april 2, 2014 board packet

Our Mission is to protect, manage and improve the water resources of Capitol Region Watershed District

Regular Meeting of the Capitol Region Watershed District (CRWD) Board Of Managers, for Wednesday,

April 2, 2014 6:00 p.m. at the office of the CRWD, 1410 Energy Park Drive, Suite 4, St. Paul, Minnesota.

REGULAR MEETING AGENDA

I. Call to Order of Regular Meeting (Vice President Mary Texer)

A) Attendance

B) Review, Amendments and Approval of the Agenda

II. Public Comment – For Items not on the Agenda (Please observe a limit of three minutes per person.)

III. Permit Applications and Program Updates (Permit Process: 1) Staff Review/Recommendation, 2) Applicant Response, 3) Public Comment, and 4)

Board Discussion and Action.)

A) Permit # 14-007 St. Paul Public Schools - 360 Colborne Parking Lot Rehabilitation (Kelley)

B) Permit # 14-011 Excel Energy - East Metro Gas Pipeline – Phase 2 (Kelley)

C) Permit Program/Rules Update (Kelley)

IV. Special Reports – TBI Drainage Improvements at Cottage Ave. and Farrington Street, Anna

Eleria

V. Action Items

A) AR: Approve Minutes of the March 19, 2014 Regular Meeting (Sylvander)

B) AR: Approve Minutes of the March 19, 2014 Board Workshop (Sylvander)

C) AR: Approve Monetary Limits of Municipal Tort Liability (Doneux)

D) AR: Approve License Agreement with the City of St. Paul for Highland Ravine Project (Eleria)

VI. Unfinished Business

A) FI: Highland Ravine Update (Eleria)

B) FI: Upper Villa Park Stormwater Improvements (Kelley)

C) FI: Curtiss Pond Improvement Project (Fossum)

D) FI: Office Plan Update (Doneux)

VII. General Information

A) Administrator’s Report

VIII. Next Meetings

A) Wednesday, April 16, 2014 CAC Meeting Review

IX. Adjournment

W:\04 Board of Managers\Agendas\2014\April 2, 2014 Agenda Regular Mtg.docx

Materials Enclosed

Capitol Region Watershed District Permit Application 14-007 360 Colborne Pavement Rehab

Permit Report 14-007 360 Colborne Pavement Rehab April 2, 2014 Board Meeting

Applicant: Trinh Tranberg Consultant: Jesse Carlson

St. Paul Public Schools WSB & Associates, Inc.

1930 Como Avenue 477 Temperance Street

Saint Paul, MN 551028 Saint Paul, MN 55101

Description: Reconstruction of the parking lot at the St. Paul Public School District headquarters

Stormwater

Management: Permeable pavement with sand filter and underdrain

District Rule: C, D, and F

Disturbed Area: 2.64 acres

Impervious Area: 2.40 acres

PERMIT RECOMMENDATION: Approve with 2 Conditions

1. Increase filtration volume from 9,193 cubic feet to at least 10,204 cubic feet. Storage must be provided below the

lowest adjacent gutter elevation. See attached diagram of calculated volume retention. The volume of 10,336 cf

calculated by the applicant includes volume above the gutter elevation (hatched areas in attached diagrams A, B,

and C).

2. Provide inlet protection for the catchbasin at the center of the north edge of the parking lot.

Aerial Photo Permit Location

Grace St.

Co

lbo

rne

St.

W. 7

th S

t.

Capitol Region Watershed District Permit Report

CRWD Permit #: 14-007 Review date: March 24, 2014 Project Name: 360 Colborne Pavement Rehab Applicant: St. Paul Public Schools Purpose: Reconstruction of the parking lot at the St. Paul Public School

District headquarters. Location: 360 Colborne Street in St. Paul Applicable Rules: C, D, and F Recommendation: Approve with 2 Conditions EXHIBITS:

1. Memo to CRWD, by WSB & Associates, Inc., dated 3/19/14, recd. 3/19/14. 2. Construction plans (sheets A1, A2), by The Adkins Association, Inc., dated

2/20/14, recd. 2/25/14. 3. Construction plans (sheets C1.0, C2.0, C3.0, C4.0, C5.0, C5.1, C5.2, C5.3), by

WSB & Associates, Inc., dated 3/19/14, recd. 3/19/14. HISTORY & CONSIDERATIONS: None. RULE C: STORMWATER MANAGEMENT

Standards Proposed discharge rates for the 2-, 10-, and 100-year events shall not exceed

existing rates. Developments and redevelopments must reduce runoff volumes in the amount

equivalent to an inch of runoff from the impervious areas of the site. Stormwater must be pretreated before discharging to infiltration areas to

maintain the long-term viability of the infiltration area. Developments and redevelopments must incorporate effective non-point

source pollution reduction BMPs to achieve 90% total suspended solid removal.

W:\07 Programs\Permitting\2014\14-007 360 Colborne Pavement Rehab\14-007 PermitReport2.doc Page 1 of 4

Findings 1. A hydrograph method based on sound hydrologic theory is used to analyze

runoff for the design or analysis of flows and water levels. 2. Runoff rates for the proposed activity do not exceed existing runoff rates for

the 2-, 10-, and 100-year critical storm events. Stormwater leaving the project area is discharged into a well-defined receiving channel or pipe and routed to a public drainage system.

3. Stormwater runoff volume retention is not achieved onsite in the amount equivalent to the runoff generated from one inch of rainfall over the impervious surfaces of the development.

a. The amount of proposed impervious onsite is 104,662 square feet. b. Volume retention: Volume Retention Required (cu. ft.) Volume Retention Provided (cu. ft.)

7,850 None, filtration is proposed.

c. Alternative compliance sequencing has been requested due to poor soils and bedrock.

d. Filtration is proposed: Volume Retention Required (cu. ft.) Volume Retention Provided (cu. ft.)

10,204 9,193

e. Banking of excess volume retention is not proposed. f. Filtration volume and facility sizes have been calculated using the

appropriate hydrological soil group classification and design filtration rate.

g. The filtration areas are capable of filtering the required volume within 48 hours.

h. Stormwater runoff is pretreated to remove solids before discharging to infiltration areas.

4. Best management practices achieve 90% total suspended solids removal from the runoff generated on an annual basis.

5. Am MOU for maintenance of permitted BMPs exists between CRWD and SPPS.

RULE D: FLOOD CONTROL Standards Compensatory storage shall be provided for fill placed within the 100-year

floodplain. All habitable buildings, roads, and parking structures on or adjacent to a

project site shall comply with District freeboard requirements. Findings 1. There is no floodplain on the property according to FEMA.


2. All habitable buildings, roads, and parking structures on or adjacent to the project site comply with CRWD freeboard requirements.

RULE E: WETLAND MANAGEMENT Standard

Wetlands shall not be drained, filled (wholly or in part), excavated, or have sustaining hydrology impacted such that there will be a decrease in the inherent (existing) functions and values of the wetland.

A minimum buffer of 25 feet of permanent nonimpacted vegetative ground cover abutting and surrounding a wetland is required.

Findings 1. There are no known wetlands located on the property.

RULE F: EROSION AND SEDIMENT CONTROL

Standards A plan shall demonstrate that appropriate erosion and sediment control

measures protect downstream water bodies from the effects of a land-disturbing activity.

Erosion Control Plans must adhere to the MPCA Protecting Water Quality in Urban Areas Manual.

Findings 1. Erosion and sediment control measures are consistent with best management

practices, as demonstrated in the MPCA manual Protecting Water Quality in Urban Areas.

2. Adjacent properties are protected from sediment transport/deposition. 3. Wetlands, waterbodies and water conveyance systems are not protected from

erosion/sediment transport/deposition. 4. Project site is greater than 1 acre; an NPDES permit is required.

RULE G: ILLICIT DISCHARGE AND CONNECTION

Standard Stormwater management and utility plans shall indicate all existing and

proposed connections from developed and undeveloped lands for all water that drains to the District MS4.

Findings 1. New direct connections or replacement of existing connections are not

proposed. 2. Prohibited discharges are not proposed.


RECOMMENDATION: Approve with 2 Conditions Conditions:

1. Increase filtration volume from 9,193 cubic feet to at least 10,204 cubic feet. Storage must be provided below the lowest adjacent gutter elevation. See attached diagram of calculated volume retention. The volume of 10,336 cf calculated by the applicant includes volume above the gutter elevation (hatched areas in attached diagrams A, B, and C).

2. Provide inlet protection for the catchbasin at the center of the north edge of the parking lot.


DR

AFT

- N

OT

FO

RC

ON

ST

RU

CIT

ON

C3.

0SI

TE A

ND

PA

VIN

G P

LAN

Capitol Region Watershed District Permit Application 14-011 Xcel Energy Pipeline Phase II

Permit Report 14-011 Xcel Energy Pipeline Phase II April 2, 2014 Board Meeting

PERMIT RECOMMENDATION: Approve with 6 Conditions 1. Receipt of $17,400 surety.

2. Provide plans signed by a professional engineer per the Minnesota Board of AELSLAGID.

3. Provide a copy of the NPDES permit.

4. Identify specific locations of inlet protection, stormwater and erosion control devices.

5. Provide the amount of impervious area to be reconstructed and maps or figures similar to that provided with the 2013

CRWD permit application.

6. Provide additional information on Highland Park regulator station between stations 2+30 and 3+40.

a. Will a building be constructed?

b. When will this part of the project be constructed?

VARIANCE REQUEST RECOMMENDATION:

Approve variance from Rule C Stormwater Management requirements

Applicant: Sharon Sarappo Consultant: Tony Wendland

Xcel Energy Xcel Energy

414 Nicollet Mall MP-4 825 Rice Street

Minneapolis, MN,55401 St. Paul, MN 55117

Description: Replacement and maintenance of existing pipeline

Stormwater

Management: None, a variance has been requested

District Rule: C and F

Disturbed Area: 8.7 Acres

Impervious Area: unknown

Aerial Photo Permit Location

35

E

W 7

th S

t.

Capitol Region Watershed District Permit Report

CRWD Permit #: 14-011 Review date: March 27, 2014 Project Name: East Metro Gas Pipeline Replacement Project Phase II Applicant: Sharon Sarappo Xcel Energy 414 Nicollet Mall MP-4 Minneapolis, MN 55401 Purpose: Replacement and maintenance of 12,583 lineal feet of an existing

high pressure gas pipeline Location: From south to north, the project alignment runs from Montreal

Avenue along Lexington Parkway South to Pleasant Avenue to Eleanor Avenue to South Chatsworth Street to Pleasant Avenue to Monroe Court to Victoria Street to Victoria Avenue to Pleasant Avenue crossing Saint Clair Avenue with a northern extent at Pleasant Avenue and Saint Albans Street.

Applicable Rules: C, D, and F Recommendation: Approve with 6 Conditions Variance Request: Approve variance from Rule C Stormwater Management

requirements EXHIBITS:

1. Letter to CRWD, by Xcel Energy, dated 3/12/14, recd. 3/12/14. 2. Construction Plans (Sheets 000-001, 200-229,300-303), by Xcel Energy, dated

12/6/13, recd. 3/12/14. HISTORY & CONSIDERATIONS: In 2013, the Capitol Region Watershed District approved a variance from Rule C for Phase I of this project on the basis that the property that Xcel Energy was working on was owned by another entity. Xcel complied with Rule C on all property under their ownership and improved drainage patterns through impervious disconnects, vegetated conveyances, and treatment to the maximum extent practicable. The newly replaced

W:\07 Programs\Permitting\2014\14-011 Xcel Pipeline Phase II\14-011 Permit Report1.doc Page 1 of 4

impervious surfaces that triggered stormwater requirements were turned back to the local road authority that remains responsible for managing stormwater runoff from those impervious surfaces. RULE C: STORMWATER MANAGEMENT

Standards Proposed discharge rates for the 2-, 10-, and 100-year events shall not exceed

existing rates. Developments and redevelopments must reduce runoff volumes in the amount

equivalent to an inch of runoff from the impervious areas of the site. Stormwater must be pretreated before discharging to infiltration areas to

maintain the long-term viability of the infiltration area. Developments and redevelopments must incorporate effective non-point

source pollution reduction BMPs to achieve 90% total suspended solid removal.

Findings 1. A hydrograph method based on sound hydrologic theory is not used to analyze

runoff for the design or analysis of flows and water levels. 2. Runoff rates for the proposed activity do not exceed existing runoff rates for

the 2-, 10-, and 100-year critical storm events. Stormwater leaving the project area is discharged into a well-defined receiving channel or pipe and routed to a public drainage system.

3. Stormwater runoff volume retention is not achieved onsite in the amount equivalent to the runoff generated from one inch of rainfall over the impervious surfaces of the development.

a. The amount of proposed impervious onsite is unknown. b. Volume retention: Volume Retention Required (cu. ft.) Volume Retention Provided (cu. ft.)

unknown None.

4. Alternative compliance sequencing has been requested. a. The applicant has not partially complied with the volume retention

standard on site. b. The applicant has not partially complied with the volume retention

standard at off-site locations due to previously reconstructed and treated streets.

c. The project is linear according to the CRWD definition. d. The applicant has not submitted money to be contributed to the

Stormwater Impact Fund (variance requested). e. The project is linear according to the CRWD definition.

5. Best management practices do not achieve 90% total suspended solids removal from the runoff generated by a NURP water quality storm (2.5” rainfall) or on an annual basis. (variance requested).


6. The applicant has completed the Alternative Compliance Sequence and has requested a Variance from Rule C for the volume reduction due to the lack of land ownership or control over the impervious surfaces being replaced in-kind.

7. A recordable executed maintenance agreement is not required

RULE D: FLOOD CONTROL Standards Compensatory storage shall be provided for fill placed within the 100-year

floodplain. All habitable buildings, roads, and parking structures on or adjacent to a

project site shall comply with District freeboard requirements. Findings 1. There is no floodplain on the property according to FEMA. 2. It is not known if all habitable buildings, roads, and parking structures on or

adjacent to the project site comply with CRWD freeboard requirements, but there is no change in the existing drainage patterns or volumes.

RULE E: WETLAND MANAGEMENT Standard

Wetlands shall not be drained, filled (wholly or in part), excavated, or have sustaining hydrology impacted such that there will be a decrease in the inherent (existing) functions and values of the wetland.

A minimum buffer of 25 feet of permanent nonimpacted vegetative ground cover abutting and surrounding a wetland is required.

Findings 1. There are no known wetlands located on the property.

RULE F: EROSION AND SEDIMENT CONTROL

Standards A plan shall demonstrate that appropriate erosion and sediment control

measures protect downstream water bodies from the effects of a land-disturbing activity.

Erosion Control Plans must adhere to the MPCA Protecting Water Quality in Urban Areas Manual.

Findings 1. Erosion and sediment control measures are consistent with best management

practices, as demonstrated in the MPCA manual Protecting Water Quality in Urban Areas.


2. Adjacent properties are protected from sediment transport/deposition. 3. Wetlands, waterbodies and water conveyance systems are not protected from

erosion/sediment transport/deposition. 4. Project site is greater than 1 acre; an NPDES permit is required.

RULE G: ILLICIT DISCHARGE AND CONNECTION

Standard Stormwater management and utility plans shall indicate all existing and

proposed connections from developed and undeveloped lands for all water that drains to the District MS4.

Findings 1. New direct connections or replacement of existing connections are not

proposed. 2. Prohibited discharges are not proposed.

RECOMMENDATION: Approve with 6 Conditions Conditions:

1. Receipt of surety. 2. Provide plans signed by a professional engineer per the Minnesota Board of

AELSLAGID. 3. Provide a copy of the NPDES permit. 4. Identify specific locations of inlet protection, stormwater and erosion control

devices. 5. Provide the amount of impervious area to be reconstructed and maps or figures

similar to that provided with the 2013 CRWD permit application. 6. Provide additional information on Highland Park regulator station between

stations 2+30 and 3+40. a. Will a building be constructed? b. When will this part of the project be constructed?

Variance Request: Approve variance from Rule C Stormwater Management

requirements


Our Mission is to protect, manage and improve the water resources of Capitol Region Watershed District.

DATE: March 27, 2014

TO: CRWD Board of Managers

FROM: Anna Eleria, Water Resource Project Manager

RE: TBI Drainage Improvements at Cottage Ave. and Farrington St - Feasibility Study Report

Background

In late 2011, CRWD staff was first made aware of a local flooding problem in the backyard of 300

Cottage Avenue West, which is adjacent to CRWD’s Trout Brook Storm Sewer Interceptor. This area

receives runoff from its own property and neighboring properties to the east and from multi-family

properties and BNSF right-of-way to the west. The existing flared inlet to TBI, which is upstream and

west of the affected property, is undersized and improperly designed. The flared inlet frequently was

blocked with organic debris and trash after a rainstorm and stormwater runoff bypassed the inlet and the

associated berm and flowed into and ponded in the backyard of 300 Cottage Avenue. For a year and a

half, CRWD staff conducted frequent minor maintenance work to improve drainage to the existing inlet.

Issues

In 2013, CRWD approached the localized flooding issue in two ways. First, CRWD hired a contractor in

late summer 2013 to conduct more significant maintenance work that included clearing sediment, trash

and debris from the area around the inlet, grading work in the ditch upstream of the inlet, and repairing

and raising the berm. Based on follow-up inspections, the inlet has remained clear and open helping to

ensure runoff from the west flows into TBI inlet. The work eliminated the need for CRWD staff to

conduct any minor maintenance work last fall.

Second, CRWD commenced a feasibility study to better understand the issue, evaluate its cause(s) and

identify potential long-term solutions. The feasibility study, conducted by Barr Engineering, included

field investigations, detailed modeling, and evaluation of flood mitigation alternatives including volume-

reduction/water quality improvement strategies. The draft feasibility report has been completed and is

enclosed for the Board’s review and comment including a recommendation on the preferred alternative.

Barr Engineering staff will present the draft feasibility report and CRWD staff will share comments

received from the CAC who heard the presentation at their March meeting.

Action Requested

None required, for your review and comment including a recommendation on preferred alternative for

drainage improvements at TBI Cottage Ave. and Farrington St.

enc: TBI Drainage Improvements at Cottage Ave. and Farrington St. - Feasibility Study Report

W:\06 Projects\Trout Brook Interceptor\TBI Farrington-Cottage\Board Memos\BM TBI Farrington Feasibility Study Report 04-02-14.docx

April 2, 2014

IV. Special Report – A) TBI

Drainage Improvements at

Cottage and Farrington -

Feasibility Study Report (Eleria)

TITLE OF REPORT Date of Report

Feasibility Report: Trout Brook Storm Sewer Interceptor Drainage Improvements at Vicinity of Cottage Ave. and Farrington St.

Capitol Region Watershed District Saint Paul, MN Barr Engineering Co. J. Herbert, N. Campeau, and M. McKinney March 2014

Feasibility Report Trout Brook Storm Sewer Interceptor Drainage Improvements at Vicinity of Cottage Ave. and Farrington St. Prepared for Capitol Region Watershed District March 2014

4700 West 77th

Street Minneapolis, MN 55435-4803 Phone: (952) 832-2600 Fax: (952) 832-2601

P:\Mpls\23 MN\62\2362944\WorkFiles\TBI Engineer\Farrington Erosion and HH Study\Workfiles\Report\FarringtonCottage_Report March

2014.docx i

Feasibility Report Trout Brook Storm Sewer Interceptor Drainage Improvements at

Vicinity of Cottage Ave. and Farrington St.

March 2014

Table of Contents

1.0 Background ............................................................................................................................................ 1

1.1 Purpose ........................................................................................................................................ 1

1.2 Background and Scope ............................................................................................................... 1

1.3 Study Area .................................................................................................................................. 2

2.0 Modeling ................................................................................................................................................ 3

2.1 Delineation of Subwatersheds & Field Review .......................................................................... 3

2.2 Hydraulic and Hydrologic Modeling .......................................................................................... 3

2.3 Localized Flooding ..................................................................................................................... 4

2.4 Localized Flooding Mitigation Alternatives ............................................................................... 5

3.0 Results .................................................................................................................................................... 6

3.1 Alternative 1 – Replacement of Inlet Downstream of Farrington Ave. ...................................... 6

3.2 Alternative 2 – New Inlet Upstream of Farrington Ave. ............................................................ 6

3.3 Alternative 3 – Rain Garden Upstream of Farrington Ave. ........................................................ 7

3.4 Alternative 4 – New Inlet and Rain Garden Upstream of Farrington Ave. ................................ 9

4.0 Conclusion ............................................................................................................................................ 11

List of Tables

Table 1 Localized Flooding Inundation Area, Volume, and Depth ................................................ 4

Table 2 Flood Volume Sources. ................................................................................................... 5

Table 3 Alternative 1 Opinion of Cost .......................................................................................... 6



Table 6 Proposed Rain Garden Cost-Benefit Summary ................................................................. 9

Table 7 Alternative 4 Opinion of Cost ........................................................................................ 10

Table 8 Flood Mitigation Alternatives Summary ........................................................................ 10

List of Figures

Figure 1 Study Area

Figure 2 Land Use

Figure 3 Storm sewer

Figure 4 Existing Inundation Area

Figure 5 Flood Mitigation Alternatives

P:\Mpls\23 MN\62\2362944\WorkFiles\TBI Engineer\Farrington Erosion and HH Study\Workfiles\Report\FarringtonCottage_Report March 2014.docx ii

List of Appendices

Appendix A Technical Addendum

P:\Mpls\23 MN\62\2362944\WorkFiles\TBI Engineer\Farrington Erosion and HH Study\Workfiles\Report\FarringtonCottage_Report March 2014.docx 1

1.0 Background

1.1 Purpose

The purpose of this feasibility report is to provide a summary related to potential Trout Brook Storm

Sewer Interceptor (TBI) drainage improvements in the vicinity of Cottage Ave. and Farrington St. in

Saint Paul, MN. Specifically, this report provides updates to the CRWD’s existing TBI XP-SWMM

model, and outlines potential localized flood mitigation alternatives and associated opinions of cost.

1.2 Background and Scope

The Capitol Region Watershed District (CRWD) is aware of a localized flooding concern at 300

Cottage Ave. W. The low-lying area on this property periodically experiences standing water

following precipitation events, prompting complaints from the homeowner. It is our understanding

that localized flooding does not impact any homes or other permanent structures. Upstream of the

localized flooding, there is a 12-inch inlet to the TBI. Possible sources of localized flooding include

(a) direct drainage to the property and (b) flow-bypassing the 12-inch inlet near the property.

In 2012, a detailed XP-SWMM model of the entire TBI system was developed. Although the 12-inch

inlet was included in the 2012 TBI model, watershed divides in the area were only developed to TBI

inlet points. Therefore, due to the unique local drainage, further refinement of the existing TBI model

in the vicinity of Cottage Ave. and Farrington St. was required to evaluate sources of localized

flooding and potential solutions.

To determine the probable sources of localized flooding at 300 Cottage Ave. W and determine

potential improvements, the following tasks were performed:

1. Delineate and field verify subwatersheds to the location of localized flooding and nearby

storm sewer inlets.

2. Update the CRWD’s existing XP-SWMM model to determine probable causes of localized

flooding.

3. Evaluate flood mitigation alternatives using the updated XP-SWMM model.

All existing conditions detailed modeling will be incorporated into the current version of the TBI XP -

SWMM model. This technical report summarizes findings related to the referenced tasks and will be

added to the 2012 TBI XP-SWMM model report as an addendum.


1.3 Study Area

The study area includes all potential sources of direct drainage to the localized flooding area on 300

Cottage Ave. W. This area is generally bounded to the North, East, South, and West by Arlington

Ave. W, Galtier St., the BNSF freight rail line, and W. Wheelock Pkwy., respectively. Figure 1

shows the extent of the study area, subwatershed divides, and the area of localized flooding.


2.0 Modeling

2.1 Delineation of Subwatersheds & Field Review

To better understand drainage patterns and potential sources of flooding in the vicinity of Cottage

Ave. and Farrington St., subwatersheds from the 2012 TBI XP-SWMM model were further refined

and subdivided. Typically, this involved redefining subwatersheds in the study area to represent

individual stormsewer inlets, catch basin clusters, and potential sources of direct drainage to the

localized flooding. The updated subwatershed divides were developed using a variety of data sources

including:

One-foot topography for the City of St. Paul.

High resolution (1 meter, resampled to 3.3 meter grid cell resolution) LiDAR data collected

by the National Geodetic Survey (NGS) for the Republican National Convention (RNC) in

June 2007 covering the entire study area, to supplement the data provided by the CRWD. It

was also used to create a Digital Elevation Model (DEM) that was used to develop model

input parameters.

As-built storm sewer plan sheets for the City of St. Paul. Figure 3 shows the existing

stormsewer network, including Trout Brook Interceptor, in the study area.

After initially refining subwatershed divides based on the data sources listed above, a field review

was conducted on June 25, 2013 to confirm drainage patterns and the location of storm sewer inlets.

Figure 1 illustrates the final watershed divides used in XP-SWMM modeling efforts. Nineteen

subwatersheds were defined within the study area, ranging in area from 0.3 to 6.8 acres.

2.2 Hydraulic and Hydrologic Modeling

CRWD’s 2012 XP-SWMM model was used for this analysis. Updated subwatershed divides in the

study area were incorporated into the existing model. This involved generating hydrologic

parameters for all new subwatersheds, and defining hydraulic parameters associated with storm sewer

flow and overland runoff within the project area. The Technical Addendum, included as Appendix A

of this report, details the hydrologic and hydraulic modeling assumptions used for this analysis.


2.3 Localized Flooding

Using the updated and refined XP-SWMM model, inundation mapping was performed for the 2-, 10-,

and 100-year rainfall events (Figure 4). Inundation area and localized flood depths are summarized in

Table 1. Modeling results suggest that the low-lying area near 300 Cottage Ave. W floods to a depth

of approximately two feet and four feet for the 2-year and 100-year rainfall events, respectively.

Based on 2007 LiDAR data, inundation depth would need to approach 10 feet to impact the apparent

low home located at 1355 Galtier St (Figure 4).

Table 1 Localized Flooding Inundation Area, Volume, and Depth

Return

Interval

Inundation

Area (ac)

Flooding

Depth (ft)

Flood Volume

(ac-ft)

2-yr 0.20 2.0 0.15

10-yr 0.46 3.1 0.52

100-yr 0.67 4.1 1.0

The hydrologic and hydraulic analyses indicate that there are two primary sources of runoff

contributing to localized flooding: (1) direct runoff from the subwatershed to the low-lying area and

(2) flow bypassing a 12-inch inlet to the TBI located to the southwest of the low-lying property. The

4.9-acre drainage area, identified as FC_17 on Figure 1 (direct drainage area to localized flooding),

produces the majority of flood volume, particularly for smaller events (Table 2) . Three acres of the

high density residential area between Western Ave. N and Farrington St. (FC_11 on Figure 2) is not

directly serviced by storm sewer. Stormwater runoff from this area is conveyed via a ditch to the 12-

inch inlet. High flows from the developed area periodically overwhelm the 12-inch inlet and overtop

the berm contributing to localized flooding. Modeling indicates that the 2-year, 24-hour rainfall event

generates runoff sufficient to overtop the berm. The field investigation performed on June 25, 2013

corroborates this modeling result, as obvious signs of erosion and minor-washout were observed

along the ditch between the developed area and the inlet, and from the toe of the berm to the low-

lying area.


Table 2 Flood Volume Sources.

Direct Drainage Bypassing 12-inch Inlet

Return

Interval

Total Flood

Volume (ac-ft)

Flood Volume

(ac-ft)

% of Total

Flood Volume

Flood Volume

(ac-ft)

% of Total

Flood Volume

2-yr 0.15 0.14 89.4 0.02 10.6

10-yr 0.52 0.38 72.9 0.14 27.1

100-yr 1.04 0.71 67.9 0.33 32.1

2.4 Localized Flooding Mitigation Alternatives

Localized flood mitigation alternatives were developed and evaluated using the updated XP-SWMM

model. Corrective measures were developed to improve stormwater conveyance and/or reduce

stormwater volumes. Strategies investigated included:

Increasing stormwater conveyance capacity by installing new TBI inlet.

Improving existing collector ditch and inlet locations.

Implementing volume-reduction strategies.

Ultimately, four potential mitigating measures were investigated. The following results section

provide brief descriptions of each of the four flood mitigation options evaluated and provide

preliminary opinions of construction costs for each alternative.


3.0 Results

All alternatives presented are located within CRWD’s TBI easement over BNSF property . Careful

review of the easement agreement with BNSF will be necessary to determine which alternatives, if

any, are allowed by the terms of the existing agreement.

3.1 Alternative 1 – Replacement of Inlet Downstream of Farrington Ave.

Replace the existing 12-inch inlet identified on Figure 3 with a 3-foot diameter beehive inlet

structure (Figure 5). The objective of this alternative is to increase stormwater conveyance capacity

into the TBI such that the berm (Figure 3) would no longer overtop during the 100-year rainfall

event.

Modeling indicates that the proposed 3-foot diameter beehive structure has sufficient capacity to

convey ditch-flow into the TBI without further modifications to the existing berm. For this

alternative, runoff to the low-lying area is generally limited to its direct drainage area. Reductions in

flood depth, flood volume, and inundation area associated with this alternative are shown in Table 8.

Table 3 Alternative 1 Opinion of Cost

Bid Item Item Description Unit Estimated

Quantity

Unit Price Total

Extension

1.1 Mobilization/Demobilization L.S. 1 $1,500 $1,500

1.2 Remove and dispose existing

inlet

L.S. 1 $1,000 $1,000

1.3 Beehive inlet EA 1 $1,500 $1,500

1.4 36" riser EA 1 $2,700 $2,700

1.5 Connect riser to TBI EA 1 $5,000 $5,000

1.6 Erosion control L.S. 1 $3,000 $3,000

1.7 Site Restoration L.S. 1 $1,000 $1,000

1.8 Contingency – Approx. 30%* L.S. 1 $5,000 $5,000

Total (Alternative 1) $20,700 *Contingency includes unforeseen construction costs that are not included in this conceptual-level opinion of cost.

3.2 Alternative 2 – New Inlet Upstream of Farrington Ave.

Retain the existing 12-inch inlet structure and install a 3-foot beehive structure along the

collector ditch which receives flow from the developed area between Western Ave. North and

Farrington St. not serviced by storm sewer (Figure 5). Due to erosion and minor wash-out

observed in this area, this alternative would require armoring and stabilization of the flow path from

the developed area to the proposed beehive. The Alternative 2 beehive structure is positioned in a


low point along this ditch which will provide pooling around the inlet to maximize conveyance into

the TBI. To efficiently route flow from the developed area between Western Avenue North and

Farrington Sttreet (Subwatershed FC_11) to the proposed inlet, it may be necessary to construct

additional curb in the southeast corner of the parking lot discharging runoff from the developed area

to the ditch.

Modeling indicates that the proposed 3-foot beehive structure has sufficient capacity to convey

runoff from the developed area into the TBI. Additionally, the 12-inch inlet has sufficient capacity to

convey runoff generated down-gradient of the beehive inlet location into the TBI. As with

Alternative 1, runoff to the low-lying area is generally limited to its direct drainage area. Reductions

in flood depth, flood volume, and inundation area associated with this alternative are shown in Table

8.



Quantity

Unit Price Total

Extension


2.2 Beehive inlet EA 1 $1,500 $1,500

2.3 36" riser EA 1 $4,000 $4,000


2.5 Inlet channel armoring L.S. 1 $2,000 $2,000



2.8 Contingency – Approx. 30% L.S. 1 $5,500 $5,500

Total (Alternative 2) $23,500 *Contingency includes unforeseen construction costs that are not included in this conceptual -level opinion of cost.

3.3 Alternative 3 – Rain Garden Upstream of Farrington Ave.

Construct a rain garden in the collector ditch corridor to provide water quality treatment and

reduce stormwater volume (Figure 5). The rain garden is sized to remain within the TBI easement

and to maintain a distance of 25 feet from the centerline of BNSF’s railroad track. The existing TBI

easement will need to be reviewed and may need to be amended to provide adequate area for access

and repairs to the TBI if this alternative is to be implemented. This alternative assumes appropriate

soils for infiltration; however the rain garden could also be constructed as a filtration garden with an

underdrain discharging into TBI. County soils mapping suggests that this area is composed of

hydrologic soil group B soils that would be appropriate for infiltration practices. Site visits confirm

that this area is generally adequately drained; however, no soil borings have been taken.


The proposed rain garden has a footprint of over 3,000 ft2 (0.07 ac) and volume of 2,224 cubic feet,

which results in treatment 0.33- inches of runoff from the tributary impervious surfaces (1.85 ac).

The proposed rain garden assumes a 12-inch dead storage depth below the outlet, 3:1 side slopes, and

construction within the TBI storm sewer easement. Further expansion of the rain garden would

require extensive clearing of trees along the BNSF railroad.

Although a rain garden does provide volume reduction and attenuates peak flow from the developed

area, the berm identified on Figure 5 will continue to overtop into the localized flooding area during

the 10- and 100-year events. Reductions in flood depth, flood volume, and inundation area

associated with this alternative are shown in Table 8.

A water quality analysis was performed on the proposed rain garden using the MPCA’s Minimal

Impact Design Standards (MIDS) calculator. The proposed infiltration rain garden would annually

remove approximately 135,000 cubic feet of runoff volume, 466 pounds of total suspended solids

(TSS), and 2.6 pounds of total phosphorus (1.4 pounds of particulate phosphorus and 1.2 pounds of

dissolved phosphorus). Table 6 provides a cost-benefit analysis of the proposed rain garden, with the

following assumptions:

Design life of 35 years

Annual interest of 4%

Annual operations and maintenance (O&M) cost of $1.25 per cubic foot of treatment

Engineering costs for design and construction administration are estimated at 15% of the

construction costs



Quantity

Unit Price Total

Extension


3.2 Rain garden, complete SF 3,000 $12 $36,000




3.6 Contingency - 30% L.S. 1 $14,000 $14,000



Table 6 Proposed Rain Garden Cost-Benefit Summary

Description Amount

Annualized Cost of

Treatment

Construction Estimate $61,000 NA

Estimated Engineering Costs $9,150 NA

Estimate of Annual O&M ($1.25/CF) $2,780 NA

Estimated Total Annualized Cost $6,538 NA

Annual Pounds of TSS Removed 466 $14.03

Annual Pounds of TP Removed 2.6 $2,514.79

Annual Cubic Feet of Runoff Removed 135000 $0.05

3.4 Alternative 4 – New Inlet and Rain Garden Upstream of Farrington Ave.

Construct a rain garden and 3-foot riser structure in the collector ditch corridor to reduce

stormwater volume, provide water quality treatment, and increase stormwater conveyance into

the TBI (Figure 5). The rain garden used in this alternative is the same as described in Alternative 3,

but includes a riser inlet one foot above the bottom of the rain garden. The current TBI easement with

the railroad may need to be amended if this alternative is to be implemented (as noted in Alternative

3).

The riser generally conveys flow not infiltrated by the rain garden into the TBI. Additionally, the 12-

inch inlet has sufficient capacity to convey runoff generated down-gradient of the rain garden into

the TBI. As with Alternatives 1 and 2, runoff to the low-lying area prone to localized flooding is

generally limited to its direct drainage area. Reductions in flood depth, flood volume, and inundation

area associated with this alternative are shown in Table 8. Table 8 also shows the percent

contributing for the direct drainage from the FC_17 watershed and runoff that bypasses the TBI inlet,

if any.




Quantity

Unit Price Total

Extension


4.2 Rain garden SF 3,000 $12 $36,000

4.3 Beehive inlet EA 1 $1,500 $1,500

4.4 36" riser EA 1 $4,000 $4,000





4.8 Contingency - 30% L.S. 1 $18,000 $18,000


Table 8 Flood Mitigation Alternatives Summary

Flood Depth at Localized Flooding Area (feet)

Return

Interval

Existing

Condition Alt. 1 Alt. 2 Alt. 3 Alt. 4

2-yr 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0

10-yr 3.1 2.8 2.8 3.1 2.8

100-yr 4.1 3.5 3.5 4.1 3.5

Inundation Area at Localized Flooding Area (acres)

Return

Interval

Existing


2-yr 0.2 0.1 0.1 0.1 0.1

10-yr 0.5 0.4 0.4 0.5 0.4

100-yr 1.0 0.7 0.7 1.0 0.7

Flood Sources (% Flood Volume from Direct Drainage / % from Bypassing)

Return

Interval

Existing


2-yr 89% / 11% 100% / 0% 100% / 0% 100% / 0% 100% / 0%

10-yr 73% / 27% 100% / 0% 100% / 0% 77% / 23% 100% / 0%

100-yr 68% / 32% 100% / 0% 100% / 0% 69% / 31% 100% / 0%


4.0 Conclusion

As noted, runoff from the 4.9-acre direct-drainage area (FC_17 on Figure 1) contributes to the

majority of localized flooding at the low-lying area. Table 8 shows that, although three of the four

options intercept flow along the collector ditch, localized flooding is not eliminated due to the direct

drainage from the houses and backyard areas in Subwatershed FC_17. In the modeled events, this

localized flooding does not appear to impact existing structures.

Alternatives 1, 2, and 4 produce the largest reductions in localized flood depth and inundation area

for the 10- and 100-year rainfall events. Additionally, Alternatives 2 and 4 provide the additional

benefit of significantly reducing flow and associated channel degradation in the collector ditch

between the developed area and the existing 12-inch inlet. Alternatives 3 and 4 have the additional

benefit of providing limited water quality treatment to 1.85 acres of impervious surface.

Figures

W Arlington Ave

W Maryland Ave

W Cottage Ave

W Wheelock Pkwy

N Fa

rringto

n St

BNSF Rail Line

Wes

tern A

ve

N Ga

ltier S

t

W Cottage Ave

FC_01

FC_09

FC_17TRT2A

FC_10

FC_16

FC_07FC_11

FC_12

FC_06 FC_18

FC_08

TRT7E

FC_03

FC_14

FC_04

FC_13

TRT3B

FC_02

Source: Esri, DigitalGlobe, GeoEye, i-cubed, USDA, USGS, AEX,Getmapping, Aerogrid, IGN, IGP, and the GIS User Community

Barr Footer: ArcGIS 10.1, 2014-01-15 15:57 File: I:\Projects\23\62\944\GIS\Maps\Farrington Erosion & Flooding\Maps\Figures\Figure 1 - Study Area.mxd User: mbm

!;N0 50 100 150

Meters

Figure 1STUDY AREA

Drainage Improvements NearCottage Ave. and Farrington St.

Capitol Region Watershed DistrictSt. Paul, MN

0 200 400 600Feet

Subwatershed BoundariesTrout Brook InterceptorMajor Contour (10-ft Interval)Minor Contour (5-ft Interval)Municipal Street

Area of Localized Flooding:Low-Lying Area at 300 W. Cottage Ave

§̈¦35E

§̈¦94

456753 456755456749

456731

ProjectArea

1 inch = 400 feet

W Arlington Ave

W Cottage Ave

W Wheelock Pkwy

N Fa

rringto

n St

W Ivy Ave

N Ga

ltier S

t

N Arun

del S

t

W Orange Ave

N Ma

tilda S

t

N Ma

rion S

t

Weste

rn Av

e

Virgin

ia St

N We

stern

Ave

N Cu

mberl

and S

t

N Vir

ginia

St

N Arun

del S

t

N Fa

rringto

n St

N Ga

ltier S

t

W Cottage Ave

N Ma

tilda S

t

FC_01

FC_09

FC_17TRT2A

FC_10

FC_16

FC_07FC_11

FC_12

FC_06FC_18

FC_08

TRT7E

FC_03

FC_14

FC_04

FC_13

TRT3B

FC_02


Barr Footer: ArcGIS 10.1, 2014-03-04 12:39 File: I:\Projects\23\62\944\GIS\Maps\Farrington Erosion & Flooding\Maps\Figures\Figure 2 - Land Use.mxd User: mbm

!;N0 50 100 150

Meters

Figure 2LAND USE



0 200 400 600Feet

Subwatershed BoundariesImpervious AreaTrout Brook InterceptorCity of St. Paul StormsewerCommercialIndustrialInstitutionalParks and Open SpaceResidential High DensityResidential Low DensityRoadsUndevelopedWater

1 inch = 350 feet

!>

12 inRCP

96 inCEM

96 inCEM

96 inCEM

18 inRCP

96 in

CEM

96 inCEM

96 inCEM

54 in

RCP

36 in

RCP 96 in

CEM

12 in

RCP

27 in

RCP

18 inRCP

54 in

UNK

15 in

RCP

12 inRCP

30 in

RCP

12 inRCP

12 inRCP

30 in

RCP

15 in

RCP

W Arlington Ave

W Cottage Ave

W Wheelock Pkwy

N Fa

rringto

n St

W Ivy Ave

N Ga

ltier S

t

N Arun

del S

t

W Orange Ave

N Ma

tilda S

t

N Ma

rion S

t

Weste

rn Av

e

Virgin

ia St

N We

stern

Ave

N Cu

mberl

and S

t

N Vir

ginia

St

N Arun

del S

t

N Fa

rringto

n St

N Ga

ltier S

t

W Cottage Ave

N Ma

tilda S

t

FC_01

FC_09

FC_17TRT2A

FC_10

FC_16

FC_07FC_11

FC_12

FC_06FC_18

FC_08

TRT7E

FC_03

FC_14

FC_04TRT3B

FC_13

FC_02


Barr Footer: ArcGIS 10.1, 2014-03-04 12:42 File: I:\Projects\23\62\944\GIS\Maps\Farrington Erosion & Flooding\Maps\Figures\Figure 3 - Stormsewer.mxd User: mbm

!;N0 50 100 150

Meters

Figure 3STORMSEWER



0 350 700Feet

Subwatershed Boundaries!> Existing 12" TBI Inlet

Existing Berm, Constructed in 2013Trout Brook InterceptorCity of St. Paul StormsewerMunicipal Street

1 inch = 350 feet

Existing Berm and Inlet

!A

W Ivy Ave

W Cottage Ave

N Ga

ltier S

t

N Fa

rringto

n St

N Ma

tilda S

t

N Ga

ltier S

t

N Fa

rringto

n St

FC_17TRT2A

TRT7E

FC_18

FC_16FC_14

TRT3B

FC_13FC_10

FC_11


Barr Footer: ArcGIS 10.1, 2014-03-04 11:57 File: I:\Projects\23\62\944\GIS\Maps\Farrington Erosion & Flooding\Maps\Figures\Figure 4 - Inundation Area.mxd User: mbm

!;N

0 25 50 75Meters

Figure 4EXISTING INUNDATION AREADrainage Improvements Near

Cottage Ave. and Farrington St.Capitol Region Watershed District

St. Paul, MN

0 150 300Feet

2-year Inundation Area10-year Inundation Area100-yr Inundation AreaSubwatershed Boundaries

!AApparent Low Home (1355 Galtier St.)

!> Existing 12" TBI InletExisting Berm, Constructed in 2013Trout Brook InterceptorCity of St. Paul StormsewerMunicipal Street

Source: Esri, DigitalGlobe,GeoEye, i-cubed, USDA,USGS, AEX, Getmapping,Aerogrid, IGN, IGP, and theGIS User Community

1 inch = 150 feet

Area of Localized Flooding:Low-Lying Area at300 W. Cottage Ave

!>

!>

Weste

rn Av

e

N Ma

tilda S

t

W Ivy Ave

N Fa

rringto

n St

N Fa

rringto

n St

TRT2AFC_11FC_17

FC_07

FC_04

TRT3B

FC_08

FC_16FC_10 FC_14 FC_18FC_06

FC_03


Barr Footer: ArcGIS 10.1, 2014-03-06 08:44 File: I:\Projects\23\62\944\GIS\Maps\Farrington Erosion & Flooding\Maps\Figures\Figure 5 - Restoration Alternatives2.mxd User: mbm

!;N0 25 50 75

Meters

Figure 5FLOOD MITIGATION

ALTERNATIVESDrainage Improvements Near

Cottage Ave. and Farrington St.Capitol Region Watershed District

St. Paul, MN

0 150 300Feet

Subwatershed BoundariesRainwater GardenDeveloped Area2-year Inundation Areafrom Direct Drainage 10-year Inundation Areafrom Direct Drainage 100-year Inundation Areafrom Direct Drainage

!> Beehive StructureExisting Berm, Constructed in 2013Trout Brook InterceptorCity of St. Paul StormsewerMunicipal Street

Source: Esri, DigitalGlobe,GeoEye, i-cubed, USDA,USGS, AEX, Getmapping,Aerogrid, IGN, IGP, and theGIS User Community

1 inch = 150 feet

Alternative 1:Beehive InletReplacing 12-inch InletEst. Cost: $20,700

Alternative 2:Beehive Structure Receiving Flow from Developed AreaEst. Cost: $23,500Alternative 4:Beehive Intlet (Riser) and Rainwater GardenReceiving Flow from Developed AreaEst. Cost: $76,500

Alternative 3:Rainwater Garden ReceivingFlow from Developed AreaEst. Cost: $61,000

Developed Drainage Area to Rain Garden

Existing Berm

Appendix A

Technical Addendum

1

P:\Mpls\23 MN\62\2362944\WorkFiles\TBI Engineer\Farrington Erosion and HH Study\Workfiles\Report\FarringtonCottage_Report_TechnicalAddendum.docx

Technical Addendum Hydrologic Modeling The 2012 XP-SWMM model was calibrated based on observed flow data from the three CRWD flow

monitoring stations and five CRWD pond monitoring stations. Many hydrologic parameters, including

Hortonian infiltration parameters and impervious depression storage, were adjusted during the calibration

process. Table 1 shows the hydrologic parameters which, after calibration, were locally constant within

the vicinity of Cottage Ave. and Farrington St. Hydrologic parameter values shown in Table 1 were

applied to all new subwatersheds in the study area, consistent with their use in the calibration process.

Table 1. 2012 XP-SWMM TBI Calibration Parameters.

Parameter Calibrated Value Minimum Infiltration Rate (Fc) 0.7 in/hr Infiltration Decay Rate (k) 0.003 s-1

Impervious Depression Storage (Ds) 0.1 in To ensure consistency throughout the entirety of the model, all hydrologic parameters not listed in Table

1 were generated based on the methodologies and assumptions described in Section 3.2 of the 2012 TBI

XP-SWMM report. This involved evaluating areal distributions of hydrologic soil group, impervious area,

slope, and land use type, and determining the longest flow path length for each new subwatershed. Figure

2 shows land use delineation within the project area. Associated hydrologic parameters, such as maximum

infiltration rate, directly connected impervious area, and watershed width were then calculated based on

the methodology described in 2012 TBI XP-SWMM report. Assumed parameter values used in the 2012

TBI XP-SWMM model for pervious and impervious roughness and pervious depression storage were

applied to the new subwatersheds. The 24-hour rainfall distribution and design event precipitation depths

used in 2012 TBI XP-SWMM modeling efforts were unchanged for this analysis.

Hydraulic Modeling Hydrographs generated from hydrologic modeling of subwatersheds within the project area were routed

to stormsewer inlets or to the location of flooding via overland conveyances. Where inlet control and

stormsewer surcharging were possible, storages, overflow conduits, and hydraulic control structures were

included to accurately account for all potential sources of overland flow to the location of flooding.

2


Stormsewer and Stormsewer Inlets The calibrated 2012 TBI XP-SWMM model did not explicitly model the small stormsewer network

draining the majority of the study area. For this reason, hydraulic parameters associated with all pipes in

the study area were generated and incorporated into the greater TBI stormsewer network. Figure 3 shows

stormsewer within the project area included in the original 2012 TBI model, and stormsewer pipe

segments added as part of this analysis.

To ensure consistency throughout the model, hydraulic parameters were generated based on methodology

and data sources outlined in Section 3.3 of the 2012 TBI model report. Pipe diameter, shape, invert

elevations, and slope were taken from City of St. Paul stormsewer CAD file data. Because rim elevations

were not specified within the City of St. Paul stormsewer CAD data file for the majority of added

stormsewer network, rim elevations were instead assumed from DEM data. A typical reinforced concrete

pipe (RCP) manning’s roughness value of 0.013 was assumed, and entrance and exit losses assigned to

each individual pipe segment were referenced from the Wurbs and James 2002 Water Resources

Engineering textbook. Two flared end section stormsewer inlets, including the 12-inch inlet to the TBI

near the location of flooding, were assigned appropriate inlet types in XP-SWMM. Both were modeled as

having grooved ends, projecting from the surrounding surface.

An earthen and rock dam surrounding the 12-inch inlet to the TBI was included in the model as a weir

structure, representing the improved berm that was initiated by CRWD and constructed in Summer 2013

by G. F. Jedlicki, Inc. Berm dimensions were developed from observations made during the June 25,

2013, site visit. Storage in the ditch behind the berm, and at all locations where inlet barrel capacity or

hydraulic structures could conceivably restrict flow, was determined using high-resolution LiDAR data

and was incorporated into the model.

Open-Channel Properties Open-channels were modeled within the project area to convey overland flow to TBI stormsewer inlets

and storage areas, including the location of flooding. The main collector ditch along the southern

boundary of the project area, parallel to and north of the BNSF freight rail line, was modeled as a series of

natural cross-sections and trapezoidal channels. Where the ditch profile could clearly be discerned from

elevation data, the ditch was modeled as a natural section. Natural cross-sections, developed from high-

resolution lidar data, were defined at the most constricting points along the ditch profile. All reaches

modeled as natural sections were extremely vegetated. For this reason, Manning’s roughness values of

0.12 and 0.14 were chosen for the center of channel and channel overbanks, respectively. These values

3


are typical for very weedy reaches, as defined by the Bedient, Huber and Vieux 2008 Hydrology and

Floodplain Analysis textbook. Where natural sections could not be defined, the collector ditch was

modeled as a trapezoidal channel two feet wide, 1.5 feet deep, with 2H:1V side slopes. Where the ditch

was densely vegetated, a Manning’s roughness value of 0.12 was assumed. Where the ditch was more

typical of a low-stage channel with some rocks and weeds, a value of 0.045 was used (Bedient et al.,

2008).

Overland flow from catch basin surcharging was modeled using wide, shallow trapezoidal channels.

Where catch basins surcharged onto paved road surfaces, the channel-bottom width was set equal to the

road width, and a manning’s roughness of 0.014, typical for overland flow over asphalt, was assumed

(Crawford and Linsley, 1966). Where catch basins surcharged onto grass or turf surfaces, Manning’s

overland flow roughness of 0.2, typical of light turf surfaces, was used (Crawford and Linsley, 1966), and

channel-bottom width was set to 10 feet.


Regular Meeting of the Capitol Region Watershed District (CRWD) Board of Managers, for Wednesday,

March 19, 2014 6:11 p.m. at the office of the CRWD, 1410 Energy Park Drive, Suite 4, St. Paul, Minnesota.

REGULAR MEETING

I. Call to Order of Regular Meeting (President Joe Collins)

A) Attendance

Joe Collins

Shirley Reider

Seitu Jones

Mary Texer

Mike Thienes

Staff Present

Mark Doneux, CRWD

Michelle Sylvander, CRWD

Forrest Kelley, CRWD

Anna Eleria, CRWD

Nate Zwonitzer, CRWD

Gustavo Castro, CRWD

Jim Mogan, Ramsey County

Attorney

Public Attendees Marcelle Weslock, LHB, Inc.

Jared Olson, Ryan Company

Matt Holmboe, Solution Blue

B) Review, Amendments and Approval of the Agenda

President Collins asked for additions or changes to the agenda. Administrator Doneux requested a number of

changes. Administrator Doneux requested that Special Report item A. TBI Drainage Improvements at Cottage

Ave. and Farrington Street be removed and addressed at a future meeting. Administrator Doneux requested the

addition of Action Items G. Lake McCarrons weed harvesting , H. Amend the June 2012 treasurers report and

motion #12-06-17, I. Support sponsorship of CAC event with Freshwater Society. Move action items D. and E.

to follow the permit applications and program updates so Attorney Mogan can be included in the discussions.

Motion 14-048: Approve the March 19, 2014 Agenda with changes.

Texer/Jones

Unanimously approved

II. Public Comments – For Items not on the Agenda

There were no public comments.

III. Permit Applications and Program Updates

A) Permit # 13-027 Vintage on Selby Review Extension Request (Kelley)

Mr. Kelley reviewed Permit #13-027 Vintage on Selby Extension Request. The permit was tabled with 12

conditions on October 2, 2013, and two extensions have been approved. The current review period will expire

on March 24, 2014. Plans have been submitted to address the Board approved conditions. The applicant is

April 2, 2014 Board Meeting

V. Action Item A) Approve Minutes

of March 19, 2014

DRAFT Regular Board Meeting

(Sylvander)


looking into alternative volume reduction practices to minimize water adjacent to the building, and have

requested additional review time to re-submit revised plans if necessary.

Motion 14-049: Approve the 60-day extension of permit #13-027 Vintage on Selby.

Thienes/Reider


B) Permit # 14-001 Montana-Greenbrier RSVP (Kelley)

Mr. Kelley reviewed Permit #14-001 Montana-Greenbrier. The applicant is the City of St. Paul. The permit is

for residential street reconstruction near Montana and Greenbrier. The applicable rules are Stormwater

Management (Rule C), Flood Control (Rule D), Erosion and Sediment Control (Rule F). The disturbed area of

this project is 3.39 Acres and 3.39 Acres impervious surface.

Motion 14-050: Approve permit #14-001 Montana-Greenbrier with 2 conditions:

1. Provide copy of issued NPDES Permit.

2. Provide practices to remove gross pollutants at the following locations:

a. California and Edgerton

b. Idaho and Edgerton

c. Iowa and Edgerton

Jones/Texer


Motion 14-051: Approve withdrawal of 11,091 cubic feet of credits from the St. Paul Public Works Volume

Bank.

Jones/Texer


C) Permit #14-005 Hazelden Redevelopment (Kelley)

Mr. Kelley reviewed permit#14-005 Hazelden Redevelopment. The applicant is Hazelden. The permit is for

building removal, addition, and site improvements at 680 Stewart Avenue. The applicable rules are Stormwater

Management (Rule C), Flood Control (Rule D), Erosion and Sediment Control (Rule F). The disturbed area of

this project is 5.75 Acres and 2.78 Acres impervious surface.

Motion 14-052: Approve permit #14-005 Hazelden Redevelopment with 6 conditions:

1. Provide a copy of the NPDES permit.

2. Receipt of $13,900 surety and documentation of recorded maintenance agreement.


4. Revise basin soil mixtures to consist of 80% sand, 20% compost.

5. Provide pretreatment of runoff upstream of the filtration basin. A second SAFL Baffle could be

added to structures CB-B3 or MH-B2.

6. Provide planting plans for the basin bottoms. Establishing vegetation in stormwter BMPs from

seed is not recommended.


President Collins requested clarification of item #5. Mr. Kelley replied that our rules require a pretreatment of

a filtration system be in place. For projects that do not have a pretreatment plan in place a SAFL Baffle can be

added.

Texer/Reider


D) Permit #14-008 Lowertown Ballpark (Kelley)

Mr. Kelley reviewed Permit #14-008 Lowertown Ballpark. The applicant is the City of St. Paul Parks and

Recreation Department. The permit is for construction of a new Saints ballpark at 5th

Street between Broadway

and John Streets. The applicable rules are Wetland Management (Rule E), and Erosion and Sediment Control

(Rule F). The disturbed area of this project is 9.5 Acres and 4.55 Acres impervious surface.

Motion 14-053: Approve permit #14-008 Lowertown Ballpark with four conditions.


2. Clarify subwatershed boundaries or drainage routes:

a. Label curb cut locations surrounding the rain garden.

b. Show the trench drain that will collect runoff from PR-2.

c. Show how runoff from PR-5b between PR-3b and PR-2 is directed to the right field underground

storage.

3. Provide additional detail so that the plans, profiles and HydroCAD correspond:

a. Reduce structural soil voids to 26% or provide documentation to support a higher value.

b. For Detail 6 on sheet C551, revise rock void space to 40% in HydroCAD model or provide

documentation to support a higher value.

c. For Pond 1P – Field Storage, provide a cross-section of the field that corresponds with

HydroCAD.

4. Amend the SWPPP and submit an updated erosion and sediment control plan to better reflect how to

protect the permanent stormwater management during the process of construction.

Reider/Texer


E) Permit #14-009 Waters of Highland (Kelley)

Mr. Kelley reviewed Permit #14-009 Waters of Highland. The applicant is the Waters Senior Living. The

permit is for construction of new senior housing. The applicable rules are Stormwater Management (Rule C),

Flood Control (Rule D), Erosion and Sediment Control (Rule F). The disturbed area of this project is 1.06

Acres.

Motion 14-054: Approve permit #14-009 Waters of Highland with five conditions.

1. Receipt of $3,750 surety and documentation of maintenance agreement recorded with Ramsey County.


3. Provide copy of issued NPDES permit.

4. Provide a sump or alternative pretreatment device at STMH-40.

5. Revise underground infiltration system detail on sheet C8-2:

a. Remove geotextile fabric from the bottom of the system, fabric on top and sides only

b. Specify that storage rock shall be non-limestone material.


Texer/Reider


F) TAC Update (Kelley)

Mr. Kelley reviewed TAC meeting discussion about filtration credits. Since the goal is to remove phosphorus,

the problem is with dissolved phosphorus and the potential for systems with drain tile outlets to allow

phosphorus to leach out the BMP. Barr Enginering has looked at examples with the MIDS calculator in order to

compare the performance of filtration BMPS to infiltration BMPS. Mr. Collins asked if certain soil types have

different outcomes. Mr. Kelley replied that the filtration type along with many other factors alter the

phosphorus removal numbers. Administrator Doneux noted that the 70% credit will need to be changed to

something lower, while increasing the credit for adding soils amendments to capture dissolved

phosphorus. CRWD will also look to conduct more of our own monitoring to determine effectiveness and

appropriate credit scenarios.

V. Action Items

D) AR: Approve Easements and Access Agreement for Highland Ravine Stabilization Project

(Eleria)

Ms. Eleria reviewed the Highland Ravine Stabilization Project. The work involves both private property and

public parkland with construction limits ranging from 10 to 20 feet wide along the centerlines of three

ravinesand slightly wider for a stormwater basin at the junction of Ravines 1 and 2. The construction area for

Ravines 1 and 2 is located on five single-family residential properties and the access route is via Deer Park

Townhome Association. The project will take place on City parkland for Ravine 3 and one private residence.

Ms. Eleria said that CRWD has received signed easements from the single-family homeowners in all three

ravines. The Deer Park Townhome Association was reviewing CRWD’s revisions to the agreement. CRWD

staff anticipates that we will come to terms on the agreement with Deer Park.

Motion 14-055: Approve the easements for the Highland Ravine Stabilization Project; and approve the

agreement with Deer Park Townhome Association subject of approval of the Ramsey County Attorney

Reider/Jones


E) AR: Authorize Bidding for Highland Ravine Stabilization Project (Eleria)

Ms. Eleria, reviewed that in November 2012, CRWD hired Wenck Associates to conduct the design and

engineering work for the Highland Ravine Stabilization Project. The purpose of the project is to slow down

runoff in the ravines, minimize ravine erosion, and prevent flooding and sedimentation to downstream

properties. The project area is situated on both private property and City parkland between Lexington Parkway

and Edgcumbe Road in Saint Paul.

Over the past year and a half, CRWD has involved the affected property owners in the design of the ravine

stabilization project providing several opportunities to review iterations of the plans and holding over a dozen

meetings and site visits. Several pertinent City departments have reviewed and commented on the project

through the City’s site plan review process.


Wenck has prepared the Highland Ravine Stabilization Project Manual or Contract Documents. Legal

documents have been reviewed on two occasions by Ramsey County Attorney and CRWD staff. Ms. Eleria and

CRWD staff estimates that the total cost of the Highland Ravine Stabilization Project will be $400,000. CRWD

staff will review the final plans, key contract specifications, and the project costs including the engineer’s

estimate for construction.

Motion 14-056: Authorize solicitation of bids for the Highland Ravine Stabilization Project subject to obtaining

all required easements and agreements from property owners, and the review and approval of the Ramsey

County Attorney.

Reider/Texer


IV. Special Reports.

A. TBI Drainage Improvements at Cottage Ave. and Farrington Street, Anna Eleria

This Special Report was removed and will be addressed at a later date.

B. Stewardship Grant Program Improvements, Nate Zwonitzer

Mr. Zwonitzer reviewed the Stewardship Grant program and how it offers financial assistance to property

owners interested in implementing stormwater BMPs on their property. Typical projects that receive funding

include rain gardens, rain barrels, permeable hardscapes, and swales. Most grant awards are under $10,000 and

will typically cover 100% of material costs or 50% of total project costs (materials and labor), whichever is less.

In addition to funding, the program provides on-site technical assistance and construction-ready designs. Mr.

Zwonitzer said that over the past year staff has been reviewing the Stewardship Grant program to identify ways

it can be improved.

Mr. Zwonitzer shared a presentation showing several areas of the Stewardship Grant Program where

improvements were identified including outreach/education, design efficiency, and grant project funding. The

presentation outlined goals of the program.

Goal 1: Provide an exceptional level of education/outreach A site visit would be provided to all property owners requesting one. Site visits would consist of a

representative from RCD and CRWD analyzing the property for runoff issues and identifying BMP

opportunities. Site visits provide a great opportunity for face-to-face education on water resource issues. Mr.

Castro reviewed the contents of the educational folder. Every property owner would receive a folder

containing additional information on CRWD and its activities, grant program information, upcoming events,

Citizen Advisory Committee and more details on projects identified for their property.

Goal 2: Improve design efficiency

When requested, a concept-level “Clean Water Plan” would be developed for every property. Clean Water

Plans are much quicker to produce than full design sets, and they will show all identified BMP opportunities.

Plans will also include basic project information such as total cost, water quality treatment ranking, and

whether additional design services are available. This will allow a property owner to select which project(s)

will be fully designed, and it will greatly reduce the amount of time and money spent on designs that don’t lead

to project construction.

Goal 3: Develop more equitable grant award system based on project benefit


Mr. Zwonitzer reviewed calculations to help determine grant awards for projects. Instead of focusing on the

project cost, the calculator factors in size and area type treated (roof, street, lawn etc.), rainfall depth treated,

and provides a bonus based on promotional/educational value of the project. A high performing, highly visible

project may be eligible for 100% funding, thereby increasing the likelihood it will be installed. Low

performing, low visibility projects may not be eligible for full designs or funding.

Ms. Reider commented that the program is very well thought out and easy to follow. Ms. Texer replied that this

raises our level of professionalism. Mr. Thienes commented that other watershed districts could benefit from

this program too. The board members were very pleased with the improvements to the grant award system.

Administrator Doneux noted that the program updates were presented to the CAC and members felt very

pleased with the improvements. The CAC made a motion to approve the updates.

Motion 14-057: Approve updated Stewardship Grant Program process as follows:

a. All property owners will receive a site visit, educational materials and a clean water plan,

b. Adopt grant award calculation rates as outlined in tables 1 and 2 of the staff memo, and prorate grant

awards based on the percentage of the 1” rainfall treated,

c. Establish $300 as the minimum grant award a project must be eligible for to receive detailed designs and

grant funds,

d. Allow staff to adjust grant award calculation by an additional 20% to accommodate special

circumstances.

Thienes/Texer


V. Action Items

A) AR: Approve Minutes of the February 26, 2014 Board Workshop (Sylvander)

Motion 14-058: Approve Minutes of the February 26, 2014 Board Workshop.

Texer/Reider


B) AR: Approve Minutes of the March 5, 2014 Regular Meeting (Sylvander)

Motion 14-059: Approve Minutes of the March 5, 2014 Regular Meeting.

Texer/Reider


C) AR: Approve February Accounts Payable & Budget Update (Sylvander)

Motion 14-060: Approve February 2014 Accounts Payable/Receivables and February Budget Report and

direct Treasurer and Board President to endorse and disperse checks for these payments.

Thienes/Texer


F) AR: Approve Contract Amendment with Houston Engineering for Curtiss Pond Improvement

Pond Project (Fossum)


Administrator Doneux reviewed in place of Mr. Fossum that at the June 5, 2013 Board meeting the Managers

approved for Final Design Engineering for Curtiss Pond Improvement Project and authorize Board President

and Administrator to execute a professional services agreement with Houston Engineering, Inc. for an amount

not to exceed $51,000. This approval only authorized work included in Tasks 1 and 2. As we move closer to a

spring 2014 bidding of the project, the District will need to authorize Task 3—Bidding and Construction

Management in the amount of $45,184. Mr. Fossum and staff have directed Houston Engineering to complete

additional design work under Task 2 that is outside the scope of the original proposal. That work includes: 1.)

Removal of the 3 swirl-separator pretreatment manholes and adding 130’ of additional underground storage

pipe; and 2.) Including OptiRTC technology within the inlet manhole structure and coordination with

Geosyntec Consultants to complete this design work. This additional work under Task 2 will cost $4,400.

Motion 14-061: Approve Contract Amendment #1 with Houston Engineering for the Curtis Pond Improvement

Project for Final Design Engineering and authorize Administrator to execute the Amendment in an amount of

$49,584, for a total contract amount not to exceed $100,584.

Jones/Texer


G) AR: Lake McCarrons Vegetation Harvesting (Doneux)

Mr. Zwontizer reviewed that the Lake McCarrons homeowner association requested funding from CRWD to

facilitate vegetation management on the west end of the lake. CRWD hosted two workshops to get homeowner

input, and their ideas were presented to the DNR to determine what activities would be allowed. Two

permissible harvesting approaches have been identified, a harvesting contractor has been contacted and

tentatively scheduled for work in 2014.

Ideas collected from homeowners were reviewed by the DNR. For non-invasive aquatic plant management, the

following guidelines must be followed:

No permit required

Harvested width is less than ½ shoreline or 50 feet, whichever is less

Harvested area is less than 2,500 SF, plus 15 foot-wide channel to open water (most direct route)

Permit required

Harvested area up to 100 feet or ½ shoreline, whichever is less, and a lakeward distance of 100-150 feet

Properties with less than 70 feet of shoreline can harvest up to 35 feet

Harvesting must be done in same area each year unless authorized by DNR to change

Based on these regulations, maps were developed that outline “no permit” and “permit required” harvesting

options for each property in the priority areas identified by the homeowners. CRWD would like to present these

options to the homeowners at a meeting in the near future. The homeowners would decide which approach they

would like to pursue for their property. To aid in their decision, Midwest Weed Harvesting was contacted for

rough cost guidelines CRWD used for project planning. A cost of $0.04/ft2 was determined to be an

approximate rate for harvesting. Additional costs include mobilization, insurance, and permitting (if needed).

A funding structure has been developed where CRWD would cover all of the “no permit” scenario costs. This

includes roughly $1,245 in mobilization and insurance, as well as harvesting. If homeowners elect to harvest

beyond the “no permit” level, they would be responsible for the additional harvesting cost estimated at $0.04/ft2


plus the cost of the required permit ($35/parcel). To simplify the process, CRWD would coordinate all

payments and permitting on the homeowners’ behalf. It is anticipated that two rounds will be needed to keep

areas clear for the summer.

Motion 14-062: Authorize CRWD to coordinate and manage two rounds of aquatic vegetation harvesting for

Lake McCarrons for parcels identified in Table 1 of the March 19, 2014 staff memo as follows:

a) CRWD will fund 100% of harvesting costs for the “no permit” option, mobilization, insurance, and

other fixed costs in 2014 estimated to cost approimately $12,000.00,

b) Property owners will be responsible for the permit fees and additional harvesting costs as shown in

Table 1 of the March 19th

staff memo for “permit required” scenario at a rate of $0.04/square foot

each round of treatment.

Reider/Texer


H) AR: Amendments to June 20, 2012 Meeting Minutes and A/P Report (Sylvander)

In a recent Grant audit it was discovered that $75,000.00 was received and deposited but not recorded as part of

the May 2012 Accounts Receivable report.

Motion 14-063: Authorize amendment of motion #12-06-17 to reflect Accounts Receivable for $75,049.25 and

to amend the May 2012 Accounts Payable and Receivable report to reflect total receivables of $75,049.25.

Reider/Texer


I) AR: Support sponsorship of CAC event with Freshwater Society (Doneux)

Administrator Doneux stated that the CAC would like to host a fall event that would bring awareness to the

CAC and Capitol Region Watershed District. This event would include a guest speaker or lecture specializing

in water and the environment. The CAC is requesting support to sponsor an event hosted by Freshwater

Society, Moos Family lecture series on September 18, 2014 by Jay Famiglietti.

Mr. Jones commented that this event would help to place CRWD in the academic community. Ms. Texer

agreed and stated that the CAC is very interested in this event.

Motion 14-064: Approve sponsorship of $4,000 to support Freshwater Society event, Moos Family Lecture by

Jay Famiglietti schedule for September 18, 2014.

Texer/Jones


VI. Unfinished Business

No Unfinished Business.

VII. General Information

A) Administrator’s Report


Administrator Approved or Executed Agreements

Amendment Number 2 to Engineering Services with Barr Engineering on Green Line Green Infrastructure

Practices to increase costs for 2014 from $5,000 to $7,000.

General updates including recent and upcoming meetings and events

The Trout Brook Realignment Big Dig story was published in the American Public Works Association,

Minnesota Chapter online newsletter on February 24, 2014 and be accessed on our homepage.

Harambee Elementary was awarded a 2014 CRWD Partner Grant to support a water quality curriculum for

fourth and fifth graders. The students recently conducted an exercise on water quality and determined it is much

easier to prevent water pollution than to clean up polluted water. The project was featured in the school

newsletter. Copies of the newsletter will be available at the meeting.

Staff continues to support Central High School efforts to raise student and community support for stormwater

site improvements. Staff will support an Earth Day event on Tuesday, April 22 with a tour of Green Line BMPs

and a Transforming Central printmaking project in conjunction with CRWD’s artist in residence Christine

Baeumler.

Brooke Asleson of the Minnesota Pollution Control Agency presented the Twin Cities Metro Area Chloride

Management Plan to the Watershed Partners meeting on March 12, 2014 attended by Lindsay VanPatten. The

goal of the plan is to develop a strategy for chloride TMDLs and to provide a Winter Maintenance Assessment

Tool Kit including BMP suggestions to assist local partners in managing chloride. The largest challenge for

addressing chloride issues is addressing the public’s expectation and perception of safety. Bob Fossum is a

member of the Monitoring Sub-Committee of the TCMA Chloride Project Stakeholder group.

1.) Upcoming events and meetings

a) Next Board Meeting is Wednesday April 2, 2014 from 6:00 - 8:00 pm.

b) Women’s Environmental Network, annual networking event is Wednesday April 2, 2014 from 6:00 –

8:00 pm at Hamline University.

c) Next CAC Meeting is Wednesday April 9, 2014 from 7:00 - 9:00 pm.

d) The 20th

Annual Great River Gathering presented by the Saint Paul River Front Corporation is Thursday

May 8, 2014 from 5:00 – 8:30 pm at Union Depot.

e) Saint Paul Public Works Annul Open House is Tuesday May 20, 2014 from 4:00 – 7:00 pm at the Dale

Street Garage.

2.) Project Updates - Staff continues to work with Dr. Mae Davenport on a community capacity assessment in CRWD in partnership

with Ramsey-Washington Metro Watershed District and Mississippi Watershed Management Organization.

Issues and stakeholder focus groups for the community capacity assessment are summarized in the table.


Issue/Opportunity Goal Stakeholder Groups

Nonpoint source pollution

Inspire caring, inspire motivation for actions to

prevent pollution and complete clean water

projects.

1) Businesses and

commercial property

owners on the Green

Line and 2)

Organizations on The

Green Line that serve

culturally diverse

groups. 3) CRWD

residents at large

Lack of clean water actions or

opportunities for action by

community members

Authentic engagement in conversations with

watershed districts, community members feel

heard

Invisibility of water makes issues

seems unimportant, people don't

see the impact

Connection made between land use and clean

water

VIII. Adjournment

Motion 14-065: Adjournment of the March 19, 2014 Regular Board Meeting at 7:45 p.m.

Texer/Reider

Unanimously Approved

Respectfully submitted,

Michelle Sylvander

1

Board Workshop of the Capitol Region Watershed District (CRWD) Board of Managers, for March 19, 2014,

5:00 p.m. at the office of the CRWD, 1410 Energy Park Drive, Suite 4, St. Paul, MN 55108.

Board Workshop Minutes

I. Call to Order at 5:00 p.m. (President Joe Collins)

A) Attendance

Joe Collins

Mary Texer

Seitu Jones

Mike Thienes

Shirley Reider

Others Present

Mark Doneux, CRWD

Michelle Sylvander, CRWD

Jim Mogan, Ramsey County

Attorney

Public Attendees Jason Mundstock, CB Richards

Joe Hughes, CB Richards

II. Workshop Purpose Mark Doneux

Administrator Doneux reviewed the purpose of the workshop is to review the needs assessment and establish a

clear direction regarding the build, buy or lease option and establish an overall budget for the project.

III. Review of Needs Assessment/Program Jason Mundstock/Joe Hughes

Mr. Mundstock and Mr. Hughes reviewed the basic needs assessment to confirm key or priority needs versus

wants. Recent office site visits have helped focus the needs based on currently available properties on the

market. It was determined that being located in an area with public transportation, parking, and safety were

very important to the CRWD staff and Board of Managers.

IV. Discussion of Office Alternatives Jason Mundstock/Joe Hughes

Jason Mundstock and Joe Hughes reviewed the findings of the Market Analysis including a financial analysis of

three office facility options. Those options include build, buy and lease. Mr. Mundstock reviewed the three

options conservatively projected over a 10 year period.

Ms. Reider commented that buying a property would give CRWD more control and more responsibility.

Administrator Doneux noted that either the build or buy option would be able to meet more of the total needs

and wants. Mr. Thienes commented that a new building would be a stronger asset. In ten years from now a

new building would still be considered new, an older remodeled building would be ten years older. The Board

of Managers agreed that land for a new building should be the focus in addition to continue looking for a

building to buy and remodel. Mr. Jones agreed that efforts should continue looking for an existing building to

purchase and remodel. Mr. Jones also felt that a conversation with the current building owners to extend the

lease needs to take place soon. Administrator Doneux agreed to discuss, with the building owners, extending

the current lease. Depending on findings of land or an existing building, CRWD will need to be prepared to

extend the lease in September 2014. Further discussion will continue at April 2nd

meeting.


V. Action Item B) Approve

Minutes of March 19, 2014

DRAFT Board Workshop

(Sylvander)

2

Administrator Doneux summarized the Board’s direction on a new office space by stating the Board’s

preference and first priority was to purchase land for a new building. The District would continue to consider

existing buildings to remodel if they were to come on the market. If either build or buy appear infeasible the

District would then look into leasing office space. The budget for office space was agreed upon as presented by

CB Richard Ellis staff. The budget may need to be amended in future based on actual properties. The District

will initiate discussions with the current landlord for a possible lease extension.

President Collins thanked everyone for coming and felt the meeting was beneficial to help improve

communication on future discussions.

V. Workshop Adjournment 6:04 p.m. adjourned by consensus.

Respectfully submitted, Michelle Sylvander




FROM: Mark Doneux, Administrator

RE: Approve Monetary Limits of Municipal Tort Liability

Background

In the past several years the Board has decided to NOT waive the tort liability limits. In a review of our

insurance coverage it was determined that we must again determine if we are going to waive our tort

liability limits.

Issues

I have met with Mark Lenz, the District’s Insurance agent. Mr. Lenz reviewed the options regarding

whether or not to waive tort liability limits, as the District has done in the past. I would recommend that

the District NOT waive the monetary limits on municipal tort liability. The District will continue to

purchase an insurance rider for accident coverage for volunteers.

Requested Action

Accept the LMCIT liability coverage and NOT Waive the Monetary Limits on municipal tort liability.

enc: LMCIT Liability Coverage – Waiver Form

W:\04 Board of Managers\Insurance\Board Memo LMCIT Liability 3-27-14.docx

April 2, 2014

V. Action Item C)

Approve Monetary Limits of

Municipal Tort Liability

(Doneux)




FROM: Anna Eleria, Water Resource Project Manager

RE: Approve City of Saint Paul License Agreement for Highland Ravine Stabilization Project

Background

The Highland Ravine Stabilization Project involves work on both private property and public parkland

with construction limits ranging from 10 to 20 feet wide along the centerlines of three ravines (Ravines

1, 2 and 3). In Ravine 3, the majority of the project will take place on City parkland with a small area on

one private residence. The private property easement has been secured and approved by CRWD’s Board

of Managers.

Issues

The City of Saint Paul and CRWD staff have prepared a draft license agreement for access and

construction of the Highland Ravine Stabilization Project on City parkland. The agreement grants

CRWD the rights to stabilize the main ravine channel with rock grade control structures, remove select,

undesirable trees to allow more sunlight into the area, and conduct minor grading to enhance the berm

on the downstream ravine section within City property. It also allows CRWD to maintain the project

through 2017. CRWD staff will review the enclosed draft license agreement and seek its approval at the

Board meeting.

Action Requested

Approve the license agreement with the City of Saint Paul for the Highland Ravine Stabilization Project

subject to approval of the Ramsey County Attorney.

encs: Draft Highland Ravine License Agreement with City of Saint Paul

W:\06 Projects\Highland Ravine\Board-CAC Memos\BM Highland Ravine SP License Agreement 04-02-14.docx


V. Action Item – D) License

Agreement for Highland Ravine

Stabilization Project – (Eleria)

1

LICENSE AGREEMENT

This License Agreement is entered into this _____ day of ___________, 2014 between

the City of Saint Paul, a municipal corporation, through its Department of Parks and Recreation,

400 City Hall Annex, 25 W. Fourth Street, Saint Paul, Minnesota, 55102 (“Licensor”) and

Capitol Region Watershed District, 1410 Energy Park Dr, St Paul, MN 55108 (“Licensee”).

WITNESSETH:

WHEREAS, the Licensee wishes to perform work on land which is owned by the City of

Saint Paul Department of Parks and Recreation, which will consist of stabilization and minor

grading to enhance the berm on the downstream ravine section and provide greater flooding

protection for nearby property, and needs to enter onto said parkland for access purposes.

WHEREAS, the Licensor is willing to grant access to the park property and to allow the

proposed work to be done under the terms and conditions set forth herein.

Now, therefore, in consideration of the mutual covenants and promises herein, Licensor and

Licensee agree as follows:

1. Premises described: The Licensor grants access to the property described as Highland

Park, as set forth on Exhibit A, attached hereto and incorporated herein by reference.

2. Term of License: Licensee may have access to the property from May 1, 2014 until

December 31, 2017, unless extended by mutual agreement for a defined period, with

written confirmation signed by both parties.

3. Use of Premises: Licensee will access the premises for the purpose of performing ravine

stabilization and landscape ecology improvements. CRWD will stabilize the main ravine

channel with rock grade control structures, remove select, undesirable trees to allow more

sunlight into the area, and conduct minor grading to enhance the berm on the downstream

ravine section to provide greater flooding protection to 909 Lexington Parkway. The

planned work may include the use of heavy equipment as needed to perform said work.

Storage of equipment, machinery, materials and supplies is permitted overnight within

fenced use area. No other use of the premises is permitted. Licensee shall be required to

install temporary fencing around the area during the term of the license to prevent public

access to the site.

Licensee must provide plans of the proposed work for approval by the Department of

Parks and Recreation before performing any work under this License.

2

4. Payment: The Licensee shall bear all costs associated with the Permitted Use, which

shall include the installation of temporary fencing for protection of the public, all work

performed to stabilize the ravine for flood control purposes under this License, and any

other associated costs of the requirement of this License.

5. Assignment/Subleasing: Licensee shall not transfer nor assign its rights hereunder or

sublet any interest in the Licensed premises.

6. Indemnification: Licensee shall protect, indemnify and hold harmless the Licensor and

its employees, officers and agents, from and against any and all claims, demands and

causes of action whatsoever for injury to or death of person, or loss or damage to

property occurring on the premises or in any manner resulting from the Licensee’s use

and occupancy of the premises.

7. Insurance: Licensee shall provide or shall ensure that any contractors accessing the site

under this License shall provide proof of comprehensive general liability insurance,

including blanket contractual liability coverage and personal injury liability coverage

with a combined single limit of not less than $1,500,000 aggregate, or $1,000,000 per

occurrence. Such insurance shall name the Licensor as “additional insured.”

8. Security: Licensee shall provide all security necessary pursuant to this License, including

that necessary for Licensee’s vehicles, machinery, equipment, sets, facilities and supplies

and Licensor shall have no liability for any injury, loss or damage arising out of

Licensee’s failure to properly provide such security.

9. Restoration of Premises: Licensee shall be responsible for the restoration of the premises

at the end of the License term. This shall include removal of the temporary fencing

around the area used to prevent public access to the site, restoration of the turf and

vegetation, as well as any other restoration of damages caused by Licensee.

10. Access for Subsequent Activities: Licensee will require periodic and long-term access to

the site at various times in the future for maintenance and other activities. This

Agreement does not provide that access, however, Licensor agrees that approval for that

access will not be unreasonably withheld, and that provision for future access is

necessary to approve the decision to proceed with the immediate project.

11. Contacts for Parties: Licensor has designated ______________ as the person responsible

for administration of the work done pursuant to this License. Licensee’s administrator

for purposes of this License will be: Mark Doneux, Administrator, 1410 Energy Park

Drive, Suite 4, Saint Paul, MN 55108, (651) 644-8888, [email protected].

3

IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the parties hereto have executed this License on the date first set forth above: City of Saint Paul, Department of Parks and Recreation By:___________________________ Mike Hahm, CPRP

Director of Parks and Recreation Agreed to and accepted by the Licensee Capitol Regional Watershed District:

By:_________________________

Joe Collins

Board President


TO: CRWD Board of Managers and Staff

FROM: Mark Doneux, Administrator

RE: April 2, 2014 Administrator’s Report

Administrator Approved or Executed Agreements

No new agreements

Board Approved or Executed Agreements

Partner Grant Agreement with Harambee Elementary for water education programming and activities - $9,000.

General updates including recent and upcoming meetings and events

Friday, March 14 was Seasonal Water Resource Technician, Stephanie Herbst’s last day at CRWD. Jordan

Jessen started work on Monday, March 17 as the new Annual Water Resource Technician.

Staff will attend the annual Women’s Environmental Network, networking event on Wednesday April 2, 2014

held at Hamline University.

Staff will give a presentation on stormwater management and BMPs to students during Central High School’s

Earth Day Extravaganza on Tuesday, April 29, 2014.

The IT Committee has decided to contract with Computer Revolution as CRWD’s IT consultant.

1.) Upcoming events and meetings

a) Manager Collins will not be at the April 2, 2014 Board meeting.

b) Next CAC meeting is Wednesday April 9, 2014 from 7:00 - 9:00 pm. Manager Reider will attend the

April 9, 2014 CAC meeting.

c) Next Board Meeting is Wednesday April 16, 2014 from 6:00 to 8:00 pm. Manager Jones will not be at

the April 16, 2014 meeting.

d) Manager Thienes will not be at the May 7, 2014 or May 11, 2014 Board meetings.

e) The 20th

Annual Great River Gathering presented by the Saint Paul River Front Corporation is Thursday

May 8, 2014 from 5:00 – 8:30 pm at Union Depot.

f) Saint Paul Public Works Annul Open House is Tuesday May 20, 2014 from 4:00 – 7:00 pm at the Dale

Street Garage.

2.) Project Updates – None at this time

W:\04 Board of Managers\Correspondence\Administrator's Report 2014\Administrator's Report 4-2-14.docx


april 2, 2014 board packet

Documents

permit applications

paul public schools

board meeting applicant

regular meeting agenda

acres permit recommendation

colborne street

agenda regular

public comment