, along with information about feedback provided on the names by the focus groups and the Parks and Recreation Advisory Board. The council is asked to provide direction on the name. 5. Website Development Update – Information Resources (45 minutes) Per direction from the Council, the final design concept for the website redesign will be presented, along with facts and findings from focus groups, user surveys and website data, as well as steps remaining to develop the replacement web site platform. Development has been deeply rooted and driven in actual web site user input and historical city web site analytics. The new web site is currently scheduled for public release in late Q1 or early Q2 of 2017. Written Reports 6. Shared Services Agreements with City of Golden Valley 7. Ordinance for Collecting Partial Plan Review Fee with Permit Application Meeting: Study Session Meeting Date: September 26, 2016 Discussion Item: 2 EXECUTIVE SUMMARY TITLE: Debrief of Eastman Nature Center Tour in the Elm Creek Park RECOMMENDED ACTION: The purpose of the discussion is to review the tour of the Eastman Nature Center held on September 12 and to share thoughts or observations. POLICY CONSIDERATION: What features did the City Council view at Eastman Nature Center that should or should not be incorporated in the planning for a new interpretive center at Westwood Hills Nature Center? SUMMARY: In 2016 the city hired Miller Dunwidde Architecture to create a comprehensive master plan to address development and programming goals for the Westwood Hills Nature Center. The plan included the nature center facilities, outdoor programming sites, infrastructure and programming needs. The master plan serves as the vision, guiding principles, resource allocation and action plan to meet the identified needs of the community and to assist the city in planning for future building development at Westwood Hills Nature Center. Citizen input played a key role in shaping this plan. City Council toured Eastman Nature Center to understand some of the features that could be included in the new interpretive center at Westwood Hills Nature Center. On the tour, the guide mentioned many items that they have learned since being operational for four years. Here are just a few of those items: make the main entrance inviting to all; include silencing wall panels between classrooms; ensure multiple access to storage areas; add automatic toilets and hand dryers; plan on how to move large size groups (school groups) from parking lot to inside the building and make the concession stand purposeful (if included). NEXT STEPS: If the Council wanted to continue to proceed, the next step in the Westwood Hills Master Plan process is to solicit Request for Proposals for the design development phase documents. This would happen in the first quarter of 2017. FINANCIAL OR BUDGET CONSIDERATION: The Capital Improvement Program has budgeted $300,000 in 2017 and $700,000 in 2018 for design fees for the Westwood Hills Nature Center and $11,000,000 in 2019 for construction of a new Nature Center building. VISION CONSIDERATION: St. Louis Park is committed to being a connected and engaged community. St. Louis Park is committed to being a leader in environmental stewardship. SUPPORTING DOCUMENTS: None Prepared by: Jason T. West, Recreation Superintendent Mark Oestreich, Westwood Hills Nature Center Manager Reviewed by: Cynthia S. Walsh, Director of Operations and Recreation Approved by: Tom Harmening, City Manager Meeting: Study Session Meeting Date: September 26, 2016 Discussion Item: 3 EXECUTIVE SUMMARY TITLE: Carpenter Park Regional Stormwater Improvement RECOMMENDED ACTION: No action at this time. Staff desires to discuss the proposed project with the Council and receive feedback. POLICY CONSIDERATION: Does the City Council wish to proceed with the construction of regional stormwater treatment at Carpenter Park? SUMMARY: In 2014 the city completed the Beltline LRT Station Project Area Coordinated Stormwater Management Analysis Study (Beltline Study) to evaluate possible regional storm water quality treatment in the Beltline Station Area. One location where this treatment can occur is the southwest corner of Carpenter Park. This project was initially discussed with the City Council at the June 6, 2016 Special Study Session as part of the Bass Lake Preserve project update. At that time the Council indicated it wanted to learn more about this project and the benefits it would provide before committing to construction. Since that time, a feasibility study has been completed by WSB and Associates, Inc. The proposed project is feasible; it will provide stormwater treatment to 42 acres and remove 30 pounds of phosphorus loading in the Bass Lake Preserve watershed. In addition, this project would benefit both the redevelopment of the Beltline EDA site and serve as an alternate location for the skateboard park that was displaced as part of the project at the Rec Center. As part of the feasibility study, it was discovered that there are contaminated materials buried in the park which would need to be removed as a part of any construction project on this site. While this material is not hazardous, it will need to be disposed of in a landfill. To address these costs, staff recommends applying for a Hennepin County grant which can fund the cost of contamination removal. The deadline for this grant application is November 1, 2016. Attached to this memo is detailed information for the proposed project, its benefits and a copy of the proposed resolution. FINANCIAL OR BUDGET CONSIDERATION: The engineer’s estimate for this project is $1,164,700. The project is proposed to be paid using the Storm Water Utility Fund. Staff would like to solicit Environmental Response Funds from Hennepin County, and if successful, they will be used to address contaminated soil disposal. VISION CONSIDERATION: St. Louis Park is committed to being a leader in environmental stewardship. We will increase environmental consciousness and responsibility in all areas of city business. SUPPORTING DOCUMENTS: Discussion Feasibility Study Prepared by: Phillip Elkin, Senior Engineering Project Manager Reviewed by: Debra Heiser, Engineering Director Approved by: Tom Harmening, City Manager Study Session Meeting of September 26, 2016 (Item No. 3) Page 2 Title: Carpenter Park Regional Stormwater Improvement DISCUSSION BACKGROUND: The concept of constructing regional stormwater treatment in Carpenter Park began in June 2014, with the Beltline LRT Station Project Area Coordinated Stormwater Management Analysis Study (Beltline Study). This extensive study of the Bass Lake Preserve Watershed identified a number of Best Management Practices (BMPs) and potential locations to provide stormwater treatment as the area redeveloped. In this study, Carpenter Park was identified as a possible location for a stormwater pond. After reviewing this study and discussing potential redevelopment in the Beltline Station Area with Community Development staff, Engineering staff recommended using a sub-surface basin and water reuse project to meet the goals of regional treatment. This type of BMP would be more efficient at pollutant removal and volume control for a large watershed area. This idea was also discussed with the Operations and Recreation staff, as part of the skateboard park re-location planning. The project made sense in that both proposed projects will require stormwater treatment to improve water quality discharging to the Bass Lake Preserve. After discussing this project with the Council last June, a feasibility study was completed to determine the amount of runoff which could be directed to the proposed system and the level of treatment and the benefit of re-using stormwater collected to irrigate the park and adjacent ballfields. Staff has met with the Minnehaha Creek Watershed District to explain the project and to determine if the storm water treatment provided at this site could be credited toward the Beltline Station Area Redevelopment. While more documentation and a formal application will be needed, MCWD staff supported the idea of treatment at Carpenter Park for this subwatershed. One of the items discovered as part of the feasibility study was that the park was filled with contaminated/impacted soil and debris, i.e. urban fill, sometime between 1956 and 1967. A limited Phase II environmental study was conducted and found that the soils are contaminated and would need to be hauled off-site to an acceptable land fill. In addition, the project would require a Response Action Plan (RAP) and Construction Contingency Plan (CCP). PROJECT DESCRIPTION: The Carpenter Park Regional Stormwater Improvement is proposed to be located in the southwest corner of Carpenter Park. This sub-surface stormwater basin will: Provide stormwater treatment and rate control to a 42-acre watershed, which is currently untreated, and drains to Bass Lake Preserve. Provide stormwater treatment for a 12,000 square foot skateboard park. Provide improved flood management, in a historically flood prone area, adjacent to Police Station. Improve the usability and drainage of the existing play fields within Carpenter Park. Four treatment strategies were studied to determine the most effective and cost efficient way to treat the stormwater prior to leaving the site. These strategies were; 1) Detention only, 1A) Detention with a Media Filter, 1B) Detention with an Iron-enhanced Sand Filter (IESF) and 1C) Detention with stormwater re-use through irrigation. The recommended strategy is 1A) Detention with a Media Filter. This proposes to construct underground stormwater storage utilizing StormTrap, a commercial product which creates storage by assembling pre-cast concrete pieces to form a vault. This product offered the most reliable structure which maximized storage and minimized space. Study Session Meeting of September 26, 2016 (Item No. 3) Page 3 Title: Carpenter Park Regional Stormwater Improvement Below in Table 1 is a summary of each treatment strategy and its cost estimates Table 1. Summary of Treatment Strategies and Costs Water Quality Treatment Options Annual Phosphorus Removal (lb/yr) Construction Cost Annual Maintenance Cost1 25-year Life Cycle Total Phosphorus Cost ($/lb TP)3 Option 1 - Detention 15.6 $805,300 $500 $2,097 Option 1A – Detention and Media/Cartridge Filter 27.6 $1,164,700 $12,500 $2,140 Option 1B – Detention and IESF 31.6 $1,362,200 $15,500 $2,215 Option 1C – Detention and Reuse/Irrigation 18.9 $1,133,600 $5,5002 $2,513 1 Annual Maintenance Cost Include: • Option 1: $500 (Pretreatment Cleanout) • Option 1A: $500 (Pretreatment Cleanout) + $9,500 (Cartridge Replacement 30*$400/cartridge) • Option 1B: $500 (Pretreatment Cleanout) + $15,000 (Media Replacement $125,000*3 media replacements /25yr) • Option 1C: $500 (Pretreatment Cleanout)+ $5,000 (Variable and some of the cost are included in the existing system operation) 2 Annual Water Savings= $3,350 (1.7 MGY * $2/1000 Gal) 3 25-Yr Life Cycle TP Cost have been calculated as follows: • Option 1: [$805,300+$500/yr *25yr]/[15.6lb TP/yr*25yr] = $2,097/ lb TP • Option 1A: [$1,164,700+$12,500/yr *25yr]/[27.6lb TP/yr *25yr] = $2,140/ lb TP • Option 1B: [$1,362,200+$15,500/yr *25yr]/[31.6lb TP/yr *25yr] = $2,215/ lb TP • Option 1C: [$1,133,600+($5,500/yr-$3,350/yr)*25yr)]/[18.9lb TP/yr*25yr] = $2,513/ lb TP As part of the feasibility study, the consultant was asked to compare the above recommended BMPs with other BMPs often associated with stormwater management; namely ponds and raingardens. To achieve a similar phosphorus removal using the National Urban Runoff Treatment (NURP) water quality treatment standards, a stormwater pond would need to be 4.9 ac-feet, which translates to a 100 foot by 250 foot surface area with a dead pool depth of 9 feet. Rain gardens typically are sized to treat approximately one half acre of tributary area. Using a typical sizing for rain garden (10 by 20 feet in surface area, with a depth of one foot) it was determined that 230 rain gardens would be needed to remove an equivalent amount of total phosphorus. The assumptions and cost estimations for both BMP alternatives are listed in Table 2. Study Session Meeting of September 26, 2016 (Item No. 3) Page 4 Title: Carpenter Park Regional Stormwater Improvement Table 2: Alternate Best Management Practice BMP Annual Phosphorus Removal (lb/year) Construction Cost Annual Maintenance Cost 25-year Life Cycle Total Phosphorus Cost ($/lb TP) NURP Pond 29.0 $2,113,095.00 $1,500.00 $2,925.00 230 Rain Gardens 30.0 $1,150,000.00 $15,000.00 $2,200.00 RECOMMENDATION: The project is feasible, environmentally responsible, and cost-effective from an engineering perspective and WSB & Associates, Inc. recommends construction of the proposed improvements as detailed in the technical memorandum based upon the option that best meets the needs of the City. SUMMARY: The proposed Carpenter Park Regional Stormwater Treatment Facility is feasible and beneficial to the future redevelopment of the Beltline Station Area, the future skateboard park, and the water quality goals of the Bass Lake Preserve. 701 Xenia Avenue South | Suite 300 | Minneapolis, MN 55416 | (763) 541-4800 Building a legacy – your legacy. Equal Opportunity Employer | wsbeng.com K:\03336-000\Admin\Docs\MEMO - pelkin - Carpenter Park Design Anaylsis_091616.docx Technical Memorandum To: Phil Elkin, PE, City of St. Louis Park Erick Francis, City of St. Louis Park From: Katy Thompson, PE, WSB & Associates Bill Alms, WSB & Associates Date: September 16, 2016 Re: Carpenter Park Water Quality Improvement Project Design Analysis WSB Project No. 3336-00 This technical memorandum summarizes the design analysis that has been completed for the Carpenter Park Water Quality Improvement Project. Three (3) routing options and four (4) treatment strategies are included along with design assumptions and the anticipated treatment results for the underground water quality treatment system options in Carpenter Park. Purpose The intent of the Carpenter Park Improvement Project is to provide an underground stormwater management facility in the southwest corner of Carpenter Park. The project will provide stormwater treatment and rate control to a 46 acre subwatershed which currently drains untreated to Bass Lake. This project also intendeds to: • Provide improved flood management, in a historically flood prone area adjacent to the police station. • Improve the usability and drainage of the existing play fields within Carpenter Park. • Include design considerations and provide stormwater treatment for a 12,000 square-foot skateboard park and half size soccer field. The additional water quality treatment credits obtained through project permitting with MCWD are intended to be used for future reconstruction projects located within the Triangle subwatershed. Existing Conditions Storm sewer extends from Minnetonka Boulevard at the northern boundary of Carpenter Park, to the frontage road south of Carpenter Park, covering a 42.2-acre drainage area. An additional 4.1-acre subwatershed is located northeast of Carpenter Park covering the Menorah Neighborhood. Stormwater from these two drainage areas flows into a central discharge point located just south of the pedestrian bridge. It then continues east to Ottawa Ave before crossing Highway 7. No phosphorus or sediment removal is provided prior to the water being discharged from either subwatershed. During large storm events significant ponding occurs within the City Hall parking lot, in Carpenter Park, and along Raleigh Avenue. A stormwater management analysis was competed by Barr Engineering in July 2012 for the Beltline LRT Station Project area. This study included a XPSWMM model and P8 analysis of the entire Bass Lake watershed. The XPSWMM model was utilized as a starting point for the analysis of different treatment options contained within this memo. Study Session Meeting of September 26, 2016 (Item No. 3) Title: Carpenter Park Regional Stormwater Improvement Page 5 Carpenter Park Water Quality Improvement Project Design Analysis September 16, 2016 Page 2 K:\03336-000\Admin\Docs\MEMO - pelkin - Carpenter Park Design Anaylsis_091616.docx Carpenter Park is listed in two MPCA databases including State Assessment Site (SAS) SA7656 and Unpermitted Dump Site REM03727. A Limited Phase II Environmental Site Assessment (Phase II ESA) was completed by WSB in June 2016, which included excavation of five test pits to depths of 12 to 14 feet below grade in the area of the proposed stormwater improvements. Both soil and groundwater impacts were identified at the Site which would require a portion of the material excavated from Carpenter Park to be disposed of in landfill. Routing Stormwater to Carpenter Park The intent of the underground stormwater facility is to treat as much of the existing drainage area as possible, while maximizing rate control and water quality benefits. The trunk storm sewer depth (8-12 feet) and flat profile (< 0.5%) limit the ability to provide storage in Carpenter Park without excavating deeper into the park to provide an underground storage system. Due to the effects of contaminated soil and high groundwater identified in the Carpenter park environmental site assessment, alternative options were reviewed for routing stormwater to the treatment system: Routing Option 1: Extend Existing Storm Sewer – Minimize Excavation To minimize the excavation depth necessary for the underground stormwater facility, and eliminate the need for a lift station, four alternative storm sewer connections were evaluated to provide a higher inlet elevation (Figure 1 - Alternative Connections). With Option 1, one or more alternative connection points would be identified upstream in the subwatershed and new storm sewer would be installed to reroute water to the underground storage facility by gravity. Each of these connections would allow for a higher base elevation of the underground treatment facility, thus less excavation would be required. However, each of these alternatives results in a large expense to extend storm sewer pipes, and would consequentially divert a smaller portion of the watershed to the facility. Benefits • Invert elevation of detention storage facility can be higher, therefore decreasing the amount of excavation necessary. Drawbacks • A smaller percentage of the drainage area is being treated. o Results in less overall pollutant removal • Requires more linear feet of storm sewer than Option 2 and 3. • Potential utility conflicts and additional easements may be required to reroute the storm sewer along side-yard property lines. Routing Option 2: Lift Station Including a high capacity lift station at the lower southwest corner of Carpenter Park’s storm sewer network would also reduce the excavation depth of the stormwater facility. The lift station would continually pump water during a storm event. A majority of the contributing drainage area (42.2 of the 46.3 acres) would be directed to the stormwater facility. Although a lift station may decrease the initial cost of the storage facility in comparison to a deeper excavation, the operations and maintenance required would increase the life cycle cost of the system. Benefits • Invert elevation of detention storage facility can be higher, therefore decreasing the amount of excavation necessary. • Majority of the drainage area can be directed to the stormwater facility. Drawbacks • Operations and maintenance required increases the life cycle cost of the system. • Variable size and intensity of storm events would limit the ability to treat small and large storm events with the same pumps. Study Session Meeting of September 26, 2016 (Item No. 3) Title: Carpenter Park Regional Stormwater Improvement Page 6 Carpenter Park Water Quality Improvement Project Design Analysis September 16, 2016 Page 3 K:\03336-000\Admin\Docs\MEMO - pelkin - Carpenter Park Design Anaylsis_091616.docx • Requires pumps to be operational to provide flood storage benefit. Routing Option 3: Diversion from Existing Storm Sewer Placing a new structure to divert stormwater would allow for runoff to be directed into the underground stormwater facility via gravity flow. Two potential diversion structure locations were evaluated: the southwest and northeast corner of Carpenter Park (Figure 2 - Diversion Connection Options). The northeast corner only diverts approximately four acres of runoff, and would require a similar structure to the southwest corner. It is more cost effective to only divert stormwater at the southwest corner. Option 3 requires less pipe material than Option 1, and stormwater runoff can be diverted via gravity flow rather than mechanical pump. However, excavation of the park to a depth of at least 10 feet is necessary. Benefits: • Majority of the drainage area can be directed to the stormwater facility. • Treats stormwater runoff from all storm events. • Requires fewer linear feet of storm sewer. • Does not require any pumps to be operational to provide additional flood storage in the storm sewer network. Drawbacks: • An excavation depth of at least 10 feet is necessary resulting in requirement for additional contaminated material disposal. • Requires large diversion (10’ x 8’ Box) structure direct stormwater into the underground system without causing upstream flood impacts. We recommend that the City use Routing Option 3 to route stormwater to the underground treatment facility. Diverting storm to capture the majority of the tributary drainage area is the most cost effective method to maximize treatment while still maintaining a low life cycle cost. The Environmental Assessment that was completed at the proposed excavation site shows excavating down to a depth of 10 feet is feasible with some material requiring disposal at a landfill. Water Quality Treatment Strategy Options With the selection of Routing Option 3, four water quality treatment strategies were analyzed for total project cost, annual maintenance cost, and life cycle cost benefit for total phosphorus treatment. The four options are categorizes as one primary treatment option and three additional secondary treatment options in addition to the primary treatment. Treatment Strategy 1: Detention Only An underground stormwater treatment system would be constructed with a dead pool depth of four feet and live pool depth of one and a half feet. This underground pond would remove pollutants through sedimentation and would also provide additional storage capacity to the system . No pumps would be included as part of Treatment Strategy 1. This option provides the lowest capital cost, lowest annual cost, and lowest life cycle cost of all of the treatment strategies. P8 modeling and the MIDS calculator show this treatment strategy providing 15.6 pounds of total phosphorus reduction per year. For each pound of total phosphorus removed per year, typical equivalency factors allow for 0.8 to 1.0 acres of fully reconstructed impervious surface can be credited for future projects. A consideration could be to design the detention system with the potential for a retrofit for filtration or irrigation reuse (Treatment Strategies 1.A, B, or C) in the future, and the interim strategy would be primarily detention. Study Session Meeting of September 26, 2016 (Item No. 3) Title: Carpenter Park Regional Stormwater Improvement Page 7 Carpenter Park Water Quality Improvement Project Design Analysis September 16, 2016 Page 4 K:\03336-000\Admin\Docs\MEMO - pelkin - Carpenter Park Design Anaylsis_091616.docx Benefits: • Removes annual total phosphorous to credit approximately 12-15 acres of future reconstructed impervious surface. • Lowest annual maintenance. • Lowest capital cost. • Lowest life cycle cost per pound of total phosphorus. • Potential to be an interim primary solution and secondary treatment can be incorporated in future years as desired. Drawbacks: • Lowest annual total phosphorus removal. Treatment Strategy 1.A: Media/Cartridge Filter After the stormwater reaches the detention facility described in Strategy 1, stormwater would be pumped through a force main into a secondary treatment vault where cartridges would remove phosphorus by filtration fine sediments and absorption of dissolved phosphorous with aluminum oxide coated media. Treated water would be returned to the main line storm sewer system near the pedestrian bridge by gravity. Treatment Strategy 1.A removes between 65-78% of the total phosphorus that is pumped from the detention system. The system would include 30 cartridges that need to be replaced on an annual basis, at the cost of $3,150 per cartridge. Benefits: • Maintenance costs are predictable. • Credit for approximately 22-28 acres of reconstructed impervious surface can be achieved. Drawbacks • Highest annual maintenance cost. Treatment Strategy 1.B: Iron-Enhanced Sand Filter (IESF) Similar to 1.A, stormwater would be pumped through a force main into a vault where the stormwater is then filtered through an iron-enhanced sand filter and exits into the main line storm sewer system. Minnesota Stormwater manual recommends a filter rate of three feet per day for iron-enhance sand filters. Therefor a 4,010 square foot sand filter would be required for the iron- enhanced sand filter system. The system could be constructed without a concrete detention vault, but would require the park to be excavated every 7 to 10 years to change out media. A concrete detention vault could be constructed to house the filter media; however, there would still be significant effort to remove 450 yard3 of sand every 7 to 10 years from below grade. Note that the maintenance cycle for this system is highly variable and is still being researched. Benefits: • Highest annual total phosphorus removal of the secondary treatment options- credit for approximately 25 to 31 acres of reconstructed impervious surface can be achieved. • Lowest life cycle cost per pound of total phosphorus of the secondary treatment options. Drawbacks • Large footprint required for either concrete vault or regular excavation for the replacement of materials. • Less predictable maintenance costs. Study Session Meeting of September 26, 2016 (Item No. 3) Title: Carpenter Park Regional Stormwater Improvement Page 8 Carpenter Park Water Quality Improvement Project Design Analysis September 16, 2016 Page 5 K:\03336-000\Admin\Docs\MEMO - pelkin - Carpenter Park Design Anaylsis_091616.docx Treatment Strategy 1.C: Reuse/Irrigation Stormwater within the detention system can be reused for irrigation of Carpenter Field. This option utilizes volume reduction as a method of total phosphorus removal rather than filtration. The existing system needs to be assessed prior to finalizing irrigation system expansion estimate. The design cost estimates assume that an additional one and a half acres of irrigation would need to be added to the existing system. Benefits: • The only secondary treatment strategy that uses volume reduction as a method for phosphorus removal. • Saves the City money in water costs for irrigating Carpenter Park (estimated $3,350/year). • Public interest and engagement is strong for stormwater reuse and irrigation. • Has the lowest annual operating cost of the secondary treatment options. Drawbacks: • Cost relies on existing irrigation system being in satisfactory condition. • Has the lowest annual total phosphorus removal of the secondary treatment options - credit for approximately 15 acres of reconstructed impervious surface can be achieved. Cost Estimate Below in Table 1 is a summary of each treatment strategy and its cost estimates. A detailed opinion of probable costs can be found in the attachments. Table 1. Summary of Treatment Strategies and Costs Water Quality Treatment Options Annual Phosphorus Removal (lb/yr) Construction Cost Annual Maintenance Cost1 25-year Life Cycle Total Phosphorus Cost ($/lb TP)3 Option 1 - Detention 15.6 $805,300 $500 $2,097 Option 1A – Detention and Media/Cartridge Filter 27.6 $1,164,700 $12,500 $2,140 Option 1B – Detention and IESF 31.6 $1,362,200 $15,500 $2,215 Option 1C – Detention and Reuse/Irrigation 18.9 $1,133,600 $5,500 2 $2,513 1 Annual Maintenance Cost Include: • Option 1: $500 (Pretreatment Cleanout) • Option 1A: $500 (Pretreatment Cleanout) + $9,500 (Cartridge Replacement 30*$400/cartridge) • Option 1B: $500 (Pretreatment Cleanout) + $15,000 (Media Replacement $125,000*3 media replacements /25yr) • Option 1C: $500 (Pretreatment Cleanout)+ $5,000 (Variable and some of the cost are included in the existing system operation) 2 Annual Water Savings= $3,350 (1.7 MGY * $2/1000 Gal) 3 25-Yr Life Cycle TP Cost have been calculated as follows: • Option 1: [$805,300+$500/yr*25yr]/[15.6lb TP/yr*25yr] = $2,097/ lb TP • Option 1A: [$1,164,700+$12,500/yr*25yr]/[27.6lb TP/yr*25yr] = $2,140/ lb TP • Option 1B: [$1,362,200+$15,500/yr*25yr]/[31.6lb TP/yr*25yr] = $2,215/ lb TP • Option 1C: [$1,133,600+($5,500/yr-$3,350/yr)*25yr)]/[18.9lb TP/yr*25yr] = $2,513/ lb TP Study Session Meeting of September 26, 2016 (Item No. 3) Title: Carpenter Park Regional Stormwater Improvement Page 9 Carpenter Park Water Quality Improvement Project Design Analysis September 16, 2016 Page 6 K:\03336-000\Admin\Docs\MEMO - pelkin - Carpenter Park Design Anaylsis_091616.docx Comparison to Alternative Water Quality Treatment Best Management Practices The treatment strategies listed above have been compared with the alternative Best Management Practices (BMP) of ponding and raingardens. Ponding was estimated assuming National Urban Runoff Treatment (NURP) water quality treatment standards of a two and a half inch rainfall event. The dead pool volume for the Carpenter Park tributary area would need to be 4.9 ac-feet, which translates to a 100 foot by 250 foot surface area with a dead pool depth of 9 feet. The construction of this NURP pond assumes a cost of $9.9 per cubic feet of storage provided. Rain gardens typically are sized to treat approximately one half acre of tributary area. Typical sizing for rain gardens are 10 by 20 feet in surface area, with a depth of one foot assuming the Soils are Type C. 230 rain gardens would be needed to remove 30 pounds per year of total phosphorus. Each rain garden would cost approximately $5,000 to construct (excavation, grading and materials). The assumptions and cost estimations for both BMP alternatives are listed in Table 2. Table 2: Alternate Best Management Practice BMP Annual Phosphorus Removal (lb/year) Construction Cost Annual Maintenance Cost 25-year Life Cycle Total Phosphorus Cost ($/lb TP) NURP Pond 29.0 $2,113,095.00 $1,500.00 $2,925.00 230 Rain Gardens 30.0 $1,150,000.00 $15,000.00 $2,200.00 Recommendations The water quality treatment strategy chosen will greatly depend on the City’s credit goals and annual maintenance expectations. If the City determines that the credit gained from a detention-only treatment strategy is sufficient to their current goals, then no secondary treatment is necessary. If the desire for additional credits is identified, the system can also be designed to facilitate a future retrofit for irrigation or reuse outlined in Strategies 1.A-1.C. If a greater number of credits are desired, Treatment Strategy 1.A: Media/Cartridge Filter provides the greatest cost benefit over a 25 year life cycle. The project is feasible, environmentally responsible, and cost-effective from an engineering perspective and WSB & Associates, Inc. recommends construction of the proposed improvements as detailed in this technical memorandum based upon option that best meets the needs of the City. The economic feasibility of this project should be determined by the City Council. Attachments: • Figure 1 • Figure 2 • Opinion Cost Spreadsheet • MIDS Calculator Results • Option 1 Detail: Storm Trap Concept • Option 1A Details: Contech Storm Filter Info Study Session Meeting of September 26, 2016 (Item No. 3) Title: Carpenter Park Regional Stormwater Improvement Page 10 ¯ Legend Storm_Sewer New Storm Sewer Parcela Figure 1: Carpenter ParkStorm Sewer Rerouting Options 0 250 500125 Feet Node Invert: 887.1 Required pipe length: 750 ft Invert at Carpenter Field: 876 ft Watershed area to treatment: 9.1 ac Node Invert: 873.9 Required pipe length: 700 ft Invert at Carpenter Field: 872.5 ft Watershed area to treatment: 16.4 ac Node Invert: 875.5 Required pipe length: 700 ft Invert at Carpenter Field: 874.1 ft Watershed area to treatment: 2.6 ac Field Elevation: 877 ft Node Invert: 901.3 Required pipe length: 950 ft Invert at Carpenter Field: 880 ft Watershed area to treatment: 5.5 ac Study Session Meeting of September 26, 2016 (Item No. 3) Title: Carpenter Park Regional Stormwater Improvement Page 11 ¯ Legend Subwatersh East Diversion Structure [4.1 Ac - 56% Impervious\ Other West Diversion Structure [42.2 Ac - 49% Impervious\ Figure 2: Carpenter Park Drainage Areas 0 250 500125 Feet Salem Area: 6.87Ac Minnetonka Area: 12.92 Ac Raleigh Middle Area: 1.52 Ac Raleigh South Area: 6.41 Ac Raleigh North Area: 2.89 Ac City Hall West Area: 1.11 Ac City Hall East Area: 2.15 Ac Menorah Area: 4.10 Ac Ped Bridge Area: 4.75 Ac Carpenter Central Area: 3.87 Ac Carpenter North Area: 2.48 Ac City Hall Central Area: 1.93 Ac Study Session Meeting of September 26, 2016 (Item No. 3) Title: Carpenter Park Regional Stormwater Improvement Page 12 1 of 2K:\03336-000\Quantity\Preliminary\Carpenter Park_OPC_MMR_091416_UpdatedMediaFilter.xlsx WSB Project:Design By:WCA Project Location:City of St. Louis Park Checked By: WSB Project No:Date:9/7/2016 Item No. MN/DOT Specification No. Description Unit Estimated Total Quantity Estimated Unit Price Estimated Total Cost 1 2021.501 MOBILIZATION LUMP SUM 1 $30,300.00 $30,300.00 2 2101.511 CLEARING AND GRUBBING LUMP SUM 1 $3,000.00 $3,000.00 3 2104.501 REMOVE PIPE SEWER (STORM)LIN FT 20 $50.00 $1,000.00 4 2104.501 REMOVE DRAINAGE STRUCTURES (STORM)EACH 1 $2,000.00 $2,000.00 5 2104.503 REMOVE BITUMINOUS SIDEWALK SQ YD 100 $8.00 $800.00 6 2105.525 DEWATERING LUMP SUM 1 $20,000.00 $20,000.00 7 2105.501 COMMON EXCAVATION MANAGEMENT LEVEL III CU YD 4,200 $30.00 $126,000.00 8 2105.543 COMMON BARROW (BACKFILL)CU YD 1,250 $10.00 $12,500.00 9 2501.511 36" PIPE SEWER LIN FT 300 $100.00 $30,000.00 10 2506.501 DESIGN SPECIAL DIVERSION STRUCTURE EACH 1 $50,000.00 $50,000.00 11 2506.502 DRAINAGE STRUCTURE DESIGN 96-4020 EACH 1 $15,000.00 $15,000.00 12 2506.601 UNDERGROUND STORAGE SYSTEM LUMP SUM 1 $325,000.00 $325,000.00 13 2573.602 EROSION CONTROL LUMP SUM 1 $8,500.00 $8,500.00 14 2575.502 SURFACE RESTORATION LUMP SUM 1 $12,500.00 $12,500.00 SUBTOTAL - TREATMENT STRATEGY 1 - DETENTION SYSTEM $636,600.00 +15% CONTINGENCY $95,500.00 CONSTRUCTION SUBTOTAL $732,100.00 + 10% INDIRECT $73,200.00 TOTAL - TREATMENT STRATEGY 1 - DETENTION SYSTEM $805,300.00 15 2105.501 COMMON EXCAVATION MANAGEMENT LEVEL III CU YD 150 $30.00 $4,500.00 16 5105.543 COMMON BARROW (BACKFILL)CU YD 100 $10.00 $1,000.00 17 2501.511 15" RC PIPE CULVERT CLASS V LF 20 $30.00 $600.00 18 2506.501 LIFT STATION EACH 1 $125,000.00 $125,000.00 19 2503.603 6" PVC FORCE MAIN LF 75 $40.00 $3,000.00 20 2506.602 MEDIA FILTER CARTRIDGES VAULT LUMP SUM 1 $150,000.00 $150,000.00 SUBTOTAL TREATMENT STRATEGY 1A $284,100.00 SUBTOTAL TREATMENT STRATEGY 1 + 1A $920,700.00 + 15% CONTINGENCY $138,100.00 CONSTRUCTION SUBTOTAL $1,058,800.00 + 10% INDIRECT $105,900.00 TOTAL TREATMENT STRATEGY 1A $1,164,700.00 Opinion of Probable Cost Carpenter Park Water Quality Improvement Project 03336-00 Treatment Strategy 1 - Detention System (StormTrap) Treatment Strategy 1A - Media/Cartridge Filter Study Session Meeting of September 26, 2016 (Item No. 3) Title: Carpenter Park Regional Stormwater Improvement Page 13 2 of 2K:\03336-000\Quantity\Preliminary\Carpenter Park_OPC_MMR_091416_UpdatedMediaFilter.xlsx WSB Project:Design By:WCA Project Location:City of St. Louis Park Checked By: WSB Project No:Date:9/7/2016 Item No. MN/DOT Specification No. Description Unit Estimated Total Quantity Estimated Unit Price Estimated Total Cost Opinion of Probable Cost Carpenter Park Water Quality Improvement Project 03336-00 21 2105.501 COMMON EXCAVATION MANAGEMENT LEVEL III CU YD 1,500 $30.00 $45,000.00 22 2105.522 COARSE FILTER AGGREGATE CU YD 150 $20.00 $3,000.00 23 2105.522 SELECT GRANULAR (BACKFILL)CU YD 1,000 $10.00 $10,000.00 24 2105.522 IRON ENHANCED FILTRATION MEDIUM CY 450 $200.00 $90,000.00 25 2501.511 15" RC PIPE CULVERT CLASS V LF 50 $30.00 $1,500.00 26 2503.603 6" PVC FORCE MAIN LF 20 $40.00 $800.00 27 2506.501 LIFT STATION EACH 1 $125,000.00 $125,000.00 28 2506.602 DESIGN SPECIAL - FILTER VAULT CONC.LUMP SUM 1 $165,000.00 $165,000.00 SUBTOTAL TREATMENT STRATEGY 1B $440,300.00 SUBTOTAL TREATMENT STRATEGY 1 + 1B $1,076,900.00 + 15% CONTINGENCY $161,500.00 CONSTRUCTION SUBTOTAL $1,238,400.00 + 10% INDIRECT $123,800.00 TOTAL TREATMENT STRATEGY 1B $1,362,200.00 29 2503.603 6" PVC FORCE MAIN LF 250 $40.00 $10,000.00 30 2504.601 IRRIGATION SYSTEM (EXPANSION)LUMP SUM 1 $35,000.00 $35,000.00 31 2504.602 6" IRRIGATION GATE VALVE EACH 2 $1,500.00 $3,000.00 32 2504.602 CONNECT TO EXISTING IRRIGATION SYSTEM EACH 1 $15,000.00 $15,000.00 33 2504.602 RPZ & ENCLOSURE EACH 1 $1,500.00 $1,500.00 34 2504.602 IRRIGATION METER AND CONTROLS EACH 1 $5,000.00 $5,000.00 35 2506.602 LIFT STATION (PUMP+FILTER + ENCLOSURE)LUMP SUM 1 $150,000.00 $150,000.00 36 2506.602 UV TREATMENT ADD-ON LUMP SUM 1 $30,000.00 $30,000.00 37 2575.502 SURFACE RESTORATION LUMP SUM 1 $10,000.00 $10,000.00 SUBTOTAL TREATMENT STRATEGY 1C $259,500.00 SUBTOTAL TREATMENT STRATEGY 1 + 1C $896,100.00 + 15% CONTINGENCY $134,400.00 CONSTRUCTION SUBTOTAL $1,030,500.00 + 10% INDIRECT $103,100.00 TOTAL TREATMENT STRATEGY 1C $1,133,600.00 Treatment Strategy 1C - IRRIGATION/WATER REUSE Treatment Strategy 1B - IESF Study Session Meeting of September 26, 2016 (Item No. 3) Title: Carpenter Park Regional Stormwater Improvement Page 14 Project Information Calculator Version:Version 2: June 2014 Project Name:Carpenter Park Improvements User Name / Company Name:Bill Alms - WSB & Associates Date:September 6, 2016 Project Description:Assessment of Filtration Site Information Retention Requirement (inches):1.1 Site's Zip Code:55416 Annual Rainfall (inches):31 Phosphorus EMC (mg/l):0.3 TSS EMC (mg/l):54.5 Total Site Area Land Cover A Soils (acres) B Soils (acres) C Soils (acres) D Soils (acres) Total (acres) Forest/Open Space - Undisturbed, protected forest/open space or reforested land 0 Managed Turf - disturbed, graded for yards or other turf to be mowed/managed 21.9 21.9 Impervious Area (acres) 20.3 Total Area (acres) 42.2 Site Areas Routed to BMPs Land Cover A Soils (acres) B Soils (acres) C Soils (acres) D Soils (acres) Total (acres) Forest/Open Space - Undisturbed, protected forest/open space or reforested land 0 Managed Turf - disturbed, graded for yards or other turf to be mowed/managed 21.9 21.9 Impervious Area (acres) 20.3 Total Area (acres) 42.2 Study Session Meeting of September 26, 2016 (Item No. 3) Title: Carpenter Park Regional Stormwater Improvement Page 15 Summary Information Performance Goal Requirement Performance goal volume retention requirement: 81058 ft3 Volume removed by BMPs towards performance goal:ft3 Percent volume removed towards performance goal % Annual Volume and Pollutant Load Reductions Post development annual runoff volume 56.0395 acre-ft Annual runoff volume removed by BMPs:0acre-ft Percent annual runoff volume removed:0 % Post development annual particulate P load:25.15 lbs Annual particulate P removed by BMPs:15.59 lbs Post development annual dissolved P load:20.58 lbs Annual dissolved P removed by BMPs:0 lbs Percent annual total phosphorus removed:34 % Post development annual TSS load:8307 lbs Annual TSS removed by BMPs:4984 lbs Percent annual TSS removed:60 % BMP Summary Performance Goal Summary BMP Name BMP Volume Capacity (ft3) Volume Recieved (ft3) Volume Retained (ft3) Volume Outflow (ft3) Percent Retained (%) Underground Stormwater pond 0 81058 0 81058 0 Annual Volume Summary BMP Name Volume From Direct Watershed (acre-ft) Volume From Upstream BMPs (acre-ft) Volume Retained (acre-ft) Volume outflow (acre-ft) Percent Retained (%) Underground Stormwater pond 56.0395 0 0 56.0395 0 Particulate Phosphorus Summary BMP Name Load From Direct Watershed (lbs) Load From Upstream BMPs (lbs) Load Retained (lbs) Outflow Load (lbs) Percent Retained (%) Underground Stormwater pond 25.15 0 15.59 9.56 62 Study Session Meeting of September 26, 2016 (Item No. 3) Title: Carpenter Park Regional Stormwater Improvement Page 16 Dissolved Phosphorus Summary BMP Name Load From Direct Watershed (lbs) Load From Upstream BMPs (lbs) Load Retained (lbs) Outflow Load (lbs) Percent Retained (%) Underground Stormwater pond 20.58 0 0 20.58 0 TSS Summary BMP Name Load From Direct Watershed (lbs) Load From Upstream BMPs (lbs) Load Retained (lbs) Outflow Load (lbs) Percent Retained (%) Underground Stormwater pond 8307 0 4984 3323 60 BMP Schematic Study Session Meeting of September 26, 2016 (Item No. 3) Title: Carpenter Park Regional Stormwater Improvement Page 17 Project Information Calculator Version:Version 2: June 2014 Project Name:Carpenter Park Improvements User Name / Company Name:Bill Alms - WSB & Associates Date:September 6, 2016 Project Description:Assessment of Filtration - Enhanced Site Information Retention Requirement (inches):1.1 Site's Zip Code:55416 Annual Rainfall (inches):31 Phosphorus EMC (mg/l):0.3 TSS EMC (mg/l):54.5 Total Site Area Land Cover A Soils (acres) B Soils (acres) C Soils (acres) D Soils (acres) Total (acres) Forest/Open Space - Undisturbed, protected forest/open space or reforested land 0 Managed Turf - disturbed, graded for yards or other turf to be mowed/managed 21.9 21.9 Impervious Area (acres) 20.3 Total Area (acres) 42.2 Site Areas Routed to BMPs Land Cover A Soils (acres) B Soils (acres) C Soils (acres) D Soils (acres) Total (acres) Forest/Open Space - Undisturbed, protected forest/open space or reforested land 0 Managed Turf - disturbed, graded for yards or other turf to be mowed/managed 21.9 21.9 Impervious Area (acres) 20.3 Total Area (acres) 42.2 Study Session Meeting of September 26, 2016 (Item No. 3) Title: Carpenter Park Regional Stormwater Improvement Page 18 Summary Information Performance Goal Requirement Performance goal volume retention requirement: 81058 ft3 Volume removed by BMPs towards performance goal:ft3 Percent volume removed towards performance goal % Annual Volume and Pollutant Load Reductions Post development annual runoff volume 56.0395 acre-ft Annual runoff volume removed by BMPs:0acre-ft Percent annual runoff volume removed:0 % Post development annual particulate P load:25.15 lbs Annual particulate P removed by BMPs:21.33 lbs Post development annual dissolved P load:20.58 lbs Annual dissolved P removed by BMPs:10.29 lbs Percent annual total phosphorus removed:69 % Post development annual TSS load:8307 lbs Annual TSS removed by BMPs:7975 lbs Percent annual TSS removed:96 % BMP Summary Performance Goal Summary BMP Name BMP Volume Capacity (ft3) Volume Recieved (ft3) Volume Retained (ft3) Volume Outflow (ft3) Percent Retained (%) Underground Stormwater pond 0 81058 0 81058 0 Enhanced Media Filter 0 81058 0 81058 0 Annual Volume Summary BMP Name Volume From Direct Watershed (acre-ft) Volume From Upstream BMPs (acre-ft) Volume Retained (acre-ft) Volume outflow (acre-ft) Percent Retained (%) Underground Stormwater pond 56.0395 0 0 56.0395 0 Enhanced Media Filter 0 0 0 0 0 Particulate Phosphorus Summary Study Session Meeting of September 26, 2016 (Item No. 3) Title: Carpenter Park Regional Stormwater Improvement Page 19 BMP Name Load From Direct Watershed (lbs) Load From Upstream BMPs (lbs) Load Retained (lbs) Outflow Load (lbs) Percent Retained (%) Underground Stormwater pond 25.15 0 15.59 9.56 62 Enhanced Media Filter 0 9.56 5.74 3.82 60 Dissolved Phosphorus Summary BMP Name Load From Direct Watershed (lbs) Load From Upstream BMPs (lbs) Load Retained (lbs) Outflow Load (lbs) Percent Retained (%) Underground Stormwater pond 20.58 0 0 20.58 0 Enhanced Media Filter 0 20.58 10.29 10.29 50 TSS Summary BMP Name Load From Direct Watershed (lbs) Load From Upstream BMPs (lbs) Load Retained (lbs) Outflow Load (lbs) Percent Retained (%) Underground Stormwater pond 8307 0 4984 3323 60 Enhanced Media Filter 0 3323 2991 332 90 BMP Schematic Study Session Meeting of September 26, 2016 (Item No. 3) Title: Carpenter Park Regional Stormwater Improvement Page 20 Project Information Calculator Version:Version 2: June 2014 Project Name:Carpenter Park Improvements User Name / Company Name:Bill Alms - WSB & Associates Date:September 6, 2016 Project Description:Assessment of reuse Site Information Retention Requirement (inches):1.1 Site's Zip Code:55416 Annual Rainfall (inches):31 Phosphorus EMC (mg/l):0.3 TSS EMC (mg/l):54.5 Total Site Area Land Cover A Soils (acres) B Soils (acres) C Soils (acres) D Soils (acres) Total (acres) Forest/Open Space - Undisturbed, protected forest/open space or reforested land 0 Managed Turf - disturbed, graded for yards or other turf to be mowed/managed 21.9 21.9 Impervious Area (acres) 20.3 Total Area (acres) 42.2 Site Areas Routed to BMPs Land Cover A Soils (acres) B Soils (acres) C Soils (acres) D Soils (acres) Total (acres) Forest/Open Space - Undisturbed, protected forest/open space or reforested land 0 Managed Turf - disturbed, graded for yards or other turf to be mowed/managed 21.9 21.9 Impervious Area (acres) 20.3 Total Area (acres) 42.2 Study Session Meeting of September 26, 2016 (Item No. 3) Title: Carpenter Park Regional Stormwater Improvement Page 21 Summary Information Performance Goal Requirement Performance goal volume retention requirement: 81058 ft3 Volume removed by BMPs towards performance goal:5834 ft3 Percent volume removed towards performance goal 7 % Annual Volume and Pollutant Load Reductions Post development annual runoff volume 56.0395 acre-ft Annual runoff volume removed by BMPs:6.107 acre-ft Percent annual runoff volume removed:11 % Post development annual particulate P load:25.15 lbs Annual particulate P removed by BMPs:16.63 lbs Post development annual dissolved P load:20.58 lbs Annual dissolved P removed by BMPs:2.24 lbs Percent annual total phosphorus removed:41 % Post development annual TSS load:8307 lbs Annual TSS removed by BMPs:5346 lbs Percent annual TSS removed:64 % BMP Summary Performance Goal Summary BMP Name BMP Volume Capacity (ft3) Volume Recieved (ft3) Volume Retained (ft3) Volume Outflow (ft3) Percent Retained (%) Reuse Irrigation System 5834 81058 5834 75224 7 Underground Stormwater pond 0 75224 0 75224 0 Annual Volume Summary BMP Name Volume From Direct Watershed (acre-ft) Volume From Upstream BMPs (acre-ft) Volume Retained (acre-ft) Volume outflow (acre-ft) Percent Retained (%) Reuse Irrigation System 56.0395 0 6.107 49.9325 11 Underground Stormwater pond 0 49.9325 0 49.9325 0 Particulate Phosphorus Summary Study Session Meeting of September 26, 2016 (Item No. 3) Title: Carpenter Park Regional Stormwater Improvement Page 22 BMP Name Load From Direct Watershed (lbs) Load From Upstream BMPs (lbs) Load Retained (lbs) Outflow Load (lbs) Percent Retained (%) Reuse Irrigation System 25.15 0 2.74 22.41 11 Underground Stormwater pond 0 22.41 13.89 8.52 62 Dissolved Phosphorus Summary BMP Name Load From Direct Watershed (lbs) Load From Upstream BMPs (lbs) Load Retained (lbs) Outflow Load (lbs) Percent Retained (%) Reuse Irrigation System 20.58 0 2.24 18.34 11 Underground Stormwater pond 0 18.34 0 18.34 0 TSS Summary BMP Name Load From Direct Watershed (lbs) Load From Upstream BMPs (lbs) Load Retained (lbs) Outflow Load (lbs) Percent Retained (%) Reuse Irrigation System 8307 0 905 7402 11 Underground Stormwater pond 0 7402 4441 2961 60 BMP Schematic Study Session Meeting of September 26, 2016 (Item No. 3) Title: Carpenter Park Regional Stormwater Improvement Page 23 William Alms WSB & Associates, Inc. 701 Xenia Ave South, Suite 300 Minneapolis, MN 55416 RE: Carpenter Park RWH Vault - St. Louis Park , MN Dear William:** Excludes waterproofing liner, risers/grates/frames ** StormTrap, LLC is pleased to offer the following opinion of cost for the installation of the StormTrap system for the above stated project. Please note that the opinion of cost assumes that all spoil will be left on site and is exclusive of any applicable taxes. Assumptions used for this project are as follows (see page 2 of the design for complete design criteria): Cover: 6ft (min) to 8ft (max); Groundwater: @ Elevation 876.00'; Loading ASTM C857 HS-20 Total Water Storage Provided 1.04 Acre-Feet or 45,495 C.F. Footprint (Outside Area)(137' x 65')4'-0" Dead Volume = 32,800 CF Interior Square Footage 7536 SqFt. = 0.753 Ac-Ft 72 StormTrap Units (see attached layout) (StormTrap Units + Delivery + JointTape + JointWrap) SUB TOTAL FOR MATERIAL AND FREIGHT $161,951.00 Excavation 4,191 C.Y.@ $9.00 Per C.Y.$37,720.91 (StormTrap Area + Minimum Cover + 8 Inch Pad) Overdig Excavation 1,585 C.Y.@ $9.00 Per C.Y.$14,262.19 (Overdig is 1:1 Slope per OSHA Standard) Install Units 72 Pieces @ $125.00 Per Piece $9,000.00 (Crane + Labor Costs for Setting Units) CONCRETE PAD (S.F.)9,164 S.F.@ $8.50 Per S.F.$77,894.05 (Forming + Labor + Rebar + Finishing) Backfill 956 C.Y.@ $30.00 Per C.Y.$28,671.36 (Filling Overdig w/ 3/4" Stone, to Top of Roof Slab) SUB-TOTAL FOR INSTALLATION $167,548.51 TOTAL OPINION OF COST FOR MATERIAL AND INSTALLATION $329,499.51 Please feel free to call me if you have any questions. Territory Manager - WI & MN 310-210-0029 mkamenick@stormtrap.com StormTrap, LLC. Sincerely, Matt Kamenick 5'-8" Headroom Units SINGLETRAP BUDGET ESTIMATE LEED Contribution and Water Quality Available Upon Request May 24, 2016 Study Session Meeting of September 26, 2016 (Item No. 3) Title: Carpenter Park Regional Stormwater Improvement Page 24 Carpenter Park StormTrap Management Facility StormTrap Preliminary Footprint 5/24/2016 1' Concrete Pad Overhang 8' Max Cover (883.00' Max Grade) 6.00' Min Cover (881.00' Min Grade) Designed for GWE @ 876.00' Top of Structure @ 875.00' Underside of Roof @ 874.50' DATA:TOTAL STORAGE VOLUME = 45,495 C.F. 5'-8" SingleTrap = 72 Pieces Total + 8 End Panels HS-20 Design Loading 4'-0" RWH Volume = 32,800 CF System Invert @ 868.83' 9" CIP Reinforced Slab (By Contractor) Outlet Invert @ 872.83' 4' RWH Sump Volume 5'-8" SingleTrap set on 8" CIP Slab Concrete Pad Width = 66.19' System Width = 64.19' System Length = 136.45' Concrete Pad Length = 138.45' Study Session Meeting of September 26, 2016 (Item No. 3) Title: Carpenter Park Regional Stormwater Improvement Page 25 Study Session Meeting of September 26, 2016 (Item No. 3) Title: Carpenter Park Regional Stormwater Improvement Page 26 2495 WEST BUNGALOW ROADRPATENTEDP: 815-941-4663F: 815-416-1100MORRIS, IL 60450PRECAST CONCRETE MODULAR STORMWATER MANAGEMENT SYSTEMSTHIS STORMTRTAP DESIGN MAY BE COVERED BY 1 OR MORE OF THEFOLLOWING U.S. PATENTS: NO. 6,991,402 B2, 7,160,058 B2, 7,344,335 B2CA. PATENT NO. 2,45,609REV.:DESC.DATE:APPROVED BY:PROJECT INFORMATION:ENGINEER INFORMATION:DWG.CURRENT ISSUED DATE:NTSSCALE:1STORMTRAP USA - SINGLETRAPANYWHERE, USA. PRELIMINARYENGINEERS USAANYWHERE, USA PHONE: FAX: 01-MAY-201401-MAY-2014ISSUED FORPRELIMINARY~PRECAST CONCRETE MODULAR STORMWATER MANAGEMENT SYSTEMSHEET TITLE:SHEET NUMBER:0.0COVER SHEETSTORMTRAP USA - SINGLETRAP ANYWHERE,USAMIN: 1.08' - MAX: 6.00'COVER:LOADING:GROUND WATER TABLE:DESIGN ASSUMPTIONSBELOW THE SYSTEMS INVERTJOB NAME:ENGINEERING COMPANY:CONTACT NAME: CONTACT PHONE:CONTACT FAX:WATER STORAGE REQ'D: 43,560.00 CUBIC FEETWATER STORAGE PROV: 43,962.61 CUBIC FEETUNIT HEADROOM: 5'-8" SINGLETRAPSTORM TRAP SUPPLIER:~~~SALES EMAIL:CELL PHONE:CONTACT NAME:UNIT QUANTITY:JOB SITE INFORMATION71 TOTAL PIECESAASHTO HS-20 HIGHWAY LOADING3000 PSFSOIL PRESSURE:DESCRIPTIONENGINEERS USASTORMTRAP USA - SINGLETRAP STORMTRAP1111113.0 DETAIL LAYOUT COVER SHEETPAGE0.0DESCRIPTIONSHEET INDEXREV. 1.03.1 SINGLETRAP INSTALLATION SPECIFICATIONSFOUNDATION LAYOUT 2.0 SINGLETRAP INSTALLATION SPECIFICATIONS4.0 STANDARD - 5'-8" SINGLETRAP UNIT TYPESStudy Session Meeting of September 26, 2016 (Item No. 3) Title: Carpenter Park Regional Stormwater ImprovementPage 27 2495 WEST BUNGALOW ROADRPATENTEDP: 815-941-4663F: 815-416-1100MORRIS, IL 60450PRECAST CONCRETE MODULAR STORMWATER MANAGEMENT SYSTEMSTHIS STORMTRTAP DESIGN MAY BE COVERED BY 1 OR MORE OF THEFOLLOWING U.S. PATENTS: NO. 6,991,402 B2, 7,160,058 B2, 7,344,335 B2CA. PATENT NO. 2,45,609REV.:DESC.DATE:APPROVED BY:PROJECT INFORMATION:ENGINEER INFORMATION:DWG.CURRENT ISSUED DATE:NTSSCALE:1STORMTRAP USA - SINGLETRAPANYWHERE, USA. PRELIMINARYENGINEERS USAANYWHERE, USA PHONE: FAX: 01-MAY-201401-MAY-2014ISSUED FORPRELIMINARY~ SEE SHEET 3.1FOR DETAILS1'-0" MIN.OVERHANG 6" 5'-8" 10.00' MAX COVER1.08' MINCOVERJOINT TAPE INSTALLATIONDETAIL "A"5'-8" SINGLETRAPBACKFILL(SEE NOTE 2F)JOINT WRAP(SEE NOTE 2E)SEE DETAIL "A"REINFORCED CONCRETEFOUNDATION FOR STORMTRAP SYSTEM(SEE SHEET 3.1 FOR DETAILS)ALLOWABLE MAX GRADE = TBDALLOWABLE MIN. GRADE = TBDINSIDE/VAULT = TBDSYSTEM INVERT = TBDEXTERIOR WALL OFSTORMTRAP1" JOINT TAPE APPLIED AROUND THE PERIMETER OF THE SYSTEM ONLYFOUNDATIONSTEPPED OR SERRATED AND APPLICABLE OSHA REQUIREMENTS(SEE NOTE 2F)*FOR STRUCTURAL AND FLOTATION CALCULATIONS THE GROUND WATER TABLE IS ASSUMED TO BE BELOW THE SYSTEMS INVERT. IF WATER TABLE IS DIFFERENT THAN ASSUMED, CONTACT STORMTRAP.BUOYANCY ELEVATION = TBD1.0SHEET NUMBER:SHEET TITLE:SINGLETRAPINSTALLATIONSPECIFICATIONSALL EXTERIOR JOINTS BETWEEN ADJACENT STORMTRAP MODULES SHALL BE SEALED WITH PRE-FORMED, COLD-APPLIED, SELF-ADHERING ELASTOMERIC RESIN BONDED TO A WOVEN HIGHLY PUNCTURE RESISTANT POLYMER WRAP CONFORMING TO ASTM C891-09 AND SHALL BE 0'-8" INTEGRATED PRIMER SEALANT AS APPROVED BY STORMTRAP. THE ADHESIVE EXTERIOR JOINT WRAP SHALL BE INSTALLED ACCORDING TO THE FOLLOWING INSTALLATION INSTRUCTIONS:7.FOR FLOTATION CALCULATIONS THE GROUND WATER TABLE IS ASSUMED TO BE BELOW THE SYSTEMS INVERT. IF WATER TABLE IS DIFFERENT THAN ASSUMED, CONTACT STORMTRAP.USE A BRUSH OR WET CLOTH TO THOROUGHLY CLEAN THE OUTSIDE SURFACE AT THE POINT WHERE THE JOINT WRAP IS TO BE APPLIED.FOR STRUCTURAL CALCULATIONS THE GROUND WATER TABLE IS ASSUMED TO BE BELOW THE SYSTEMS INVERT. IF WATER TABLE IS DIFFERENT THAN ASSUMED, CONTACT STORMTRAP.4.FOR STRUCTURAL CALCULATIONS THE SOIL DENSITY IS ASSUMED TO BE 120 PCF.THE PERIMETER HORIZONTAL JOINT OF THE STORMTRAP MODULES SHALL BE SEALED TO THE FOUNDATION WITH PREFORMED MASTIC JOINT SEALER ACCORDING TO ASTM C891-09, 8.8 AND 8.12. SEE DETAIL "A".1.2.A.C.B.D.E.STORMTRAP MODULES SHALL BE PLACED ON LEVEL FOUNDATION (SEE SHEET 3.1)WITH A 1'-0" OVERHANG ON ALL SIDES THAT SHALL BE POURED IN PLACE BYINSTALLING CONTRACTOR.THE STORMTRAP MODULES SHALL BE PLACED SUCH THAT THE MAXIMUMSPACE BETWEEN ADJACENT MODULES DOES NOT EXCEED 3/4". IF THE SPACE EXCEEDS 3/4", THE MODULES SHALL BE RESET WITH APPROPRIATE ADJUSTMENT MADE TO LINE AND GRADE TO BRING THE SPACE INTO SPECIFICATION.SPECIFICATIONS ON THE ENGINEER'S DRAWINGS SHALL TAKE PRECEDENCE.STORMTRAP SHALL BE INSTALLED IN ACCORDANCE WITH ASTM C891-09, STANDARD PRACTICE FOR INSTALLATION OF UNDERGROUND PRECAST CONCRETE UTILITY STRUCTURES. THE FOLLOWING ADDITIONS AND/OR EXCEPTIONS SHALL APPLY:STORMTRAP INSTALLATION SPECIFICATIONSTORMTRAP MODULES SHALL BE MANUFACTURED ACCORDING TO SHOP DRAWINGSAPPROVED BY THE INSTALLING CONTRACTOR AND ENGINEER. THE SHOP DRAWINGS SHALL INDICATE SIZE AND LOCATION OF ROOF OPENINGS AND INLET/ OUTLET PIPE OPENINGS.1.2.F.1.5.2.CONCRETE CHAMBER DESIGNED FOR AASHTO HS-20 HIGHWAY LOADING.MIN. SOIL PRESSURE 3000 PSF.TOTAL COVER: MIN. 1.08' MAX. 10.00' CONSULT STORMTRAP FOR ADDITIONALCOVER OPTIONS.STORMTRAP SPECIFICATIONTHE FILL PLACED AROUND THE STORMTRAP UNITS MUST BE DEPOSITED ON BOTH SIDES AT THE SAME TIME AND TO APPROXIMATELY THE SAME ELEVATION. AT NO TIME SHALL THE FILL BEHIND ONE SIDE WALL BE MORE THAN 2'-0" HIGHER THAN THE FILL ON THE OPPOSITE SIDE. BACKFILL SHALL BE COMPACTED TO 95% STANDARD PROCTOR DENSITY OR OTHERWISE SPECIFIED BY ENGINEER. CARE SHALL BE TAKEN TO PREVENT ANY WEDGING ACTION AGAINST THE STRUCTURE, AND ALL SLOPES BOUNDING OR WITHIN THE AREA TO BE BACKFILLED MUST BE STEPPED OR SERRATED TO PREVENT WEDGE ACTION. (REFERENCE ARTICLE 502.10 I.D.O.T. S.S.R.B.C.) CARE SHALL ALSO BE TAKEN AS NOT TO DISRUPT THE JOINT WRAP FROM THE JOINT DURING THE BACKFILL PROCESS. BACKFILL MATERIAL SHALL BE CLEAN, CRUSHED, ANGULAR No.5 (AASHTO M43) AGGREGATE.A RELEASE PAPER PROTECTS THE ADHESIVE SIDE OF THE JOINT WRAP. PLACE THE ADHESIVE TAPE (BUTYL SIDE DOWN) AROUND THE STRUCTURE, REMOVING THE RELEASE PAPER AS YOU GO. PRESS THE JOINT WRAP FIRMLY AGAINST THE STORMTRAP MODULE SURFACE WHEN APPLYING.6.STORMTRAP IS NOT WATERTIGHT. CONTACT STORMTRAP FOR WATERTIGHT OPTIONS.WATERTIGHT APPLICATION TO BE PROVIDED BY OTHERS.3.ALL DIMENSIONS AND SOIL CONDITIONS, INCLUDING BUT NOT LIMITEDTO GROUNDWATER AND SOIL BEARING CAPACITY ARE TO BE VERIFIED INTHE FIELD BY OTHERS PRIOR TO STORMTRAP INSTALLATION.Study Session Meeting of September 26, 2016 (Item No. 3) Title: Carpenter Park Regional Stormwater ImprovementPage 28 2495 WEST BUNGALOW ROADRPATENTEDP: 815-941-4663F: 815-416-1100MORRIS, IL 60450PRECAST CONCRETE MODULAR STORMWATER MANAGEMENT SYSTEMSTHIS STORMTRTAP DESIGN MAY BE COVERED BY 1 OR MORE OF THEFOLLOWING U.S. PATENTS: NO. 6,991,402 B2, 7,160,058 B2, 7,344,335 B2CA. PATENT NO. 2,45,609REV.:DESC.DATE:APPROVED BY:PROJECT INFORMATION:ENGINEER INFORMATION:DWG.CURRENT ISSUED DATE:NTSSCALE:1STORMTRAP USA - SINGLETRAPANYWHERE, USA. PRELIMINARYENGINEERS USAANYWHERE, USA PHONE: FAX: 01-MAY-201401-MAY-2014ISSUED FORPRELIMINARY~NON- SHRINK GROUTINLET/OUTLET PIPEWALL OF STORMTRAPNON- SHRINK GROUT1'-0" x 1'-0" CONCRETE COLLAR (TYP)1'-0" MIN.1'-4"1 3/16"1'-4 3/4"1'-5 1/2"7"10 1/2" 1'-0" 1'-4" 1'-4" 2.0SHEET NUMBER:SHEET TITLE:RECOMMENDEDSINGLETRAPINSTALLATIONSPECIFICATIONS3.2.1.ALIGN CENTER OF PIPE TO CORRECT ELEVATION AND INSERT INTO OPENING.IF PIPE IS CUT, CARE SHOULD BE TAKEN TO ALLOW NO SHARP EDGES. BEVEL AND LUBRICATE LEAD END OF PIPE.CLEAN AND LIGHTLY LUBRICATE ALL OF PIPE TO BE INSERTED INTO STORMTRAP.RECOMMENDED PIPEINSTALLATION INSTRUCTIONSTHE ANNULAR SPACE BETWEEN THE PIPE AND THE HOLE SHALL BE FILLED WITH NON-SHRINK GROUT.PIPE OPENINGS SHALL MAINTAIN A MINIMUM 1'-0" OF CLEARANCE FROM A VERTICAL EDGEOF THE STORMTRAP UNIT.RECOMMENDEDPIPE OPENING SPECIFICATIONMAXIMUM OPENING SIZE TO BE DETERMINED BY UNIT HEIGHT. PREFERRED OPENING SIZE 36" OR LESS. ANY OPENING NEEDED THAT DOES NOT FIT THIS CRITERIA SHALL BE BROUGHT TO THE ATTENTION OF STORMTRAP FOR REVIEW.2.4.3.1.TYPICAL ACCESS OPENINGS FOR THE STORMTRAP SYSTEM ARE 2'-0" IN DIAMETER. ACCESS OPENINGS LARGER THAN 2'-0" IN DIAMETER NEED TO BE APPROVED BY STORMTRAP. ALL OPENINGS MUST RETAIN AT LEAST 1'-0" OF CLEARANCE IN ALL DIRECTIONS FROM THE EDGE OF THE STORMTRAP UNITS.RECOMMENDEDACCESS OPENING SPECIFICATION1.STORMTRAP LIFTING INSERTS MAY BE RELOCATED TO COINCIDE WITH THE ACCESSOPENING OR THE CENTER OF GRAVITY OF THE UNIT AS NEEDED. 2.3.4.5.STORMTRAP ACCESS OPENINGS MAY BE RELOCATED TO AVOID INTERFERENCE WITH INLET AND/OR OUTLET PIPE OPENINGS SO PLACEMENT OF STEPS IS ATTAINABLE.ACCESS OPENINGS SHOULD BE LOCATED IN ORDER MEET THE APPROPRIATEMUNICIPAL REQUIREMENTS. STORMTRAP RECOMMENDS AT LEAST ONE ACCESSOPENING PER SYSTEM FOR ACCESS AND INSPECTION.PLASTIC COATED STEEL STEPS PRODUCED BY M.A. INDUSTRIES PART #PS3-PFC (SEE DETAIL TO THE RIGHT) ARE PROVIDED INSIDE ANY UNIT WHERE DEEMED NECESSARY. THE HIGHEST STEP IN THE UNIT IS TO BE PLACED A DISTANCE OF 1'-0" FROM THE INSIDE EDGE OF THE STORMTRAP UNITS. ALL ENSUING STEPS SHALL BE PLACED WITH A MAXIMUM DISTANCE OF 1'-4" BETWEEN THEM. STEPS MAY BE MOVED OR ALTERED TO AVOID OPENINGS OR OTHER IRREGULARITIES IN THE UNIT.6.USE PRECAST ADJUSTING RINGS AS NEEDED TO MEET GRADE. STORMTRAP RECOMMENDS FOR COVER OVER 2' TO USE PRECAST BARREL OR CONE SECTIONS. (BY OTHERS)CONNECTING PIPES SHALL BE INSTALLED WITH A 1'-0" CONCRETE COLLAR, AND A AGGREGATE CRADLE FOR AT LEAST ONE PIPE LENGTH, AS SHOWN. A STRUCTURAL GRADE CONCRETE OR GROUT WITH A MINIMUM 28 DAY COMPRESSIVE STRENGTH OF 3000 PSI SHALL BE USED.RISER / STAIR DETAILFOUNDATIONPIPE CONNECTIONSTAIR DETAILMEETS:BNQASTM D-4101-95bASTM C-478-95aAASHTO M-199ASTM A-615OPSS 1351.08.02FRAME & COVER AS SPECIFIED BYENGINEERPRECAST CONCRETE ADJUSTING RINGS, BARREL OR CONE SECTIONS AS NEEDEDSEE RECOMMENDED ACCESS OPENING SPECIFICAITON NOTE 6NON-SHRINK GROUTNOTCH IN FOUNDATIONTO ALLOW INVERT OF PIPETO MEET THE INVERT OFTHE FOUNDATIONStudy Session Meeting of September 26, 2016 (Item No. 3) Title: Carpenter Park Regional Stormwater ImprovementPage 29 2495 WEST BUNGALOW ROADRPATENTEDP: 815-941-4663F: 815-416-1100MORRIS, IL 60450PRECAST CONCRETE MODULAR STORMWATER MANAGEMENT SYSTEMSTHIS STORMTRTAP DESIGN MAY BE COVERED BY 1 OR MORE OF THEFOLLOWING U.S. PATENTS: NO. 6,991,402 B2, 7,160,058 B2, 7,344,335 B2CA. PATENT NO. 2,45,609REV.:DESC.DATE:APPROVED BY:PROJECT INFORMATION:ENGINEER INFORMATION:DWG.CURRENT ISSUED DATE:NTSSCALE:1STORMTRAP USA - SINGLETRAPANYWHERE, USA. PRELIMINARYENGINEERS USAANYWHERE, USA PHONE: FAX: 01-MAY-201401-MAY-2014ISSUED FORPRELIMINARY~SEE SHEET 1.0FOUNDATION DETAILS6" THICK WALL PANELSDESCRIPTION5'-8" SINGLETRAP5'-8" SINGLETRAPIQTY.4718III13 JOINTWRAPBILL OF MATERIALS5PANEL14.5' PER ROLLJOINTTAPE29UNIT TYPE150' PER ROLL5'-8" SINGLETRAPII5'-8" SINGLETRAP2IV05'-8" SINGLETRAP0VII45'-8" SINGLETRAPSPIVWEIGHT1660115900162541876217685VARIES3066#IVIII III III III III IIIIVIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIVIIIIIIIVIVIIIIII IIIIII IIIIII IIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIV "W-A" "W-B" "W" "L-B" "L-A" "L" DETAIL LAYOUT 3.0SHEET NUMBER:SHEET TITLE:DETAIL LAYOUTDIMENSION OF STORMTRAP SYSTEM ALLOW FOR A 3/4" GAP BETWEEN EACH UNIT.ALL DIMENSIONS TO BE VERIFIED IN THE FIELD BY OTHERS.SEE SHEET 2 FOR INSTALLATION SPECIFICATIONS.SP - INDICATES A UNIT WITH MODIFICATIONS.P - INDICATES A UNIT WITH A PANEL ATTACHMENT2.1.NOTES:ALLOWABLE MAX GRADE = TBDALLOWABLE MIN GRADE = TBDINSIDE HEIGHT ELEVATION = TBDSYSTEM INVERT = TBDSTORMTRAP VOLUME = 43,962.61 C.F. / A.F.3.DESIGN CRITERIASYSTEM DIMENSIONSL= 105 FT - 8.25 INW = 81 FT - 1.75 INL-A = 90 FT - 3.5 INL-B = 15 FT - 4.75 INW-A = 72 FT - 8 INW-B = 8 FT - 5.75 IN4.5.Study Session Meeting of September 26, 2016 (Item No. 3) Title: Carpenter Park Regional Stormwater ImprovementPage 30 2495 WEST BUNGALOW ROADRPATENTEDP: 815-941-4663F: 815-416-1100MORRIS, IL 60450PRECAST CONCRETE MODULAR STORMWATER MANAGEMENT SYSTEMSTHIS STORMTRTAP DESIGN MAY BE COVERED BY 1 OR MORE OF THEFOLLOWING U.S. PATENTS: NO. 6,991,402 B2, 7,160,058 B2, 7,344,335 B2CA. PATENT NO. 2,45,609REV.:DESC.DATE:APPROVED BY:PROJECT INFORMATION:ENGINEER INFORMATION:DWG.CURRENT ISSUED DATE:NTSSCALE:1STORMTRAP USA - SINGLETRAPANYWHERE, USA. PRELIMINARYENGINEERS USAANYWHERE, USA PHONE: FAX: 01-MAY-201401-MAY-2014ISSUED FORPRELIMINARY~SLAB THICKNESS "W-A" "W-B" "W" "L-B" "L-A" "L" REBAR PLACED INCENTER OF SLAB1.2.3.CONCRETEFOUNDATION PLAN4.TOP OF FOUNDATIONSTORM TRAP FOUNDATIONCONCRETE STRENGTH @ 28 DAYS, 5%-8% ENTRAINED AIR, 4" MAX. SLUMP.NET ALLOWABLE SOIL PRESSURE GREATER THAN OR EQUAL TO 3000 PSF.SOIL CONDITIONS TO BE VERIFIED ON SITE BY OTHERS.1'-0" OVERHANG AROUND OUTSIDE OF SYSTEM.REBAR: ASTM A-615 GRADE 60. BLACK BAR.DIMENSION OF FOUNDATION MUST HAVE 1'-0" OVERHANG BEYOND EXTERNAL FACE OF UNITS.DIMENSION OF STORMTRAP SYSTEM ALLOW FOR A 3/4" GAP BETWEEN EACH UNIT.ALL DIMENSIONS TO BE VERIFIED IN THE FIELD BY OTHERS.SEE SHEET 2 FOR INSTALLATION SPECIFICATIONS.THE CONTROL JOINTS CAN BE 16'-0" TO 24'-0" MAX APART.NOTES:DETAIL "B"FOUNDATION DIMENSIONSL= 107 FT - 8.25 INW = 83 FT - 1.75 INL-A = 92 FT - 3.5 INL-B = 15 FT - 4.75 INW-A = 74 FT - 8 INW-B = 8 FT - 5.75 IN6.7.5.8.9.10.CONCRETEFOUNDATIONDETAILSHEET TITLE:SHEET NUMBER:3.1SEE DETAIL "B"MAXIMUM SYSTEM COVERSLAB THICKNESSCONCRETE STRENGTHREINFORCEMENT (BOTH DIRECTIONS)6" - 1'-0" 8" 4000 psi #4 @ 18" o.c.1'-1" - 2'-0" 8" 4000 psi #4 @ 16" o.c.2'-1" - 3'-0" 8" 4000 psi #4 @ 12" o.c.3'-1" - 4'-0" 8" 4000 psi #4 @ 12" o.c.4'-1" - 5'-0" 8" 4000 psi #5 @ 18" o.c.5'-1" - 6'-0" 8" 4000 psi #5 @ 16" o.c.6'-1" - 7'-0" 8" 4000 psi #5 @ 16" o.c.7'-1" - 8'-0" 9" 4000 psi #5 @ 12" o.c.8'-1" - 9'-0" 10" 4000 psi #5 @ 12" o.c.9'-1" - 10'-0" 10" 4500 psi #5 @ 12" o.c.Study Session Meeting of September 26, 2016 (Item No. 3) Title: Carpenter Park Regional Stormwater ImprovementPage 31 2495 WEST BUNGALOW ROADRPATENTEDP: 815-941-4663F: 815-416-1100MORRIS, IL 60450PRECAST CONCRETE MODULAR STORMWATER MANAGEMENT SYSTEMSTHIS STORMTRTAP DESIGN MAY BE COVERED BY 1 OR MORE OF THEFOLLOWING U.S. PATENTS: NO. 6,991,402 B2, 7,160,058 B2, 7,344,335 B2CA. PATENT NO. 2,45,609REV.:DESC.DATE:APPROVED BY:PROJECT INFORMATION:ENGINEER INFORMATION:DWG.CURRENT ISSUED DATE:NTSSCALE:1STORMTRAP USA - SINGLETRAPANYWHERE, USA. PRELIMINARYENGINEERS USAANYWHERE, USA PHONE: FAX: 01-MAY-201401-MAY-2014ISSUED FORPRELIMINARY~4.0SHEET NUMBER:SHEET TITLE:UNIT TYPES5'-8" SINGLETRAPTYPE INOTES:OPENING LOCATIONS VARY ON UNIT HEIGHT AND LENGTHS.1.SP - INDICATES A UNIT WITH MODIFICATIONS.2.P - INDICATES A UNIT WITH A PANEL ATTACHMENT3.POCKET WINDOW OPENINGS ARE OPTIONAL4.TYPE IITYPE IVTYPE IIITYPE VIITYPE IIPANELTYPE IVPANELTYPE VIIPANELStudy Session Meeting of September 26, 2016 (Item No. 3) Title: Carpenter Park Regional Stormwater ImprovementPage 32 11835 NE Glenn Widing Dive, Portland, OR 97220 Toll-free: 800.548.4667 Fax: 800.561.1271 ©2012 Contech Engineered Solutions LLC www.ContechES.com Page 1 of 2 TS-P027 Size and Cost Estimate Prepared by Craig Fairbaugh on September 12, 2016 Carpenter Park – St. Louis Park – Stormwater Treatment System Minneapolis, MN Information provided: • Stormfilter Inflow = 0.25 cfs • Influent TSS = 1989.2 lb/yr • Influent TP = 15.3 lb/yr • TP removal required = 10-12 lb/yr (65-78% removal) Assumptions: • Media = PhosphoSorb • Cartridge Size = 27 in. • Per Cartridge flow rate = 11.3 gpm • Specific flow rate = 1.0 gpm/ft2 • Drop required from inlet to outlet = 3.05’ minimum • Estimated TSS removal = 54.0 lbs/cartridge/yr • Estimated phosphorus removal efficiency = 67%1 1 Total phosphorus removal for 16 events with influent TP concentrations in the range of 0.1 to 0.5 mg/L averaged 75 percent. A bootstrap estimate of the lower 95 percent confidence limit (LCL95) of the mean total phosphorus reduction was 67 percent (see attached GULD approval). Size and cost estimates: The StormFilter is a flow-based system, and therefore, is sized by calculating the peak water quality flow rate associated with the design storm. However, when the StormFilter is placed downstream of detention the flow rate generated at the water quality storm is not always representative of the total volume of water that will go through the system or type of pollutant-loading the system may experience in one year. Based on the information provided, Contech Engineered Solutions LLC recommends using an 8’ x 16’ StormFilter Vault with (30) 27” PhosphoSorb cartridges (see attached standard detail). The estimated cost of this system is $103,200, complete and delivered to the job site. This estimate assumes the rim to outlet elevation is approximately 8.75’. The final system cost will depend on the actual depth of the unit and whether additional costs are required (access hatch, grated inlets, etc.). The contractor is responsible for setting the StormFilter system and all external plumbing. Please contact your local Contech representative for any further questions. Regards, Craig Fairbaugh Stormwater Design Engineer Contech Engineered Solutions LLC Off: 503-258-3140 Fax: 800-561-1271 CFairbaugh@conteches.com www.ContechES.com Study Session Meeting of September 26, 2016 (Item No. 3) Title: Carpenter Park Regional Stormwater Improvement Page 33 Study Session Meeting of September 26, 2016 (Item No. 3) Title: Carpenter Park Regional Stormwater Improvement Page 34 Page | 1 November 2015 GENERAL USE LEVEL DESIGNATION FOR BASIC (TSS) AND PHOSPHORUS TREATMENT For CONTECH Engineered Solutions Stormwater Management StormFilter® with PhosphoSorb® media Ecology’s Decision: 1. Based on Contech Engineered Solutions application, Ecology hereby issues the following use level designation for the Stormwater Management StormFilter® using PhosphoSorb® media cartridges: General Use Level Designation (GULD) for Basic Treatment (total suspended solids) and for Phosphorus (total phosphorus) treatment. o Sized at a hydraulic loading rate of no greater than 1.67 gallon per minute (gpm) per square foot (sq ft.) of media surface, per Table 1. o Using Contech’s PhosphoSorb media. Specifications for the media shall match the specifications provided by the manufacturer and approved by Ecology. Table 1. StormFilter cartridge design flow rates for 18-inch diameter cartridges with PhosphoSorb media operating at 1.67 gpm/sq ft. Effective cartridge height (in) Cartridge flow rate (gpm/cartridge) 12 8.35 18 12.53 27 18.79 Study Session Meeting of September 26, 2016 (Item No. 3) Title: Carpenter Park Regional Stormwater Improvement Page 35 Page | 2 2. Ecology approves StormFilter systems containing PhosphoSorb media for treatment at the cartridge flow rate shown in Table 1, to achieve the maximum water quality design flow rate. Calculate the water quality design flow rates using the following procedures: Western Washington: For treatment installed upstream of detention or retention, the water quality design flow rate is the peak 15-minute flow rate as calculated using the latest version of the Western Washington Hydrology Model or other Ecology- approved continuous runoff model. Eastern Washington: For treatment installed upstream of detention or retention, the water quality design flow rate is the peak 15-minute flow rate as calculated using one of the three methods described in Chapter 2.2.5 of the Stormwater Management Manual for Eastern Washington (SWMMEW) or local manual. Entire State: For treatment installed downstream of detention, the water quality design flow rate is the full 2-year release rate of the detention facility. 3. The GULD designation has no expiration date but it may be amended or revoked by Ecology and is subject to the conditions specified below . Ecology’s Conditions of Use: StormFilter systems containing PhosphoSorb media shall comply with these conditions: 1. Design, assemble, install, operate, and maintain StormFilter systems containing PhosphoSorb media in accordance with applicable Contech Engineered Solutions manuals, documents, and the Ecology Decision. 2. Use sediment loading capacity, in conjunction with the water quality design flow rate, to determine the target maintenance interval. 3. Owners shall install StormFilter systems in such a manner that bypass flows exceeding the water quality treatment rate or flows through the system will not re-suspend captured sediments. 4. Pretreatment of TSS and oil and grease may be necessary, and designers shall provide pre-treatment in accordance with the most current versions of the CONTECH Product Design Manual or the applicable Ecology Stormwater Manual. Design pre-treatment using the performance criteria and pretreatment practices provided in the Stormwater Management Manual for Western Washington (SWMMWW), the Stormwater Management Manual for Eastern Washington (SWMMEW), or on Ecology’s “Evaluation of Emerging Stormwater Treatment Technologies” website. 5. Maintenance: The required maintenance interval for stormwater treatment devices is often dependent upon the degree of pollutant loading from a particular drainage basin. Therefore, Ecology does not endorse or recommend a “one size fits all” maintenance cycle for a particular model/size of manufactured filter treatment device. Typically, CONTECH designs StormFilter systems for a target filter media replacement interval of 12 months. Maintenance includes removing accumulated sediment from the vault, and replacing spent cartridges with recharged cartridges. Study Session Meeting of September 26, 2016 (Item No. 3) Title: Carpenter Park Regional Stormwater Improvement Page 36 Page | 3 Indications of the need for maintenance include the effluent flow decreasing to below the design flow rate, as indicated by the scumline above the shoulder of the cartridge. Owners/operators must inspect StormFilter with PhosphoSorb media for a minimum of twelve months from the start of post-construction operation to determine site-specific maintenance schedules and requirements. You must conduct inspections monthly during the wet season, and every other month during the dry season. (According to the SWMMWW, the wet season in western Washington is October 1 to April 30. According to SWMMEW, the wet season in eastern Washington is October 1 to June 30). After the first year of operation, owners/operators must conduct inspections based on the findings during the first year of inspections. Conduct inspections by qualified personnel, follow manufacturer’s guidelines, and use methods capable of determining either a decrease in treated effluent flowrate and/or a decrease in pollutant removal ability. When inspections are performed, the following findings typically serve as maintenance triggers: Accumulated vault sediment depths exceed an average of 2 inches, or Accumulated sediment depths on the tops of the cartridges exceed an average of 0.5 inches, or Standing water remains in the vault between rain events, or Bypass during storms smaller than the design storm. Note: If excessive floatables (trash and debris) are present, perform a minor maintenance consisting of gross solids removal, not cartridge replacement. 6. Discharges from the StormFilter systems containing PhosphoSorb media shall not cause or contribute to water quality standards violations in receiving waters. Applicant: CONTECH Engineered Solutions Applicant’s Address: 11835 NE Glenn Widing Dr. Portland, OR 97220 Study Session Meeting of September 26, 2016 (Item No. 3) Title: Carpenter Park Regional Stormwater Improvement Page 37 Page | 4 Application Documents: The Stormwater Management StormFilter, PhosphoSorb at a Specific Flow Rate of 1.67 gpm/ft2, Conditional Use Level Designation Application. August 2012. Quality Assurance Project Plan The Stormwater Management StormFilter® PhosphoSorb® at a Specific Flow Rate of 1.67 gpm/ft2 Performance Evaluation. August 2012. The Stormwater Management StormFilter® PhosphoSorb® at a Specific Flow Rate of 1.67 gpm/ft2, General Use Level Designation, Technical Evaluation Report. October 2015. Applicant’s Use Level Request: General use level designation as a basic (TSS) and phosphorus (total phosphorus) treatment device in accordance with Table 2 of Ecology’s 2011 Technical Guidance Manual for Evaluating Emerging Stormwater Treatment Technologies Technology Assessment Protocol – Ecology (TAPE). Applicant’s Performance Claims: Based on results from laboratory and field-testing, the applicant claims: The Stormwater Management StormFilter® with PhosphoSorb® media operating at 1.67 gpm/ft2 is able to remove 80% of Total Suspended Solids (TSS) for influent concentrations greater than 100 mg/L, is able to remove greater than 80% TSS for influent concentrations greater than 200 mg/L, and achieve a 20 mg/L effluent for influent concentrations less than 100 mg/L. The StormFilter with PhosphoSorb media is able to remove 50% or greater total phosphorus for influent concentrations between 0.1 to 0.5 mg/L. Recommendations: Ecology finds that: CONTECH Engineered Solutions has shown Ecology, through laboratory and field testing, that the Stormwater Management StormFilter® with PhosphoSorb® media is capable of attaining Ecology’s Basic and Total Phosphorus treatment goals. Findings of Fact: Laboratory testing A Phosphosorb StormFilter cartridge test unit, operating at 28 L/min (equivalent to 1.0 gpm/ sq. ft.), and subject to SSC with a silt loam texture (25% sand, 65% silt, and 10% clay by mass) originating from SCS 106 provides a mean SSC removal efficiency of 88%; A Phosphosorb StormFilter cartridge test unit, operating at 56 L/min (equivalent to 2.0 gpm/sq. ft.), and subject to SSC with a silt loam texture (25% sand, 65% silt, and 10% clay by mass) originating from SCS 106 provides a mean turbidity reduction of 82%; Study Session Meeting of September 26, 2016 (Item No. 3) Title: Carpenter Park Regional Stormwater Improvement Page 38 Page | 5 Laboratory testing of PhosphoSorb media in a Horizontal Flow Column (HFC; a 1/24th scale of a full cartridge) resulted in 50 percent dissolved phosphorus removal for the first 1,000 bed volumes. Granular activated carbon (GAC) tested under the same conditions resulted in 30 percent removal of dissolved phosphorus. Field testing Contech conducted monitoring of a StormFilter® with PhosphoSorb® media at a site along Lolo Pass Road in Zigzag, Oregon between February 2012 and February 2015. The manufacturer collected flow-weighted influent and effluent composite samples during 17 separate storm events. The system treated approximately 96 percent of the flows recorded during the monitoring period. The applicant sized the system at 1.67 gpm/sq. ft. o Influent TSS concentrations for qualifying sampled storm events ranged from 40 to 780 mg/L. For influent concentrations less than 100 mg/L (n=2) the effluent concentration was less than 10 mg/L. For influent concentrations greater than 100 mg/L the bootstrap estimate of the lower 95 percent confidence limit (LCL95) of the mean TSS reduction was 85%. Total phosphorus removal for 16 events with influent TP concentrations in the range of 0.1 to 0.5 mg/L averaged 75 percent. A bootstrap estimate of the lower 95 percent confidence limit (LCL95) of the mean total phosphorus reduction was 67 percent. Other StormFilter system with PhosphoSorb media items the Company should address: 1. Conduct testing to obtain information about maintenance requirements in order to come up with a maintenance cycle. 2. Conduct loading tests on the filter to determine maximum treatment life of the system. Technology Description: Download at: http://www.conteches.com/Products/Stormwater- Management/Treatment/Stormwater-Management-StormFilter®.aspx Contact Information: Applicant: Sean Darcy Contech Engineered Solutions 11815 NE Glenn Widing Drive Portland, OR, 97220 503-258-3105 sdarcy@conteches.com Applicant website: www.conteches.com Study Session Meeting of September 26, 2016 (Item No. 3) Title: Carpenter Park Regional Stormwater Improvement Page 39 Page | 6 Ecology web link: http://www.ecy.wa.gov/programs/wq/stormwater/newtech/index.html Ecology: Douglas C. Howie, P.E. Department of Ecology Water Quality Program (360) 407-6444 douglas.howie@ecy.wa.gov Revision History Date Revision December 2012 Original use-level-designation document: CULD for basic and phosphorus treatment. January 2013 Revised document to match standard formatting August 2014 Revised TER and expiration dates November 2015 Approved GULD designation for Basic and Phosphorus treatment Study Session Meeting of September 26, 2016 (Item No. 3) Title: Carpenter Park Regional Stormwater Improvement Page 40 StormFilter Inspection and Maintenance Procedures ENGINEERED SOLUTIONS Study Session Meeting of September 26, 2016 (Item No. 3) Title: Carpenter Park Regional Stormwater Improvement Page 41 In addition to these two activities, it is important to check the condition of the StormFilter unit after major storms for potential damage caused by high flows and for high sediment accumulation that may be caused by localized erosion in the drainage area. It may be necessary to adjust the inspection/ maintenance schedule depending on the actual operating conditions encountered by the system. In general, inspection activities can be conducted at any time, and maintenance should occur, if warranted, during dryer months in late summer to early fall. Maintenance Frequency The primary factor for determining frequency of maintenance for the StormFilter is sediment loading. A properly functioning system will remove solids from water by trapping particulates in the porous structure of the filter media inside the cartridges. The flow through the system will naturally decrease as more and more particulates are trapped. Eventually the flow through the cartridges will be low enough to require replacement. It may be possible to extend the usable span of the cartridges by removing sediment from upstream trapping devices on a routine as-needed basis, in order to prevent material from being re-suspended and discharged to the StormFilter treatment system. The average maintenance lifecycle is approximately 1-5 years. Site conditions greatly influence maintenance requirements. StormFilter units located in areas with erosion or active construction may need to be inspected and maintained more often than those with fully stabilized surface conditions. Regulatory requirements or a chemical spill can shift maintenance timing as well. The maintenance frequency may be adjusted as additional monitoring information becomes available during the inspection program. Areas that develop known problems should be inspected more frequently than areas that demonstrate no problems, particularly after major storms. Ultimately, inspection and maintenance activities should be scheduled based on the historic records and characteristics of an individual StormFilter system or site. It is recommended that the site owner develop a database to properly manage StormFilter inspection and maintenance programs.. 2 3 Maintenance Guidelines The primary purpose of the Stormwater Management StormFilter® is to filter and prevent pollutants from entering our waterways. Like any effective filtration system, periodically these pollutants must be removed to restore the StormFilter to its full efficiency and effectiveness. Maintenance requirements and frequency are dependent on the pollutant load characteristics of each site. Maintenance activities may be required in the event of a chemical spill or due to excessive sediment loading from site erosion or extreme storms. It is a good practice to inspect the system after major storm events. Maintenance Procedures Although there are many effective maintenance options, we believe the following procedure to be efficient, using common equipment and existing maintenance protocols. The following two-step procedure is recommended:: 1.Inspection •Inspection of the vault interior to determine the need for maintenance. 2.Maintenance •Cartridge replacement •Sediment removal Inspection and Maintenance Timing At least one scheduled inspection should take place per year with maintenance following as warranted. First, an inspection should be done before the winter season. During the inspection the need for maintenance should be determined and, if disposal during maintenance will be required, samples of the accumulated sediments and media should be obtained. Second, if warranted, a maintenance (replacement of the filter cartridges and removal of accumulated sediments) should be performed during periods of dry weather. Study Session Meeting of September 26, 2016 (Item No. 3) Title: Carpenter Park Regional Stormwater Improvement Page 42 2 3 Inspection Procedures The primary goal of an inspection is to assess the condition of the cartridges relative to the level of visual sediment loading as it relates to decreased treatment capacity. It may be desirable to conduct this inspection during a storm to observe the relative flow through the filter cartridges. If the submerged cartridges are severely plugged, then typically large amounts of sediments will be present and very little flow will be discharged from the drainage pipes. If this is the case, then maintenance is warranted and the cartridges need to be replaced. Warning: In the case of a spill, the worker should abort inspection activities until the proper guidance is obtained. Notify the local hazard control agency and Contech Engineered Solutions immediately. To conduct an inspection: Important: Inspection should be performed by a person who is familiar with the operation and configuration of the StormFilter treatment unit. 1.If applicable, set up safety equipment to protect and notify surrounding vehicle and pedestrian traffic. 2.Visually inspect the external condition of the unit and take notes concerning defects/problems. 3.Open the access portals to the vault and allow the system vent. 4.Without entering the vault, visually inspect the inside of the unit, and note accumulations of liquids and solids. 5.Be sure to record the level of sediment build-up on the floor of the vault, in the forebay, and on top of the cartridges. If flow is occurring, note the flow of water per drainage pipe. Record all observations. Digital pictures are valuable for historical documentation. 6.Close and fasten the access portals. 7.Remove safety equipment. 8.If appropriate, make notes about the local drainage area relative to ongoing construction, erosion problems, or high loading of other materials to the system. 9.Discuss conditions that suggest maintenance and make decision as to weather or not maintenance is needed. Maintenance Decision Tree The need for maintenance is typically based on results of the inspection. The following Maintenance Decision Tree should be used as a general guide. (Other factors, such as Regulatory Requirements, may need to be considered) 1.Sediment loading on the vault floor. a.If >4” of accumulated sediment, maintenance is required. 2.Sediment loading on top of the cartridge. a.If >1/4” of accumulation, maintenance is required. 3.Submerged cartridges. a.If >4” of static water above cartridge bottom for more than 24 hours after end of rain event, maintenance is required. (Catch basins have standing water in the cartridge bay.) 4.Plugged media. a.If pore space between media granules is absent, maintenance is required. 5.Bypass condition. a.If inspection is conducted during an average rain fall event and StormFilter remains in bypass condition (water over the internal outlet baffle wall or submerged cartridges), maintenance is required. 6.Hazardous material release. a.If hazardous material release (automotive fluids or other) is reported, maintenance is required. 7.Pronounced scum line. a.If pronounced scum line (say ≥ 1/4” thick) is present above top cap, maintenance is required. Study Session Meeting of September 26, 2016 (Item No. 3) Title: Carpenter Park Regional Stormwater Improvement Page 43 Important: Care must be used to avoid damaging the cartridges during removal and installation. The cost of repairing components damaged during maintenance will be the responsibility of the owner. C. Set the used cartridge aside or load onto the hauling truck. D. Continue steps a through c until all cartridges have been removed. Method 2: A. This activity will require that maintenance personnel enter the vault to remove the cartridges from the under drain manifold and place them under the vault opening for lifting (removal). Disconnect each filter cartridge from the underdrain connector by rotating counterclockwise 1/4 of a turn. Roll the loose cartridge, on edge, to a convenient spot beneath the vault access. B. Unscrew the cartridge cap. C. Remove the cartridge hood and float. D. At location under structure access, tip the cartridge on its side. E. Empty the cartridge onto the vault floor. Reassemble the empty cartridge. F. Set the empty, used cartridge aside or load onto the hauling truck. G. Continue steps a through e until all cartridges have been removed. 4 5 Maintenance Depending on the configuration of the particular system, maintenance personnel will be required to enter the vault to perform the maintenance. Important: If vault entry is required, OSHA rules for confined space entry must be followed. Filter cartridge replacement should occur during dry weather. It may be necessary to plug the filter inlet pipe if base flows is occurring. Replacement cartridges can be delivered to the site or customers facility. Information concerning how to obtain the replacement cartridges is available from Contech Engineered Solutions. Warning: In the case of a spill, the maintenance personnel should abort maintenance activities until the proper guidance is obtained. Notify the local hazard control agency and Contech Engineered Solutions immediately. To conduct cartridge replacement and sediment removal maintenance: 1.If applicable, set up safety equipment to protect maintenance personnel and pedestrians from site hazards. 2.Visually inspect the external condition of the unit and take notes concerning defects/problems. 3.Open the doors (access portals) to the vault and allow the system to vent. 4.Without entering the vault, give the inside of the unit, including components, a general condition inspection. 5.Make notes about the external and internal condition of the vault. Give particular attention to recording the level of sediment build-up on the floor of the vault, in the forebay, and on top of the internal components. 6.Using appropriate equipment offload the replacement cartridges (up to 150 lbs. each) and set aside. 7.Remove used cartridges from the vault using one of the following methods: Method 1: A. This activity will require that maintenance personnel enter the vault to remove the cartridges from the under drain manifold and place them under the vault opening for lifting (removal). Disconnect each filter cartridge from the underdrain connector by rotating counterclockwise 1/4 of a turn. Roll the loose cartridge, on edge, to a convenient spot beneath the vault access. Using appropriate hoisting equipment, attach a cable from the boom, crane, or tripod to the loose cartridge. Contact Contech Engineered Solutions for suggested attachment devices. B. Remove the used cartridges (up to 250 lbs. each) from the vault. Study Session Meeting of September 26, 2016 (Item No. 3) Title: Carpenter Park Regional Stormwater Improvement Page 44 4 5 8. Remove accumulated sediment from the floor of the vault and from the forebay. This can most effectively be accomplished by use of a vacuum truck. 9.Once the sediments are removed, assess the condition of the vault and the condition of the connectors. 10. Using the vacuum truck boom, crane, or tripod, lower and install the new cartridges. Once again, take care not to damage connections. 11. Close and fasten the door. 12. Remove safety equipment. 13. Finally, dispose of the accumulated materials in accordance with applicable regulations. Make arrangements to return the used empty cartridges to Contech Engineered Solutions. Related Maintenance Activities - Performed on an as-needed basis StormFilter units are often just one of many structures in a more comprehensive stormwater drainage and treatment system. In order for maintenance of the StormFilter to be successful, it is imperative that all other components be properly maintained. The maintenance/repair of upstream facilities should be carried out prior to StormFilter maintenance activities. In addition to considering upstream facilities, it is also important to correct any problems identified in the drainage area. Drainage area concerns may include: erosion problems, heavy oil loading, and discharges of inappropriate materials. Material Disposal The accumulated sediment found in stormwater treatment and conveyance systems must be handled and disposed of in accordance with regulatory protocols. It is possible for sediments to contain measurable concentrations of heavy metals and organic chemicals (such as pesticides and petroleum products). Areas with the greatest potential for high pollutant loading include industrial areas and heavily traveled roads. Sediments and water must be disposed of in accordance with all applicable waste disposal regulations. When scheduling maintenance, consideration must be made for the disposal of solid and liquid wastes. This typically requires coordination with a local landfill for solid waste disposal. For liquid waste disposal a number of options are available including a municipal vacuum truck decant facility, local waste water treatment plant or on-site treatment and discharge. Study Session Meeting of September 26, 2016 (Item No. 3) Title: Carpenter Park Regional Stormwater Improvement Page 45 Inspection Report Date: Personnel: Location: ————————————System Size: ——————————————————————————————————— System Type: Vault Cast-In-Place Linear Catch Basin Manhole Other Sediment Thickness in Forebay: ——————————————————————————————————————————— Sediment Depth on Vault Floor: ——————————————————————————————————————————— Structural Damage: ———————————————————————————————————————————————— Estimated Flow from Drainage Pipes (if available): ———————————————————————————————————— Cartridges Submerged: Yes No Depth of Standing Water: —————————————————————— StormFilter Maintenance Activities (check off if done and give description) Trash and Debris Removal: ——————————————————————————————————————————— Minor Structural Repairs: ———————————————————————————————————————————— Drainage Area Report ————————————————————————————————————————————— Excessive Oil Loading: Yes No Source: ——————————————————————— Sediment Accumulation on Pavement: Yes No Source: ——————————————————————— Erosion of Landscaped Areas: Yes No Source: ——————————————————————— Items Needing Further Work: ———————————————————————————————————————————— Owners should contact the local public works department and inquire about how the department disposes of their street waste residuals. Other Comments: ————————————————————————————————————————————————————————— ————————————————————————————————————————————————————————— ————————————————————————————————————————————————————————— ————————————————————————————————————————————————————————— ————————————————————————————————————————————————————————— ————————————————————————————————————————————————————————— ————————————————————————————————————————————————————————— ————————————————————————————————————————————————————————— Review the condition reports from the previous inspection visits. Date: Study Session Meeting of September 26, 2016 (Item No. 3) Title: Carpenter Park Regional Stormwater Improvement Page 46 StormFilter Maintenance Report Date: —————————————Personnel: ———————————————————————————————————— Location: ————————————System Size: ——————————————————————————————————— System Type: Vault Cast-In-Place Linear Catch Basin Manhole Other List Safety Procedures and Equipment Used: —————————————————————————————————————— ————————————————————————————————————————————————————————— ————————————————————————————————————————————————————————— System Observations Months in Service: Oil in Forebay (if present): Yes No Sediment Depth in Forebay (if present): ———————————————————————————————————————— Sediment Depth on Vault Floor: ——————————————————————————————————————————— Structural Damage: ———————————————————————————————————————————————— Drainage Area Report Excessive Oil Loading: Yes No Source: ————————————————————————— Sediment Accumulation on Pavement: Yes No Source: ————————————————————————— Erosion of Landscaped Areas: Yes No Source: ————————————————————————— StormFilter Cartridge Replacement Maintenance Activities Remove Trash and Debris: Yes No Details: —————————————————————————— Replace Cartridges: Yes No Details: —————————————————————————— Sediment Removed: Yes No Details: —————————————————————————— Quantity of Sediment Removed (estimate?): Minor Structural Repairs: Yes No Details: ————————————————————————— Residuals (debris, sediment) Disposal Methods: —————————————————————————————————————— Notes: —————————————————————————————————————————————————————————— —————————————————————————————————————————————————————————— —————————————————————————————————————————————————————————— —————————————————————————————————————————————————————————— —————————————————————————————————————————————————————————— —————————————————————————————————————————————————————————— —————————————————————————————————————————————————————————— Study Session Meeting of September 26, 2016 (Item No. 3) Title: Carpenter Park Regional Stormwater Improvement Page 47 800.338.1122 www.conteches.com NOTHING IN THIS CATALOG SHOULD BE CONSTRUED AS AN ExPRESSED WARRANT Y OR AN IMPLIED WARRANT Y OF MERCHANTABILITY OR FITNESS FOR AN Y PARTICULAR PURPOSE . SEE THE CONTECH STANDARD CONDITIONS OF SALE (VIEWABLE AT WWW.CONTECHES.COM /COS ) FOR MORE INFORMATION . Contech Engineered Solutions LLC provides site solutions for the civil engineering industry. Contech’s portfolio includes bridges, drainage, sanitary sewer, stormwater and earth stabilization products. For information on other Contech division offerings, visit contech-cpi.com or call 800.338.1122. Support • Drawings and specifications are available at www.conteches.com. • Site-specific design support is available from our engineers. ENGINEERED SOLUTIONS ©2016 CONTECH ENGINEERED SOLUTIONS LLC. 800-338-1122 www.ContechES.com All Rights Reserved. Printed in the USA. StormFilter Inspection and Maintenance Procedures 8/2016 Study Session Meeting of September 26, 2016 (Item No. 3) Title: Carpenter Park Regional Stormwater Improvement Page 48 Meeting: Study Session Meeting Date: September 26, 2016 Written Report: EXECUTIVE SUMMARY TITLE: August 2016 Monthly Financial Report RECOMMENDED ACTION: No action required at this time. POLICY CONSIDERATION: None at this time. SUMMARY: The Monthly Financial Report provides a summary of General Fund revenues and departmental expenditures and a comparison of budget to actual throughout the year. A budget to actual summary for the four utility funds is also included in this report. FINANCIAL OR BUDGET CONSIDERATION: At the end of August, General Fund expenditures total approximately 63.5% of the adopted annual budget, which is more than 3% under budget. The attached analysis provides details on specific variances. VISION CONSIDERATION: Not applicable. SUPPORTING DOCUMENTS: Discussion Summary of Revenues & Expenditures – General Fund Budget to Actual – Enterprise Funds Prepared by: Darla Monson, Accountant Reviewed by: Tim Simon, Chief Financial Officer Nancy Deno, Deputy City Manager/HR Director Approved by: Tom Harmening, City Manager Study Session Meeting of September 26, 2016 (Item No. ) Page 2 Title: August 2016 Monthly Financial Report DISCUSSION BACKGROUND: This report is designed to provide summary information of the overall level of revenues and departmental expenditures in the General Fund and a comparison of budget to actual throughout the year. A budget to actual summary for the four utility funds is also included in this report. PRESENT CONSIDERATIONS: General Fund Actual expenditures should generally run at about 67% of the annual budget at the end of August. General Fund expenditures are running under budget at approximately 63.5% of the adopted budget in August. Revenues tend to be harder to measure in this same way due to the timing of when they are received, examples of which include property taxes and State aid payments, and seasonal revenues for recreation. A few brief comment on specific General Fund variances are noted below. Revenues: License and permit revenues continue to exceed budget and are at 92% through August. Nearly all of the $830,000 of budgeted 2016 business and liquor license revenue has been received, which is consistent with previous years. Permit revenues are at 90% of budget through August and are about $230,000 higher than at this time last year. Expenditures: Organized Recreation is at 72.4% of budget, which is primarily a temporary variance because the full 2016 Community Education contribution of $187,400 was paid to the school district early in the year. The Recreation Center is at 71.9% due to the typical higher seasonal expenditures for temporary employees and pool supplies from the summer months. Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec Actual $2,755 $5,276 $7,921 $10,378 $12,716 $15,696 $18,755 $21,622 Budget $2,840 $5,680 $8,521 $11,361 $14,201 $17,041 $19,882 $22,722 $25,562 $28,402 $31,243 $34,083 $0 $5,000 $10,000 $15,000 $20,000 $25,000 $30,000 $35,000 $40,000 $ THOUSANDS Monthly Expenditures ‐General Fund Study Session Meeting of September 26, 2016 (Item No. ) Page 3 Title: August 2016 Monthly Financial Report Utility Funds Revenues: The utility revenue in each fund is below 67% due to the timing of the billing cycles. Revenue lags one month behind for commercial accounts and up to a full quarter behind for residential accounts depending on the billing cycle. Entries are made at the end of the year to recognize billed revenue for the full year. Other revenue is exceeding budget in the Water Fund due to additional antenna lease revenue. Other revenue in the Solid Waste Fund relates to grants from Hennepin County for recycling and organics, and the amount received is more than what was budgeted. Expenses: Personal services are exceeding budget in the Sewer Fund, but well under budget in the Storm Water Fund. This is due to staff time being recorded to the area being worked, which doesn’t always reflect in the current budget, but is adjusted to anticipated work load in the next budget year. Services & other charges in the Sewer Fund are at 81% because the Met Council waste water service charge of $348,097 is paid one month in advance. Capital outlay will vary during the year based on timing of projects and when expenditures are incurred. Summary of Revenues & Expenditures - General Fund As of August 31, 201620162016201420142015201520162016 Balance YTD Budget BudgetAudited BudgetAudited BudgetAug YTD Remaining to Actual %General Fund Revenues: General Property Taxes21,157,724$ 21,176,542$ 22,364,509$ 22,653,095$ 23,597,282$ 12,541,362$ 11,055,920$ 53.15% Licenses and Permits2,691,518 3,413,682 3,248,158 4,312,700 3,496,177 3,228,579 267,598 92.35% Fines & Forfeits320,150 369,545 320,200 263,951 341,200 173,035 168,165 50.71% Intergovernmental1,282,777 1,423,642 1,292,277 1,669,395 1,419,017 821,640 597,377 57.90% Charges for Services1,857,718 1,852,274 1,907,292 2,116,313 1,956,593 1,416,693 539,900 72.41% Miscellaneous Revenue1,112,369 1,302,160 1,196,018 1,357,373 977,546 690,390 287,156 70.62% Transfers In1,837,416 1,827,564 1,851,759 1,867,398 1,872,581 1,241,721 630,860 66.31% Investment Earnings 150,000 119,831 140,000 68,908 140,000 52,446 87,554 37.46% Other Income17,950 13,306 17,900 61,025 27,450 8,906 18,544 32.44% Use of Fund Balance286,325 - 254,891 - 254,891 0.00%Total General Fund Revenues30,427,622$ 31,498,546$ 32,624,438$ 34,370,158$ 34,082,737$ 20,174,771$ 13,907,966$ 59.19%General Fund Expenditures: General Government: Administration939,391$ 980,087$ 979,183$ 1,012,841$ 1,037,235$ 684,957$ 352,278$ 66.04% Finance876,216 873,987 912,685 902,901 933,624 564,116 369,508 60.42% Assessing559,749 560,979 602,299 601,687 641,038 402,628 238,410 62.81% Human Resources693,598 788,823 805,929 857,950 748,718 505,499 243,219 67.52% Community Development1,151,467 1,118,444 1,245,613 1,253,687 1,385,036 855,142 529,894 61.74% Facilities Maintenance1,053,715 1,039,699 1,094,836 1,072,749 1,115,877 713,915 401,962 63.98% Information Resources1,456,979 1,406,187 1,468,552 1,374,074 1,564,128 991,041 573,087 63.36% Communications & Marketing566,801 562,063 635,150 571,815 608,228 389,558 218,670 64.05% Community Outreach8,185 6,680 24,677 22,380 25,587 12,540 13,047 49.01% Engineering506,996 223,491 492,838 381,148 549,251 332,637 216,614 60.56%Total General Government7,813,097$ 7,560,440$ 8,261,762$ 8,051,233$ 8,608,722$ 5,452,032$ 3,156,690$ 63.33% Public Safety: Police7,571,315$ 7,769,592$ 8,511,557$ 8,248,745$ 8,698,661$ 5,783,683$ 2,914,978$ 66.49% Fire Protection3,458,161 3,535,716 3,722,396 3,759,386 4,030,153 2,589,734 1,440,419 64.26% Inspectional Services2,006,200 1,867,618 2,139,325 2,002,445 2,216,075 1,395,787 820,288 62.98%Total Public Safety13,035,676$ 13,172,927$ 14,373,278$ 14,010,577$ 14,944,889$ 9,769,204$ 5,175,685$ 65.37% Operations & Recreation: Public Works Administration222,994$ 236,304$ 232,437$ 213,383$ 241,304$ 161,924$ 79,380$ 67.10% Public Works Operations2,625,171 2,571,496 2,763,735 2,388,560 2,907,781 1,663,255 1,244,526 57.20% Organized Recreation1,290,038 1,277,046 1,304,470 1,360,454 1,431,260 1,036,301 394,959 72.40% Recreation Center1,543,881 1,561,224 1,591,115 1,575,042 1,602,935 1,152,319 450,616 71.89% Park Maintenance1,445,813 1,412,612 1,550,033 1,513,700 1,634,249 1,088,178 546,071 66.59% Westwood531,853 508,576 564,055 560,744 576,173 361,340 214,833 62.71% Natural Resources433,750 379,193 472,049 377,617 479,408 178,231 301,177 37.18% Vehicle Maintenance1,285,489 1,323,358 1,333,520 1,118,048 1,358,946 739,136 619,810 54.39%Total Operations & Recreation9,378,989$ 9,269,808$ 9,811,414$ 9,107,547$ 10,232,056$ 6,380,683$ 3,851,373$ 62.36% Non-Departmental: General 4,000$ 7,562$ -$ 123,720$ 30,351$ 20,232$ 10,119$ 66.66% Transfers Out- 1,050,000 - 2,194,245 - - - 0.00% Contingency195,860 13,834 177,984 14,438 266,719 - 266,719 0.00%Total Non-Departmental199,860$ 1,071,396$ 177,984$ 2,332,403$ 297,070$ 20,232$ 276,838$ 6.81%Total General Fund Expenditures30,427,622$ 31,074,572$ 32,624,438$ 33,501,760$ 34,082,737$ 21,622,151$ 12,460,586$ 63.44%Study Session Meeting of September 26, 2016 (Item No. 4) Title: August 2016 Monthly Financial Report Page 4 Budget to Actual - Enterprise FundsAs of August 31, 2016Current BudgetAug Year To DateBudget Variance% of BudgetCurrent BudgetAug Year To DateBudget Variance% of BudgetCurrent BudgetAug Year To DateBudget Variance% of BudgetCurrent BudgetAug Year To DateBudget Variance% of BudgetOperating revenues: User charges 5,967,419$ 2,956,066$ 3,011,353$ 49.54% 6,404,588$ 3,774,538$ 2,630,050$ 58.93% 3,295,700$ 1,685,887$ 1,609,813$ 51.15% 2,717,638$ 1,589,797$ 1,127,841$ 58.50% Other 265,000 377,152 (112,152) 142.32% 30,000 13,703 16,297 45.68% 101,000 111,679 (10,679) 110.57% - - - Total operating revenues 6,232,419 3,333,218 2,899,201 53.48% 6,434,588 3,788,242 2,646,346 58.87% 3,396,700 1,797,565 1,599,135 52.92% 2,717,638 1,589,797 1,127,841 58.50%Operating expenses: Personal services 1,285,538 886,302 399,236 68.94% 571,540 492,845 78,695 86.23% 536,896 292,772 244,124 54.53% 689,746 338,291 351,455 49.05% Supplies & non-capital 544,300 123,965 420,335 22.78% 64,550 25,108 39,442 38.90% 130,600 72,853 57,747 55.78% 30,100 2,624 27,476 8.72% Services & other charges 1,659,607 922,160 737,447 55.56%4,168,158 3,375,946 792,212 80.99% 2,558,367 1,421,940 1,136,427 55.58% 589,664 174,984 414,680 29.68% Depreciation * Total operating expenses3,489,445 1,932,426 1,557,019 55.38% 4,804,248 3,893,899 910,349 81.05% 3,225,863 1,787,564 1,438,299 55.41% 1,309,510 515,900 793,610 39.40%Operating income (loss)2,742,974 1,400,792 1,342,182 51.07% 1,630,340 (105,657) 1,735,997 -6.48% 170,837 10,001 160,836 5.85% 1,408,128 1,073,898 334,230 76.26%Nonoperating revenues (expenses): Interest income - - - 10,000 3,753 6,247 37.53% 18,000 10,476 7,524 24,000 10,923 13,077 Other misc income- - - - - - 2,500 - 2,500 - - - Interest expense/bank charges(241,416) (279,318) 37,902 115.70% (16,414) (13,385) (3,029) 81.55% (11,000) (8,209) (2,791) 74.63% (51,535) (32,235) (19,300) 62.55% Total nonoperating rev (exp)(241,416) (279,318) 37,902 115.70% (6,414) (9,632) 3,218 150.17% 9,500 2,266 7,234 23.86% (27,535) (21,312) (6,223) 77.40%Income (loss) before transfers2,501,558 1,121,474 1,380,084 44.83% 1,623,926 (115,289) 1,739,215 -7.10% 180,337 12,268 168,069 6.80% 1,380,593 1,052,585 328,008 76.24%Transfers inTransfers out(567,429) (378,286) (189,143) 66.67% (776,357) (517,571) (258,786) 66.67% (220,611) (147,074) (73,537) 66.67% (303,949) (202,633) (101,316) 66.67%NET INCOME (LOSS)1,934,129 743,188 1,190,941 38.42% 847,569 (632,861) 1,480,430 -74.67% (40,274) (134,806) 94,532 334.72% 1,076,644 849,953 226,691 78.94%Items reclassified to bal sht at year end: Capital Outlay(3,801,000) (882,215) (2,918,785) 23.21% (1,860,000) (1,457) (1,858,543) 0.08% (2,500) - (2,500) 0.00% (2,533,000) (163,508) (2,369,492) 6.46%Revenues over/(under) expenditures(1,866,871) (139,027) (1,727,844) (1,012,431) (634,318) (378,113) (42,774) (134,806) 92,032 (1,456,356) 686,445 (2,142,801) *Depreciation is recorded at end of year (non-cash item).Water SewerSolid WasteStorm WaterStudy Session Meeting of September 26, 2016 (Item No. 4) Title: August 2016 Monthly Financial Report Page 5 Meeting: Study Session Meeting Date: September 26, 2016 Written Report: 5 EXECUTIVE SUMMARY TITLE: Public Art Update – 4800 Excelsior & Central Park West RECOMMENDED ACTION: None at this time. This report is intended to update the Council on the 4800 Excelsior (former Bally’s site) and Central Park West public art projects. Please inform staff of any questions or concerns you might have. POLICY CONSIDERATION: None at this time. SUMMARY: Both the 4800 Excelsior and Central Park West development intend to incorporate artwork on the property. The public art project committee for the 4800 Excelsior development site met on Thursday, September 1 to interview three finalists for the project. These finalists were selected after submitting a Request for Qualifications (RFQ), which the committee reviewed at a meeting in August. During the interviews, the project committee asked a series of questions to the three artists, who each proposed a different art medium: wall mural mosaic (artist, Mercedes Austin), still life art forms (artist, Actual Size Artworks), and sculptural metal wall relief (artist, Lisa Elias). The project committee selected Lisa Elias to be commissioned for the project. Lisa’s plan includes creating a nature inspired wall piece that will also include a bike rack on the sidewalk. Trees, flowers and vines will be incorporated using warm colors and metal material. Lisa will not officially be commissioned for the project until a contract has been signed between the development owner and Lisa. The Central Park West public art project committee met on Thursday, September 22 to interview three finalists and review their proposed artwork for the development site. A separate report will be prepared to update City Council on this project. FINANCIAL OR BUDGET CONSIDERATION: None at this time. VISION CONSIDERATION: St. Louis Park is committed to promoting an integrating arts, culture and community aesthetics in all City initiatives, including implementation where appropriate. SUPPORTING DOCUMENTS: None Prepared by: Breanna Freedman, Community Liaison Reviewed by: John Luse, Chief of Police Approved by: Tom Harmening, City Manager