April 16, 2014 board of managers packet

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

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

Wednesday, April 16, 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 (President Joe Collins)

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 # 14-010 Maryland – Payne Intersection

B) Wetland and Floodplain Permitting Procedures (Kelley)

C) Permit Program/Rules Update (Kelley)

IV. Special Reports – Monitoring Program Updates A) Monitoring Program Review, Bob Fossum and Britta Suppes

a. Monitoring Station Power and Communication Upgrades, Joe Sellner

b. Enhanced Lakes Biological Monitoring, Sarah Wein

V. Action Items

A) AR: Approve Minutes of the April 2, 2014 Board Meeting (Sylvander)

B) AR: Approve March Accounts Payable & Budget Update (Sylvander)

C) AR: City of Falcon Heights Curtiss Pond Improvement Pond Project (Fossum)

a. Approve Cooperative Construction Agreement

b. Approve Maintenance Agreement

c. Authorize Bidding

D) AR: Approve Submittal of 2013 Annual Report (Doneux)

E) AR: District Office Facility (Doneux)

a. Adopt Program and Facility Plan

b. Approve Contract Amendment with CB Richard Ellis for Real Estate Consulting Services

F) AR: Approve Professional Services Agreement with Geosyntec for the Upper Villa Project

(Kelley)

G) AR: Adopt Resolution Approving Post-Issuance Compliance Procedure and Policy for Tax-

Exempt Bonds (Doneux)

VI. Unfinished Business

a. Highland Ravine Update (Eleria)

b. Lake McCarron’s Aquatic Plant Harvesting Project Update (Doneux)

Materials Enclosed


VII. General Information

A) Administrator’s Report

VIII. Next Meeting(s)

A) Wednesday, May 7, 2014 CAC Meeting Review

IX. Adjournment

W:\04 Board of Managers\Agendas\2014\April 16, 2014 Agenda Regular Mtg.docx

Capitol Region Watershed District Permit Application 14-010 Maryland-Payne

Permit Report 14-010 April 16, 2014 Board Meeting

PERMIT RECOMMENDATION: Approve with 3 Conditions

1. Provide a copy of the NPDES permit.

2. Provide additional detail on the Maryland Avenue Traffic study scope and process.

3. Provide documentation to support a cost of $125 per lineal foot for the future installation of 640 linear feet of perforated

18” pipe, or reduce the unit price accordingly. For reference, the City of St. Paul recently estimated an installed cost of

$47 per lineal foot for 280 lineal feet of 12” perforated pipe.

Applicant: Lucas Lortie Contact Molly Churchich

Ramsey County Public Works Ramsey County Public Works

1425 Paul Kirkwold Drive 1425 Paul Kirkwold Drive

Arden Hills, MN 55112 Arden Hills, MN 55112

Description: Road reconstruction and intersection improvements at Payne and Maryland Avenues

Stormwater

Management: Applicant proposes submittal of $67,500 to the Stormwater Impact Fund

District Rule: C, D, and F

Disturbed Area: 3.5 Acres

Impervious Acres: 2.25 Acres

Aerial Photo

Pay

ne A

ven

ue

Maryland Avneue

Permit Location

Capitol Region Watershed District Permit Report

CRWD Permit #: 14-010 Review date: April 11, 2014 Project Name: Maryland Payne Intersection Applicant: Ramsey County Department of Public Works Purpose: Street Reconstruction Location: Maryland Avenue between Edgerton Street and Greenbrier Street Applicable Rules: C, D, and F Recommendation: Approve with 3 Conditions EXHIBITS:

1. Memorandum, by Ramsey County, dated 3/11/14, recd. 3/12/14. 2. Construction Plans (9 sheets), by Ramsey County, not dated, recd. 3/12/14. 3. HydroCAD models, by Ramsey County, dated 4/2/14, recd. 4/9/14. 4. Soil borings (SB-3 and SB-4), by Ramsey County, dated 3/11/14, recd. 3/12/14. 5. Drainage Area Maps, by Ramsey County, not dated, recd. 4/9/14. 6. Response to Questions, by Ramsey County, not dated, recd. 4/9/14. 7. Construction Plan Updates (sheets 33-40), by Ramsey County, dated 3/20/14.

Recd. 4/9/14. 8. Soil Boring Map, By Ramsey County, not dated, recd. 4/9/14.

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.

W:\07 Programs\Permitting\2014\14-010 Maryland-Payne Intersection\14-010 Permit Report2b.doc Page 1 of 4

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 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 98,010 square feet. b. Volume retention: Volume Retention Required (cu. ft.) Volume Retention Provided (cu. ft.)

7,351 None

4. Alternative compliance sequencing has been requested due to utility conflicts, poor soils, and lack of space.

a. The applicant did not partially comply with the volume retention standard.

b. The applicant did not partially comply with the volume retention standard at an offsite location or through the use of qualified banking credits.

c. The applicant requests to submit $60,750 to the Stormwater Impact Fund. This money is proposed to be used at the intersection of Maryland Avenue and Edgerton Street as reconstruction of Maryland Avenue continues to the west. No schedule was provided for the Maryland Avenue and Edgerton Street reconstruction, but is estimated to be completed within 3-5 years.

d. The project is linear, and the cost cap has amount is proposed to be submitted to the Stormwater Impact Fund.

e. Banking of excess volume retention is not applicable 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.

6. A memorandum of agreement exists between Ramsey County and CRWD

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. However, sufficient conveyances have been provided to allow the storm sewer system to function as or better than it did prior to the project.

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 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 3 Conditions Conditions:

1. Provide a copy of the NPDES permit. 2. Provide additional detail on the Maryland Avenue Traffic study scope and

process. 3. Provide documentation to support a cost of $125 per lineal foot for the future

installation of 640 linear feet of perforated 18” pipe, or reduce the unit price accordingly. For reference, the City of St. Paul recently estimated an installed cost of $47 per lineal foot for 280 lineal feet of 12” perforated pipe.


20'

R/W

33'

EXISTING

C/L

2.0% 2.0%

5'CONC BLVD.WALK

5'CONCBLVD.WALK

R/WEXISTING

R/WPROPOSED

2' 11' 11' 11' 11' 2'

W.B. THRU LANE W.B. THRU LANE LEFT TURN LANE E.B. THRU LANE E.B. THRU LANE

LANES

0'-11'

VARIABLE - 13'

R/W

33'

EXISTING

C/L WB LANES

C/L EB

20'WALK

5'8'BLVD

1:3 MAXPROFILE GRADE

LINESECTION

CONST.

LINESECTION

1:3 MAX

33'

R/WEXISTING

1'

WALK5' 8'

BLVD

BITUMINOUS TACK COAT BETWEEN BOT. COURSES MNDOT SPEC.23572" - 2360 BITUMINOUS WEARING COURSE MIXTURE SPWEB440F2" - 2360 BITUMINOUS WEARING COURSE MIXTURE SPWEB440F3" - 2360 BITUMINOUS NONWEARING COURSE MIXTURE SPNWB430B6" - AGGREGATE BASE CLASS 6 MN/DOT SPEC. 221124" - SELECT GRANULAR BORROW4" CONCRETE WALK MN/DOT 2521

6" AGGREGATE BASE CLASS 6 MN/DOT SPEC. 2211SEE DETAIL SHEET 15

INSET A

2.0%4.0%

INSET A3" TOPSOIL & SOD

4.0%2.0%

INSET A

1'1'

2:1 2:1

8" - CONCRETE PAVEMENTVARIABLE DEPTH- BITUMINOUS OVERLAY

NOTES

5'

33'

2.0%

3" TOPSOIL & SOD

5'

6"6"

11

FILL WITH COMMON BORROW MATERIAL1

880

890

900

910

920

930

880

890

900

910

920

930

47+00

911.

4

911.

35

910.

7

910.

80

48+00

909.

9

910.

19

909.

3

909.

56

49+00

908.

8

908.

96

908.

4

908.

44

50+00

908.

0

908.

00

907.

5

907.

55

51+00

907.

0

907.

12

906.

7

906.

74

52+00

906.

5

906.

45

906.

3

906.

44

53+00

906.

2

906.

68

905.

7

906.

33

54+00

905.

0

905.

26

903.

8

904.

10

55+00

902.

8

902.

93

901.

9

901.

77

56+00

900.

7

900.

60

899.

5

899.

44

57+00

898.

4

898.

27

897.

2

897.

11

58+00

896.

1

895.

96

895.

1

895.

02

59+00

894.

3

894.

35

893.

8

893.

90

60+00 61+00

-0.89%

-2.33%

-0.88%

-0.99%

-1.25%

-0.63% 0.60%

PV

I 47+

20.3

6E

LEV

911

.64

PV

I 60+

47.0

0E

LEV

893

.48

PVI 47+85.00ELEV 911.00

K=350.17L=90.00'

PV

T 47

+40.

00E

LEV

911

.45

PV

T 48

+30.

00E

LEV

910

.44

PVI 53+80.00ELEV 906.90

K=30.72L=90.00'

PV

T 53

+35.

00E

LEV

906

.62

PV

T 54

+25.

00E

LEV

905

.85HP 53+53.43

ELEV 906.68

PVI 49+65.00ELEV 908.75

K=248.48L=90.00'

PV

T 49

+20.

00E

LEV

909

.31

PV

T 50

+10.

00E

LEV

908

.35

PVI 51+70.00ELEV 906.93

K=353.67L=90.00'

PV

T 51

+25.

00E

LEV

907

.33

PV

T 52

+15.

00E

LEV

906

.64

PVI 52+75.00ELEV 906.26

K=72.97L=90.00'

PV

T 52

+30.

00E

LEV

906

.55

PV

T 53

+20.

00E

LEV

906

.54LP 52+76.22

ELEV 906.40

PVI 59+00.00ELEV 894.78

K=91.86L=132.78'

PV

T 58

+33.

61E

LEV

896

.33

PV

T 59

+66.

39E

LEV

894

.19

PAYNE AVENUECENTERLINE

1204

1210

591

599 603607

609611

615 617621 623

12011202

647 657 663 667 671 675 679 687 693 697 1201 1201

655

1199

1197

1193

11991 99119999119991199911991 999119911 99119911 99119911 99119911 99119911 9119911 91199

3" MILL WITHVARIABLEDEPTHOVERLAY

3" MILL WITHVARIABLE

DEPTHOVERLAY

11'11'

11'11'11'

5'

5'

11'11'

11'11'11'

5'

5'

47+20 48+00 49+00 50+00 51+00 52+00 53+00 54+00 55+00 56+00 57+00 58+00 59+0060+00 60+70

893.48

MARYLAND AVENUE AT PAYNE AVENUE

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

Stormwater Impact Fund Implementation Plan (Adopted March 17, 2010)

Capitol Region Watershed District’s (CRWD) mission is to protect, manage and improve the water

resources of the District. The District adopted Rules in September 2006. The Rules were amended

January 7, 2009 and require permits for projects that create greater than one acre of land disturbance.

Stormwater Management Rule C requires permanent Best Management Practices (BMPs) to achieve

volume reduction in the amount equivalent to one inch of rainfall over the new impervious surfaces of

the development. The alternative compliance section of Rule C, section 3(c)(2), part (iii) allows for

payment to the Stormwater Impact Fund when on-site practices, off-site treatment, or banked volume

reduction credits can not be used to achieve compliance. Money contributed to the Fund will be used

to provide equivalent volume reduction elsewhere in the District.

GOALS

The Stormwater Impact Fund is the last step in the alternative compliance sequencing section of

CRWD Rule C and is intended to:

Provide an alternative method to achieve volume reduction on all permitted projects;

Account for unique conditions that may make compliance difficult on some sites;

Incorporate flexibility into the District’s stormwater requirements;

Provide applicants a known process and expenditure for project planning and budgeting.

ELIGIBILITY FOR CONTRIBUTION TO THE STORMWATER IMPACT FUND

The following criteria must be met in order for a project to be eligible for contribution to the

Stormwater Impact Fund as required in Stormwater Rule C:

Documentation of specific site conditions indicating why standard compliance is not feasible

and the project therefore qualifies for alternative compliance sequencing;

Documentation that the alternative compliance sequencing steps have been satisfied;

In the case of linear projects that have previous Board approval to defer volume reduction

credits as provided for in Rule C, Section 3(c)(4), documentation to support why BMPs to

compensate for the volume deficit have not been constructed within two years of approving the

deferral.

1410 Energy Park Dr., Suite 4, St. Paul, MN 55108

Phone: (651) 644-8888 Fax: (651) 644-8894 www.capitolregionwd.org

Capitol Region Watershed District


ELIGIBILITY FOR USE OF FUNDS

Money from the Stormwater Impact Fund shall be allocated to the following two activities:

1. Project Planning and Engineering for Construction of Volume Reduction Practices

2. Construction of Volume Reduction Practices

The Board of Managers will evaluate projects as funding becomes available and assign priority

to projects based on the following criteria:

1. Projects located within the same subwatershed as the permitted projects contributing to the

Fund.

2. Projects that are identified in completed subwatershed studies or other planning documents.

3. Projects that include multiple funding and planning partners

4. Quantity of stormwater treated

5. Cost per cubic foot removed

W:\07 Programs\Rules\Stormwater Impact Fund\Stormwater Impact Fund.doc

Capitol Region Watershed District Permit Application 14-010 Maryland-Payne

Permit Report 14-010 April 16, 2014 Board Meeting

PERMIT RECOMMENDATION: Approve with 3 Conditions


2. Provide additional detail on the Maryland Avenue Traffic study scope and process.

3. Provide documentation to support a cost of $125 per lineal foot for the future installation of 640 linear feet of perforated

18” pipe, or reduce the unit price accordingly. For reference, the City of St. Paul recently estimated an installed cost of

$47 per lineal foot for 280 lineal feet of 12” perforated pipe.

Applicant: Lucas Lortie Contact Molly Churchich

Ramsey County Public Works Ramsey County Public Works

1425 Paul Kirkwold Drive 1425 Paul Kirkwold Drive

Arden Hills, MN 55112 Arden Hills, MN 55112

Description: Road reconstruction and intersection improvements at Payne and Maryland Avenues

Stormwater

Management: Applicant proposes submittal of $67,500 to the Stormwater Impact Fund

District Rule: C, D, and F

Disturbed Area: 3.5 Acres

Impervious Acres: 2.25 Acres

Aerial Photo

Pay

ne A

ven

ue

Maryland Avneue

Permit Location

Capitol Region Watershed District Permit Report

CRWD Permit #: 14-010 Review date: April 11, 2014 Project Name: Maryland Payne Intersection Applicant: Ramsey County Department of Public Works Purpose: Street Reconstruction Location: Maryland Avenue between Edgerton Street and Greenbrier Street Applicable Rules: C, D, and F Recommendation: Approve with 3 Conditions EXHIBITS:

1. Memorandum, by Ramsey County, dated 3/11/14, recd. 3/12/14. 2. Construction Plans (9 sheets), by Ramsey County, not dated, recd. 3/12/14. 3. HydroCAD models, by Ramsey County, dated 4/2/14, recd. 4/9/14. 4. Soil borings (SB-3 and SB-4), by Ramsey County, dated 3/11/14, recd. 3/12/14. 5. Drainage Area Maps, by Ramsey County, not dated, recd. 4/9/14. 6. Response to Questions, by Ramsey County, not dated, recd. 4/9/14. 7. Construction Plan Updates (sheets 33-40), by Ramsey County, dated 3/20/14.

Recd. 4/9/14. 8. Soil Boring Map, By Ramsey County, not dated, recd. 4/9/14.

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.

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 98,010 square feet. b. Volume retention: Volume Retention Required (cu. ft.) Volume Retention Provided (cu. ft.)

7,351 None

4. Alternative compliance sequencing has been requested due to utility conflicts, poor soils, and lack of space.

a. The applicant did not partially comply with the volume retention standard.

b. The applicant did not partially comply with the volume retention standard at an offsite location or through the use of qualified banking credits.

c. The applicant requests to submit $60,750 to the Stormwater Impact Fund. This money is proposed to be used at the intersection of Maryland Avenue and Edgerton Street as reconstruction of Maryland Avenue continues to the west. No schedule was provided for the Maryland Avenue and Edgerton Street reconstruction, but is estimated to be completed within 3-5 years.

d. The project is linear, and the cost cap has amount is proposed to be submitted to the Stormwater Impact Fund.

e. Banking of excess volume retention is not applicable 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.

6. A memorandum of agreement exists between Ramsey County and CRWD

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. However, sufficient conveyances have been provided to allow the storm sewer system to function as or better than it did prior to the project.

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 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 3 Conditions Conditions:

1. Provide a copy of the NPDES permit. 2. Provide additional detail on the Maryland Avenue Traffic study scope and

process. 3. Provide documentation to support a cost of $125 per lineal foot for the future

installation of 640 linear feet of perforated 18” pipe, or reduce the unit price accordingly. For reference, the City of St. Paul recently estimated an installed cost of $47 per lineal foot for 280 lineal feet of 12” perforated pipe.


20'

R/W

33'

EXISTING

C/L

2.0% 2.0%

5'CONC BLVD.WALK

5'CONCBLVD.WALK

R/WEXISTING

R/WPROPOSED

2' 11' 11' 11' 11' 2'

W.B. THRU LANE W.B. THRU LANE LEFT TURN LANE E.B. THRU LANE E.B. THRU LANE

LANES

0'-11'

VARIABLE - 13'

R/W

33'

EXISTING

C/L WB LANES

C/L EB

20'WALK

5'8'BLVD

1:3 MAXPROFILE GRADE

LINESECTION

CONST.

LINESECTION

1:3 MAX

33'

R/WEXISTING

1'

WALK5' 8'

BLVD

BITUMINOUS TACK COAT BETWEEN BOT. COURSES MNDOT SPEC.23572" - 2360 BITUMINOUS WEARING COURSE MIXTURE SPWEB440F2" - 2360 BITUMINOUS WEARING COURSE MIXTURE SPWEB440F3" - 2360 BITUMINOUS NONWEARING COURSE MIXTURE SPNWB430B6" - AGGREGATE BASE CLASS 6 MN/DOT SPEC. 221124" - SELECT GRANULAR BORROW4" CONCRETE WALK MN/DOT 2521

6" AGGREGATE BASE CLASS 6 MN/DOT SPEC. 2211SEE DETAIL SHEET 15

INSET A

2.0%4.0%

INSET A3" TOPSOIL & SOD

4.0%2.0%

INSET A

1'1'

2:1 2:1

8" - CONCRETE PAVEMENTVARIABLE DEPTH- BITUMINOUS OVERLAY

NOTES

5'

33'

2.0%

3" TOPSOIL & SOD

5'

6"6"

11

FILL WITH COMMON BORROW MATERIAL1

880

890

900

910

920

930

880

890

900

910

920

930

47+00

911.

4

911.

35

910.

7

910.

80

48+00

909.

9

910.

19

909.

3

909.

56

49+00

908.

8

908.

96

908.

4

908.

44

50+00

908.

0

908.

00

907.

5

907.

55

51+00

907.

0

907.

12

906.

7

906.

74

52+00

906.

5

906.

45

906.

3

906.

44

53+00

906.

2

906.

68

905.

7

906.

33

54+00

905.

0

905.

26

903.

8

904.

10

55+00

902.

8

902.

93

901.

9

901.

77

56+00

900.

7

900.

60

899.

5

899.

44

57+00

898.

4

898.

27

897.

2

897.

11

58+00

896.

1

895.

96

895.

1

895.

02

59+00

894.

3

894.

35

893.

8

893.

90

60+00 61+00

-0.89%

-2.33%

-0.88%

-0.99%

-1.25%

-0.63% 0.60%

PV

I 47+

20.3

6E

LEV

911

.64

PV

I 60+

47.0

0E

LEV

893

.48

PVI 47+85.00ELEV 911.00

K=350.17L=90.00'

PV

T 47

+40.

00E

LEV

911

.45

PV

T 48

+30.

00E

LEV

910

.44

PVI 53+80.00ELEV 906.90

K=30.72L=90.00'

PV

T 53

+35.

00E

LEV

906

.62

PV

T 54

+25.

00E

LEV

905

.85HP 53+53.43

ELEV 906.68

PVI 49+65.00ELEV 908.75

K=248.48L=90.00'

PV

T 49

+20.

00E

LEV

909

.31

PV

T 50

+10.

00E

LEV

908

.35

PVI 51+70.00ELEV 906.93

K=353.67L=90.00'

PV

T 51

+25.

00E

LEV

907

.33

PV

T 52

+15.

00E

LEV

906

.64

PVI 52+75.00ELEV 906.26

K=72.97L=90.00'

PV

T 52

+30.

00E

LEV

906

.55

PV

T 53

+20.

00E

LEV

906

.54LP 52+76.22

ELEV 906.40

PVI 59+00.00ELEV 894.78

K=91.86L=132.78'

PV

T 58

+33.

61E

LEV

896

.33

PV

T 59

+66.

39E

LEV

894

.19

PAYNE AVENUECENTERLINE

1204

1210

591

599 603607

609611

615 617621 623

12011202

647 657 663 667 671 675 679 687 693 697 1201 1201

655

1199

1197

1193

11991 99119999119991199911991 999119911 99119911 99119911 99119911 99119911 9119911 91199

3" MILL WITHVARIABLEDEPTHOVERLAY

3" MILL WITHVARIABLE

DEPTHOVERLAY

11'11'

11'11'11'

5'

5'

11'11'

11'11'11'

5'

5'

47+20 48+00 49+00 50+00 51+00 52+00 53+00 54+00 55+00 56+00 57+00 58+00 59+0060+00 60+70

893.48

MARYLAND AVENUE AT PAYNE AVENUE


Stormwater Impact Fund Implementation Plan (Adopted March 17, 2010)

Capitol Region Watershed District’s (CRWD) mission is to protect, manage and improve the water

resources of the District. The District adopted Rules in September 2006. The Rules were amended

January 7, 2009 and require permits for projects that create greater than one acre of land disturbance.

Stormwater Management Rule C requires permanent Best Management Practices (BMPs) to achieve

volume reduction in the amount equivalent to one inch of rainfall over the new impervious surfaces of

the development. The alternative compliance section of Rule C, section 3(c)(2), part (iii) allows for

payment to the Stormwater Impact Fund when on-site practices, off-site treatment, or banked volume

reduction credits can not be used to achieve compliance. Money contributed to the Fund will be used

to provide equivalent volume reduction elsewhere in the District.

GOALS

The Stormwater Impact Fund is the last step in the alternative compliance sequencing section of

CRWD Rule C and is intended to:

Provide an alternative method to achieve volume reduction on all permitted projects;

Account for unique conditions that may make compliance difficult on some sites;

Incorporate flexibility into the District’s stormwater requirements;

Provide applicants a known process and expenditure for project planning and budgeting.

ELIGIBILITY FOR CONTRIBUTION TO THE STORMWATER IMPACT FUND

The following criteria must be met in order for a project to be eligible for contribution to the

Stormwater Impact Fund as required in Stormwater Rule C:

Documentation of specific site conditions indicating why standard compliance is not feasible

and the project therefore qualifies for alternative compliance sequencing;

Documentation that the alternative compliance sequencing steps have been satisfied;

In the case of linear projects that have previous Board approval to defer volume reduction

credits as provided for in Rule C, Section 3(c)(4), documentation to support why BMPs to

compensate for the volume deficit have not been constructed within two years of approving the

deferral.

1410 Energy Park Dr., Suite 4, St. Paul, MN 55108

Phone: (651) 644-8888 Fax: (651) 644-8894 www.capitolregionwd.org

Capitol Region Watershed District


ELIGIBILITY FOR USE OF FUNDS

Money from the Stormwater Impact Fund shall be allocated to the following two activities:

1. Project Planning and Engineering for Construction of Volume Reduction Practices

2. Construction of Volume Reduction Practices

The Board of Managers will evaluate projects as funding becomes available and assign priority

to projects based on the following criteria:

1. Projects located within the same subwatershed as the permitted projects contributing to the

Fund.

2. Projects that are identified in completed subwatershed studies or other planning documents.

3. Projects that include multiple funding and planning partners

4. Quantity of stormwater treated

5. Cost per cubic foot removed

W:\07 Programs\Rules\Stormwater Impact Fund\Stormwater Impact Fund.doc


DATE: April 10, 2014 TO: CRWD Board of Managers FROM: Bob Fossum, Water Resource Program Manager Britta Suppes, Monitoring Program Coordinator Joe Sellner, Water Resource Technician

Sarah Wein, Water Resource Technician SUBJECT: Monitoring Program Review Background Capitol Region Watershed District established a Monitoring and Data Collection Program in 2004. Over the program’s 9 year history incremental improvements and enhancements have been made. In 2013, the District sought to complete a comprehensive review of the program to analyze, and if necessary refocus the goals, approach, methods, and deliverables of the Program. Issues District staff completed a review of the existing program during a staff retreat that took place the morning of November 1, 2013 at the Wilder Foundation Offices. Following this, recommendations for program improvement were developed.

The District’s CAC reviewed the draft Monitoring Program Review and 2014-2016 Recommendations on April 9, 2014 and offered several suggestions relative to clarifying the intent of the recommendations and identifying areas where data could be used to better inform the public on water resource and water quality issues. The CAC passed a motion supporting the Monitoring Program Review and Recommendations document with the suggested changes. District staff will present the draft Monitoring Program Review and 2014-2016 Recommendations to the Board. Additionally, during the first part of 2014, District staff have already begun work on two recommendations identified in the Program Review so that can be implemented during the 2014 field season. Staff will review with the Managers the Monitoring Station Power and Communication Improvement Plan and Enhanced Lakes Biological Monitoring Work Plan. Requested Action Approve the Monitoring Program Review and 2014-2016 Recommendations. enc: Monitoring Program Review and 2014-2016 Recommendations, draft Monitoring Station Power and Communication Improvement Plan, draft

Enhanced Lakes Biological Monitoring Work Plan, draft W:\07 Programs\Monitoring & Data Acquisition\0 Projects\2013 Program Evaluation\Brd Memo Mont Prog Review 4-10-14.docx

April 16, 2014 Board Meeting IV. Special Reports, A)

Monitoring Program Review

Monitoring Program Review and 2014-2016 Recommendations

Capitol Region Watershed District Saint Paul, MN April 2014

2

1. Background

Capitol Region Watershed District established a Monitoring Program in 2004. Over the program’s nine year history incremental improvements and enhancements have been made. In 2013, the District sought to complete a comprehensive review of the program to analyze, and if necessary, refocus the goals, approach, methods, and deliverables of the Program.

2. Program Review

District staff completed a review of the existing program and discussed its strengths and weaknesses. The first step in the review was a staff retreat that took place the morning of November 1, 2013 at the Wilder Foundation Offices. Elizabeth Beckman facilitated the discussion and the following District staff participated in the retreat: Anna Eleria, Britta Suppes, Forrest Kelley, Mark Doneux, Corey Poland, Joe Sellner, Nate Zwonitzer, Gustavo Castro, Stephanie Herbst, and Bob Fossum. Discussions at the retreat resulted from consideration of the following questions:

1. What do we do well? 2. Why monitor in CRWD? 3. How can our monitoring data be used in other CRWD programs? 4. Who are the audiences for our data? 5. What do our audiences need to effectively make use of our data? 6. Who are potential new monitoring program partners who could strengthen our work? 7. What changes can we make to improve the efficiency of our data collection? 8. To best use our finite resources, where are areas we could reduce or eliminate collection

efforts? 9. Is there anything that should be added to the program?

A summary of the retreat, responses to the questions above, subsequent discussions, and initial recommendations are found in Appendix 1.

3. Program Evaluation and Recommendations

Following the retreat, staff of the Monitoring, Research, and Maintenance Division developed a list of recommendations for the Monitoring Program. These recommendations were focused on the 3-year time period of 2014—2016. A summary table of all recommendations including a proposed schedule and estimated additional cost is found at the end of this document. The recommendations are grouped by the questions from the retreat that they address. (Note: no recommendations are linked to questions 1 and 4)

3

Question #2--Why monitor in CRWD? Recommendation 1 Currently, in Annual Monitoring Reports, the stated goal/objective of the monitoring program as follows:

In 2004, CRWD established a monitoring program to assess water quality and quantity of various subwatersheds and stormwater best management practices (BMPs) owned and/or operated and maintained by CRWD…..The objectives of the program are to identify water quality problem areas, quantify the subwatershed runoff pollutant loadings to the Mississippi River, evaluate the effectiveness of BMPs, and provide data for the calibration of hydrologic, hydraulic, and water quality models.

It is recommended that the District adjust the goal/objective of the Monitoring Program as follows: CRWD monitors waters within the District to: identify problem areas, quantify subwatershed runoff pollutant loadings, evaluate effectiveness of BMPs, provide data to calibrate hydrologic, hydraulic, and water quality models, and promote understanding of District water resources and water quality. Question #3--How can our monitoring data be used in other CRWD programs? Recommendation 2 The District should better incorporate monitoring data into the following work of the District. Specifically, better utilizing monitoring data within the following programs should be evaluated:

a) BMP Performance b) Targeting CIPs, grants and education c) In-lake management decisions d) Spatial Analysis e) MS4 permit, specifically TMDL compliance/progress

Question #5--What do our audiences need to effectively make use of our data? Recommendation 3

Develop a comprehensive monitoring database that could more effectively manage the large data sets of the District. This would improve: data organization, data accessibility, data querying, and data analysis. The database should have components useable to both District staff and the general public. Recommendation 4 Complete a comprehensive evaluation of and implement improvements to the District’s reporting methods. The evaluation should focus on improvements to: format, frequency, analysis types, generation of figures & tables, data cleaning.

4

Recommendation 5 Consider expanded stand-alone sub-watershed reports that would contain a more comprehensive analysis of monitoring data in the subwatershed. This could include reports for the Como Lake and/or Trout Brook Subwatersheds. Further consider a subwatershed summary document that would be focused to inform the general public. Question #6--Who are potential new monitoring program partners who could strengthen our work? Recommendation 6 Based on the idea that a true partnership needs to mutually benefit all parties, 5 specific partners should be prioritized for actively developing or enhancing our monitoring partnerships over the next 3 years. The 5 priority partners are:

a) University of Minnesota b) City of St Paul c) Ramsey County (Conservation District and Public Works) d) Ramsey Washington Metro Watershed District (RWMWD) e) Mississippi Watershed Management Organization (MWMO)

The District would continue to actively communicate and partner with several other entities but would not actively attempt to develop/nurture new partnerships during the next three year period unless mutually beneficial outcomes can be realized. Question #7--What changes can we make to improve the efficiency of our data collection? Recommendation 7 Improve staff organization and training. This includes create of the District’s Monitoring, Research, and Maintenance Division as well as more formal and comprehensive training of new District staff. Recommendation 8 Install AC Power and Remote Data Access to baseline sites (6). This would improve the monitoring program as follows:

a. Temperature control (heating & cooling) of sampling equipment b. Year-round sampling c. Reduced frequency of site visits d. Analyze and report data more quickly e. Improved data quality

Recommendation 9

5

Improve methods and efficiency of sample preparation and lab analysis, including: a. Submittal requirements and procedures b. Laboratory results reporting c. Sample Bottle Cleaning d. Finalize Quality Assurance and Project Plan (QAPP)

Recommendation 10 For baseline sites, adjust sampling frequency as follows:

a. Fewer baseflow samples (1x per month vs 2x per month) b. Focus sampling towards larger storm events

Question #8--To best use our finite resources, where are areas we could reduce or eliminate collection efforts? Recommendation 11 Evaluate and consider adjusting monitoring parameters and frequency at the following locations:

a. Arlington-Pascal Infiltration Trenches (T5E, T4W, T4E) b. Como Regional Pond Inlet and Outlet c. Arlington Hamline Underground (AHUG) Outlet d. Como 3 Subwatershed e. Stormwater Pond Level Loggers

Recommendation 12 Evaluate and consider discontinuing analysis of the following chemical parameters:

a. Nitrogen b. Metals with negligible concentrations (Nickle, Cromium)

Recommendation 13 Evaluate and consider adjusting Qualitative Lakes Data Collection. Consider utilizing citizen volunteers to accomplish this work. Question #9--Is there anything that should be added to the program? Recommendation 14 Enhance lake monitoring and conduct more complete analysis. Regularly collect and analyze the following data:

a. Biological data i. Fisheries

ii. Macrophytes

6

iii. Phyto/Zooplankton b. Temperature c. Ice cover/Ice out d. Sediment

Recommendation 15 Historically, the District has focused on more typical stormwater parameters such as phosphorus and total suspended solids. The District should consider expanding its analysis of other stormwater parameters, including:

a. Bacteria/microbial source tracking b. Chloride c. Trash d. Polycyclic aromatic hydrocarbons (PAHs)

Recommendation 16 Consider monitoring and/or analysis of previously unmonitored subwatersheds. This effort should focus on:

a. Subwatersheds with land uses/source areas different than existing monitored locations b. Utilize modeling to simulate loading

Recommendation 17 Consider additional BMP monitoring, such as:

a. Research based BMP monitoring b. “Microsite” monitoring (roofs, parking lots, greenspace, construction sites, private

BMPs) c. Climate change adaptation monitoring

7

Monitoring Program Review RecommendationsSchedule and estimated additional costs beyond typical annual monitoring cost

# Name 2014 2015 2016 Estimated Additional Cost Question Addressed1 New goal/mission statement for Monitoring Program -$ 22 Better incorporate data into other District programs -$ 33 Develop a comprehensive monitoring database Budgeted for in 2014 54 Improvements to monitoring reports -$ 55 Consider stand-alone subwatershed reports (Como, Trout Brook) -$ 56 Develop enhanced monitoring partnerships 2,500$ 67 Improve staff organization and training 5,000$ 78 Install AC power and remote data access at baseline sites Budgeted for in 2014 79 Sample preparation and lab improvements 5,000$ 7

10 Adjust sampling frequency for baseline sites -$ 711 Evaluate adjusting some existing monitoring sites -$ 812 Evaluate discontinuing some existing chemical analysis -$ 813 Evaluate adjusting qualitative lakes data collection -$ 814 Expand Lakes Monitoring to include additional biological data Budgeted for in 2014 915 Consider expanding analysis to others stormwater parameters Budgeted for in 2014 916 Consider monitoring of previously unmonitored subwatersheds -$ 917 Consider additional BMP monitoring -$ 9

12,500$

8

Appendix 1—Monitoring Program Review Retreat Summary, November 1, 2013

W:\07 Programs\Monitoring & Data Acquisition\0 Projects\2013 Program Evaluation\Monitoring Program Review and 2014-2016 Workplan, 04-11-2014.docx

9

Monitoring program evaluation, Retreat Summary and Initial Recommendations Retreat held 11/1/2013 Document drafted 11/19/2013

1. What do we do well? Responses to this question can be categorized into 3 categories: Data Collection, Data Analysis/Reporting, Other

Data Collection o Collecting data. o Developing methods that work in CRWD. o Adapt to challenges of monitoring in an urban watershed o Working on a team in the field. o Handling lots of physical/manual labor successfully. o Maintain equipment….make sure it’s in working order and appropriate for the task. o Efficiency in field work…we have lots of tasks to do and they all get done

Data Analysis/Reporting o QA/QC of data. o Managing a lot of data. o Reporting data. o Sharing with other practitioners….transparent with process and data. o Making a complete analysis of data...automated samplers and loading calculations. o Calculating loads…it takes time. This is unique and important because it plays into cost-

benefit analysis. o

Other o Adequately funding the different steps of the program….monitoring is made a budgetary

priority. o Recently open to innovation, encouraging innovative thought, open to staff suggesting

ways to do things better. o We want to be leaders in our field and make it happen...this generates pride in our work. o We generate lots of data, but perhaps more important is its quality…it is research grade

and usable by other partners. o Communication between field staff and coordinator (weekly meetings, regular

communication, open lines of dialogue) this is key to getting work done well.

2. Why monitor in CRWD? Each response to this question was tested against our current monitoring program goal to see if it is adequately covered in the current goal or adjustments need to be made.

Current program goal:

10

In 2004, CRWD established a monitoring program to assess water quality and quantity of various subwatersheds and stormwater best management practices (BMPs) owned and/or operated and maintained by CRWD…..The objectives of the program are to identify water quality problem areas, quantify the subwatershed runoff pollutant loadings to the Mississippi River, evaluate the effectiveness of BMPs, and provide data for the calibration of hydrologic, hydraulic, and water quality models.

Overall the current goal encapsulates the program well with the exception of monitoring serving to educate and increase awareness within the District. Potential new program mission statement: (in bulleted list to make review/discussion easier, final will be narrative) CRWD monitors waters within the District to:

a) Identify problem areas b) Quantify subwatershed runoff pollutant loadings c) Evaluate effectiveness of BMPs d) Provide data to calibrate hydrologic, hydraulic, and water quality models e) Educate and increase awareness

3. How can our monitoring data be used in other CRWD programs? The responses to this question can be placed in one of 6 categories listed below.

Permitting a. Determine Rules (Requirements and Standards…1”?). b. Subwatershed-specific rules (Como TMDL). c. Permit sites – problem areas, i.e. illicit discharges. d. BMP Performance. e. Identify suitable designs of BMP construction sites. f. Construction site inspection and permitting

Subwatershed (new) a. Focus project dollars. b. Address “hot spots”.

TBI a. Model/calibrate/validate. b. Safety for operations and maintenance. c. MS4 Permit. d. Trout Brook conveyance questions.

Education a. Show impacts, good and bad. b. Link behaviors with water quality improvements. c. Influence public decision making in relation to other watersheds

Capital Improvement Projects a. To focus our CIPs, grants and education geographically. b. Determine maintenance requirements and frequency.

11

c. Assist BMP design and placement. Other

a. Support research opportunities. b. Climate change adaptation. c. In-lake management. d. Guide wetland management plan. e. Spatial analysis (GIS, modeling, etc.)

Recommendation: 5 priorities areas to incorporate monitoring data in the next 3 years.

a. BMP Performance b. Focus CIPs, grants and education c. In-lake management decisions d. Spatial Analysis e. MS4 permit, specifically TMDL compliance/progress

4. Who are the audiences for our data?

Answers to this question can be grouped into 3 major categories—Internal, External-Local, External-Non-Local

Internal o CRWD Board. o CRWD staff. o Citizens of CRWD, children, adults and seniors (different data delivery systems for all).

External--Local o MPCA. o Other CRWD cities. o Scientific community, academia, graduate students. o Stormwater professionals. o Developers (a potential audience). o Artists. o Teachers. o Advocates. o Nonprofit staff. o Landscape professionals. o Snowplow drivers, winter maintenance workers (Saint Paul snowplow fleet drivers and

their supervisors, Kevin Nelson, Matt Morreim). o Contractors. o Legislators/policymakers. o District planning councils. o Other decision makers.

External—Non-Local o Other regulatory agencies, EPA, NPDES NPS Listserv (Don Waye). o Other cities outside CRWD. o International locations.

12

5. What do our audiences need to effectively make use of our data?

Answers to this question can be grouped into 2 major categories—Data Understanding, Data Delivery

Data Understanding o Data they can understand. o Summaries. o Pie charts. o To know how to ask for the data, i.e. we need to help them know what’s available, and

may need us to prompt them re: what they want/need. o Point person to ask questions re: data, “handholding.” o Presentation of data in different formats. o Condensed versions of data. o More concise or simplified versions of data for the layperson. o Symbols, images to show data. o Interactive presentations. o Translation/interpretation. o Interpreted data: “What does it mean?” o Clean recommendations for management: “How do I use this data as an audience

member?” o Caveats or disclaimers for data. o Clear definitions of QAQC…people need assurance of how the data was collected, e.g.

Braun recently sent a clear definition of their QAQC. o We need to promote our data to certain audiences. o Comparison or amount that is commonly understood. o To make sure audiences members understand the science to education/policy leap. o A call to action, either general or specific.

Data Delivery

o Detailed procedures about collection. o Easy access to data. o Electronic/internet access. o Good organization. o Different delivery methods: a cellphone app, printed reports, .PDFs, billboards. o Different ways to query data on website, or monitoring database. o Consistent way to give data away to everyone, even if they are a nontraditional client. o Nontraditional delivery methods, marketing, advertising formats. o Deliver data in a more timely way, sometimes it is needed immediately by a client,

especially illicit discharges. o Raw data available. o A place to provide feedback and/or to interact with the data.

6. Who are potential new monitoring program partners who could strengthen our work?

13

Each potential partner was put into one of 6 categories for partner types: 1. Academic/Research:

a. University of Minnesota i. St. Anthony Falls Lab (SAFL)

ii. Ecology Evolution Behavior (EEB) iii. Entomology iv. Water Resource Center

b. University of New Hampshire c. Center for Watershed Protection (CWP) d. Water Environment Federation (WEF) e. Local Road Research Board

2. State/NAT’L Govt:

a. MPCA b. DNR c. MnDOT d. EPA e. USGS f. NWS g. Port Authority

3. Cities/Counties/Municipalities:

a. City of St. Paul i. Public Works, Sewer Division

ii. Regional Water Services b. City of Roseville c. City of Falcon Heights d. Ramsey County

i. Conservation District ii. Public Works

e. Other major cities within the region (e.g. Milwaukee)

4. Other Watershed Districts: a. MWMO b. RWMWD c. WCD d. MCWD

5. Citizens/Groups/NGOs

a. CLNN b. Citizen volunteers c. Non-profit/advocacy groups d. Private landowners with BMPs

14

6. Private Sector a. Media/Communication b. Private engineering companies (e.g. Barr) c. Vendors of BMPs

Recommendation: Based on the idea that a true partnership needs to mutually benefit all parties, from the list above 5 specific partners should be prioritized for actively developing or enhancing our monitoring partnerships over the next 3 years.

a. University of Minnesota b. City of St Paul c. Ramsey County (CD and PW) d. RWMWD e. MWMO

The others in the list above we would actively communicate and partner with as appropriate partnerships present themselves but we would not actively attempt to develop/nurture partnerships during the next three year period.

7. What changes can we make to improve the efficiency of our data collection? 8. To best use our finite resources, where are areas we could reduce or eliminate collection

efforts? 9. Is there anything that should be added to the program?

Based on the response to Questions 7-9 priority items (Top 5) were listed for Changes, Deletions, and Additions to the monitoring program (without sacrificing data quality): TOP 5 Changes:

1. AC Power and Remote Data Access to baseline sites a. Temp control (heating & cooling) b. Year-round monitoring c. Reduced frequency of site visits d. Analyze and report data more quickly e. Improved data quality

2. Staff organization and training 3. Monitoring Database development 4. Reporting Improvements (Format, Frequency, Analysis types, Generation of figures & tables,

data cleaning) 5. Sample Preparation and Lab Efficiency

a. Submittal requirements and procedures b. Laboratory results reporting c. Bottle Cleaning

15

TOP 5 Deletions: 1. Site Removal:

a. Trenches (T5E, T4W, T4E) b. GCP Inlet and Outlet c. AHUG Outlet d. Como 3—what are we doing here? e. Level Loggers—do we need this many deployed? What is data being used for?

2. Parameter removal: a. N b. Metals with non-detects (Ni, Cr)

3. Qualitative Lakes Data Collection (volunteers instead?) 4. Adjust Sampling Frequency:

a. Fewer baseflow samples (1x per month vs 2x) b. Larger storm events only

TOP 5 Additions:

1. Lakes Monitoring Data expansion and more complete analysis a. Biological data

i. Fisheries ii. Macrophytes

iii. Phyto/Zooplankton b. Temperature c. Ice cover/Ice out d. Sediment

2. Expanded analysis of other stormwater parameters a. Bacteria/microbial source tracking b. Chloride c. Trash d. PAHS e. Emerging contaminants

3. Monitoring of new subwatersheds a. Sub-WSs with different land use/source areas b. Utilize modeling to simulate loading c. Detailed, stand-alone reports by subwatershed

i. Como ii. Trout Brook

4. BMP Monitoring a. BMP research based monitoring b. “Microsite” monitoring (roofs, parking lots, greenspace, construction sites, private

BMPs) c. Climate change adaption monitoring

5. Detailed sub-watershed reports a. Expanded subwatershed monitoring and more detailed reports by subwatershed

16

Hot topics:

Reporting wetland data Groundwater data Lake monitoring – biochemical and chemical Mississippi River Emerging contaminants

Monitoring Station Power and Communication UpgradeWork Plan


I. Background Capitol Region Watershed District (CRWD) maintains and operates, as of February 2014, 16 full water quality sites consisting of an automated water sampler, data logger, and area-velocity sensor. Each is equipped with a 12 volt deep cycle marine battery to power the sampler and two 6 volt lantern batteries to power the data logger and area-velocity sensor. Stored data on the data loggers is manually downloaded to a field laptop which is brought to each site. There are several limitations and inefficiencies to the current monitoring system: Battery Power

1. Battery voltages must be checked on a regular basis to prevent power failure. This requires routine visits to each monitoring site.

2. When a battery voltage drops below the accepted threshold, it must be exchanged for a fully charged battery and returned to the CRWD shop for charging. There is no system to charge batteries in the field, nor is there a source of backup power.

3. Power failures due to low battery power are common. Power failures can result in loss of data and/or potential water quality samples.

Data Access

1. Stored data must be downloaded manually requiring a CRWD staff member to visit each site.

2. Data cannot be reviewed for possible equipment issues, current conditions, illicit discharges etc. until a site visit has been made and the data downloaded.

3. Certain sampling activities such as snowmelt grabs or storm grabs require specific conditions that, at present, can only be determined by physically visiting each site.

4. All programming of data loggers and samplers must be carried out in person at each site.

5. A site visit is required to determine if a site collected water quality samples during a storm event.

A significant amount of staff time is dedicated to the maintenance, reprogramming, status checking, and sample collection at monitoring sites. Table 1 summarizes the staff time spent at the 3 Trout Brook Monitoring Sites in 2013. Table 1 - 2013 Staff Hours

Activity Trout Brook East Branch Trout Brook West Branch Trout Brook Outlet Total

Storm Composite/Grab 8.1 6.4 13.0 27.6

Base Composite/Grab 14.7 14.0 12.8 41.6

Routine Site Visit 6.4 7.2 6.7 20.0

Maintenance 2.9 5.6 6.4 14.9

Total 32.2 33.2 38.9 104.4

CRWD is interested in increasing power reliability, reducing staff time spent on field visits, and accessing site data in real-time. To achieve these goals, CRWD has evaluated the establishment of AC power at its monitoring sites and a communication system for remote wireless data access.

II. Project Goals and Description The primary goals of this project are to 1) Increase sampling reliability and data integrity by providing monitoring sites with a reliable power source 2) Establish a system of real-time and/or on-demand remote wireless data access between deployed monitoring equipment and the CRWD office and 3) Increase the efficiency of staff time and resources related to field work activities. A reliable power source will eliminate periods of missing data caused by battery power failure. Continuous power will also increase the consistency of samples, delivering uniform volumes for each sample, by eliminating variations in pump motor speeds caused by the diminishing power over time supplied by the current battery setup. A key component of the remote data access system will be a 2-way communication system allowing for (re)programming of equipment without the need for personnel to be physically present at a site. Access to real-time data on flow conditions, sampler status, and equipment condition as well as the ability to react to conditions through remote programming is expected to significantly reduce staff time spent on travel to and from sites. It will also allow for more timely and effective responses to equipment malfunctions thereby increasing data quality. Higher quality raw data will reduce the amount and scope of QA/QC that needs to be done prior to reporting each year’s monitoring data. CRWD will pilot the power upgrades and communication system outlined in this work plan at three (3) of its long term baseline monitoring sites:

1. Trout Brook – East Branch 2. Trout Brook – West Branch 3. Trout Brook – Outlet

These sites were chosen because they are anticipated to be monitored well into the foreseeable future and because they monitor the Trout Brook Storm Sewer Interceptor, which CRWD owns and maintains. Once the three pilot sites have been established and the performance of the remote data access system has been evaluated, CRWD will make a determination on how or whether to implement remote data access at its remaining baseline monitoring sites.

III. Project Organization CRWD will coordinate with Xcel Energy, property owners and the electrical contractor throughout the course of this project. IV. Scope of Work The tasks needed to complete this project can be divided into two main categories 1) Installation of the AC power connection and 2) Establishment of the remote wireless data access system. Many aspects of the two categories can be completed concurrently, but the remote data access system cannot be fully established and tested without first establishing the AC power connection. 1. Installation of AC Power Connection

Task 1 CRWD will ensure that all necessary easements and agreements from property owners are in order prior to proceeding with any of the following tasks. Task 2 CRWD will solicit quotes and contract with an electrical contractor who will be responsible for the following:

1. Assessment of the project needs in terms of materials, labor, and energy loads. 2. Calculation of each site’s projected load and complete the necessary load sheet

for submittal to Xcel Energy. 3. Installation of an Xcel Energy approved meter and all necessary components

from the meter to the monitoring box terminating in a standard outlet (exact specs to be determined by the electrician).

Task 3 Meet with parties to discuss the project. Parties include but are not limited to:

1. Xcel Energy 2. CRWD personnel 3. CRWD’s electrician/contractor 4. Property owner(s)

Task 4 CRWD or its contractor will apply for service from Xcel Energy. Task 5 Xcel Energy will design the project and determine its costs, if any. Task 6 All necessary agreements between Xcel and CRWD will be signed and any payment owed to Xcel will be made before construction begins.

Task 7 Xcel Energy will construct the designed project. Task 8 A final check will be performed by CRWD’s electrician and, if necessary, Xcel Energy.

2. Establishment of Wireless Data Access System Task 1 Set up cellular data plans for the three pilot sites. Task 2 Equipment Purchases:

1. Three (3) Isco 2105ci cellular interface modules 2. Three (3) power adapters with battery backup for the 6712 samplers at the three

pilot sites

Task 3 Conduct in-house testing of the intended setup prior to field deployment.

1. Evaluate performance vs. needs 2. Adjust and seek additional solutions as needed.

Task 4 Deploy remote access equipment in the field and evaluate its field performance. Task 5 Continually evaluate overall performance of the remote access system vs. desires and find areas for improvement, if any.

1. Evaluate the potential benefits of the addition of Flowlink Pro software. 2. Perform a cost-benefit analysis after 1 year of operation.

V. Anticipated Timeline CRWD anticipates that the remote access system and all supporting components will be active and in use by late July to early August 2014. The largest uncertainty in the schedule is Xcel Energy’s construction schedule. The expected time to go from design to construction is 8 – 10 weeks. Table 2 outlines the anticipated schedule of tasks.

Table 2 - Anticipated Timeline

VI. Cost Estimates Table 3 outlines the estimated up-front costs associated with the proposed system. Once the system is in place, recurring costs consist of monthly charges for the cellular data plan and power usage. Table 3 – Estimated Up-Front Costs

Item Unit Cost Units Total

Xcel Energy Design and Construction1 $3200 3 $9600

Electrician Installation1 $900 3 $2700

Cellular Data Plan – 3 Sites (Verizon Wireless) $45 242 $1080

Verizon Static IP setup (one‐time fee) $500 3 $1500

Isco 2105ci Module $3070 3 $9210

Power Adapter with Battery Backup (Isco model 914) $536 3 $1609

Project Total $25,6991 Based on data provided by MWMO for similar work.

2 Months. Based on minimum 2 year contract.

Attachments: Xcel Energy Electric Service Information Load Sheet

May June July August Sept Oct Nov Dec

Task 1 ‐ Secure Easments and Property Owner Agreements CRWD x

Task 2 ‐ Solicit Quotes and Contract with Electrical Contractor CRWD x

2.1 ‐ Assessment of project needs Electrician x

2.2 ‐ Calculation of projected load and submittal to Xcel Electrician x

2.3 ‐ Installation of Meter and Connection to Monitoring Box Electrician x

Task 3 ‐ Meet With Parties to Discuss Project All x

Task 4 ‐ Apply for Service from Xcel CRWD x

Task 5 ‐ Design Project and Determine Costs Xcel x

Task 6 ‐ Sign Agreements and Make Payment to Xcel Xcel/CRWD x

Task 7 ‐ Construction Xcel x

Task 8 ‐ Finalize Installation and Perform Check Electrician x

Task 1 ‐ Set up Cellular Data Plan CRWD x

Task 2 ‐ Equipment Purchases CRWD x

Task 3 ‐ In‐House Testing CRWD x

Task 4 ‐ Field Deployment of Equipment CRWD x

Task 5 ‐ Performance Evaluation CRWD x x

Task Party

Establishment of Remote Data Access System

2014

Installation of AC Power Connection

Enhanced Lake Biological Monitoring Work Plan


2

I. Background of CRWD Lakes Capitol Region Watershed District (CRWD) has five lakes within its boundaries: Como Lake, Crosby Lake, Little Crosby Lake, Loeb Lake, and Lake McCarrons (monitored annually since 1984, 1999, 2011, 2003, and 1988, respectively). The lakes are monitored by Ramsey County Public Works (RCPW), Ramsey Conservation District (RCD), the Minnesota Department of Natural Resources (DNR), and CRWD to assess overall health and to determine if each lake supports their designated uses for swimming, fishing, and/or aesthetics. All of the lakes receive stormwater runoff and ultimately drain to the Mississippi River (with the exception of Loeb Lake). Como, Crosby, Little Crosby and Loeb Lakes are classified as shallow lakes, defined by a maximum depth of less than fifteen feet or those in which more than 80% of the lake is within the littoral zone (the area of the lake in which plants grow). Lake McCarrons is the only deep lake in the District, defined by a maximum depth of greater than fifteen feet or those in which less than 80% of the lake is in the littoral zone. Every two years, the Minnesota Pollution Control Agency (MPCA) assesses the water quality conditions of the State’s surface waters and updates the “Impaired Waters List” based on the current, available water quality data. This list identifies the lakes and streams in the state that do not meet their designated uses (i.e.: fishing, swimming, drinking water, etc) because of poor water quality. Of the five District lakes, Como Lake is the only lake listed as impaired on the MPCA 303(d) list for excess nutrients, having been listed since 2002. CRWD developed the Como Lake Strategic Management Plan in 2002 in an effort to improve water quality in the lake. II. Historical Monitoring and the Need for More Data CRWD lakes have been consistently monitored in the past for chemical, physical, and some biological parameters (i.e., nutrient concentrations, water clarity, and aquatic vegetation, respectively). Examining the relationships between these parameters provides insight into overall lake health. In many cases chemical and physical data are the primary factors that inform lake management decisions. Biological data is equally as important, and can provide additional insight into the complex interactions taking place within a lake. Biological parameters include information on abundance and size of phytoplankton and zooplankton, abundance and types of aquatic vegetation, and size and composition of fish populations. Historically, CRWD or others have collected or obtained data on certain biological parameters, but on an inconsistent basis (Table 1). Collection of biological data is often more

3

time-intensive and expensive, and therefore not monitored as frequently as some of the major chemical and physical data parameters collected. The relationship among the biological organisms in a lake is complex and can greatly affect water quality. For example, if there are larger populations of piscivorous fish (fish that consume other smaller fish) in a lake, this can cause lower populations of planktivorous fish (fish that consume zooplankton). When there are not as many planktivorous fish to feed on zooplankton (such as daphnia), zooplankton communities increase, feeding on more of the phytoplankton in the lake. This can result in lower levels of algae and clearer water. Conversely, lower levels of piscivorous fish equates to higher levels of planktivorous fish, lower levels of zooplankton to consume phytoplankton, higher levels of algae growth and reduced water clarity. Among other chemical, physical, and biological factors, the abundance of different members of the lake food chain can greatly affect water quality and clarity.

In addition, lake sediments can often be a large internal source of phosphorus. A small amount of phosphorus released from the upper level sediments (typically through wave action or rough fish disturbance) can have a pronounced impact on the overall phosphorus concentration in the water column. Sediment data has been collected in the past, but only on a few lakes for specific purposes (i.e., the 2004 alum treatment of Lake McCarrons). Establishing baseline lake sediment data would provide information essential for identifying phosphorus sources and could impact lake management decisions. III. Project Goals and Description The primary goal of this project is to enhance monitoring of biological parameters of CRWD lakes in order to increase understanding of how they interact with chemical and physical parameters, all of which shape lake water quality. Ultimately, this additional knowledge will provide a more complete picture of CRWD lake health. In 2013, CRWD contracted Wenck Associates, Inc. to complete a statistical analysis of CRWD lake data to determine if any water quality trends exist and what factors could be causing these trends. One major recommendation from the report was to increase monitoring of biological data, as many of these parameters (aquatic vegetation, zooplankton and phytoplankton abundance, and fish populations) could be having an effect which cannot be determined by examining chemical and physical data alone. By obtaining data on biological parameters that have not been monitored in the past or have been monitored infrequently, a better picture of what is happening within the District’s lakes can be obtained. This additional data will also help us better understand our overall watershed management efforts. For example, many successful BMP projects (i.e., CRWD’s Arlington-Pascal Stormwater Improvement Project) have been completed in recent years in the area around

4

Como Lake. The projects have significantly reduced external pollutant loading to the lake, but improvements in water quality have been inconsistent. Instead, a cyclical trend in total phosphorus (TP) and chlorophyll-a (Chl-a) concentrations, and Secchi disk depth has become apparent, where every 5-6 years these parameters fluctuate and affect water quality. This is one example of where knowledge of biological factors will increase understanding of lake water quality trends, as it can be difficult to develop conclusions based on chemical and physical data alone.

5

Table 1. CRWD HISTORICAL LAKE MONITORING

Chemical/Physical Data Collection Yes 2x per month (May-Sept)

1984 (Como), 1999 (Crosby), 2003 (Loeb),

1988 (McCarrons), 2011 (Little Crosby)

RCPW

Collected parameters in accordance with MPCA required data collection (depth, pH, DO, conductivity, Chl-a, chloride, ammonia, TP, temperature, etc). Collected annually since start year.

Aquatic Vegetation Point-Intercept Surveys* Yes2x per year (spring and late summer)

2012-2013 (And past years for lakes surveyed during DNR fish

surveys, i.e., Loeb)

RCD (DNR)

Occurred in all lakes. Additional survey completed in West End of Lake McCarrons in August, 2013. Additionally done in Como in 2010, Crosby in 2009, and Loeb in 2011. Data collected on Species Name, Depth, % Occurrence, and Avg. Abundance.

Aquatic Vegetation Biovolume Analysis** YesOnce/Year (late

summer) 2012-2013 RCDOccurred in all lakes. Data collected on lake depth, plant biovolume at each depth, % area covered in vegetation, heat map.

Phytoplankton Data Collection Yes 2x per month (May-Sept)

1984 (Como), 1999 (Crosby), 2003 (Loeb),


RCPW

Data collected on Phylum/Genus and concentration (organisms/mL) found for each date. Collected annually since start year except for McCarrons, which missed a year in 1999.

Zooplankton Data Collection Yes 2x per month (May-Sept)

1984 (Como), 1999 (Crosby), 2003 (Loeb),


RCPW Data collected on number and concentration (1000/m^3) of specific types, as well as daphnia size distribution

Fisheries Survey YesOnce (mid-late

summer)

2011 (Como), 2004 (Crosby), 2006 (Loeb),

2008 McCarronsDNR

The DNR surveys all MN lakes on a 5-10 year rotation. Stocking occurs more frequently in lakes popular for fishing. Little Crosby never surveyed. Data not collected frequently enough on any lake to say it was regularly monitored.

Temperature Data Collection Yes 2x per month (May-Sept)

1984 (Como), 1999 (Crosby), 2003 (Loeb),


RCPW Surface temperature and temperature profiles taken along with chemical/physical data collection

Sediment Analysis Yes Once (unknown times of year)

2004 (McCarrons), 2008 (Crosby)

Barr Engineering/ UMN LCR

Completed once for McCarrons (2004) corresponding to the alum treatment on the lake, and once for Crosby (2008) completed by the UMN LRC. Not enough times to say we consciously monitored for sediments in the past.

Lake Elevations Yes

At least once/month,

twice/month in summer

1978 (Como), 1924 (McCarrons), 2003 (Loeb) DNR

Monitored as part of the Lake Level Minnesota Monitoring Program by the DNR.

* The point-intercept method involves surveying aquatic vegetation at specif ic evenly-spaced points throughout a lake and documenting type and abundance of plant species found.

** Biovolume surveys involve using a GPS enabled depth-f inder to assess evenly spaced transects that determine the depth of the lake and the amount of aquatic vegetation along each transect.

Data Type NotesPreviously Collected? Frequency Collected Since Year Collected By

6

IV. Enhanced Monitoring Recommendations The following recommendations are proposed for each CRWD lake (Table 2): Monitoring to be continued as currently scheduled:

Chemical/physical data collection eight times from May – September by RCPW

Aquatic vegetation point-intercept surveys completed twice per summer by RCD

Aquatic vegetation biovolume analysis completed twice per summer by RCD

Phytoplankton data collection eight times from May – September by RCPW

Zooplankton data collection eight times from May – September by RCPW

Monitoring to be completed by external organizations not contracted by CRWD Fisheries surveys to be conducted on Crosby Lake, Loeb Lake and Lake McCarrons in

2014 by the Minnesota DNR

Lake elevations to be measured on Como Lake, Loeb Lake, and Lake McCarrons by the Minnesota DNR

Recommended additional monitoring:

Chemical/physical data to be collected in spring and fall by RCPW (if possible)

Aquatic vegetation point-intercept survey to be conducted in spring by RCD (if possible)

Aquatic vegetation biovolume analysis to be conducted in spring by RCD (if possible)

Phytoplankton data to be collected in spring and fall by RCPW (if possible)

Zooplankton data to be collected in spring and fall by RCPW (if possible)

Fisheries surveys to be conducted on Como Lake and Little Crosby Lake in 2014 by a consultant. Fisheries surveys to be conducted in future years for ALL lakes by a consultant when not surveyed by the DNR.

Temperature monitoring equipment to be installed in Como Lake and Lake McCarrons by CRWD (to obtain continuous data on lake epilimnion temperature)

Sediment analyses to be conducted on all lakes in winter of 2014 – 2015 by external consultant (with potential for additional analyses in future years)

Lake elevation to be measured in Como Lake, Crosby Lake, and Lake McCarrons by CRWD

7

Table 2. CRWD PROPOSED LAKE MONITORING

Winter April May - Sept October

Chemical/Physical Data Collection Once? 2x per Month

Once? Annually RCPW

Collected parameters in accordance with MPCA required data collection (depth, pH, DO, conductivity, Chl-a, chloride, ammonia, TP, temperature, etc). Potential collection in early spring and late fall if possible based on staff time.

Aquatic Vegetation Point-Intercept Surveys Once 2x per summer

Annually RCD* As per previous collection methods, collect data on Species Name, Depth, % Occurrence, and Avg. Abundance.

Aquatic Vegetation Biovolume Analysis Once2x per

summer Annually RCD*As per previous collection methods, but potentially interested in performing this during the spring as well as the late summer timeframe. This is dependent upon staffing at RCPW and cost.

Phytoplankton Data Collection Once? 2x per Month Once? Annually RCPW

As per previous collection methods, collect data on phytoplankton type (phylum/genus) and concentration (organisms/mL). Recommendations for monitoring are once in early spring and late fall, and 2x monthly through summer. Hope for early spring/late fall but probably not possible based on predicted staff time.

Zooplankton Data Collection Once? 2x per Month Once? Annually RCPW

As per previous collection methods, collect data on zooplankton type, number and concentration (1000/m 3̂), as well as daphnia size distribution. Recommendations for monitoring are once in spring and fall, and 1x monthly through summer. The District anticipates for spring/fall monitoring but it is probably not possible based on predicted staff time. CRWD already collects more than is recommended during summer months.

Fisheries Survey Once Annually DNR or consultant

Crosby/Loeb/McCarrons will be monitored in 2014 by the DNR. Como is scheduled to be monitored in 2016. CRWD will be responsible for organizing consultants to monitor Como/Little Crosby in 2014. As the DNR only monitors MN lakes every 5-6 years (at most), future years will require CRWD to find external consults to complete this work in future years.

Temperature Data Collection Continuous Annually CRWD

CRWD will install temperature monitoring equipment in Villa Park to see possible effect of Villa Park overflow on Lake McCarrons surface temperature. Temperature sensors will also be installed in Como/McCarrons on the fishing piers which will give a continous record of temperature over the summer months.

Sediment Analysis Once? 2014 Consultant

Survey sediment once (Talk to consultant as to best time during the year to conduct sampling and what parameters to monitor) in order to have baseline knowledge of the sediment in our lakes. Based on the findings, this could have to be analyzed again in the future.

Lake Elevations Continuous Continuous Continuous Annually CRWD

The DNR currently manages the lake elevation database and historical years of elevation data for Como/Loeb/McCarrons can be obtained from their website. The District will install a level logger in Crosby Lake to monitor level for Crosby/Little Crosby.

*May require the use of consultants if RCD does not have adequate staff resources.

Data Type To be Collected By

NotesAnnually or 2014 only?

Frequency of Collection

8

V. Project Timeline As shown in Table 3, the majority of preparatory work for this project is expected to be completed in April 2014. Once outside consultants are determined for the additional work that is to be completed, the 2014 budget for the additional monitoring can be finalized. Data will then be collected by CRWD monitoring staff at the end of the monitoring season and included in the 2014 reporting. Table 3. CRWD 2014 lakes enhanced biological monitoring timeline

March April May June July August September OctoberAdministrative

Develop work plan draft CRWDCRWD staff review of work plan CRWD Early AprilPresent work plan to CRWD Board CRWD April 16th Verify contract with RCPW for 2014 monitoring season CRWDContract with external consultants to complete additional work CRWDDevelop budget specifics based off of consultant work CRWD

MonitoringInstall temperature probes in Como Lake and Lake McCarrons CRWD (As early as possible)Install level gauge in Crosby Lake CRWD (As early as possible)

2014 Lakes MonitoringRCPW, RCD,

DNR, etc (If possible) (If possible)

Tasks Organization2014 Monitoring Season

9

VI. Project Budget The CRWD 2014 lakes monitoring budget allocates $20,000 for enhanced biological monitoring of all five lakes (Table 4). This amount is sufficient to cover anticipated costs of the additional monitoring. Table 4. CRWD 2014 lakes monitoring budget Cost Budgeted Amount DescriptionCRWD Staff Time $4,880 Includes 0.1 FTE for qualitative lakes monitoring and lakes reportingRCPW $6,000 Lakes monitoring and laboratory analysisEnhanced Biological Monitoring $20,000 For additional monitoring of aquatic organisms and sedimentEquipment $1,300 Equipment purchase, rental/lease, and maintenance

Total $32,180


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

April 2, 2014 6:09 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

Jim Mogan, Ramsey County

Attorney

Public Attendees Nathan Campeau, Barr

Engineering

Tony Wendland, Xcel

Sharon Sarappo, Xcel

Conrad Miller, Xcel

B) Review, Amendments and Approval of the Agenda

Manager Mary Texer asked for additions or changes to the agenda. No changes were requested.

Motion 14-066: Approve the April 2, 2014 Agenda.

Reider/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 # 14-007 St. Paul Public Schools – 360 Colborne Parking Lot Rehabilitation (Kelley)

Mr. Kelley reviewed Permit #14-007 Colborne Pavement Rehabilitation. The applicant is St. Paul Public

Schools. The permit is for reconstruction of the parking lot at the St. Paul Public School District headquarters.

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 2.64 Acres and 2.40 Acres impervious surface.

Motion 14-067: Approve the St. Paul Public Schools – 360 Colborne Parking Lot Rehabilitation 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).

April 16, 2014 Board Meeting

V. Action Item A) Approve Minutes

of April 2, 2014

DRAFT Regular Board Meeting

(Sylvander)


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

No discussion.

Reider/Jones


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

Mr. Kelley reviewed Permit #14-011 Xcel Energy East Metro Gas Pipeline. The applicant is Xcel Energy. The

permit is for replacement and maintenance of existing pipeline. The applicable rules are Stormwater

Management (Rule C), and Erosion and Sediment Control (Rule F). The disturbed area of this project is 8.7

Acres.

Motion 14-068: Approve permit #14-011 Xcel Energy – East Metro Gas Pipeline Phase 2 with 6 conditions:

1. Receipt of surety.

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


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?

Ms. Texer requested clarification of item number six, provide addition information on regulator station. Mr.

Kelley replied that he has already received the additional information requested.

Mr. Jones asked if there will additional utilities in future phases. Mr. Kelley replied that there may be in the

future but he is not aware of any.

Thienes/Reider


Motion 14-069: Approve variance from Rule C Stormwater Management requirements for permit #14-011 Xcel

Energy East Metro Gas Pipeline.

Thienes/Reider


C) Permit Program/Rules Update (Kelley)

Mr. Kelley reviewed an upcoming permit for a Goodwill store on University Avenue. Mr. Kelley noted that the

TAC is still working on some adjustments to the rules. The percentages for the new filtration credits were off

so the TAC may need to go back and redo some the calculations.

IV. Special Reports.


A. TBI Drainage Improvements at Cottage Ave. and Farrington Street (Eleria)

Ms. Eleria introduced Mr. Nathan Campeau with Barr Engineering. Ms. Eleria reviewed how an area located

near Cottage Avenue and Farrington Street has experienced flooding from rainwater runoff. Mr. Campeau

shared his feasibility report showing the causes of flooding and potential solutions. The inlet in this area would

often get clogged with debris, garbage, and items being dumped. In the summer of 2013 repairs were made to

the berm and large rocks were placed around the inlet. Soon after the repairs were made a large rainfall tested

the improvements and it held to hold up well to the amount of storm water runoff. The improvements have

reduced the flooding in this area. The low area located just north east of the inlet may still experience some

flooding in a residential backyard. Mr. Campeau reviewed four options that could be implemented to reduce

the flooding problems in this area. The first option would be to replace the current inlet with a beehive style

inlet. This would allow more runoff to enter the storm drain. Option number two would be to place a beehive

style inlet further upstream. This option would capture more stormwater runoff before it would reach the

current inlet. The third option would be to build a raingarden. This option does cost more and would not

reduce flooding. The forth option is a combination of a beehive style inlet and a raingarden.

Administrator Doneux noted that Mr. Campeau has shared his feasibility report with the CAC in March for

comments. Two of the CAC members had strong opinions of this project. Mr. Barton suggested that the area is

a wetland and a flooding easement be acquired. Mr. Byrne suggested obtaining flooding or ponding easements

rather than building a project.

Mr. Jones asked why the cause of the flooding was not looked into further for the homeowners. Ms. Eleria

replied that much of the information was based on the information that the homeowners were sharing.

The focus of the project was, to determine if CRWD was contributing to the problem. Ms. Eleria noted that she

has not heard from the neighbor that was having flooding issues in his backyard. There was some discussion

about option number two, adding a beehive inlet further upstream. The Board of Managers discussed observing

this area and to consider adding this to the budget in 2015 if a project is warranted. The Board of Managers

thanked Mr. Campeau for his presentation.

V. Action Items

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

Motion 14-070: Approve Minutes of the March 19, 2014Regular Meeting.

Jones/Reider


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

Motion 14-071: Approve Minutes of the March 19, 2014 Board Workshop.

Reider/Thienes


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


Administrator Doneux reviewed that 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. Administrator Doneux 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. Administrator Doneux recommends 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.

Motion 14-072: Accept the LMCIT liability coverage and NOT Waive the Monetary Limits on municipal tort

liability.

Thienes/Jones


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

(Eleria)

Ms. Eleria, reviewed the Highland Ravine Stabilization Project. This 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. 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.

Ms. Eleria said the City of Saint Paul and CRWD staff prepared a draft license agreement for access and

construction of the Highland Ravine Stabilization Project on City parkland. The license 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. The license also allows CRWD to maintain the project through

2017.

Mr. Jones asked what the difference was between a license and easement. Attorney Mogen replied that a

license gives CRWD the right to access and use the land. An easement is a more permanent attachment to the

land.

Motion 14-073: Approve the license agreement with the City of Saint Paul for the Highland Ravine

Stabilization Project subject to approval of the Ramsey County Attorney.

Thienes/Reider


VI. Unfinished Business

A) FI: Highland Ravine Update (Eleria)

Ms. Eleria provided an update on the Highland Ravine Project. Attorney Mogen has been talking to the

Attorney for the Deer Park Association. The final issues and verbiage are being worked out. Ms. Eleria

anticipates being able to put the project out to bid next week.

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


Mr. Kelley reviewed the Upper Villa Park stormwater improvements. Mr. Kelley has met with the City of

Roseville Public Works Department. It has been confirmed that CRWD will proceed with the feasibility study

for the reuse portion of the project. Mr. Kelley currently has proposals from SRF and Geosyntec.

C) FI: Curtiss Pond Improvement Project (Fossum)

Mr. Fossum provided an update on the Curtiss Pond Improvement Project. Mr. Fossum reviewed the evolution

of the design. Mr Fossum reviewed that the newest design will lower the level of the pond by two feet before

anticipated rainfall. Educational informational signage will be added to the site. The City of Falcon Heights is

currently in the planning process for the park area. The city plans to remove the current basketball court. The

hockey rink will be paved and serve as the basketball court in the summer months. Mr. Fossum reviewed a

schedule of the project. The City of Falcon Heights will be reviewing the project and schedule. Work would

not begin until after the MN State Fair due to heavy traffic.

D) FI: Office Plan Update (Doneux)

Administrator Doneux gave an update on the office plans. Administrator Doneux met with CBRE, they will

compile the information collected into one summary report. This report will be presented at the next meeting.

A letter is being drafted to extend the current lease.

VII. General Information

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.

Sarah Wein and Britta Suppes will attend the annual Women’s Environmental Network, networking event on

Wednesday April 2, 2014 held at Hamline University.

A meeting is set for Monday, April 7, 2014 with the neighbors of Lake McCarrons to discuss weed harvesting.

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

VIII. Adjournment

Motion 14-074: Adjournment of the April 2, 2014 Regular Board Meeting at 7:23 p.m.

Jones/Thienes

Unanimously Approved

Respectfully submitted,

Michelle Sylvander

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

DATE: April 10, 2014

TO: CRWD Board of Managers

FROM: Michelle Sylvander, Office Manager

RE: March 2014 Accounts Payable/Receivable and Administrative/Program Budget

Report

_________________________________________________________________________________

Background

Enclosed are the Accounts Payable/Receivable and the Administrative/Program Budget Reports for the

Month of March 2014.

Issues

Summary of Accounts Payable/Receivable Report: Accounts Payable $ 278,719.20

Accounts Receivable $ 50,851.51

Summary of Preliminary Budget Report:

Administrative Budget $ 70,856.21

Program Budget $ 161,188.85

Project Budget $ 15,590.87

Capital Improvement Budget $ 31,083.27

TOTAL $ 278,719.20

Request Action

Approve March 2014 Accounts Payable/Receivable and March Budget Report and direct Treasurer and

Board President to endorse and disperse checks for these payments.

enc: March 2014 Accounts Payable/Receivable

March 2014 Preliminary Budget Report

W:\02 Budget and Finance\Board Memos\Board Memos 2014\BD Memo AP Budget Report 4.10.2014.docx

April 19, 2014

Board Meeting

V. Action Items – B) Accounts

Payable & Budget Update

(Sylvander)

CAPITOL REGION WATERSHED DISTRICT 2014 BUDGET REPORT REPORT DATE: 4/10/2014

OPERATIONSProject/Program: 2014 Budget

2014 Budget Transfers/

Amendments

2014 Amended Budget Current Month Expenditures YTD Expenditures Balance of Budget

Remaining % of Budget Expended

ADMINISTRATION Administrative Budget 419,800.00 419,800.00 70,856.21 162,160.58 257,639.42 38.63%

200-Administration 80,081.00 80,081.00 - - 80,081.00 0.00%

201-Groundwater 7,950.00 7,950.00 - 16.54 7,933.46 0.21%

207-Rulemaking/Rule Revisions 28,650.00 28,650.00 889.08 2,220.38 26,429.62 7.75%

208-Permitting 177,482.00 177,482.00 12,717.37 33,409.53 144,072.47 18.82%

210-Stewardship Grants 210,152.00 210,152.00 4,155.57 30,367.98 179,784.02 14.45%

211-Monitoring and Data Collection 489,802.00 489,802.00 101,585.17 174,027.18 315,774.82 35.53%

220-Education/Outreach 224,530.00 224,530.00 36,531.10 52,777.12 171,752.88 23.51%

225-Technical Resources & Information Sharing 48,080.00 48,080.00 - - 48,080.00 0.00%

228-Future Trends: Research & Positioning 98,000.00 98,000.00 - - 98,000.00 0.00%

230-Geogrpahic Information Systems (GIS) 71,490.00 71,490.00 1,171.88 7,124.27 64,365.73 9.97%

240-Safety Program 28,140.00 28,140.00 4,138.68 8,761.56 19,378.44 31.14%

PROGRAM TOTAL 1,464,357.00 0.00 1,464,357.00 161,188.85 308,704.56 1,155,652.44 21.08%

300-Administration 39,169.00 39,169.00 0.00 - 39,169.00 0.00%

301-Shoreline & Streambank Maintenance 20,920.00 20,920.00 8,000.00 8,000.00 12,920.00 38.24%

305-Como Lake Subwatershed 185,594.00 185,594.00 665.50 1,514.83 184,079.17 0.82%

310-Lake McCarron's Subwatershed 30,000.00 30,000.00 968.96 968.96 29,031.04 0.00%

313-Loeb Lake Subwatershed 11,920.00 11,920.00 - - 11,920.00 0.00%

315-Trout Brook Subwatershed 219,230.00 219,230.00 4,334.85 16,905.33 202,324.67 7.71%

317-Crosby Lake Subwatershed 11,920.00 11,920.00 0.00 0.00 11,920.00 0.00%

325-Wetland, Stream and Ecosystem Restoration-Planning 76,320.00 76,320.00 531.43 1,193.58 75,126.42 0.00%

330-Mississippi River Subwatershed 107,398.00 107,398.00 1,090.13 5,885.49 101,512.51 5.48%

PROJECTS TOTAL 702,471.00 0.00 702,471.00 15,590.87 34,468.19 668,002.81 4.91%

TOTAL OPERATIONS BUDGET $2,586,628.00 $0.00 $2,586,628.00 $247,635.93 $505,333.33 $2,081,294.67 19.54%

Capital Improvement Project 2014 Budget2014 Budget Transfers/

Amendments

2014 Amended Budget Current Month Expenditures YTD Expenditures Balance of Budget

Remaining % of Budget Expended

401-Shoreline Restoration Fund 48,380.00 48,380.00 0.00 0.00 48,380.00 0.00%

405-Como BMP Fund 599,620.00 599,620.00 11,525.52 23,058.25 576,561.75 3.85%

410- Lake McCarron's BMP Fund 67,700.00 67,700.00 5,072.05 11,104.06 56,595.94 16.40%

415-Trout Brook BMP's 35,400.00 35,400.00 5,141.60 22,450.45 12,949.55 63.42%

417-Crosby Lake BMP 45,600.00 45,600.00 6,362.70 12,768.61 32,831.39 0.00%

420-Other BMP Fund 0.00 0.00 174.33 174.33 (174.33) 0.00%

425-Wetland, Stream and Ecosystem Restoration - Implementation 151,920.00 151,920.00 - - 151,920.00 0.00%

430-Mississippi River Subwatersheds BMP's 76,520.00 76,520.00 272.21 12,485.83 64,034.17 0.00%

440-Special Projects and Grants 539,510.00 539,510.00 2,534.86 204,073.73 335,436.27 37.83%

490-Debt Services 372,000.00 372,000.00 - 139,530.91 232,469.09 37.51%

TOTAL CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT PROGRAM $1,936,650.00 $0.00 $1,936,650.00 $31,083.27 $425,646.17 $1,511,003.83 21.98%

Fund Balances Unaudited Fund Balance @ 12/31/13

2014 Fund Balance Transfers

Unaudited Fund Balance @ 12/31/14 2014 YTD Revenue Current Month

Expenditures YTD Expenditures Unaudited Fund Balance @ 03/31/14

Operations 1,854,547.70 - 1,854,547.70 7,004.31 247,635.93 505,333.33 1,356,218.68

Capital Improvement 2,923,609.07 - 2,923,609.07 48,613.48 31,083.27 425,646.17 2,546,576.38

TOTAL FUND BALANCE: $4,778,156.77 $0.00 $4,778,156.77 $55,617.79 $278,719.20 $930,979.50 $3,902,795.06

PRO

GR

AM

SPR

OJE

CT

SC

API

TA

L IM

PRO

VE

ME

NT

FUN

D B

AL

AN

CE

S

Report Date 4/16/14

Date Vendor Name Vendor Address Invoice # Description Amount Total Check # G/L Code G/L Description

03/01/14 Metropolitan Council P.O. Box 856513Minneapolis, MN 55485-6513 1027174 Lab Analysis $62,277.00 $62,277.00 15840 211-13210-4450 $15,569.25

211-13230-4450 $9,341.55 Laboratory Analysis

03/28/14 Computer Revolution 2335 Fairview Ave.Roseville, MN 55113 Computer Equipment $2,388.89 $2,388.89 15841 101-14970-4610 Equipment Purchase/Rental/Lease

03/31/14 Al's Coffee 820 Decatur Ave. NorthGolden Valley, MN 55427 117569 Coffee $101.50 --- --- 101-14970-4210 Office Supplies

04/01/14 Al's Coffee 820 Decatur Ave. NorthGolden Valley, MN 55427 33417 Oasis Filter Cooler $10.76 $112.26 15842 101-14970-4210 Office Supplies

03/21/14 Barr Engineering 4700 West 77th Street Minneapolis MN 55435-4803 23620944.05-38 TBI Engineering Services $3,152.16 --- --- 315-14550-4470 Engineering

03/21/14 Barr Engineering 4700 West 77th Street Minneapolis MN 55435-4803 23620944.11-6 Farrington Drainage $2,029.50 --- ---

---

415-13818-4470 Engineering

03/21/14 Barr Engineering 4700 West 77th Street Minneapolis MN 55435-4803 23620944.09-27 Trout Brook Realignment from I-35E to Cayuga $2,415.50 $7,597.16 15843 415-12815-4470 Engineering

03/03/14 Ben Meadows P.O. Box 5275Janesville, WI 53547-5275 1020006407 Saftey Equipment $52.92 --- --- 240-14396-4210 Office Supplies

03/19/14 Ben Meadows P.O. Box 5275Janesville, WI 53547-5275 1020037782 Saftey Equipment $887.14 $940.06 15844 240-14396-4210 Office Supplies

03/13/14 Benefit Extras, Inc. P.O. Box 1815Burnsville, MN 55337 55072 Monthly Flex and Renewal Processing Fee $51.75 $51.75 15845 101-14970-4040 Employee Benefits

06/17/13 Bond Trust Services 3060 Centre Pointe Drive, Suite 110Roseville, MN 55113 9149 Paying Agent Services $450.00 $450.00 15846 101-14970-4290 Insurnce & Bonds

03/31/14 Braun IntertecNW 7644P.O. Box 1450Minneapolis, MN 55485-7644

1401022 Lab Analysis $840.00 --- ---211-14200-4450 $420.00211-14210-4450 $134.40211-14230-4450 $285.60

Laboratory Analysis


1400837 Lab Analysis $840.00 --- ---211-14200-4450 $420.00211-14210-4450 $134.40211-14230-4450 $285.60

Laboratory Analysis


1400769 Lab Analysis $840.00 --- ---211-14200-4450 $420.00211-14210-4450 $134.40211-14230-4450 $285.60

Laboratory Analysis


1400573 Lab Analysis $630.00 --- ---211-14200-4450 $352.80211-14210-4450 $138.60211-14230-4450 $138.60

Laboratory Analysis


1400516 Lab Analysis $2,224.00 $5,374.00 15847 211-14200-4450 $1668.00211-14210-4450 $556.00 Laboratory Analysis

04/01/14 CBRE P.O. Box 848844Los Angeles, CA 90084-8844 PJM0019000P Project Management Fees $10,468.77 --- --- 101-14970-4430 Consultants

12/17/13 CBRE P.O. Box 848844Los Angeles, CA 90084-8844 PJM0015559P Project Management Fees $10,055.37 $20,524.14 15848 101-14970-4430 Consultants

03/25/14 Century College 3300 Century Avenue NorthWhite Bear Lake, MN 55110-1842 540586 Confined Space Training 2/26/2014 $1,835.00 $1,835.00 15849 240-14390-4430 Consultants

03/23/14 City of St. Paul 1100 Hamline Avenue NorthSt. Paul, MN 55108 Intership Support Parks & Recreation Internship - Tyler Polster $8,000.00 $8,000.00 15850 301-14405-4710 Grants/Cost-Share/Partnerships

01/24/14 Joe Collins 1410 Energy Park Dr.St. Paul, MN 55108 1st Quarter Expense Report 1st Quarter, 2014 $934.68 $934.68 15851 101-13970-4000 $900.00

101-13970-4010 $34.68 Manager Per Diem/Expense

03/07/14 Corner Marking Co. 1174 7th Street W.St. Paul, MN 55102 86916 Name Plate for Jordan Jessen $19.91 $19.91 15852 101-14970-4210 Office Supplies

03/28/14 Anna Eleria March Expense Expense Report $57.68 $57.68 15853

101-14970-4330 $5.04240-14390-4330 $11.20315-14550-4330 $12.88330-14620-4330 $20.16417-12801-4330 $8.40

Staff Expenses

03/27/14 Ford Motor Credit Company, LLCMunicipal Finance1 American Road, MD 7500Dearborn, MI 48126

1082858 2013 Ford Edge Lease - April $535.81 $535.81 15854

208-14000-4635 - 160.74 210-14141-4635 - 160.74 220-14275-4635 - 107.16 315-14550-4635 - 107.15

Equipment Lease/Purchase

03/28/14 Bob Fossom March Expense Expense Report $220.36 $220.36 15855 405-13700-4330 $1.12410-12750-4330 $219.24 Staff Expenses

03/14/14 Geosyntec 900 Broken Sound Pkwy, Suite 200Boca Raton, FL 33487-2775 1714141 Curtiss Pond Design & Construction Project $1,884.00 $1,884.00 15856 405-13700-4470 Engineering

03/25/14 Hamline University 1536 Hewitt AvenueSt. Paul, MN 55104 H003267/H003647 Design & Production of 3 exhibits $24,900.00 $24,900.00 --- 220-14250-4610 Equipment Purchase/Rental/Lease

ACCOUNTS PAYABLE/RECEIVABLE

Report Date 4/16/14



03/12/14 Hamline University 1536 Hewitt AvenueSt. Paul, MN 55104 Membership Dues Watershed Patners $3,500.00 $3,500.00 15857 220-14265-4260 Dues & Publications

04/10/14 Health PartnersNW 3600PO Box 1450Minneapolis, MN 55485-3600

May May Health & Dental Benefits $10,541.42 $10,541.42 15858 various Employee Benefits

02/28/14 HLB 4810 White Bear ParkwayWhite Bear Lake, MN 55110 150413240 Monthly Accounting for Feb. 2014 $5,388.69 $5,388.69 15859 101-14970-4440 Accounting

03/13/14 Houston Engineering Inc. 1401 21st Ave. N.Fargo, ND 58102 19220 Curtiss Pond Design & Construction Project $7,928.00 $7,928.00 15860 405-13700-4470 Engineering

03/14/14 Impressive Print 1995 Oakcrest AvenueRoseville, MN 55113 62562 Winter News letter $367.00 --- --- 220-14250-4210 Office Supplies

04/04/14 Impressive Print 1995 Oakcrest AvenueRoseville, MN 55113 62805 Arlington Pascal Brochure, Green Lin Brochure $509.07 $876.07 15861 220-14250-4210 Office Supplies

03/31/14 International Erosiion Control Assoc. 3401 Quebec Street, Suite 3500Denver, CO 80207-2339 2014 Membership 2014 Membership $170.00 $170.00 15862 101-14970-4260 Dues & Publications

03/11/14 Integra Telecom P.O. Box 2966Milwaukee, WI 53201-2966 11826292 Monthly Phone service $558.70 $558.70 15863 101-14970-4320 Utilities

04/08/14 Seitu Jones 629 Kent StreetSt. Paul, MN 55103 Expense Report 1st Qtr Expense Report $700.47 $700.47 15864 101-14970-4000 $675.00


03/28/14 Forrest Kelley 1259 Avon St. N.St. Paul, MN 55117 Expense Report Jan.-March Expense Report $253.51 --- ---

208-14000-4330 $220.19208-14000-4635 $10.00210-14141-4635 $10.00220-14275-4635 $6.66315-14550-4635 $6.66

Staff Expenses

03/28/14 Forrest Kelley 1259 Avon St. N.St. Paul, MN 55117 March Cleaning March Monthly office cleaning $600.00 $853.51 15865 101-14970-4320 Utilities

03/28/14 C Lanphear Design 3715 45th Avenue SouthMinnapolis, MN 55406 0314-01 Design work $603.23 $603.23 15866

101-14970-4430 $175.00220-14275-4430 $50.00220-14250-4430$378.23

Consultants

03/17/14 Marco P.O. Box 790448St. Louise, MO 63179-0448 249528050 Konica Minolta Copier contract $810.10 $810.10 15867 101-14970-4610 Equipment Purchase/Rental/Lease

03/18/14 Marco NW 7128, P.O. Box 1450Minneapolis, MN 55485-7128 1874375 HP contract 3/18/2014-04/17/2014 $21.04 $21.04 15868 101-14970-4610 Equipment Purchase/Rental/Lease

03/24/14 MenardsCapitol One CommercialP.O. Box 5219Carol Stream, IL 60197-5219

3.05906E+14 Office Supplies - mouse traps, trash bags, light bulbs $34.63 $34.63 15869 101-14970-4210 Office Supplies

03/31/14 MetlifeSmall Business CenterP.O. Box 804466Kansas City, Missouri 64180-4466

KM05988320 Employee Benefits - April $591.40 --- --- Various Employee Benefits

03/31/14 MetlifeSmall Business CenterP.O. Box 804466Kansas City, Missouri 64180-4466

Employee Benefits - May $591.40 $1,182.80 15870 April-May 2014 Employee Benefits

03/25/14 Metropolitan ConcilEnvironmental ServiceP.O. Box 856513Minneapolis, MN 55485-6513

1031722 Lab Analysis $12,183.75 $12,183.75 15871211-13210-4450 $3045.94211-13230-4450 $1827.56211-13200-4450 $7310.25

Laboratory Analysis

03/28/14 Midway Ford 2777 North Snelling Ave.Roseville, MN 55113 385101 Tire mount & balance $180.51 $180.51 15872

208-14000-4635 $54.15210-14141-4635 $54.15220-14275-4635 $36.10315-14550-4635 $36.11

Equipment Lease/Purchase

04/04/14 Nelson's 1562 Como Ave.St. Paul, MN 55108 561721 Confined space training $136.63 $136.63 15873 240-14390-4280 Training & Education

04/02/14 Noah & Associates, Inc. 8117 Telgraph RoadBloomington, MN 55438 1477 Job Family Tables $968.75 $968.75 15874 101-14970-4430 Consultants

03/31/14 Pioneer Press 345 Cedar StreetSt. Paul, MN 55101 314424071 Legal Notice for 2014 Mtg Schedule & Workshop $120.60 $120.60 15875 101-14970-4310 Legal Notices

02/28/14 Pitney Bowes P.O. Box 223648Pittsburgh, PA 15250-2648 38926275-May Postage Meter refill funds $1,000.00 $1,000.00 15876 101-14970-4300 Postage

03/28/14 Corey Poland 1410 Energy Park Dr.St. Paul, MN 55108 Expense Report March Expense Report $154.23 $154.23 15877 208-14000-4330 $100.80

211-14200-4330 $53.43 Staff Expenses

02/21/14 Ramsey County - Attorney90 Plato Blvd. WP.O. Box 64097St. Paul, MN 55164-0097

Atty 4649 Attorney Services - Feb. 2014 $2,394.00 $2,394.00 15878 101-14970-4420 Legal Services

04/03/14 Shirley Reider 1725 Fairview Ave. N.Falcon Heights, MN 55113 Expense Report 1st Qtr Expense Report $703.26 $703.26 15879 101-14970-4000 $675.00


02/28/14 Joe Sellner 1410 Energy Park Dr St. Paul MN 55108 Feb. 2014 Feb. Expense Report $20.00 $20.00 15880 211-14200-4330 Staff Expenses

03/04/14 Slate Holdco LLC 4678 World Parkway CircleSt. Louis, MO 63134 Rent Office Rent - May $5,835.00 $5,835.00 15881 101-14970-4220 Office/District Facility Lease/Rent

Report Date 4/16/14



02/20/14 SRF Consulting One Carlson Parkway North, Suite 150Minneapolis, MN 55447-4443 7896.00-9 Lake McCarrons SW BMP CWP $1,019.00 $1,019.00 15882 410-12751-4470 Engineering

02/15/14 StaplesDept. DETP.O. Box 83689Chicago, IL 60696-3689

8029202944 Office Supplies $92.19 $92.19 15883 101-14970-4210 Office Supplies

03/17/14 Techware17850 Kenwood Trail, Suite 216Lakeville, MN 55044 85335 Sage Software $3,000.00 $3,000.00 15884 101-14970-4610 Equipment Purchase/Rental/Lease

02/26/14 Mary Texer 1St. Qtr Expense Report - 1st Qtr 2014 $1,112.72 $1,112.72 15885 101-14970-4000 $1050.00101-14970-4010 $62.72 Manager Per Diem/Expense

03/31/14 Michael Thienes 1St. Qtr Expense Report - 1st Qtr 2014 $725.85 $725.85 15886 101-14970-4000 $675.00101-14970-4010 $50.85 Manager Per Diem/Expense

02/28/14 University of MinnesotaEnvironmental Internship & Career Fair198 McNeal Hall1985 Buford Avenue

5836 Registration for job fair $130.00 $130.00 15887 101-14970-4340 Employee Procurement

02/28/14 US Bank P.O. Box 790408St. Louis, MO 63179-0408 March

Intermedia.net $392.72, Lynda.com $25.00, MN Association $110.00, St. Paul Bagelry $27.97, Kwik Trip $5.97, Amazon $742.03, Credit $93.00 (late fees)

$1,264.69 $1,264.69 15888

101-14970-4210 $471.72101-14970-4210 ($93.00) credit

101-14970-4280 $110.00240-14390-4280 $33.94101-14970-4610 $742.03

Office Supplies/Training/Equipment

02/18/14 Viking Industrial Center 710 Raymond Ave.St. Paul, MN 55114 3012179 Monitoring Equipment $263.75 --- --- 240-14396-4210 Office Supplies

03/06/14 Viking Industrial Center 710 Raymond Ave.St. Paul, MN 55114 3010865 Saftey equipment $385.03 --- --- 240-14396-4610 Equipment Purchase/Rental/Lease

02/18/14 Viking Industrial Center 710 Raymond Ave.St. Paul, MN 55114 3009726B Oxygen Sensor $249.72 --- --- 240-14396-4210 Office Supplies

02/18/14 Viking Industrial Center 710 Raymond Ave.St. Paul, MN 55114 3009740B Safey equipment $9.49 $907.99 15889 240-14396-4210 Office Supplies

03/28/14 Walters P.O. Box 67Circle Pines, MN 55014 703018 Trash/Recycling - March $54.76 $54.76 15890 101-14970-4320 Utilities

02/18/14 Wenck1800 Pioneer Creek CenterP.O. Box 249Maple Plain, MN 55359-0249

11401043 Highland Ravine $2,896.00 --- --- 417-12801-4470 Engineering


11401045 Permit Engineering $4,249.28 --- ---

208-14000-4470 $506.88208-14103-4470 $400.00208-14005-4470 $380.00208-14006-4470 $387.20208-14007-4470 $448.00

208-14008-4470 $1679.20208-14009-4470 $448.00

Engineering


11401044 Permit Program $1,125.00 $8,270.28 15891

208-14004-4470 $600.00208-13022-4470 $225.00208-13029-4470 $75.00

208-13033-4470 $225.00

Engineering

03/18/14 Xcel Energy P.O. Box 9477Minneapolis, MN 55484-9477 March 2014 Electrial Service $508.00 $508.00 15892 101-14970-4320 Utilities

03/01/14 XylemOl CorporationP.O. Box 9010College Station TX 77842-9010

164570 Water Lvl Logger $989.00 $989.00 15893 211-14200-4210 Office Supplies

Approved for Payment:

4/16/2014

$278,719.20

$278,719.20 Michael Thienes, Treasurer Date

Report Date 4/16/14



RECEIPTS

Vendor Name Vendor Address Description Check Amount Check # G/L Code G/L Description

02/28/14 Xcel Energy 414 Nicollet MallMinneapolis, MN 55401 Permit Fee for Pipeline Phase II $2,000.00 875355 208-14010 Permit Fees

03/20/14 Ramsey-Washington Metro Watershed 2665 Noel DriveLittle Canada, MN 55117 Confined Space Training $300.00 66714 240-14390 Miscellaneous Income

03/20/14 State of Minnesota 658 Cedar Street, Suite 400St. Paul, MN 55155-1616 Green Line - Central Corridor $48,484.00 53554592 430-12880 Grant Income

03/31/14 PMA FINANCIAL - 4M Fund7th Floor 2135 City Gate Lane Naperville, IL 60563

Interest Income $67.51 N/A 101-3700 Interest Income

03/24/14 TOTAL $50,851.51

OUTSTANDING INVOICES/CREDITS

03/03/14 All CoveredDept. 33163P.O. Box 39000San Francisco, CA 94139-3163

600491 Monthly Service Fee $1,557.38 $1,557.38 Ended contract - prepaid one month

03/17/14 Techware17850 Kenwood Trail, Suite 216Lakeville, MN 55044 85335 Sage Software $3,051.09 $3,051.09 Only paying 1/2 - not installed

03/11/14 Pitney Bowes Purchase Power 38926275 Credit for returned ink cart. ($53.92) ($53.92) Credit for items returned from old meter

Northern Battery 1326007 Credit RM363478 & RM377567 -credit for core charge ($80.00) ($80.00)


DATE: April 10, 2014 TO: CRWD Board of Managers FROM: Bob Fossum, Water Resource Program Manager SUBJECT: Curtis Pond Improvement Project Background Curtiss Field Pond, located in Falcon Heights, regularly floods during moderate rainfall events which limits the use of the park, park infrastructure, and presents a safety concern for the City. In 2011, the City requested our assistance in determining the causes of the problems and identifying possible solutions to mitigate the flooding. In 2012 the District completed the Curtiss Pond Improvement Project Feasibility Study. The study recommended a project to increase the stormwater storage and infiltration area with in the park. During 2013 and early 2014 the District has been completing final design of the project. Issues District staff reviewed the draft Curtiss Pond Plans, Cost Estimate, and Project Financing with the CAC on April 9, 2014. The CAC offered was supportive of the project and recommended it move forward. District staff will review the project plans, cost estimate, financing, schedule, and maintenance plan with the Managers. Requested Action Approve Curtiss Pond Improvement Project Joint Powers Agreement with Falcons Heights and direct Board President and Administrator to execute the agreement. Approve Curtiss Pond Improvement Project Maintenance MOA with Falcons Heights and direct Board President and Administrator to execute the agreement, subject to the review and approval of the Ramsey County Attorney. Authorize Bidding for the Curtiss Pond Improvement Project. enc: Curtiss Pond Improvement Project Joint Powers Agreement with Falcons Heights Curtiss Pond Improvement Project Maintenance MOU with Falcons Heights

Curtiss Pond Improvement Project Plans Curtiss Pond Improvement Project Cost Estimate Curtiss Pond Improvement Project Financing Plan W:\06 Projects\Curtis Field\Bidding, Contracting\Brd Memo Curtiss Pond 4-10-14.docx

April 16, 2014 Board Meeting V. Action Items, C) Curtiss Pond

Improvement Project

JOINT POWERS AGREEMENT

THIS AGREEMENT is entered into between the Capitol Region Watershed District a Minnesota watershed district established under the authority of Minnesota Statutes Chapter 103D (the CRWD), and the city of Falcon Heights, a municipal corporation under the laws of the State of Minnesota (the City), pursuant to the provisions of Minn. Stat. §103D.335, subd. 2, and §471.59.

Recitals

WHEREAS, the CRWD and the City have been planning to conduct stormwater and flood mitigation improvements to Pond at Curtiss Field by completing the Curtiss Pond Improvement Project (the Project); and WHEREAS, the Project contemplates and includes regrading of the field, installation of an underground storage system and site restoration; and WHEREAS, the Project has been identified in the “Curtiss Pond Improvement Project Feasibility Study” report dated August 28, 2013, and prepared by Houston Engineering, Inc.; and WHEREAS, these constructed improvements are proposed at the Curtiss Field Park adjacent to the Snelling Ave. N. and Idaho Ave. intersection in the city of Falcon Heights, See Exhibit “A”; and WHEREAS, the City and the CRWD have agreed to participate in financing the total cost of the Project, and such participation for the City as is defined herein. NOW, THEREFORE, in consideration of the mutual promises and benefits that each party shall derive herefrom, the parties agree as follows: 1. Purpose. The purpose of this Agreement is to define the funding shares, direction, management and control, contracting, supervision, and liability of the parties in connection with the Project. 2. Funding. Pursuant to estimates prepared by Houston Engineering, Inc. dated April 1, 2014 (See Exhibit “B”) the preliminary estimate of the cost of the Project is $575,600. The CRWD shall be responsible for payment of the sum of $375,600. The City shall pay $200,000, subject to the provisions of paragraph 3. 3. Cost Overrun. In the event actual design and construction costs exceed $575,600, the City shall pay an additional 10%, to a maximum additional contribution of $20,000. Regardless of actual cost, the City’s maximum contribution shall be $220,000. The CRWD shall be responsible for additional costs not paid by the City. 4. Project Management. The CRWD shall manage and direct the Project on its own behalf and on behalf of the City. The CRWD shall cause to be prepared all construction plans and specifications; shall prepare bid specifications and let the Project for public bidding; shall award the construction and

related contracts; shall enter into construction and other contracts on its behalf; and shall direct and manage completion of the Project. The CRWD reserves the right to reject all bids. 5. Extra Work. All extra work orders or substantial changes to the Project made during construction of the Project shall be subject to approval by change order in writing signed by the City and the CRWD prior to such construction. 6. Construction Permits. Each party having jurisdiction for any construction permits or other permits required for construction of the Project agrees to provide those permits, in accordance with applicable law, with no fee or expense made to the Project. 7. Records and Reports/Payment by City. All parties agree to maintain records of costs pertaining to the Project in accordance with Minnesota Statutes and relevant internal record keeping and accounting procedures. Upon completion of the Project, the CRWD will submit a payment request to the City, payable in full within sixty (60) days of the billing date. Completion of the Project will be as determined by the City and the CRWD at a final project walk-through and when all punchlist items have been satisfactorily addressed by the Contractor. 8. Maintenance and Safety During Construction. Work site maintenance and safety will be the responsibility of CRWD and its contractor during the construction project. 9. Employees. It is further agreed that any and all employees of CRWD and all other persons engaged by CRWD in the performance of any work or services required, volunteered, or provided for herein to be performed by CRWD, shall not be considered employees of City, and that any and all claims that may arise under the Worker’s Compensation Act of the State of Minnesota on behalf of said employees while so engaged, and any and all claims made by any third parties as a consequence of any act or omission on the part of said employees while so engaged on any of the work or services provided to be rendered herein, shall in no way be the obligation or responsibility of City. 10. Non-Discrimination. The provisions of Minn. Stat. §181.59, and of any applicable local ordinance relating to Civil Rights and Discrimination, shall be considered a part of this Agreement as if fully set forth herein 11. Indemnification. The City and CRWD agree that liability under this Agreement is controlled by Minn. Stat. §471.59, subd. 1a and that the total liability for the participating cities shall not exceed the limits on governmental liability for a single use of government as specified in §466.04, subd. 1. CRWD agrees to defend, indemnify, and hold harmless City against any and all claims, liability, loss, damage, or expense arising under the provisions of this Agreement and caused by or resulting from negligent acts or omissions of CRWD or those of CRWD’s employees or agents. City agrees to defend, indemnify, and hold harmless CRWD against any and all claims liability, loss, damage, or expense arising under the provisions of this Agreement for which City is responsible and caused by or resulting from negligent acts or omissions of City and or those of City’s employees or agents. Under no circumstances, however, shall a party be required to pay on behalf of itself and the other party any amount in excess of the limits on liability established in Minnesota Statutes, Chapter 466, applicable to any one party. The limits of liability for both parties may not be added together to determine the maximum amount of liability for either party. The intent of this paragraph is to impose on each party a

Page 2 of 6

limited duty to defend and indemnify each other subject to the limits of liability under Minnesota Statutes, Chapter 466. The purpose of creating this duty to defend and indemnify is to simplify the defense of claims by eliminating conflicts among the parties and to permit liability claims against both parties from a single occurrence to be defended by a single attorney. 12. Project Property Ownership. Upon completion of the Project, all infrastructure constructed and all property utilized in connection with the Project shall be the property of the City, and the CRWD shall have no interest in or claim thereto. 13. Term. This Agreement shall be effective as of the last date of signature of the parties below. This Agreement shall expire and be of no further force or effect upon completion of the Project, except that the provisions of paragraphs 7 and 12 shall survive expiration of the Agreement. CAPITOL REGION WATERSHED DISTRICT By: __________________________ Joe Collins, President Date Recommended for Approval: By: __________________________ Mark Doneux, Administrator Date

Page 3 of 6

CITY OF FALCON HEIGHTS BY: Peter Lindstrom, Mayor AND: Bart Fischer, City Administrator/Clerk

STATE OF MINNESOTA ) ) SS COUNTY OF RAMSEY ) The foregoing instrument was acknowledge before me this __ day of _______________, 2014, by Peter Lindstrom and by Bart Fischer, respectively the Mayor and City Administrator/Clerk of the City of Falcon Heights, a Minnesota municipal corporation, on behalf of the corporation and pursuant to the authority granted by its City Council. Notary Public

Page 4 of 6

EXHIBIT A Project Plans for Curtiss Pond Improvement Project

Page 5 of 6

EXHIBIT B Estimated Costs for Construction of Curtiss Pond Improvement Project

Curtiss Pond Improvement Project Costs and Financing 4-1-2014

CostsConstruction, Contingency $424,000Base Engineering (Houston Eng. Inc.) $81,600Design and Installation--OptiRTC (Geosyntec) $70,000

Total $575,600

Financing CRWD $375,600Falcon Heights $200,000

Total $575,600

Page 6 of 6

CONTRACT NO. _________________

MEMORANDUM OF AGREEMENT for

MAINTENANCE OF STORMWATER MANAGEMENT FACILITY AT CURTISS FIELD PARK

AN AGREEMENT, dated this of , 2014, by and

between the CAPITOL REGION WATERSHED DISTRICT hereinafter called the “DISTRICT”, and the CITY OF FALCON HEIGHTS, Minnesota hereinafter called the “CITY”.

WHEREAS, the DISTRICT and the CITY jointly completed installation of a stormwater

management facility at Curtiss Field Park as part of the 2014 Curtiss Pond Improvement Project; and

WHEREAS, the DISTRICT and CITY jointly participated in financing the installation of

the stormwater management facility and have considerable vested interest in the proper long-term operation and maintenance of the facility; and

WHEREAS, the DISTRICT and the CITY desire to enter into an agreement to maintain

constructed stormwater management facilities to ensure timely and efficient operation and maintenance of the facilities; and

NOW, THEREFORE, in consideration of the mutual terms and conditions hereinafter set forth, the DISTRICT and the CITY agree as follows:

SECTION 1. Definitions a) Stormwater Management Facility means the devices constructed as a part of the

Curtiss Pond Improvement Project. SECTION 2. DISTRICT Obligations The DISTRICT shall maintain, in working

condition and in accordance with the manufacturer’s recommended schedule of long term maintenance activities, all improvements associated with the Inlet Manhole and Opti-RTC infrastructure, including, the stop logs, valve, actuator motor, level probes, electrical service, telephone service, and control panel.

SECTION 3. CITY Obligations The CITY shall maintain all improvements installed as part of the Curtiss Pond Improvement Project, with the exception of the improvements identified as District obligations in Section 2, in working condition and in accordance with the schedule of long term maintenance activities agreed to, as follows:

a) Maintain all stormwater management facilities as necessary to preserve the integrity

and intended function of the facility, and where applicable in accordance with the recommendations of the State of Minnesota Stormwater Manual, or as amended.

1 of 2

SECTION 4. Entire Agreement It is understood and agreed that this Agreement constitutes the entire Agreement between the parties, and that it supersedes all oral agreements and negotiations between the parties relating to the subject matters hereof. This Agreement may be amended only by written agreement of the parties.

IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the parties hereto have executed this Agreement, the day and year first above written. CITY OF FALCON HEIGHTS, MINNESOTA CAPITOL REGION WATERSHED DISTRICT By By _______________________________

Peter Lindstrom, Mayor Joe Collins, President By By_______________________________ Bart Fischer, Administrator Mark Doneux, Administrator Approved as to form: Approved as to form: _______________________________ City Attorney Assistant Ramsey County Attorney Legal Counsel for Capitol Region Watershed District

2 of 2

Houston

Houston

Houston

Houston

HoustonEngineering Inc.

Houston

ENGINEERING COST ESTIMATE

CURTISS POND PROJECT1‐Apr‐14

Item Item Description Unit Quantity Unit Price Total Price

2021.501 MOBILIZATION LUMP SUM 1 15,000.00$ 15,000.00$ 2101.618 REMOVE SHRUBS SQ FT 100 5.00$ 500.00$ 2104.503 SAW CUT AND REMOVE CONCRETE WALK SQ FT 1162 1.25$ 1,452.50$ 2104.602 SALVAGE AND REINSTALL DISABLED PARKING SIGN EACH 1 500.00$ 500.00$ 2105.501 COMMON EXCAVATION (CV)(P) CU YD 3900 8.00$ 31,200.00$ 2105.607 HAUL AND DISPOSAL SOIL (LV) CU YD 3000 10.00$ 30,000.00$ 2015.525 TOPSOIL BORROW CU YD 170 25.00$ 4,250.00$ 2015.525 CLAY BORROW FOR CLAY PLUG CU YD 4 30.00$ 120.00$ 2015.535 PLACE SALVAGED TOPSOIL (P) CU YD 253 4.00$ 1,012.00$ 2105.601 WATER CONTROL LUMP SUM 1 5,000.00$ 5,000.00$ 2211.503 AGGREGATE BASE (LV) (CLASS 5) CU YD 30 25.00$ 750.00$ 2451.607 0.75" ‐ 2" WASHED ROCK FOR DETENTION SYSTEM (P) CU YD 1330 35.00$ 46,550.00$ 2501.515 24" RC PIPE APRON EACH 1 850.00$ 850.00$ 2503.511 24" CS PIPE SEWER LIN FT 4 70.00$ 280.00$ 2503.511 24" RC PIPE SEWER LIN FT 8 45.00$ 360.00$ 2506.601 CMP DETENTION SYSTEM LUMP SUM 1 189,000.00$ 189,000.00$ 2506.602 WATER CONTROL STRUCTURE EACH 1 16,000.00$ 16,000.00$ 2511.515 GEOTEXTILE FABRIC, NON WOVEN SQ YD 1300 5.00$ 6,500.00$ 2521.501 4" CONCRETE WALK SQ FT 1523 3.50$ 5,330.50$ 2557.501 TEMPORARY 6FT CHAIN‐LINK FENCE LIN FT 495 15.00$ 7,425.00$ 2557.517 TEMPORARY 12FT VEHICULAR GATE W/LOCK EACH 1 750.00$ 750.00$ 2563.602 TRAFFIC CONTROL LUMP SUM 1 5,000.00$ 5,000.00$ 2564.537 PROJECT SIGN EACH 2 1,500.00$ 3,000.00$ 2573.502 SILT FENCE, TYPE PA LIN FT 110 3.50$ 385.00$ 2573.505 SILT FENCE , TYPE TB LIN FT 85 20.00$ 1,700.00$ 2573.535 STABILIZED CONSTRUCTION EXIT LUMP SUM 1 1,500.00$ 1,500.00$ 2574.604 SOIL BED PREPARATION SQ YD 2320 0.50$ 1,160.00$ 2575.502 COVER CROP SEED MIXTURE 21‐112 POUND 48 4.00$ 192.00$ 2575.502 SEED MIXTURE 25‐151 POUND 58 4.00$ 232.00$ 2575.563 HYDRAULIC MATRIX, FIBER BONDED HYDRO‐MULCH SQ YD 2190 0.85$ 1,861.50$ 2575.523 EROSION CONTROL BLANKET CATEGORY 2 SQ YD 130 4.00$ 520.00$ 2575.530 INLET PROTECTION EACH 1 500.00$ 500.00$ 3803.501 4" PVC SCH. 80 ELECTRIC CONDUIT LIN FT 16 20.00$ 320.00$

SUBTOTAL BASE BID 379,200.50$

10% CONTINGENCY 37,920.05$

TOTAL BASE BID 417,120.55$

Bid Alternate #1

2557.501 4FT CHAIN‐LINK FENCE LIN FT 522 10.00$ 5,220.00$ 2557.517 8FT VEHICULAR GATE W/LOCK EACH 3 600.00$ 1,800.00$

SUBTOTAL ALTERNATIVE #1 7,020.00$

Bid Alternate #2

2104.501 REMOVE EXISTING CHAIN‐LINK FENCE LIN FT 80 5.00$ 400.00$ 2104.503 REMOVE BITUMINOUS SQ FT 1610 1.67$ 2,688.70$ 2104.503 SAW CUT AND REMOVE CONCRETE WALK SQ FT 166 1.25$ 207.50$ 2104.509 REMOVE BASKETBALL HOOP EACH 1 500.00$ 500.00$ 2015.525 TOPSOIL BORROW CU YD 30 25.00$ 750.00$ 2574.604 SOIL BED PREPARATION SQ YD 200 0.50$ 100.00$ 2575.502 COVER CROP SEED MIXTURE 21‐112 POUND 5 4.00$ 20.00$ 2575.502 SEED MIXTURE 25‐151 POUND 5 4.00$ 20.00$ 2575.563 HYDRAULIC MATRIX, FIBER BONDED HYDRO‐MULCH SQ YD 200 0.85$ 170.00$

SUBTOTAL ALTERNATIVE #2 4,856.20$

Curtiss Pond Improvement Project Costs and Financing 4-1-2014

CostsConstruction, Contingency $424,000Base Engineering (Houston Eng. Inc.) $81,600Design and Installation--OptiRTC (Geosyntec) $70,000

Total $575,600

Financing CRWD $375,600Falcon Heights $200,000

Total $575,600




FROM: Mark Doneux

RE: Approve CRWD 2013 Annual Report

Background

All metropolitan watershed management organizations are required to annually submit to the

Minnesota Board of Water and Soil Resources (BWSR) an Activity Report, Financial Report

and Financial Audit.

Issues

Attached is the Draft CRWD 2013 Annual Report. Upon Board approval and the receipt of

Financial Audit documents, staff will submit the Annual Report to BWSR. A draft Annual

Report will be submitted to BWSR by April 30, 2014 to comply with 8410 requirements.

Request Action

Approve the Draft CRWD 2013 Annual Report for submission to BWSR.

enc: Draft CRWD 2013 Annual Report

W:\07 Programs\Edu-Outreach\Communication\Annual Report 2013\BM Approve 2013_Annual Report.docx

April 16, 2014 Board Meeting

V. Action Items – D) Approve

2013 Annual Report (Doneux)

CAPITOL REGION WATERSHED DISTRICT

2013A N N U A L R E P O R T

DRAFT

2 | C A P I T O L R E G I O N W A T E R S H E D D I S T R I C T A N N U A L R E P O R T 2 0 1 3

Dear community stakeholders: April 2014

Board Managers and staff of Capitol Region Watershed District (CRWD) would like to share a review of the past

year’s accomplishments, the Capitol Region Watershed District 2013 Annual Report.

2013 was another excellent year for CRWD. Improvement projects were completed on the Trout Brook

Stormwater Interceptor, which was transferred to CRWD from Metropolitan Council in 2006. CRWD’s

Permitting Program completed its eighth year. In 2013, 36 permit applications were received and processed. Of

the 210 acres covered in the applications, approximately 82 of those acres were impervious surfaces on which

stormwater runoff is treated to the 1” standard specified in CRWD’s Watershed Rules.

In 2013, CRWD operated 50 monitoring stations including 16 flow and water quality sites, five flow logger sites,

20 level loggers, seven rain gauges and two grab sample sites. Four of the flow and water quality monitoring

sites are located at major CRWD subwatershed outlets to the Mississippi River.

The completion of green infrastructure practices on the Metropolitan Council’s Green Line signified an impor-

tant milestone in water quality protection partnership in an urban transit corridor. With financial assistance

from State of Minnesota Clean Water Fund, project partners Metropolitan Council, CRWD, City of Saint Paul and

Ramsey County built a tree trench, rain gardens and stormwater planters to reduce stormwater pollution in the

light rail transit corridor.

In 2013, construction began on Trout Brook Nature Sanctuary, a 41-acre site on Saint Paul’s East Side that

will include special water quality features. CRWD is also a partner with the City of Saint Paul’s Inspiring

Communities Program, which leverages grant funds to acquire and redevelop foreclosed properties. The City

requested CRWD’s assistance to create stormwater plans that minimize runoff and improve aesthetics on

those properties. CRWD also assisted with the installation of 80 boulevard rain gardens in Hamline Midway and

Macalester Groveland neighborhoods in partnership with City of Saint Paul Department of Public Works as they

carried out their annual Residential Street Vitality Program (RSVP) street reconstruction.

Board Managers, Citizen Advisory Committee members and staff said goodbye to trusted colleagues in 2013

when former manager Marylyn Deneen passed away in January, former manager Mary Jo Murray passed away

in March, CRWD Citizen Advisory Committee member Jerome Wagner passed away in June and former Board

President Bob Piram passed away in September. We recall with gratitude their years of dedicated service.

More details of our accomplishments follow in this report. For this successful year, CRWD Board of Managers

would like to express appreciation to CRWD’s Citizen Advisory Committee, Saint Paul District Planning Councils,

the cities of Saint Paul, Falcon Heights, Maplewood, Roseville, and Lauderdale, Ramsey County, Ramsey

Conservation District and most importantly, the citizens of CRWD for their continued support in helping

improve our water quality.

Respectfully,

Joe Collins, President Mark Doneux, Administrator

Letter to Stakeholders

2 0 1 3 A N N U A L R E P O R T C A P I T O L R E G I O N W A T E R S H E D D I S T R I C T | 3

Contents

1410 Energy Park Drive • Suite 4Saint Paul, Minnesota 55108651.644.8888 • fax 651.644.8894www.capitolregionwd.org

Great River Greening provides expert planting support.

Letter to Stakeholders ............................. inside cover

Our Organization ........................................................... 4

District Map .................................................................. 6

Our People .........................................................................7

Recognition ...................................................................... 8

Our Work

CRWD Water Resources ........................................ 10

Trout Brook Storm Sewer Interceptor ................ 17

Watershed Rules and Permitting .........................18

Education and Outreach ........................................20

Stewardship and Partner Grants ......................... 24

Inspiring Communities Program ..........................27

Stormwater Quality Monitoring .......................... 28

BMP Maintenance and Monitoring ....................30

Green Line .....................................................................32

Finance Summary ......................................................... 34

Our Plans

2013 Year in Review .................................................. 35

2014 Workplan ............................................................ 39

Appendix A: Financial Statement and Audit

Appendix B: Printed Materials

Appendix C: BWSR Annual Report Compliance

Crosby Lake.Cover: Lake McCarrons.

DRAFT


Our Organization

Mission To protect, manage and improve the water resources of Capitol Region

Watershed District.

Vision Capitol Region Watershed District achieves cleaner waters through

strategic initiatives and partnerships, using:

• research-based, informed decision making,

• effective water quality rules and

• education and outreach to promote changed attitudes toward

water quality stewardship.

What is a Watershed District?

A watershed district is a special purpose unit of local government in charge

of managing water resources within designated watershed boundaries.

Watershed districts work to protect and improve water quality in the lakes,

rivers and wetlands, and to protect residents against flooding.

Because Minnesota is the Land of 10,000 Lakes, it was one of the very first

states to establish watershed districts as legal entities through the Minnesota

Watershed Act of 1955. Minnesota has 48 watershed districts, including 13

in the metro area, all working to protect our lakes, streams, wetlands and

natural habitat.

All of CRWD drains to the Mississippi River.


Our Organization

Background

Capitol Region Watershed District (CRWD) originated

from a small group of dedicated citizens who wanted

to protect Como Lake. They petitioned the State of

Minnesota Board of Water and Soil Resources (BWSR)

to create a new watershed district, and in 1998 CRWD

was formed. CRWD is a special purpose local unit of

government created to manage and protect part of

the Mississippi River Basin, along with the lakes and

wetlands that drain to the river.

CRWD covers 40 square miles and includes portions of

the cities of Falcon Heights, Lauderdale, Maplewood,

Roseville and Saint Paul. Located within Ramsey

County, it has a population of 225,000. CRWD

drains to the Mississippi River, also its primary water

resource. Como Lake, Crosby Lake, Loeb Lake and Lake

McCarrons are also located in the District.

A Board of five managers appointed by the Ramsey

County Board of Commissioners guides the work

of CRWD. Meetings are held on the first and third

Wednesdays of the month and are open to the public.

Officers are elected at the annual meeting, which is

generally held in December. CRWD works with other

government units, partner cities and neighboring

watershed districts to protect, manage and improve

surface water and groundwater. District staff also

undertakes and cooperates on studies and projects

to protect and improve lakes, wetlands and the

Mississippi River.

The District’s 2010 Watershed Plan was adopted on

September 1, 2010. The plan is the blueprint for the

work of CRWD and includes goals and objectives,

watershed data, standards, priorities and implemen-

tation plans for CRWD until 2020. The plan is available

at capitolregionwd.org.

Finances

State statutes 103B and 103D provide watershed

districts the authority to levy property taxes and

this amount is included on property tax statements.

A budget is developed annually and approved after

comments are received and a public hearing is held.

The funds received through the property tax levy can

be used for projects, grants, programs and adminis-

tration as recommended in the Watershed Plan. More

specific information on CRWD’s finances and a copy

of the 2013 Financial Statement and Audit can be

found in Appendix A.

Pier at Como Lake.


Lauderdale

Roseville

St. Paul

LakeMcCarrons

Como Lake

LoebLake

CrosbyLake

Mississippi R

iver

Mississippi River

Maplewood

TROUT BROOKCOMO

CROSBY

ST. ANTHONY PARK

DAVERN

ST. ANTHONY HILL

MISSISSIPPI RIVER BLVDEAST KITTSONDALE

PHALEN CREEK

DOWNTOWN

MCCARRONS LAKE

WEST KITTSONDALEURBAN

WEST SEVENTH

GOODRICHWESTERN

HIDDEN FALLS

0 10.5Miles

I

FalconHeights

94

35E

Major Waterbodies

Parks

CRWD

Subwatersheds

Major Highways

Falcon Heights

Lauderdale

Maplewood

Roseville

St. Paul

District Map

Capitol Region Watershed District is home to more than 225,000 people and the land area contains 42% impervious surfaces.

Our Organization


Our People

Board of ManagersCRWD is led by a five-person Board of Managers that guides the implementation of goals and objectives

set forth in the CRWD Watershed Management Plan. Board Managers are appointed by the Ramsey County

Board of Commissioners and serve a three-year term.

Citizen Advisory Committee StaffMark Doneux, Administrator

Elizabeth Beckman, Education Coordinator

Gustavo Castro, Water Resource Specialist

Anna Eleria, Water Resource Specialist

Bob Fossum, Water Resource Project Manager

Forrest Kelley, Permit Coordinator

Corey Poland, Water Resource Technician

Britta Suppes, Monitoring Coordinator

Michelle Sylvander, Office Manager

Lindsay VanPatten, Education & Administrative Assistant

Nate Zwonitzer, Urban BMP Specialist

Staff can be contacted by email at

[email protected].

The Citizen Advisory Committee (CAC) assists CRWD Board of Managers with organizational development and strengthens connections between CRWD and its citizens. Meetings are held the second Wednesday of each month and are open to the public. 2013 members are:

David Arbeit; co-chair, Bill Barton, Pat Byrne, Janna Caywood, Steven Duerre, Michael MacDonald, Ted McCaslin*, Kathryn Swanson, Michael Trojan, Michelle Ulrich, Jerome Wagner, Richard Weil, Gwen Willems; co-chair

* At-large CAC member.

Shirley Reider1725 Fairview Ave N Falcon Heights, MN [email protected]

Joe Collins, President534 W Orange StSaint Paul, MN 55117joe.collins@ ci.stpaul.mn.us

Michael Thienes, Treasurer284 S McCarrons BlvdRoseville, MN 55113mthienes@ comcast.net

Seitu Jones, Secretary629 Kent StSaint Paul, MN 55103seitu.jones@ comcast.net

Mary Texer, Education/ Information113 Farrington StSaint Paul, MN [email protected]

Seasonal Water Resource Technicians David DePaz, Stephanie Herbst, Joe Sellner

Interns Lisa Hu, Amanda Wareham, Marlys Mandaville,

Samantha Varela

2013 Consultant EngineersBarr Engineering 4700 77th St | Minneapolis, MN 55435

Emmons & Olivier Resources, Inc. 651 Hale Ave N | Oakdale, MN 55128

HDR Engineering, Inc. 701 Xenia Ave S | Minneapolis, MN 55416

HR Green and Associates 2550 University Ave W, Ste 400N | Saint Paul MN 55114

Houston Engineering, Inc. 6901 E Fish Lake Rd, Ste 140 | Maple Grove MN 55369

SRF Consulting Group, Inc. One Carlson Pkwy, Ste 150 | Minneapolis, MN 55447

Wenck Associates 1800 Pioneer Creek Center | Maple Plain, MN 55359


Recognitions

Recognition

At CRWD’s 2013 Annual Meeting in December,

Mike Thienes was recognized for 15 years of

continuous service as a Board Manager. Mike

has also served as Board Treasurer during his

entire tenure.

Bob Fossum was recognized as Employee of

the Year in 2013 for ten years of service and his

work on many of the District’s integral projects.

MAWD awards

City of Saint Paul and CRWD’s Neighborhood

Stabilization Program wins Program of the Year

from the Minnesota Association of Watershed

Districts. See page 27 for program details.

Bob Piram, Board

Manager 2000-2013,

Board President 2001-2011

Mary Jo Murray, Board

Manager 2000-2005

Jerome Wagner, Citizen

Advisory Committee

Member 1998-2013

Marylyn Deneen,

Board Manager

2000-2011

In Remembrance

Board Managers and staff said goodbye to trusted

colleagues in 2013 when former manager Marylyn

Deneen passed away in January, former manager

Mary Jo Murray passed away in March, CRWD

Citizen Advisory Committee member Jerome Wagner

passed away in June and former Board President Bob

Piram passed away in September. We recall with

gratitude their years of dedicated service.

Mike Thienes with Administrator Doneux.

CRWD Board President presents Bob Fossum with the award.


Recognitions

LID conference participants

LID conference tour of Como BMPs

National Conferences

Staff members from CRWD have had the

privilege to present projects and work of the

district at multiple national conferences.

International Low Impact Development Symposium: Saint Paul, Minnesota August 18-21, 2013

CRWD Administrator Mark Doneux delivered

the opening remarks for the conference.

Britta Suppes, 2013.

Monitoring Methods for LID Practices for

Performance and Pollutant Removal.

Bob Fossum, 2013.

Urban Stormwater BMP Performance

and Cost-Effectiveness: The Arlington

Pascal Project.

Forrest Kelly, Anna Eleria, 2013.

Green Infrastructure for the Central

Corridor Light Rail Transit Project.

Anna Eleria CRWD, Roxanne Young, Saint

Paul Department of Planning and Economic

Development, 2013.

Redefining the Affordable Housing

Landscape: Linking Neighborhood

Stabilization with Stormwater Management.

WEFTEC 2013 Conference: Chicago, Illinois October 6-9, 2013

Bob Fossum, 2013.

Quantifying Gross solids and phosphorous

loads captured by Stormwater BMP

Pretreatment devices.

Forrest Kelley, 2013.

Green Infrastructure for the Central

Corridor Light Rail Transit Project.

1 0 | C A P I T O L R E G I O N W A T E R S H E D D I S T R I C T A N N U A L R E P O R T 2 0 1 3

Our Work

CRWD Water Resources

The water resources located in CRWD all eventually

discharge to the Mississippi River. The four major lakes

in CRWD are Como Lake, Crosby Lake and Loeb Lake

in Saint Paul, and Lake McCarrons in Roseville. All four

lakes serve important recreational needs for CRWD

residents and visitors, including fishing, boating and

swimming. Ramsey County conducts water quality

monitoring of the lakes in CRWD.

Groundwater below the surface of the District

provides non-drinking water for businesses and

institutions in Ramsey County. Few natural wetlands

in the District remain because they were removed or

altered during urbanization and development over the

past century. Woodview Marsh located off Larpenteur

Avenue in Roseville, Willow Reserve located off

Maryland Avenue in Saint Paul, and Villa Park wetland

located northwest of Lake McCarrons in Roseville are

the largest tracts of wetlands in the District.

Como Lake

Located in the City of Saint Paul, Como Lake is a rela-

tively shallow (approximately 16 feet deep), 72-acre

lake located in a highly urbanized watershed. Como

Lake and its associated parkland are a major regional

recreational amenity within the metro. The lake drains

1,680 acres of land in Saint Paul, Roseville and Falcon

Heights.

Nonpoint source or stormwater runoff is the most

serious threat to the water quality of Como Lake

because it carries excessive quantities of nutrients,

specifically phosphorus and sediment, to the lake.

Como Lake does not meet water quality standards for

nutrients and is therefore listed as an impaired water

body by the Minnesota Pollution Control Agency.

In 2002, CRWD developed a strategic management

plan that describes water-related issues facing the

lake and identifies the management strategies and

Arlington-Pascal Stormwater Improvement Project

Algae overgrowth in Como Lake has caused problems

with water clarity and quality, and has periodically

created an unpleasant odor in the area around the

lake. Elsewhere in the Como Lake watershed,

excessive stormwater runoff caused local flooding

problems. CRWD, along with the cities of Saint Paul,

Falcon Heights and Roseville, and Ramsey County,

have worked cooperatively to evaluate, design,

construct and fund several stormwater facilities

to address these problems. The Arlington-Pascal

Stormwater Improvement Project has resulted in a

number of important and effective efforts including

rain gardens, infiltration trenches, a large under-

ground infiltration/storage facility, a regional storm-

water pond and storm drain improvements. Como Lake algae blooms, August 2010.

2 0 1 3 A N N U A L R E P O R T C A P I T O L R E G I O N W A T E R S H E D D I S T R I C T | 1 1

Our Work


implementation activities to address the priority

issues. This plan serves CRWD, the City of Saint Paul

and other partners to guide projects that will improve

Como Lake. The plan identified four priority areas of

concern: water quality, aesthetics, recreation/lake use

and natural resources. One of the key management

goals from the plan is to reduce phosphorus loading

of the lake by 60%.

Loeb Lake

Loeb Lake is a nine-acre lake with an average

depth of nine feet and maximum depth of 28 feet.

It is located in Marydale Park, at the intersection

of Maryland Avenue and Dale Street in Saint Paul.

Loeb Lake is stocked with fish and is included in

the Minnesota Department of Natural Resources,

Fishing in the Neighborhood program sites. The most

common species found in the lake is bluegill. Water

quality is considered generally very good given its

Fishing off the dock at Loeb Lake.

location in a highly urbanized subwatershed. While

nutrients are relatively low to moderate year-round,

they are a pollutant of concern.

In 2009, the CRWD Board approved the Loeb Lake-

Willow Reserve Management Plan which defines the

critical water-related issues of Loeb Lake and recom-

mends management goals and implementation activi-

ties to address these issues. The Plan also considers

goals and activities for Willow Reserve — a wetland

and wildlife preserve located just northeast of

Loeb Lake.

Crosby Lake

Crosby Lake is located within the floodplain of the

Mississippi River and is part of a complex of wetland

and forested areas associated with the Mississippi

River Valley. Crosby Lake is 48 acres in size with a

maximum depth of 19 feet. Because the lake receives

only a small amount of local drainage, the lake’s

Como Lake in winter.


Our Work

water quality has generally been good with very

good lake clarity, however, in recent years its water

quality has slightly declined. CRWD analyzes the lake

monitoring data collected by Ramsey County and

identifies concerns and trends in the lake’s health in

our annual Monitoring report. The land surrounding

Crosby Lake, collectively known as Crosby Farm

Regional Park, is managed by the City of Saint Paul

Parks and Recreation Department and is a part of the

National Park Service’s Mississippi National River and

Recreation Area.

In 2012, CRWD completed the development of a

management plan for Crosby Lake. The Plan includes

management goals and implementation projects

and activities to achieve those goals. The plan was

reviewed by both technical and citizen adivisory

groups and was then approved by CRWD Board in

2012. Partial funding for this project was provided by

Minnesota Clean Water Partnership Program.

Lake McCarrons

Starting in 2008, CRWD partnered with Ramsey

Conservation District (RCD) to design and construct

restored shorelines along Lake McCarrons in Roseville.

By the end of 2013, 14 lakeshore residents with eroding

shorelines completed restoration projects with joint

cost-share funds from CRWD, BWSR and RCD. Nearly

1,900 ft. of shoreline with an area of 41,400 ft2 has

been restored. A 2009 program participant whose

project boasts nearly 600 ft. of shoreline and a 20,000

ft2 planting area annually hosts organizations and

gardening groups for tours and education about

shoreline restoration.

A restored shoreline on Lake McCarrons in Roseville.



Our Work


Villa Park Management Plan

In 2009, CRWD completed the Villa Park Wetland

Management Plan, which identified reasons why the

system was not reducing nutrient loading to Lake

McCarrons as originally designed. The Plan deter-

mined actions to improve the system’s capacity

to remove nutrient loading and recommended a

duel approach: 1) remove sediment in the wetland

system to restore treatment capacity and 2) increase

treatment in the subwatershed that drains to the Villa

Park Wetland.

The District was awarded a $430,000 loan from the

State of Minnesota to complete sediment removal

from the wetland treatment cells. Work began on

the project in July 2011 with a preliminary engineering

study to determine sediment volume, contami-

nant levels and dredging method. Final design and

financing of the project was completed in late 2012

and the dredging project was completed via hydraulic

dredging during summer 2013. The project removed

17,360 cubic yards of sediment from three cells within

Villa Park Wetland. The sediment was pumped into

geotextile tubes that allowed water to seep out and

drain back to the wetland. A total of 12,762 cubic yards

was hauled away and disposed of.

Approximately, 75% of the sediment

was disposed of in a certified landfill

because it exceeded Level 3 thresh-

olds for elevated amounts of polyaro-

matic hydrocarbons. The rest of the

sediment was categorized as Level

2 and as such was able to be reused

on industrial sites. Total cost for the

project (including construction and

engineering) was $1,397,480. CRWD

financed approximately $1,000,000

of the project and the City of Roseville

contributed $400,000.

A hydraulic dredge removes sediment from the wetland.

Captured sediment was hauled away to nearby landfills.

In April 2012, CRWD received a $275,000 grant from

the Minnesota Pollution Control Agency to conduct a

subwatershed analysis to locate, design and construct

a volume reduction practice within the drainage area

upstream of the Villa Park Wetland System. The project

will help to reduce the frequency that the wetland

system needs to be dredged and reduce the pollutant

load and volume of water entering the already under-

sized Villa Park Wetland System. During 2013, CRWD

completed the preliminary engineering study and will

complete final engineering in 2014, with construction

planned for 2015.


Our Work


Erosion damage on Highland Ravine.

Highland Ravine

Since 2007, CRWD has partnered with the City of Saint

Paul to address flooding and sedimentation problems

from the Highland Ravine in central Saint Paul.

Highland Ravine is a 50-acre woodland bluff area that

has been incised with gullies over time. The bluff is a

naturally steep escarpment that rises from Lexington

Avenue up to Edgcumbe Road with residential proper-

ties residing at its top and base and City of Saint Paul

parkland to the south. Gullies have formed in the bluff

in response to hydrologic changes associated with

urban development that has occurred near the top of

the bluff. During precipitation events, runoff is trans-

ported downslope through the gullies causing severe

erosion. Subsequently, residential properties at the base

of the bluff frequently experience property damage

from floodwater and sediment discharging from the

gullies. In addition, sediment-laden stormwater is

conveyed to the Saint Paul storm sewer system which

discharges to the Mississippi River.

In response to concerns raised by citizens regarding

property damages from gully erosion, CRWD completed

the Highland Ravine Stabilization/Restoration

Feasibility Study in spring 2011. Based on the results

from this study, several strategies were recommended

to stabilize and restore the ravine area to alleviate

flooding, sedimentation, and pollutant loading.

In 2011, CRWD received a 2012 Clean Water Fund -

Clean Water Assistance Grant for $150,000 from BWSR

to implement recommendations from the feasibility

study. In 2012 and 2013, CRWD designed the ravine

stabilization project in two ravine areas – north ravine

which is all within private residential property and

south ravine which is located primarily on City parkland.

The stabilization practices include rock grade control

structures to slow down runoff, brush bundles or other

slope stabilization features, and a stormwater pond in

the north ravine to detain runoff and allow sediment

to settle out before runoff discharges to the local

storm sewer system. Construction of the stabiliza-

tion practices will occur during summer/fall 2014. It is

estimated that the implementation of this project will

reduce total sediment loads by 11.5 tons/annually and

total phosphorus loads by 91 lbs/annually.


Our Work


Trout Brook Nature Sanctuary

A dominant theme in CRWD’s 2010 Watershed Plan is

“Bring Water Back to Saint Paul.” The value of recon-

necting the residents of Saint Paul with the water

resources that flow around them and beneath their

streets is reflected in many of the CRWD programs

— from education programs that aim to bring water

back into the consciousness of people to physical

restoration and enhancement initiatives that will

literally restore flow to streams long buried in storm

sewers. Among the specific goals highlighted in the

Watershed Management Plan is to “identify opportu-

nities to restore portions of historic streams of CRWD

by providing surface flow where water is currently

conveyed through an underground pipe.”

The Trout Brook Nature Sanctuary presents an

excellent opportunity to begin realizing this goal and

building support for expanded restoration efforts in

the city. This 41-acre site sits close to the middle of

where Trout Brook formerly flowed.

In the summer of 2013, project construction began and

by the end of the year the was about 75% complete. In

2014, construction will be completed and the park will

open to visitors in 2015.

An analysis of alternative sources of water was

conducted and included several options for routing

stormwater runoff from nearby watersheds to the

site. It was determined that pumping water from the

Trout Brook Storm Sewer Interceptor (TBI) to the

north end of the Trout Brook site would provide base

flow to the stream. This water would be augmented

during and after storm events with treated storm-

water runoff from the Hatch Agate neighborhood

west of the site. Water features include a small

stream, three stormwater treatment complexes and

an enhanced pond where the Sims Agate stormwater

pond is located. The stream will begin at the northern

end of the site and will have a base width of 6-7 ft,

with a floodplain bench on each side and options

for unpaved footpaths near the stream. Due to site

constraints, the stream will have very mild sinuosity

for most of the reach but will become very sinuous

at the lower end of the site before reaching the Sims

Agate pond.

Water will enter the stormwater management

systems from the neighborhood west of the site and

pass through a system of settling ponds, filtration

systems and wetlands before entering the stream.

In addition to improving water quality, goals for the

project are to make Sims Agate Pond safer and more

attractive for recreation and to improve wildlife

habitat. The routing of higher quality water from

Arlington Jackson pond to this pond and treating

stormwater from the Hatch Agate neighborhood

prior to entering the Sims Agate pond will create

greater capacity for ecological function and diversity.

Enhancements to the pond include a broader

emergent vegetation zone that will also function as

a safety bench to prevent people from accidentally

falling into deep areas, and greater depth diversity

throughout the pond to increase habitat diversity for a

variety fish, birds, reptiles and amphibians.

Trout Brook Nature Sanctuary during construction.


Our Work

Curtiss Pond Improvement Project

Curtiss Field Park flooded.

For several years, Curtiss Field Park in Falcon Heights

has experienced periodic flooding when the pond

within the park overflows. The pond drains an area of

Falcon Heights and Snelling Avenue but has no outlet

so all water draining to the pond must infiltrate into

the ground. Over the past several years the infiltration

capacity of the pond has decreased. This has resulted

in flooding of the park and threatened flooding to

adjacent properties.

During 2013, CRWD in partnership with the City of

Falcon Heights completed the final design of the

Curtiss Pond Improvement Project. The project will

install a large infiltration facility underneath the

field adjacent to Curtiss Pond. This will increase

the storage, infiltration footprint and long-term

reliability of water management and thereby reduce

flood frequency and flood elevations at the park.

Construction for the project is planned for fall 2014.


Our Work

Trout Brook Storm Sewer Interceptor

CRWD owns, operates and maintains the Trout Brook

Storm Sewer Interceptor (TBI), which consists of 6.5

miles of pipes that drain 5,054 acres from the cities of

Saint Paul, Roseville, Falcon Heights and Maplewood.

In 2011, during the preliminary design process of

Minnesota Department of Transportation’s (MnDOT)

reconstruction of Interstate I-35E, it was determined

that a portion of the existing TBI was in conflict with

the proposed I-35E bridge piers and needed to be

moved by the middle of 2013. The new Trout Brook

alignment involves abandoning 630 feet of existing TBI

pipe and replacing it with 830 feet of new 12’ x 9’ box

culvert and a new TBI railroad crossing.

The first phase of the project was completed in 2012,

which included installation of 560 feet of new storm

sewer sections and the new TBI railroad crossing. Prior

to construction, groundwater levels were lowered to

establish dry conditions for excavating and installing

TBI. The tracks were monitored for movement prior

to, during and after construction to ensure that the

railroad would not subside or be structurally damaged.

During Phase 2 in 2013, transition segments were

constructed at both ends of the new interceptor

segment to connect it with the old tunnel. During

construction of the new segments, stormwater from

the rest of Trout Brook Storm Sewer was diverted

from the construction area.

Cast-in-place tunnel sections connected the new

760-foot segment with the existing Trout Brook

storm-sewer interceptor. Once completed, the old

storm sewer segment was demolished or abandoned

using sand and concrete.

Stormwater Pollution Prevention Program

2013 was the sixth year of implementation of CRWD’s

Stormwater Pollution Prevention Program (SWPPP), a

federal and state requirement for controlling storm-

water discharges from urbanized areas. CRWD’s

comprehensive, multi-faceted program involves

six minimum control measures to improve water

quality and minimize stormwater runoff: education

and outreach, public involvement, illicit discharge

detection and elimination, construction site erosion

and sedimentation control, post-construction storm-

water management and pollution prevention/good

housekeeping of municipal operations. Highlights of

the program in 2013 included and partnering with

the City of Saint Paul’s Public Works Department to

construct boulevard rain gardens as part of its street

reconstruction projects.

Trout Brook pipe realignment.

Old and new segment of Trout Brook Storm Sewer during realignment.


Our Work

Watershed Rule Adoption

In 2002, CRWD adopted Development Review

Criteria addressing stormwater runoff control, flood

protection, wetland protection and erosion control.

During 2003-2005, CRWD assumed an advisory

role to District cities on development and redevel-

opment proposals. The advisory role consisted of

review and comment in reference to the District’s

Development Review Criteria. The District reviewed

71 developments and tracked implementation with all

of the criteria and found marginal compliance. After

completing a study to assess the impact of non-

compliance with the Development Review Criteria,

the District found that the water quality goals estab-

lished in the Watershed Management Plan were not

being met. CRWD then set a goal to develop and

adopt science-based watershed rules to improve

water quality. This process was initiated in 2005. In

January 2006, CRWD Board of Managers established

a joint Technical Advisory Committee (TAC) to make

recommendations on the standards in the draft

rules. After revision of the rules to reflect the recom-

mendations of the TAC, the rules were adopted in

September, effective October 1, 2006.

2013 Watershed Rules and Permitting

Construction of underground storage at a permitted site in Saint Paul.

A storm drain inlet protected from runoff at a construction site.


Our Work

2013 Watershed Rules and Permitting

CRWD Permits By Year

2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013

Applications Received 30 33 31 33 30 30 36

Acres Disturbed 94 85 110 358 142 331 210

Acres Impervious 68 64 65 194 90 109 82

Alternative Compliance Sites 12 13 5 15 14 12 17

Standard Compliance Sites 15 18 26 18 13 17 19

Linear Projects 4 5 9 9 6 4 11

Total Linear Impervious (ac) 37 34 32 156 49.83 75.93 49.78

Total Linear Treatment (cf) 72,180 20,969 75,201 431,597 118,110 435,928 223,433

Infiltration Approved (cf) 120,349 148,131 163,297 425,289 275,781 91,100 124,856

Filtration Approved (cf) 73,861 65,959 35,649 198,844 179,448 474,887 348,543

Variances Requested 2 2 2 2 1 0 3

Variances Approved 1 2 1 2 1 0 3

Incomplete/Withdrawn Applications

3 2 0 0 3 1 2

Permitting Program

The adoption of District Watershed Rules in 2006

made necessary a permitting program to ensure

that developments of more than one acre were in

compliance with standards set forth in the Rules.

By working with the District’s consultant engineer,

Wenck Associates, and permit applicants, the permit

coordinator processes applications and presents

staff recommendations to CRWD Board of Managers.

The Board votes on permit applications and approves

or denies them based on their compliance with

the Rules.

During construction, sites are inspected for

compliance with erosion and sediment control

regulations. When vegetation and topsoil are

removed at construction sites, soil is exposed and

can be transported to stormdrains and water bodies

during rain events. To ensure that the proper Best

Management Practices (BMPs) are installed and

maintained, the District verifies that construction

supervisors comply with permit conditions, to

minimize the impact of sediment-laden discharge.

Permitted sites are also inspected to ensure that

permanent stormwater BMPs are correctly installed.

It is particularly important that infiltration practices

are protected from turbid runoff and soil compaction

during construction, and that vegetation is properly

established.

The Technical Advisory Committee (TAC) convenes

regularly to discuss rules and potential changes

to the permitting process. In 2013, the TAC met to

discuss CRWD rules but no revisions were made.

Major discussion topics included credits for filtration

and iron-enhanced filtration practices, stormwater

harvest and reuse, State Minimal Impact Design

Standards and Atlas-14 Rainfall Intensity Update.


Our Work

2013 Education and Outreach

General Outreach

CRWD continued outreach to students and adults

in 2013 through direct work with organizations and

community groups. CRWD staff and volunteers

contacted more than 2,500 watershed residents

through public events, trainings, presentations,

resource assistance, school visits and field trips

within the District. This included a summer evening

lake study attended by 41 residents of all ages, a

workshop on landscaping for clean water attended

by 35 landscape professionals and a tour of green

roof projects in the watershed attended by 40

residents. CRWD also sponsored transportation

costs for six water quality education field trips

attended by CRWD students, supported Children’s

Water Fest with a financial contribution, led a

stormwater BMP tour along the Green Line for

Urban Roots’ youth interns from Saint Paul’s East

Side and supported a water themed dance event at

the first Open Streets celebration in Saint Paul.

Celebrating clean water at Saint Paul Open Streets.

Green Line Interpretive Signage

With ridership of the Green Line Light Rail estimated

at 42,000 trips per day by 2030, there is tremendous

opportunity for public education regarding the

importance of sustainable stormwater management

in urban areas. Rain gardens, stormwater planters,

underground infiltration trenches and a tree trench

system were all installed along the corridor to capture

and treat stormwater runoff. Interpretive signage

was installed to describe the purpose and function of

each of the clean water features and has been trans-

lated into Hmong and Spanish.

Blooming Saint Paul Clean Water Award judges.


Our Work


New Education Displays

CRWD Staff and volunteers participate in many

community and school events every year. Interactive

displays help communicate our messages about

stormwater runoff and pollution prevention behaviors.

Beginning in 2012, the Board of Managers and staff

began planning for new education displays for the

district. After completing research which included

literature review of studies on public messaging of

environmental issues as well as conducting multiple

focus groups of CRWD residents, it became clear

that multiple displays were needed to communicate

our messages. Findings from the research and focus

groups revealed that the displays should be designed

for either children or adults because they find different

messages appealing. It was also found that the

messages needed to communicate what individuals

could do personally and in their own neighborhoods

and yards. With this information CRWD designed

three new education displays targeted at adults in

the watershed. The primary messages of each were 1.

Pollute or protect: what you can do to protect storm-

water pollution, 2. Eutrophication: what is it and how

does it happen and 3. Rain Route: where does the rain

and stormwater in your neighborhood flow?

New Education Plan

Staff identified a need to update and strategize the

Districts Education and Outreach work for 2014 –

2015. CRWD hired HDR, Inc. to consult with staff

and develop a strategic education and outreach plan

for the next two years. Objectives were categorized

by audience and the level of importance of each

goal. Staff will use this plan to guide education and

outreach projects for 2014 and 2015.

Green Roof tour.

Eutrophication Pollute or Protect Rain Route


Metro WaterShed Partners

CRWD is a member of WaterShed Partners (WSP), a

coalition of more than 75 organizations working to

educate Minnesotans about protecting water. WSP

promotes clean water practices and aims to inspire

people to act to protect water, and to create educa-

tional programs and tools to help cities meet the

requirements of the MS4 permit.

In 2013, WSP raised more than $54,000 for media

outreach and made 5,560,507 clean water impressions

on residents in the metro area through:

• Ads on radio and TV that reached 4,883,970 people

in the Twin Cities with messages that encouraged

them to protect water by keeping streets clean.

• Connecting with approximately 676,537 Minnesota

fairgoers at the State Fair’s DNR and Eco Experience

buildings, letting people know through interactive

display, a clean water game and print materials how

they can protect water.

• Launching a Facebook campaign called StormDrain

Goalie to reach a targeted audience of local people

who have expressed interest in protecting water.

https://www.facebook.com/StormDrainGoalie

WaterShed Partners also provided services to

members including:

• Professional training on best practices in using social

media, a field trip on the river with speakers on

managing stormwater for a changing climate and a

talk on using Plain Language in communications.

• Monthly meetings with presentations about timely

issues such as invasive species, the new Nitrogen

study and movement in the legislature.

• A listserv for ongoing sharing of information and

resources.

• Cleanwatermn.org, a site with electronic resources

and an image gallery to help water educators with

outreach to their service areas.

2013 Clean Water Summit

The Clean Water Summit is an annual meeting of

water and natural resource professionals interested in

learning how to protect, manage and clean our water

resources. The theme for the 2013 conference was,

“Green Infrastructure for Clean Water: The Essential

Role of People” and focused on the role of education

and outreach efforts in creating beneficial behavior

changes. Education and Outreach Coordinator at

CRWD, Elizabeth Beckman served on the planning

team and presented on CRWD’s work and partner-

ships with the residents around Como Lake.

Internships

CRWD staff hosted several

interns 2013. In partnership

with Dr. Christie Manning of

Macalester College, CRWD

staff worked with students

Amanda Wareham and Lisa

Hu who analyzed focus group

data from groups convened to

review a set of nonpoint source

pollution education displays for

use at community events. The

students completed a literature

review and made a set of

recommendations for creating

display tools with effective

clean water messages. CRWD

also hosted Macalester College

environmental science major

Marlys Mandeville who created

supplemental materials for the

above-mentioned displays and

helped engage students in a

clean water improvement project

at Central High School. CRWD

also sponsored Gordon Parks

High School student Samantha Varela who served in

the office at Great River Greening and participated

in ecological restoration events sponsored by that

Our Work


Macalester intern Marlys Mandeville presented her final project as an intern with CRWD.

Gordon Parks High School intern Samantha Varela with Great River Greening staff.


The Blue Thumb Partners are a group of

professionals from local governmental units

(watershed and conservation districts, cities,

counties), non-profit and community organiza-

tions, and nursery and landscape professionals.

Blue Thumb partners advocate for clean water

through the use of native plant rain gardens,

native plant gardens, and shoreline restoration

projects. Since 2007, CRWD has participated as

a Blue Thumb contributing partner helping to

maintain a website of clean water gardening

resources and print and display materials

for resident use. Blue Thumb partners work

to cultivate consistent clean water planting

messages for watershed residents. In addition

to its membership contribution in 2013, CRWD

coordinated publicity for the Blue Thumb

native plant sale event Landscape Revival and

increased attendance from 800 in 2012 to 1,600

attendees in 2013. Visit bluethumb.org.

P L A N T I N G F O R C L E A N W A T E R

Attendance at 2013 Landscape Revival doubled thanks to CRWD’s event promotion.

Blooming Saint Paul Award

In the 2009 Education and Outreach Plan, the

Board of Managers prioritized the development

of a stewardship recognition program with

the goal of recognizing residents who adopt

outstanding water quality protection behaviors.

In 2013, CRWD partnered with Saint Paul

Parks and Recreation Department to sponsor

a category as part of the Blooming Saint Paul

Award program.

Since 2003, the Blooming Saint Paul Award

has recognized beautification efforts by Saint

Paul citizens through gardens and art in the

public realm. CRWD sponsored the Clean

Water Award category of nominations which

recognizes exemplary landscaping projects or

practices the demonstrate stormwater runoff

reduction, pollution prevention or water reuse.

Staff from CRWD worked with Ramsey County

Master Gardeners to judge the nominations for

the Clean Water Award. This included a short

training session for the judges to explain the

benefits of rain gardens and preventing runoff.

Thirteen projects were nominated for the Clean

Water Award Category.

Green Roof at Hamline University.

Our Work



Our Work

Stewardship and Partner Grants

Stewardship Grants

CRWD values collaboration with individuals and

organizations, and sees the involvement of all citizens

as important to improving the water resources in the

District. Through our grants we hope to encourage

a strong ethic of water resource stewardship among

citizens.

Goals of the Stewardship Grant program are to:

1. improve water quality,

2. increase groundwater recharge,

3. protect plant and wildlife communities and

4. raise stormwater pollution prevention awareness

among residents.

Grant requests are reviewed and approved by staff.

Grants include cost-share funding for residential water

quality improvement projects, as well as funding

for water quality education activities and events.

Grants are available to residents of the District as

well as government agencies, businesses, schools

and nonprofit organizations that are located and/

or conduct work in the District. CRWD offers free

technical assistance for rain garden and shoreline

restoration projects and reimburses project expenses

based on an approved project budget.

In 2013, seven grants were awarded, totaling

$8,502.49. Though grant numbers were lower than

previous years, a substantial amount of site visits

and designs were completed for projects likely to

be installed next year. These grants helped make

possible rain garden and rainwater reuse projects.

Grant funding also provided support for a native plant

education expo and market.

Urban Roots youth interns help with maintenance at Gateway Park.


Our Work


2013 Grants

Seven Stewardship Grant awards (up to $2,000) totaled $8,502.

Nine Partner Grant awards ($2,000 to $20,000) totaled $82,000.

Partner Grants

Partner Grants fund the development and delivery

of collaborative programs that increase resident

knowledge of water quality issues in order to affect

behaviors that decrease stormwater runoff. All

grantees are required to track and report general

information about the number of program activities

and participants. Priority is given to applicants who

propose to also measure program outcomes and/

or impacts to residents, for example: meaningful

actions taken, knowledge increased, behavior changes

committed to or made. In addition to increasing

resident’s awareness of water quality issues, another

purpose of the Partner Grant Program is to support

and foster relationships with organizations and groups

whose work furthers the mission of CRWD.

2013 Partner Grants included:

• Funding for an organizing project with faith commu-

nities in CRWD encouraging water quality projects

• An environmental festival highlighting the role of

water in indigenous cultures

• Civic organizing and a fall cleanup event around

Como Lake

• Stipends for environmental education intern-

ships for youth through the Urban Roots (formerly

Community Design Center) and Great River

Greening’s Science Area Teen Network

• Support of Friends of the Mississippi River’s river

stewardship and habitat restoration programs as

well as their State of the River Report and

• New equipment for the City of Saint Paul’s Street

Maintenance Department to improve plowing and

salt application techniques.

Nine grants were awarded in 2013, totaling $82,000.

CRWD staff worked at Ce Tempoxcalli’s Mother Earth Fest Macroinvertebrate night at Como Lake, June 2013.


Our Work

Special Grants

In 2013 several previous Special Grant projects

were constructed and multiple new projects were

awarded for construction in 2014-2015. The first

completed project was the Burns Avenue neigh-

borhood rain garden retrofit. Working with Urban

Roots, homeowners were recruited for curb-cut rain

garden installation within the boulevard. Curb-cut

rain gardens are the most cost-effective water

quality improvement project we can install in

neighborhoods They are designed to capture runoff

from the street before it goes into the storm drain

and the Mississippi River. A total of seven gardens

were constructed by a contractor and planted by

Urban Roots.

The second completed Special Grant project

was large water quality improvement BMPs at

the Union Depot parking lot. Ramsey County

Regional Rail Authority was awarded $200,000

for the construction of pervious parking lot islands,

bio-retention cells, and a substantial underground

filtration system. These projects will treat storm-

water runoff from the parking lot before it is

discharged to the Mississippi River.

In addition to completed projects, the CRWD Board

of Managers awarded grants for projects beginning

in 2014. The following table outlines the projects, a

brief description and the grant award amount.


Project Name Description Grant Award

Model Cities – Central Exchange and BROWNstone

Design and installation of permeable pavers, infiltration swales and native plantings along the Green Line

$65,000

Saint Paul – Lowertown Ballpark

Rain gardens, underground filtration, tree trenches, rainwater reuse and interactive signage

$225,000

Central High School Design and grant match funding for stormwater retrofits at Central High School

$80,000

Great River School Construction of stormwater retrofits including permeable parking lot, rain gardens, and rainwater reuse

$110,000

Well Sealing Grants

Abandoned wells pose a threat to public health since

they provide a direct pathway for contaminants

to enter groundwater. Groundwater is a source of

drinking water for thousands of people in the metro

area. Abandoned Well Sealing Grants are available

to all residents within Capitol Region Watershed

District who have a well that is no longer in use on

their property. Wells must be sealed by a licensed

well contractor. In 2013, 10 well sealing grants were

awarded, totaling $4,497.50.

Rain Barrel Construction Workshop Grants

With rain barrel construction

workshop grants from CRWD,

two community organizations

hosted 82 participants at three

events. Workshops were held

by Union Park District Council

and Mississippi Market food

cooperative.

Rain barrel assembly workshop.


Our Work


In summer 2011, the City of Saint Paul’s Department

of Planning and Economic Development and CRWD

began a unique partnership to enhance residential

landscapes and achieve water quality benefits at

foreclosed homes acquired by the city for rehabili-

tation. The Inspiring Communities Program

(previously Neighborhood Stabilization Program)

rehabilitates foreclosed and vacant housing in

some of the most racially diverse and economically

challenged areas of Saint Paul. Landscape designs

include features that treat nearly all runoff on-site

and include downspout redirections to rain gardens,

rain barrels or green space. CRWD provides expert

advice and design to create a landscape plan, and

both partners provide resources for installation and

educational support to homebuyers.

After a site visit to assess existing conditions, CRWD

determines how to best redirect downspouts from

the home to pervious areas and improve drainage

on the property, and where to locate rain gardens,

swales or other BMPs. The City of Saint Paul’s

Forestry Department also provides crucial input on

the condition of residential trees and recommenda-

tions on how to improve the tree canopy, which

are incorporated into the design. Along with design

assistance, CRWD provides a $1,000 reimbursement

for the construction of stormwater BMPs on each

property and consultation during construction. The

city provides each homebuyer a rain garden mainte-

nance guidebook.

By the end of 2013, more than 90 properties were

rehabilitated with new landscapes that will infiltrate

127,500 cubic feet of runoff and reduce phosphorus

loads by 2.8 pounds per year. Partners expect to

rehabilitate 40-50 new sites each year.

To recognize the unique and successful collabo-

ration, the partners received a “Program of the

Year” award from the Minnesota Association of

Watershed Districts in December.

Inspiring Communities Program

Residential Street Vitality Program (RSVP) boulevard rain garden plantings

CRWD partners with the City of Saint Paul Public Works

Department during their annual street reconstruction,

known as the Residential Street Vitality Program

(RSVP). Because the boulevard area — the space

between the sidewalk and curb on most residential

streets — is often left unplanted with anything except

turfgrass, it provides a great opportunity to put in

clean water landscaping that helps prevent polluted

runoff from flowing to the Mississippi River. Street

reconstruction is an especially good time to install rain

gardens since the boulevard is already being rebuilt. The

City of Saint Paul offers residents the opportunity to

host a garden, identifies suitable boulevards, constructs

the basin and curb cut, installs a soil mix of sand and

compost and lays mulch. Homeowners agree to plant

and maintain the gardens.

Street reconstruction recipients in Hamline Midway

and Macalester Groveland neighborhoods planted

80 rain gardens in spring 2013 with help from CRWD.

Homeowners picked up their native rain garden plants

and CRWD staff was on hand to answer questions.

Volunteers and staff members from the organization

Great River Greening worked in the neighborhoods to

help the residents with planting and watering. There

are currently 140 RSVP rain gardens in Saint Paul, with

55 more planned for 2014.

RSVP rain garden in Hamline Midway neighborhood.


Stormwater Quality Monitoring

Since 2005, CRWD has monitored stormwater

quantity and quality from its 41-square-mile

watershed in Saint Paul, Roseville, Maplewood, Falcon

Heights and Lauderdale, which eventually drains to

the Mississippi River. CRWD is highly urbanized with

225,000 residents and approximately 42% impervious

land cover.

Monitoring locations

Of the 16 major subwatersheds in CRWD (see

map page 6), six are currently monitored for

water quantity and quality (St. Anthony Park, East

Kittsondale, Phalen Creek, Trout Brook, McCarrons

and Como 7). Within the monitored subwatersheds,

CRWD collected water quality and/or quantity data

at 17 monitoring sites in 2013. At ten stations, samples

were collected during both baseflow and stormflow

periods and analyzed to determine pollutant concen-

trations for a suite of water quality parameters

including nutrients, sediment, metals and bacteria,

which are used to calculate total pollutant loading.

Additionally, CRWD monitored the water quality

of the five lakes within the District (Como Lake,

Crosby Lake, Little Crosby Lake, Loeb Lake, Lake

McCarrons) in partnership with Ramsey County

Public Works Department. Lakes were sampled

monthly or bi-weekly from May through September

for water quality parameters including nutrients,

sediment, water clarity and Chlorophyll-a. Also,

Ramsey Conservation District worked with CRWD to

conduct macrophyte and biovolume surveys of each

lake, which included plant species identification and

estimations of relative plant abundance.

Precipitation

2013 was an above average year for precipitation,

with 36.36 inches recorded. This was +5.75 inches

above the 30-year normal and the wettest year since

CRWD monitoring began in 2005. The majority of the

precipitation, however, occurred during spring with a

total 19.84 inches from April through June.

Our Work

Figure 1: 2013 water yield in cf/acre for CRWD monitored subwatersheds.

0

20,000

40,000

60,000

80,000

100,000

120,000

140,000

East Kittsondale

Wat

er Y

ield

(cf/

ac)

Historical Average*

2013

*The historical average is based on discharge data from 2010-2012 for baseline sites and 2005-2012 for baseline sites.

PhalenCreek

St. AnthonyPark

Trout BrookE. Branch

Trout BrookW. Branch

Trout BrookOutlet

Como 7Subwatershed

Sarita Villa Park

* The historical average for baseline sites is based on discharge data from 2010-2012. The historical average for BMP sites is based on discharge data from 2005-2012.


Stormwater Quality Monitoring

Our Work

CRWD staff install monitoring equipment.

Monitoring equipment.

Stormwater monitoring continues in winter.

Alternatively, August and September were uncharacter-

istically dry with a total 5.82 inches of precipitation,

5.60 inches below the 30-year normal average.

Discharge

Due to increased precipitation, major CRWD subwa-

tersheds recorded greater than average flow and

water yield in 2013 (Figure 1), especially from April

through June. Subsequently, pollutant loading generally

increased because more water carried more pollutants.

Of the four major CRWD subwatersheds, Trout Brook

exported the greatest amount of water (144,989 cf/ac)

because it has the largest total subwatershed drainage

area (8,000 acres).

Lakes

In 2013, water quality varied in each of CRWD’s five

lakes. Como Lake, Crosby and Little Crosby all failed

to meet the state eutrophication standard for total

phosphorus, so they were considered impaired.

Lake McCarrons and Loeb Lake both met the total

phosphorus standard.


BMP Maintenance and Monitoring

Stormwater BMPs are activities, practices and struc-

tures that reduce the impacts of stormwater runoff.

CRWD maintains or owns several stormwater BMP

structures throughout the watershed: 18 stormwater

BMPs constructed in the Como Lake Subwatershed

in Saint Paul and 14 along the Green Line (Central

Corridor Light Rail), also in Saint Paul.

The BMPs constructed in the Como Lake

Subwatershed were built as part of the Arlington-

Pascal Stormwater Improvement Project; a

multi-jurisdictional project that aimed to reduce

localized flooding and improve the water quality of

Como Lake. BMPs constructed include an under-

ground stormwater storage and infiltration facility,

a regional stormwater pond, eight rain gardens and

eight underground infiltration trenches. The under-

ground stormwater facility and infiltration trenches

have pretreatment devices (a hydrodynamic separator,

sumped catch basins and manholes) incorporated

into their design in order to provide treatment of

stormwater runoff by capturing trash, debris, oils

and sediment before it flows into the BMP. These

pretreatment units help to maintain the performance

of those BMPs by removing pollutants and infiltrating

stormwater runoff.

The Green Line BMPs include eight stormwater

planters and six rain gardens. These green infra-

structure practices are highly visible and not only clean

stormwater on its way to the Mississippi River, but

also add beauty, improve air quality and reduce the

urban heat island effect.

Regular inspection and maintenance of all of the

BMPs and pretreatment units is coordinated by

CRWD. Maintenance is crucial to ensure the BMPs

are functioning properly. CRWD receives assistance

with maintenance of some of the BMPs from citizen

volunteers and other government entities. In 2013, a

majority of the maintenance was completed by CRWD

staff, Conservation Corps Minnesota, Great River

Greening and a private contractor.

Since 2007, CRWD has been collecting water quality

and quantity data on several BMPs constructed for

the Arlington-Pascal Project. BMPs are monitored to

determine their overall effec-

tiveness at reducing stormwater

runoff and pollutant loads. All

of this monitoring data was

used to calibrate a water quality

model which simulated the

amount of stormwater runoff

and pollutants flowing to and

from all 18 of the Arlington-

Pascal Project BMPs. Modeling

efforts are necessary because

Minnesota’s winter prohibits

monitoring data from being

collected year-round. This

data, in addition to actual

construction, design, operation

and maintenance costs for each

individual BMP, were used to Volunteers clear Frankson McKinley rain garden,

Our Work


BMP Maintenance and Monitoring

Our Work

determine the cost-benefit (the cost per pound of

pollutants removed and the cost per unit of volume

reduction) of each BMP. All of this data is presented

in CRWD’s BMP Performance and Cost-Benefit

Analysis: Arlington-Pascal Project 2007-2010

published in spring 2012 and available at capitolre-

gionwd.org.

CRWD also undertook additional monitoring efforts to

determine the amount of gross solids (trash, organic

matter and sand/gravel) which accumulated within

the Arlington-Pascal Project BMPs as well as the gross

solids captured by the BMP’s pretreatment units. The

amount of phosphorous contained in the gross solids

was also determined. The results of this study were

incorporated into the BMP performance analysis

mentioned above. Detailed results can be found in

CRWD’s Arlington-Pascal Project: Gross Solids

Accumulation Study published in spring 2012 and

available at capitolregionwd.org.

Sumped catch basin with steel hood to capture debris

CRWD staff members monitor a rain garden near the Green Line.


The Green Line, formerly known as the Central

Corridor Light Rail Transit project, required full recon-

struction of heavily traveled streets in Saint Paul, most

notably University Avenue. The corridor is primarily

comprised of commercial and industrial land uses

with more than 100 acres of paved surfaces that were

devoid of healthy trees and green spaces. The previous

drainage system conveyed all runoff within the project

limits to the Mississippi River through numerous

outfalls without any water quality treatment. Portions

of this stretch of the river are impaired for turbidity,

nutrients and bacteria and are not meeting desig-

nated recreation uses.

CRWD, the City of Saint Paul, Metropolitan

Council (Met Council) and Ramsey County forged

a partnership with a commitment to improve

stormwater management, enhance the urban tree

canopy and transform the aesthetics of the Green

Line corridor using highly visible green infrastruc-

tures practices. Known as the Green Line Green

Infrastructure Project, two clear environmental needs

were addressed: establishing a vibrant and sustainable

urban tree canopy and maximizing treatment of

stormwater runoff from impervious surfaces.

Four types of green infrastructure practices were

constructed from 2010 to 2013: an innovative

integrated tree trench system along University

Avenue and rain gardens, stormwater planters and

infiltration trenches on side streets. These practices

incorporate natural landscape features and hydro-

logic processes to treat stormwater by infiltrating and

evapotranspiring runoff. The practices also integrate

with the character and values of the surrounding

community and serve as educational tools that help

raise community awareness of stormwater.

Improving water quality and stormwater runoff in

urban settings is a challenging, complex problem and

construction of stormwater management practices

Green Infrastructure on the Green Line

Our Work

Syndicate Street rain garden.


Green Infrastructure on the Green Line

Our Work

Oxford Street stormwater planter.

is often conducted parcel by parcel, which does

not maximize water quality treatment or achieve

cost efficiencies. The partners recognized that the

construction of the Green Line provided a rare oppor-

tunity to address multiple environmental issues and

achieve measurable results on a scale that would likely

not be feasible in the foreseeable future.

CRWD has estimated that annually the entire project

will reduce post-construction stormwater volume by

over 50% or 134 acre-feet, sediment load by 9 tons

and phosphorus load by 109 pounds to the Mississippi

River. This project contributes to the overall pollutant

load reductions required by the state for this section

of the Mississippi River.

Anticipating increased pedestrian traffic along the

Green Line corridor and surrounding neighborhoods,

artistic elements, seating areas and interpretive

signage have been incorporated into the practices.

These features encourage the public to pause and

learn more about stormwater runoff and how it’s

being treated in their community. In 2013, interpretive

signage for each type of practice was installed at the

11 side street practice sites and 11 tree trench locations

nearby. The signs have been interpreted into Hmong

and Spanish to help reach the diverse ethnic groups

residing in and visiting the Green Line corridor.

The Green Line project was featured promi-

nently during the 2013 International Low Impact

Development Symposium hosted in Saint Paul, which

drew over 800 attendees. Staff from CRWD and Met

Council and city and project consultants gave presen-

tations and a tour of the project. In addition, CRWD

has used the practices as interactive examples during

tours to teach youth from Saint Paul’s East Side about

stormwater management.


2013 District Finance Summary

CRWD offers this summary overview and analysis of the District’s financial activities for the fiscal year ended December 31, 2013. The complete 2013 Annual Financial Report and Audit can be found in Appendix A.

Operations2013 budgeted revenue was down $60,468 from a budgeted revenue of $2,322,360 and actual revenue of $2,259,892. This decrease was largely due to an increase uncollectable property taxes and the loss of the Homestead Market Value Credit. Expenditures in 2013 were under budget. Budgeted expenditures were $2,322,360 while actual expenditures were $2,086,711, or $235,649. The decrease in expenditures was largely due to several large projects that were not undertaken in 2013.

Capital Improvement Program (CIP)2013 budgeted revenue was $5,299,552 and actual revenue was $4,395,124. This decrease of $904,428 in revenue was mostly due to not receiving a MNDOT reimbursement until 2014 for work completed in 2013. Expenditures in 2013 decreased from the budgeted amount of $7,701,612 to an actual amount of $5,278,604. This reduction in expenditures was largely due to several large projects coming in under budget, several special grants not being

completed in 2013 and several projects being delayed until 2014.

Financial HighlightsThe assets of CRWD exceeded its liabilities at the close of the most recent fiscal year by $X (net assets). Of this amount, $X (unassigned net assets) may be used to meet the government’s ongoing obligations to citizens and creditors in accordance with CRWD’s fund designations and fiscal policies. CRWD’s total net assets increased $X in 2013. As of the close of the current fiscal year, CRWD’s governmental funds reported combined ending fund balance was $X compared to $X the previous year. At the end of the current fiscal year, CRWD is able to report a positive balance in net assets.

Tax Levy$2,140,918, 90%

Fees/Grants$234,300, 10%

Other(Interest Income)

$5,540, <1%

2013 Operations Revenue (actual)Total $2,259,892

Programs$912,589

47%

Projects$634,902

33%

Administration$384,725

20%

2013 Operations Expenditures (actual)Total $2,086,711

2013 CIP Revenue (actual)Total $4,395,124

Other(Interest Income)

$354, <1%

Tax Levy $304,853

8%

Fees/Grants$3,721,769

92%

Debt Service$114,218, 2%

2013 CIP Expenditures (actual)Total $5,278,604

McCarrons BMP

$243,3025%

Special CIP Grants$163,764, 4%

Trout Brook$3,353,977

72%

Shoreline/StreambankRestoration$6,847, <1%

Wetland, Stream & EcosystemRestoration$51,358, 1%

Mississippi River BMPs &Crosby Lake

$695,36415%


Our Plans

2013 Year In Review

Below is a complete list of 2013 CRWD projects:

Fund Name Project Name

Administration General Administration

Performance Review and Assistance Program

Groundwater Groundwater Protection — Well Sealing

Groundwater Studies

Ramsey County Groundwater Plan

Rulemaking/Rule Revisions Wetland Management and Regulation Plan

Permitting Implement Permit Program

Permit Tracking Database and Information Management

Construction Inspection

Stewardship Grants Grant Program Administration

Project Inspection

Project Design and Assistance

Application Processing and Grant Award

Monitoring and Data Collection Baseline Monitoring and Data Collection

Lake Monitoring and Data Collection

Villa Park Monitoring and Data Collection

Wetland Bio-monitoring

Long-term Monitoring Database Development

Willow Reserve / Loeb Lake Monitoring and Data Collection

Non-CRWD BMP Inventory

10-Year Monitoring Plan

BMP Monitoring

Education and Outreach Outreach/Communication

Homeowner Outreach — Stop the Rain Drain

Homeowner Outreach — Community Clean-up

Municipal Outreach

Website and Social Media

Contractor Outreach



Education and Outreach (cont.) Partnerships

Events/Outreach

Homeowner Outreach — Watershed Heroes

Technical Resources and Information Sharing

Local and Agency Plan Review and Tech Committee

Watershed Approach: MS4 & TMDL Compliance

Strategic Project Preparation

Future Trends: Research and Positioning

Innovative BMPs Research

Water Resource Awareness Tools/Methods/Techniques

National Speakers for Conferences

Geographic Information System GIS Program Development

Data Acquisition

Internal Mapping System

Impervious Surfaces Data Set

Safety Program Safety Training

Safety Program Updates/Audits

CSE Equipment

Shoreline and Streambank Maintenance

Lake McCarrons Shoreline Restoration Project

Saint Paul Natural Resources Intern Program

Loeb Lake Shoreline Assessment

Crosby Lake Shoreline Assessment

Como Lake Subwatershed Como Park Regional Park Stormwater Plan

Como BMP Maintenance and Inspection

Como Lake Implementation Reporting & Audit

Lake McCarrons Subwatershed Lake McCarrons Subwatershed

Villa Park Wetland Sediment Sampling

2013 Year In Review

Our Plans


2013 Year In Review

Our Plans


Loeb Lake Subwatershed Willow Reserve Restoration Plan

Crosby Lake Subwatershed

Crosby Lake Management Plan Implementation

Trout Brook Subwatershed Inspection and Minor Maintenance

TBI Easement Verification and Documentation

Center St./Rice St. Subwatershed Analysis

NPDES MS4 Stormwater Program

Illicit Discharge Detection and Elimination Program

(TBI) Television Inspection

Wetland, Stream and Ecosystem Restoration — Planning

Stream Corridor Restoration Feasibility Study

Mississippi River Subwatershed Mississippi River Subwatershed Initiatives

Implement Green Infrastructure along the Central Corridor — Planning

Large Scale Redevelopment Stormwater Planning

Green Line BMP Maintenance

Watershed Management Planning Third Generation Watershed Management Plan

Special Projects and Grants Staff & Engineering Support of Special Grants

Green Infrastructure Incentive Program

Shoreline and Streambank Restoration

Shoreline and Streambank Restoration Projects

Como Lake BMPs Curtiss Field Subwatershed Improvements

Gottfried’s Pit Improvement Project

Lake McCarrons BMPs Villa Park Wetland Restoration Project

Villa Park Subwatershed BMPs

Loeb Lake BMPs Stormwater Pond Retrofit


2013 Year In Review

Our Plans


Crosby Lake BMPs Highland Ravine

Trout Brook BMPs TBI Repair Station 53+08 to 60+49 — Cayuga Interchange

TBI Repair — Farrington

Wetland, Stream and Ecosystem Restoratiom — Implementation

Trillium Site — Water Resource Feature — Construction

Mississippi River Subwatershed BMPs

Green Line BMP Implementation

Green Line Redevelopment BMPs

Special Projects and Grants Special Grants

Debt Service Debt and Loan Service


Our Plans

Fund Name Project Name Priority Project Description

Adminstration General Administration

Critical General Administration of District Operations

Administrative Allocation

Ongoing Annual Administrative Cost Allocation to Projects and Programs

Groundwater Groundwater Protec-tion - Well Sealing

Beneficial Provide grant reimbursements for well sealing

Rulemaking/ Rule Revisions

Evaluate Rules and Conduct Annual TAC Meeting

Critical Conduct TAC process to update Rules

Permitting Implement Permit Program

Critical Implement District Permit Program

Permit Tracking Database and Infor-mation Management

Critical Implement BMP Database for previous permits

Construction Inspection

Critical Inspect active permits sites for compliance

Permit Closure and Post Construction Inspection & Mainte-nance

Important Inspect completed permit projects for compliance and maintenance

Stewardship Grants

Grant Program Administration

Important Administer, promote, and outreach on Stewardship Grants

Project Inspection Important Inspection of grant projects to ensure proper construction and function

Project Design and Assistance

Important Provide project designs through public and private partners

Application Process-ing and Grant Award

Important Grant Award payments, processing

2014 Workplan



Monitoring and Data Collection

Baseline Monitoring and Data Collection

Critical Monitoring of 7 baseline sites, 14 level logger sites and 4 rain gauges

Lake Monitoring and Data Collection

Critical Monitoring of 5 CRWD lakes, including chemistry and biological sampling and qualitative parameters

Villa Park Monitoring and Data Collection

Critical Monitoring of 2 FWQ sites in Villa Park as well as 2 level loggers and Lake McCarrons flow only station

Wetland Bio-monitoring

Important Annual Monitoring of CRWD wetlands including IBI assessments, water quality analysis, data analysis and reporting

Long-term Monitoring Database Development

Critical Development of a long term monitoring database for effective data management

BMP Monitoring Important Monitoring of BMP sites — Como 7 (6), Green Line (2), Bdale (1) and 24 level logger sites

Education and Outreach

General Critical General Communication and Outreach (Added $25,000 for U of M Community Assessment)

Stop the Rain Drain Critical Update SRD website to host CRWD Grant Programs

Homeowner Outreach — Community Clean-up

Critical Como Leaf Cleanup

Municipal Outreach Important Turf and winter maintenance Best Practices training for municipalities and Parks staff

Website and Social Media

Important Maintenance and improvement of CRWD website, purchase of contacts database

Contractor Outreach Important Best Practices training for professional landscape contractors

Partnerships Beneficial Contributions to partner organizations and collaborative groups

Events/Outreach Beneficial Events: Community and CRWD-sponsored, including Green Line outreach activity

Homeowner Outreach — Watershed Heroes

Beneficial Partnership with City of Saint Paul Parks to recognize homeowners using clean water practices

Technical Resources and Information Sharing

Local and Agency Plan Review and Tech Committee

Critical Review plans, serve on local, state, national committees related to stormwater/water quality

Strategic Project Preparation

Important Take a project(s) to next level of design to assist with grant applications ("shovel ready")

2014 Workplan

Our Plans


2014 Workplan

Our Plans


Future Trends:Research andPositioning

Innovative BMPs Research

Important Research of two BMPs or one large BMP to further CRWD understanding of their function

Water Resource Awareness Tools/Methods/Techniques

Important Develop Art Policy work with Watershed Artist in Residence

Green Infrastructure Incentive Program

Beneficial Develop incentive program for Green Infrastructure.

Climate Change Impacts-Research and Action

Beneficial Research Climate Change impacts on design Standards (Atlas — 14)

GeographicInformation Systems (GIS)

GIS Program Development

Important Manage GIS needs for CRWD

Data Acquisition Critical Purchase and update data layers

Internal Mapping System

Critical Maintain and update internal mapping system layers and troubleshoot issues

Impervious Surfaces Data Set

Critical Coordinate with GIS user group to obtain updated impervious surfaces data set

Safety Program Safety Training Critical Conduct CSE/first aid/CPR training for CRWD staff

Safety Program Up-dates/Audits

Critical Conduct safety audit including assessment of program plan, CSE protocols, office procedures and equipment

CSE Equipment Critical Proper equipment for safe entry into confined spaces including new equipment, calibration, maintenance, and repair expenses

Shoreline andStreambankMaintenance

Lake McCarrons Shoreline Restoration Project

Important Promote shoreline restoration project around Lake McCarrons

Saint Paul Natural Resources Intern Program

Important Sponsor intern with Saint Paul for BMP maintenance or other activities

Loeb Lake Shoreline Assessment

Important Conduct assessment of the lake shore

Crosby Lake Shoreline Assessment

Important Conduct assessment of the lake shore



Como Lake Subwatershed

Como Regional Park Stormwater Plan

Important Complete a Como Regional Park Stormwater Plan

Como BMP Mainte-nance and Inspection

Critical Maintenance and Inspection of Arlington-Pascal BMPs

Como Lake Imple-mentation Reporting and Audit

Important Annual MS4 TMDL compliance reporting, State of the Lake, assess need for in-lake management strategies

Lake McCarrons Subwatershed

Aquatic Invasive Species Plan

Critical Develop an Aquatic Invasive Species Prevention Plan for Lake McCarrons

Loeb Lake Subwatershed

Willow Reserve Restoration Plan

Critical Planning for the protection and restoration of Willow Reserve in Saint Paul

Crosby Lake Subwatershed

Crosby Lake Manage-ment Plan Implemen-tation

Critical Implement project initiative as listed in the Crosby Lake Management Plan

Trout Brook Subwatershed

Crosby Lake Management Plan Implementation

Critical Implement project initiative as listed in the Crosby Lake Management Plan

TBI Easement Verification and Documentation

Critical Complete easement verification work for TBI and work towards correcting errors in location and filling gaps where there are no easements

Center St./Rice St. Subwatershed Analysis

Important Evaluate management strategies and plans for water quality improvement and flood reduction for implementation by the District and its partners

NPDES MS4 Stormwater Program

Critical Coordinate District MS4 requirements in cooperation with District partners

Illicit Discharge Detection and Elimination Program

Critical Develop a web-based system for citizen reporting of potential illicit discharges

Wetland, Stream andEcosystemRestoration —Planning

Wetland/Stream Reestablishment Feasibility Study

Important Wetland/Stream Feature analysis/design for Victoria Park or Ford Site

2014 Workplan

Our Plans


2014 Workplan

Our Plans


Mississippi RiverSubwatershed

Implement Green Infrastructure along the Central Corridor — Planning

Critical Planning, Design and Construction of Green Line Stormwater BMP Signage

Redevelopment Stormwater Planning

Important Plan, design and other activities for shared, stacked green infrastructure along the Green Line

Green Line BMP Maintenance

Critical Maintain and repair CRWD's green infrastructure along Green Line

Shoreline andStreambankRestoration

Shoreline and Streambank Restoration Projects

Important Implement shoreline restoration and aquatic plant management

Ravine Stabilization Projects

Beneficial Complete design and installation of ravine stabilization projects

Como Lake BMPs

Curtiss Field Subwatershed Improvements

Critical Construction of Curtiss Pond Improvement Project to reduce flooding

Floating Island Important Design and build a floating island wetland in the Como Golf Course Pond

Lake McCarrons BMPs

McCarrons Subwatershed BMPs

Critical Construct BMPs within McCarrons Subwatershed

Crosby Lake BMPs

Highland Ravine Critical Complete the Highland Ravine Stabilization projects.

Trout Brook BMPs

TBI Repair — Farrington/Cottage

Critical Complete TBI inlet repair and new inlet installation at Farrington and Cottage

Wetland, Stream andEcosystemRestoration —Implementation

Wetland Improvement

Future Conduct wetland improvements as identified in the Wetland Management Plan, Appendix F

Wetland Reestablishment: Implementation

Future Implement feasible reestablishment projects identified in Wetland and Ecosystem Restoration — Planning (325 C)

Trout Brook Nature Sanctuary Water Feature — Construction

Critical $150K balance of 2-year $400K cost share for stream elements in the TB Nature Sanctuary


2014 Workplan

Our Plans


Mississippi RiverSubwatershedsBMPs

Green Line Redevelopment BMPs

Important Design and Construction of Innovative BMP(s) the Green Line

Lowertown Stormwater Improvement Project

Important Construciton of innovative BMPs as part of Lowertown Stormwater Improvements

Special Projects and Grants

Special Grants Critical Implement Special Grant Program

Stockholm Tree Trench Demonstration

Critical Construct Stockholm Tree Trench Demonstration w/Saint Paul based on 2013 Payne-Maryland Analysis

Debt Service Debt and Loan Service

Critical Annual Payment for 2007A, CWF Loan and 2013A Debt


Financial Statements and Audit

Appendix A


Printed Materials

Appendix B


BWSR Annual Report Compliance

Appendix C




FROM: Mark Doneux

RE: Adopt Program and Facility Plan, Amend CB Richard Ellis Agreement

Background

Following the March 19th

Board Workshop, CBRE has completed the Program and Facility Plan.

Issues

Adopt Program and Facility Plan

The next step in the process is to adopt the Program and Facility Plan. The facility plan includes a

summary and Board direction going forward, the space program, facility characteristics, buy/build/lease

analysis and a preliminary budget. Following adoption of the Program and Facility Plan the District can

begin moving forward in the search for new office space. On page two of the plan the steps going

forward are outlined as follows:

1) Proceed with a search for land, or land with a building to be demolished, in order to build a new

facility for CRWD,

2) This site search should generally be focused on three areas in St. Paul,

3) Concurrent to the land search, continue to look for buildings that could be renovated. It is understood

this is a secondary preference to constructing new, and

4) In order to minimize risk in case suitable sites cannot be located in time, start conversations and

solicit a proposal from the existing landlord for a 12-18 month lease extension.

Amend CB Richard Ellis Agreement

With Phase 1, Needs Assessment and Program Development, and Phase 2, Financial Analysis is

complete, the District can move to Phase 3, Market Review/Site Selection and Phase 4, Lease Renewal.

CB Richard Ellis has prepared a task list and budget for Phase 3 and 4 work (enclosed). Phase 3 work

has an estimated cost of just under $23,000 and Phase 4 work is estimated to cost $6,300. I would

recommend we work with CB Richard Ellis on a time and material basis with a not to exceed contract

amendment of $30,000.

Action Requested

1) Adopt CRWD Program and Facility Plan dated April 1, 2014

2) Approve Contract Amendment with CB Richard Ellis for Phase 3 and 4 work tasks not to exceed

$30,000.

enc: Program and Facility Plan, CB Richard Ellis

Phase 3 and 4 Tasks and Budget Summary W:\01 Administration\Facility Management\2012 Facility Planning\Board Memo Office Facility Update 4-10-14.docx

March 19, 2014

V. Action Item E)

District Office Facility (Doneux)




FROM: Forrest Kelley, Regulatory and Construction Program Manager

RE: Geosyntec Consultants Feasibility Study for Upper Villa Park Project

Background

The District was awarded a $275,000 Clean Water Partnership grant in 2012 for the identification,

design, and construction of volume reduction practices in the Lake McCarrons subwatershed. In

January of 2014, the District was awarded an additional $360,000 towards construction of the combined

infiltration/harvest and reuse BMP underneath the Upper Villa Park Softball field. CRWD has an

existing contract with SRF Consulting Group, Inc. for the design and construction of a volume reduction

practice in the McCarrons subwatershed with a budget of $129,000. Staff will be approving a contract

amendment with SRF for Harvest and Reuse feasibility study for $16,104 as this aspect was out of scope

of the original proposal.

Issues

As part of preliminary design, District staff and consultants, in cooperation with City of Roseville staff

are seeking to determine if Geosyntec’s OptiRTC active controls system would provide additional

benefits to the harvest and reuse system. Staff have asked Geosyntec to prepare a proposal for a

feasibility study for incorporating this technology into the Upper Villa Park combined system

(enclosed). This work will complement a supplemental feasibility study by SRF that focuses on the

benefits of harvest and reuse for the Upper Villa Park BMP. Both of these proposals have incorporated

a decision point meeting upon completion of Task 1 to determine if the active control system should be

pursued based on the cost/benefit analysis. Further work beyond Task 1 ($7,511) will only be pursued

after CRWD and City staff have decided the active controls will provide significant value and water

quality benefit to the project. Staff will review the Geosyntec proposal with the Managers and

recommend approval.

Requested Action:

Approve the Agreement with Geosyntec Consultants for Design Assistance on the Upper Villa Park

Volume Reduction and Harvest/Reuse Project, and authorize Board President and Administrator to

execute a professional services agreement for an amount not to exceed $68,000. Subject to the review of

the Ramsey County Attorney.

Enc: Potential OptiRTC at Upper Villa Park Project Proposal from Geosyntec revised 4/8/14

W:\06 Projects\McCarrons\Lake McCarrons Subwatershed CWP Grant\Reuse Feasibility\Bd Memo Upper Villa Geosyntec.docx

April 16, 2014

V. Action Items:

F) Professional Services

Agreement with Geosyntec for

the Upper Villa Park Reuse

Project (Kelley)

100 Washington Avenue South, Suite 1330 Minneapolis, MN 55401

PH 612.253.8200 www.Geosyntec.com

13 March 2014; rev 8 April 2014 Capitol Region Watershed District 1410 Energy Park Drive Suite 4 Saint Paul, MN 55108 Attention: Mr. Forrest Kelley Subject: RFP for Potential OptiRTC at Upper Villa Park Project

Dear Forrest:

Geosyntec Consultants Inc. (Geosyntec) is pleased to submit to the Capitol Region Watershed District (CRWD) a proposal to evaluate the benefits of including the OptiRTC monitoring and control system as part of the Upper Villa Park water quality improvement project in Roseville, MN.

PROJECT UNDERSTANDING AND APPROACH

CRWD is working with SRF Consulting Group, Inc. (SRF) to design an infiltration based water quality retrofit in the Lake McCarrons Subwatershed with the goal of reducing phosphorus by 45 pounds per year. As the infiltration gallery is to be located beneath an existing ball field, there is an opportunity to incorporate rainwater harvesting (RWH) for irrigation reuse as part of the project as well. CRWD would like to engage Geosyntec to determine if inclusion of the OptiRTC system can reduce the retrofit size and/or improve the function of the proposed combination of RWH and infiltration.

OptiRTC is a flexible platform that provides real-time control and data management services to meet a wide variety of environmental needs. Geosyntec’s OptiRTC system is a cloud based Microsoft Windows Azure Application coupled with lightweight low cost remote control and monitoring hardware, which provides secure and reliable infrastructure for data collection, storage, processing and internet based delivery.

KEY PERSONNEL

Mr. Eric Tollefsrud, P.G., located in our Minneapolis Office, will be the Geosyntec Project Director. Mr. Tollefsrud will be responsible for coordinating internal resources to ensure that all client expectations are being met.

Ms. Charlene Harper, P.E., LEED AP will serve as your Geosyntec Project Manager and she will be responsible for all services rendered by Geosyntec on this project. Ms. Harper has over 19 years of experience in the fields of water resources and site development specializing in low impact development and innovative stormwater treatment designs, stormwater concepts for federal projects, and compliance strategies for MS-4 and industrial stormwater permit programs.

2014 03 14 CRWD Upper Villa proposal.doc.doc

Mr. Forrest Kelley 13 March 2014; rev 8 April 2014 Page 2 of 5 Marcus Quigley, P.E., D.WRE, CPESC will provide overall quality control review and specific technical support for the OptiRTC design. Mr. Quigley has over a decade of experience working on challenging projects related to surface water hydrology, hydraulics, water quality, and stormwater and erosion and sediment control permitting and management. Through his research and development efforts, Mr. Quigley has pioneered new approaches to real-time surface and stormwater control and combined stormwater control/reuse systems.

Erica Tillinghast, CPESC, EIT will be the project engineer and lead modeler. She has two years of experience in the application of civil and water resources engineering, and was extensively involved in linking the impacts of urbanization and BMPs to stream bank erosion through her Master’s thesis research at North Carolina State University. Ms. Tillinghast has conducted hydrologic and hydraulic modeling for flood control and precipitation analyses, designed multiple stormwater BMP systems, created web-based dashboards for real-time control of stormwater practices, conducted statistical analyses, performed over 60 construction site audits, and written multiple technical documents.

Ms. Tillinghast is also assisting in a research and development effort led by Mr. Quigley and WERF entitled Critical Assessment of Stormwater Treatment and Control Selection Issues. The goal of the research is the commercialization of innovative real-time control systems for surface water application including rainwater harvesting, controlled underdrain bioretention, active green roofs, tidal marsh restoration, stormwater detention, retention, and wetland control, flood control, CSO compliance, flow diversion and splitting, and other low impact/distributed stormwater designs.

Geosyntec believes in assembling the best team to meet each client’s needs, independent of geography. CRWD will not be charged for travel time or expenses for Geosyntec’s design team; however, travel expenses for the system installation team are included in the fee below.

SCOPE OF SERVICES

Based on the project understanding described above, and a scoping phone call with SRF, Geosyntec will provide the following scope of work:

1. Project Collaboration

Geosyntec will collaborate with SRF to identify and quantify the potential project benefits possible with the inclusion of OptiRTC. Anticipated benefits include reducing the size of the infiltration gallery, optimizing nutrient removal using an actively controlled treatment train approach, and providing monitoring and feedback for tracking the system’s function. This task includes preliminary modeling in support of the control system design, based on SWMM models and plans prepared by SRF.

The deliverable for this task will be a technical memo with recommendations for system layout; budget cost information for the OptiRTC components; and quantified volume and nutrient removal benefits. This task includes three conference/web calls with CRWD and SRF, as well as one presentation to the CRWD board.

2014 03 14 CRWD Upper Villa proposal.doc

Mr. Forrest Kelley 13 March 2014; rev 8 April 2014 Page 3 of 5

2. OptiRTC Interface Design and System Specifications

Following CRWD approval of the retrofit strategy, Geosyntec will perform detailed design for sensor, control valve and other system components, which will be integrated with the proposed irrigation system. We will produce draft design drawings and specifications for team review. Two to three plan sheets will be required to depict the control system layout, including details and notes necessary to communicate installation requirements. Specifications can be provided either in book form or directly on the drawings.

Once the system design and specifications are complete, Geosyntec will also design an internet interface (i.e., dashboard) for the project for CRWD review. The dashboard will include information on the Park Villa system in real-time, including water levels in the cistern and infiltration gallery, rates of infiltration, and forecasted rainfalls. The project dashboard can be open to the public or made private at the discretion of CRWD.

This task includes one site visit and meeting with CRWD by the design and installation team. Three additional collaboration meetings by conference/web calls are included in this task. The deliverable for this task includes draft and final system drawings and specifications.

3. Construction Phase Technical Support

Geosyntec will review contractor submittals of Site Water Control System components and respond to related RFI requests. These components include water level sensors and control valves to be included in the construction bid documents developed in task 2. Other activities to be provided by the project contractor include installing and connecting power and data signal conduits and cabling from source locations to the controller and other system components as required. This budget includes review of six submittals and two RFIs, as well as two site visits for construction phase meetings or observation of installation of key Control System components.

4. OptiRTC Installation

Geosyntec will provide and install a fully configured OptiRTC controller with appropriate enclosure for interfacing with the power and signal feeds from the system control valve(s), sensor(s), network and irrigation system components installed by the site contractor. This task includes system start-up services and confirmation of operational status.

Please note, any necessary permits and permit fees will be the responsibility of CRWD.

5. Technical Support

As part of this task, Geosyntec will train the system owner/operator how to operate the OptiRTC system. The training will consist of an in-person 4 hour training session at the owner’s offices. All training materials will be submitted to the owner prior to the training for distribution to personnel to be trained. Training will consist of an introduction to the OptiRTC system and how it has been implemented as part of the project and will include a demonstration of the system using the online interface.


Mr. Forrest Kelley 13 March 2014; rev 8 April 2014 Page 4 of 5

Geosyntec will develop a site-specific Operating Manual (one draft and one final) which will provide users information to manage the system. The training session above will also include a walk-through of the operating manual to ensure site personnel understand how the system operates. Finally, Geosyntec will develop a site-specific Maintenance Manual (one draft and one final) which will provide the owner/operator information required to maintain the system including regularly scheduled maintenance protocols.

POST-CONSTRUCTION MAINTENANCE AND MONITORING

The monitoring and control platform proposed for the project requires little physical maintenance; however periodic inspection of the control valve and other components is warranted. Due to the ability to remotely monitor the system, functional abnormalities or performance degradation can be detected through these means and automatically relayed to stakeholders or operations staff for interim inspection.

The computing environment developed for operation and performance tracking is a cloud-based application set with expandability and redundancy provided as part of the system architecture. As such, network connectivity is required at the site to incorporate predictive weather information, backend processing and control, and system monitoring. If network access cannot be provided by the host property, annual operating costs will need to incorporate the cost of engaging a network service provider to enable system connectivity.

In addition, data processing and transaction costs are accrued as part of normal operations. These are incorporated in as part of the base installation costs for the first year following commissioning. Beginning in year two (2), aggregate data processing, transaction and support service costs will be $100 per month exclusive of dedicated network costs if needed.

ESTIMATED FEE

Please see the attached detailed price breakdown for additional information.

Task Total Labor Hours Direct Expenses Time & Material Budget

1 Project Collaboration

54 $0 $7,511

2 OptiRTC Interface Design and System Specifications

162 $0 $20,849

3 Construction Phase Technical Support

32 $0 $4,796

4 OptiRTC Installation

48 $19,500 $25,532

5 Technical Support 60 $0 $8,355 $67,043


Mr. Forrest Kelley 13 March 2014; rev 8 April 2014 Page 5 of 5 Geosyntec will provide a one (1) year warranty on all parts and labor installed and will maintain the system for one (1) year after the installation date. Additional system operation and maintenance after the one year warranty period will be contracted separately.

SCHEDULE

Geosyntec understands the project schedule to be as follows:

• Preliminary engineering: Feb – March 2014 • Final engineering: March – July 2014 • Construction documents: June – September 2014 • Bid: December 2014 (to be ahead of MnDOT’s bid letting schedule) • Construction: October 2015.

We are prepared to begin work immediately upon receiving notice to proceed from CRWD and the modeling information from SRF.

CLOSING

Geosyntec appreciates the opportunity to support CRWD and the Upper Villa Park project team for this important project. If you have any questions regarding this proposal, please contact me at (804) 393-9350. Sincerely,

Charlene A. Harper, P.E. Marcus Quigley, P.E. Senior Engineer Principal Attachments: Detailed Hourly Breakdown





FROM: Mark Doneux

RE: Post-Bond Issuance Compliance Policy

Background

The Capitol Region Watershed District is an issuer of tax-exempt governmental bonds. Over time, the

Internal Revenue Service has developed a series of regulations that require issuers of such bonds to take

certain actions after the bonds have been issued, to ensure that the bonds remain tax-exempt.

Issues

In September 2011, the IRS revised its Form 8038-G, which is the informational tax return that issuers

of tax-exempt governmental bonds are required to submit in connection with each bond issue. The new

version of the Form 8038-G requires the issuer to certify whether it has written procedures in place for

its post-issuance compliance activities.

The District’s Bond Counsel, Jenny Boulton of Kennedy and Graven, has prepared a model policy

which, if implemented and followed, will meet IRS requirements for post-issuance compliance. I would

recommend that the Board of Managers adopt this policy and follow the adopted policy with regard to

all of the District’s tax-exempt bonds. Simply stated, the policy requires the Administrator, as

responsible for monitoring three items:

1. How the District spends bond proceeds (use it for capital costs, authorized by statute, for our

governmental purpose),

2. How the District invests bond proceeds until they are spent and how the District invests money set

aside to pay the bonds, and

3. How the facilities the District financed are used.

This policy will be added to our current financial policies and procedures manual.

Requested Actions

Adopt Resolution Approving Post-Issuance Compliance Procedure and Policy for Tax-Exempt Bonds

enc: Post-Issuance Compliance Procedure and Policy for Tax-Exempt Bonds

Resolution Approving Post-Issuance Compliance Procedure and Policy for Tax-Exempt Bonds

W:\02 Budget and Finance\CIP Financing\Bd Memo - Post Issuance Compliance Policy 4-11-14.doc

April 16, 2014

V. Action Item G)

Adopt Post-Bond Issuance

Compliance Policy

(Doneux)


TO: CRWD Board of Managers and Staff

FROM: Mark Doneux, Administrator

RE: April 16, 2014 Administrator’s Report

Administrator Approved or Executed Agreements

No new agreements

Board Approved or Executed Agreements

No new agreements

General updates including recent and upcoming meetings and events

CRWD Staff Anna Eleria, Bob Fossum and Forrest Kelley presented at the Stormwater U: Innovation in BMPs

conference on Tuesday April 1, 2014.

Staff attended 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.

Britta Suppes will be presenting ‘Multiple uses of data from an automated monitoring network in a 6-mile urban

stormwater tunnel’ at the National Water Quality Monitoring Conference in Cincinnati, OH, April 28 – May 2.

1.) Upcoming events and meetings

a) Next Board meeting is Wednesday May 7, 2014 from 6:00 - 8:00 pm.

b) Manager Thienes will not be at the May 7, 2014 or May 21, 2014 Board meetings.

c) 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.

d) Next CAC meeting is Wednesday May 14, 2014 from 7:00 - 9:00 pm.

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

Street Garage.

2.) Project Updates – Community Capacity Assessment: CRWD staff been working with the research team at the U of M and have

developed an interview guide. Interviews will begin in early May.

W:\04 Board of Managers\Correspondence\Administrator's Report 2014\Administrator's Report 4-16-14.docx


April 16, 2014 board of managers packet

Documents

Transcript of April 16, 2014 board of managers packet