Capitol Region Watershed District Lake McCarrons Subwatershed BMP CWP Project
Subwatershed Analysis Report
Prepared by
January 9, 2013
TABLE OF CONTENTS A. Introduction ......................................................................................................................................... 1 B. Project Objective and Overview ...................................................................................................... 1 C. Previous Work .................................................................................................................................... 2 D. Investigations ...................................................................................................................................... 2 E. Field Walk and Further Investigation Recommendations ............................................................ 5 F.
P8 Water Quality Modeling .............................................................................................................. 8
G. Estimate of Probable Construction Costs...................................................................................... 10 H. Recommendations ............................................................................................................................ 11 I.
Next Steps ......................................................................................................................................... 11
i
A.
INTRODUCTION
Lake McCarrons is an 81-acre lake that is located in the southeastern corner of the City of Roseville within the Capitol Region Watershed District (CRWD) (see Figure 1 for location). A series of wetlands and open waters known as the Villa Park Wetland System (VPWS) is located to the northwest of the Lake and accounts for up to 72 percent of the total 1044-acre Lake McCarrons watershed. A popular 15-acre county park is situated along the eastern side of the lake. Lake McCarrons is a high quality recreational water body, and CRWD is committed to maintaining its integrity by managing pollutant loading from its subwatersheds, including the VPWS. Extensive monitoring and modeling has led the CRWD to develop a summer average TP concentration goal in Lake McCarrons of 33 parts per billion (ppb) or less. Recent water quality studies have noted that despite previous phosphorus reduction efforts, the VPWS continues to be a major source of nutrients to Lake McCarrons. In order to meet the inlake goal of 33 ppb, a significant reduction in phosphorus loading to the Villa Park wetland complex is necessary. In 2010, the Villa Park Wetland Management Plan (VPWMP) was published. This plan included a goal to reduce Total Phosphorus (TP) loading from the contributing watersheds to the VPWS by 45 lbs per year on an average annual basis – a 28 percent reduction from current loading. A number of specific recommendations to reduce runoff volume and pollutant loading to the wetland system from its watershed were included in the plan. In order to reduce TP loading, it is anticipated that volume control will also be required. The VPWS watershed is the subject of this analysis and report. The land use within the watershed is primarily residential, with commercial, industrial, and park areas mixed in throughout. There are also a number of wetlands and several constructed water quality ponds located within the watershed. A portion of the Trunk Highway (T.H.) 36 and Dale Street interchange is also located within the watershed.
B.
PROJECT OBJECTIVE AND OVERVIEW
The objective of this project is to reduce the TP load to Lake McCarrons by 45 pounds per year through the implementation of volume reduction Best Management Practices (BMPs) upstream of Villa Park. This project is funded through a matching grant from the MN Clean Water Partnership (CWP) by the MN Pollution Control Agency. CRWD retained SRF Consulting Group, Inc. to review previous subwatershed analyses, plans, and monitoring reports, and to conduct additional analysis in order to identify locations for BMPs that can provide the desired reduction of total phosphorus loading. Existing utility information, contours, land use, soils data and as-built plans were compiled through a detailed information collection effort. Types of data and their sources included the following:
CRWD – drainage boundaries, various reports and monitoring information, wetland delineation;
City of Roseville – as-built plans, land use, utilities, contour, and other GIS data;
Lake McCarrons Villa Park Subwatershed BMP CWP Project Subwatershed Analysis Report
Page 1
Ramsey County – land use;
Minnesota Department of Transportation – T.H. 36 and Dale Street interchange construction plans; and
Online tools such as the NRCS Web Soil Survey and the Fish and Wildlife Service National Wetlands Inventory.
Wetland boundaries were also field identified and surveyed, and field reconnaissance was completed. Based on this information, drainage areas were revised and phosphorus loading sources throughout the watershed were located. Finally, potential BMP locations and possible conveyance and routing issues were identified. Once the analysis was complete, recommendations for the most appropriate BMP locations were developed. This report provides a summary of this detailed subwatershed analysis and provides recommendations for specific BMP types and locations that will effectively reduce TP within the VPWS watershed.
C.
PREVIOUS WORK
Several water quality studies have already been completed for the Lake McCarrons watershed. These are summarized in the VPWMP, which was completed by Wenck Associates, Inc. in 2009, and revised in 2010. Wenck also performed their own analysis of the watershed and evaluated numerous BMP options. The details of this analysis are located in the VPWMP. In addition to the VPWMP, two University of Minnesota senior engineering capstone projects were completed in 2010 and 2011. The capstone design projects identified a total of 11 different locations for BMPs, and eight of these were selected for detailed P8 modeling by the students. The results of this analysis were published in the 2010 and 2011 Water Quality Management in Lake McCarrons capstone design reports. All of these locations were considered for this subwatershed analysis.
D.
INVESTIGATIONS
After a preliminary analysis of the project area, it was determined that in order to remove 45 lbs TP on an average annual basis, which is a relatively large amount, BMPs would need to be constructed in either multiple small drainage areas or one or two larger drainage areas. According to the Simple Method, which is a simplified TP loading and removal worksheet developed for the Minnesota Stormwater Manual, runoff from over 140 acres of drainage area would need to be treated assuming a 50 percent TP removal via a structural BMP. Most work to date has concentrated on smaller drainage areas (less than 100 acres) that provide small amounts of TP removal. For example, of the eight locations studied by the University of Minnesota capstone design students in 2011, only two larger areas of 331 acres and 134 acres provided potential for significant TP removal at 31.7 and 20.6 lbs using infiltration BMPs. Neither of these locations meet the goal of removing 45 lbs TP. The others were smaller areas that removed less than 4 lbs TP on an average annual basis. These are also relatively costly to develop on a per-lb removal basis.
Lake McCarrons Villa Park Subwatershed BMP CWP Project Subwatershed Analysis Report
Page 2
Land use also plays an important role in determining which drainage areas have higher pollutant loads and where stormwater treatment BMPs might be placed. Higher loading rates will result in greater TP removal when passed through an appropriate treatment BMP. This, coupled with drainage area size, helps to define which drainage areas would be the best candidates for BMP consideration. Figure 2 illustrates the annual TP loading estimated by the Simple Method. Impervious areas produce greater runoff and thus greater TP loading. The drainage area to Site 1, for example, though smaller in area, produces a relatively high loading because of its higher impervious surface area ratio. Therefore, based on the current subwatershed analysis and work completed for the VPWMP, it appears that the most cost effective approach is to concentrate on one or two larger drainage areas, preferably with a high percentage of impervious land use. Besides drainage area and land use, we developed additional criteria for selecting potential BMP locations within the Villa Park watershed. These criteria are based on previous studies and on practical and regulatory considerations. A complete list of these criteria is as follows:
Total drainage area that drains to each location,
Land use and percent impervious,
Topography,
Publically owned land available for BMP construction,
Potential wetland impacts,
Constructability and extent to which utilities, particularly storm sewer, must be modified or relocated,
Volume reduction potential (soils, proximity to groundwater),
Ability to discharge the BMP to receiving storm sewer or other conveyance system.
As mentioned previously, 11 different locations were analyzed as potential BMP locations in the 2010 and 2011 capstone design projects, and 8 of these were modeled in P8. After SRF completed an in-depth review of these locations, it was determined that the majority did not meet the above criteria. Contour data alone ruled out several potential BMP locations because of steep slopes or elevation challenges in relation to existing conveyance systems. Others were ruled out due to the small amount of drainage area that could be treated or because they were located on private property. Two locations, however, did potentially meet the criteria. Both the 2011 capstone study and the 2010 capstone study identified BMP ID#12A-4 located in the southwest quadrant of County Road B and Victoria Street (referred to as BMP Site 5 on Figure 3), and BMP ID#7 located east and south of the B-Dale softball field (referred to as BMP Site 4 on Figure 3). These two locations were further analyzed and field assessed for this subwatershed analysis. Based on this preliminary review, SRF identified five potential locations, including the two identified in the 2010 and 2011 capstone reports, and three additional locations that were not
Lake McCarrons Villa Park Subwatershed BMP CWP Project Subwatershed Analysis Report
Page 3
included in previous studies. The BMP sites are located throughout the Villa Park watershed, and are labeled Site 1, Site 2, Site 3, Site 4, and Site 5. Location descriptions are as follows: Site 1: Site 1 is located in the athletic fields of the south side of the Parkview School property, adjacent to County Road B and Dale Street. Site 2: Site 2 is located at the northern Villa Park entrance, between County Road B and the north sediment pond of the Villa Park Wetland System. Site 3: Site 3 is located to the west of Site 2, near the southeast quadrant of Dale Street and County Road B between the funeral home and the Villa Park Wetland System. Site 4: Site 4 is located in the playing field of the B-Dale Softball Club. Site 5: Site 5 is located in the southwest quadrant of the Victoria Street and County Road B intersection, north of the existing wetland. These potential BMP locations are presented in Figure 3. Table 1 provides a summary of the analysis of the five selected BMP sites and their potential to meet the removal goal of 45 lbs TP on an average annual basis. These results are preliminary and were based on the Simple Method worksheet. More detailed P8 modeling and further land use analysis was also completed and the results are discussed in Section F. Table 1: Preliminary BMP TP Removal Potential (Simple Method) Total Drainage Impervious Phosphorus Areas Area BMP BMP Loading Site Location Name Acre lbs/yr (Acres) Parkview DA1 1 34 56 School (100) Villa Park DA2 2 North 41 67 (123) Wetland Villa Park DA1 and 3 West DA3 15 79 Wetland (130) DA4 and B-Dale Club 4 DA5 63 110 softball field (249) County Road B and DA5 5 31 53 Victoria (114) Street
Lake McCarrons Villa Park Subwatershed BMP CWP Project Subwatershed Analysis Report
Total Phosphorus Removal lbs/yr 42 50
59
83
40
Page 4
The NRCS web soil survey, reproduced in Appendix A, indicates that the majority of the soils throughout the VPWS have not been divided into hydrologic soil groups. The majority of the soils are considered ‘urban soils,’ which is inconclusive in terms of infiltration capacity. Further investigation of soils will be necessary as sites are selected for preliminary design. The City of Roseville has provided GIS-based shape files and as-built information for public utilities, contours, and planimetrics throughout the City. This information was very useful in determining the potential for storm sewer modifications for each of the five BMP sites. Where gaps exist, field survey and further investigation will need to be completed before final design. After identifying the five potential sites, a field walk was conducted with representatives from CRWD, the City of Roseville, and SRF to assess physical opportunities and challenges, and to discuss types of BMPs that may be implemented. Detailed notes from the field walk can be found in Appendix B.
E.
FIELD WALK AND FURTHER INVESTIGATION RECOMMENDATIONS
Table 2 provides summarized results of the field walk and recommendations for further investigations based on both the field walk and the criteria listed previously.
Lake McCarrons Villa Park Subwatershed BMP CWP Project Subwatershed Analysis Report
Page 5
Table 2: Field Walk Notes by BMP Location BMP Site
Field Walk Notes Recommendation The school contact has indicated that they would like to remove This site should be the tennis courts located on the north edge of the school grounds. investigated further. This may be an opportunity for the school to rearrange the recreation area to allow space for a BMP at the intersection of County B and Dale Street.
1 (Parkview School)
2 (Villa Park North Wetland)
3 (Villa Park West Wetland)
Information will be needed on what is being treated within the Trunk Highway 36/Dale Street interchange to accurately determine what is draining to the proposed BMP location.
This option would likely provide the best solution for volume reduction, which means that this may provide the best solution for both CRWD and the City of Roseville.
Using this location in conjunction with Option 2 or Option 5 might be required depending on additional water quality modeling results.
The pipes that would have to be brought into this area are This site will not located to the east of the proposed location, and the elevation be investigated change between the two areas will likely not permit a further. connection.
It is likely that the area would be considered a wetland based on observed wetland species.
The groundwater in this area may be too high to allow the construction of a volume control BMP since the required three foot separation from the seasonal high groundwater level may not be attainable.
4 (B-Dale Club Softball Field)
Soil borings will be necessary here, although it is expected that this area has primarily sandy soils.
This site will not be investigated further at this point due to the likelihood of It appears that this area may be a wetland and may not be issues noted. suitable for BMP construction since mitigation would be necessary. The site identified in the capstone report is south and east of the The site identified ball field. Presence of the steep slopes and the potential loss of in the capstone report will not be high quality vegetation make this location undesirable. investigated The area to the west, within the outfield of the softball field, is further. flatter and may be an option depending upon elevations of the Use of softball field vs. storm sewer and connectivity.** field outfield should be investigated further.**
Lake McCarrons Villa Park Subwatershed BMP CWP Project Subwatershed Analysis Report
Page 6
5 (County Road B and Victoria Street)
There is a wetland located here, but it may be possible to locate a This site should be BMP (or a couple of BMPs) either near the inlets to the wetland investigated along County B or near the outlet along Victoria to provide further. treatment for phosphorus removal.
Wetland delineation will need to be done for this area.
The inlet from the North seemed to be the most promising.
Elevations will need to be obtained for the pipes connecting the wetlands on the east and west sides of Victoria St.
Given the dry weather it is difficult to tell if this site can provide any volume reduction, given much of the area is likely wetland with high groundwater.
The City of Roseville plans to reconstruct Victoria in the near future and could perform storm sewer modifications at that time if this site is found to be feasible. The City could also wrap the BMP construction into their plans to meet the CRWD goals and the needs of the project together.
**These are observations made after the field walk (during conceptual design).
Based on both the field walk and the criteria discussed previously, it was determined that BMPs at Sites 1, 4, and 5 should be investigated further. Specific BMPs investigated for each site are summarized as follows: Site 1: Parkview School
BMP Option A, Parkview School Surface Basin – Pretreatment hydrodynamic sediment separation devices and a surface infiltration basin designed to fit within the Parkview School open area without disturbing current recreational fields.
BMP Option B, Parkview School Underground System – Underground storage and infiltration system with underground sediment removal device that provides pretreatment. The underground system is expected to create a larger disturbance that may require reconfiguration of recreational fields.
Site 4: B-Dale Softball Field
BMP Option C, B-Dale Softball Field Underground System – Underground storage and infiltration system with underground grit chamber for pretreatment. Because there is adequate area available for an underground system, this BMP will be designed to meet the TP removal goal of 45 lbs/year.
Site 5: Victoria Street and County Road B
BMP Option D, Victoria-B Wetland Filtration System – Filtration system with underdrains, designed to obtain maximum TP removal without impacting wetlands.
BMP Options A, B and C will likely allow for both volume reduction and phosphorus loading reduction, whereas BMP Option D may not serve to reduce volume, due to potentially high groundwater in the adjacent wetland. Figure 3 indicates that BMP Option D is upstream of
Lake McCarrons Villa Park Subwatershed BMP CWP Project Subwatershed Analysis Report
Page 7
BMP Option C. The interaction between the two BMPs (i.e. if both options are constructed) was also investigated and is discussed briefly in the sections following.
F.
P8 WATER QUALITY MODELING
In order to determine the extent to which the BMP Options meet the TP removal goal of 45 lbs/year, P8 water quality modeling was completed. During the development of the more detailed P8 models and the analysis of data obtained for this project, adjustments to drainage areas and hydrologic characteristics, such as impervious area, were made. For example, a length of T.H. 36 between Dale Street and Victoria Street was removed from DA1, which contributes to BMP Option A, because it is now routed to an infiltration BMP located in the northeast quadrant of Victoria and T.H. 36. The BMPs were first sized based on site constraints, existing topography and availability to connect to existing storm sewer. The phosphorus loading to the site, the ability to meet the TP loading and volume reduction goals, and the budget constraints were also considered in sizing and design. The constraints are discussed in more detail in the following sections. Table 3 provides the P8 modeling results. Table 3: Preliminary P8 Modeling Results BMP Site
BMP Option
Parkview
A
Parkview
B
B-Dale Club
C
Drainage Area(s) Name (Acre) DA1 (100) DA1 (100) DA4 and DA5 (249) DA5 (114)
Impervious Area
1-inch volume standard
Treatment Volume Provided CubicFeet
Total Phosphorus Loading
Total Phosphorus Removed
Acre
Cubic-Feet
lbs/yr
lbs/yr
35
111,078
28,314
40
22.7
35
111,078
108,900
40
37.4
63
212,355
78,983
83.9
45.4
42.3
17.0
83.9
47.5
Victoria D 31 101,277 19,602* Wetland B-Dale DA4 and Club and C+D DA5 63 212,355 98,585 Victoria (249) Wetland *70% credit volume as per the CRWD’s Rules for Filtration BMPs.
Site 1, Parkview School – BMP Options A and B: Preliminary design and future discussions with the Roseville School District will determine final BMP size and extents, and, therefore, TP and volume removal. However, it is assumed for this report that the BMP footprint should minimize impacts on existing facilities, whether it is above ground or underground. Figures 4 and 5 provide a rough location and footprint of the two BMP systems that were evaluated for this area. Both options would take flow through a splitting device from modified County Road B and Dale Street storm sewer and direct it to the treatment site. Option A provides treatment using Lake McCarrons Villa Park Subwatershed BMP CWP Project Subwatershed Analysis Report
Page 8
hydrodynamic sediment separation devices (e.g. Stormceptor) for pretreatment and an infiltration basin that will minimize the impact to existing facilities. Option B provides pretreatment and infiltration in an underground system located beneath the existing soccer field. The phosphorus loading from DA1 is only 40 lbs/year, so based on the loading alone it is not possible to remove 45 lbs/year. It is possible to meet approximately half of the loading reduction goal and stay within the construction budget with Option A. In order to provide the maximum amount of TP removal at this site, either an underground system or significant permanent impacts to the recreational areas is necessary. Option B was sized to remove as much volume and TP as possible, but can be scaled back based on budget constraints. However, the cost estimate for Option B is higher than others due to restoration of the many impacts to school property. Site 4, B-Dale Club – BMP Option C: A BMP for this option would be placed in the outfield area of the softball field. This system would consist of a subsurface infiltration chamber system. Option C has a large contributing drainage area, with existing ponds located upstream. The existing ponds are included in the P8 model and provide some reduction in phosphorus loading from the drainage area upstream of Option C. The loading to Option C is still over 80 lbs/year, and therefore this BMP has been sized to meet the desired removal rate of 45 lbs TP/year. Option C could easily be scaled down to fit within the allocated construction budget, and still provide a significant amount of phosphorus loading reduction, or size could be increased to maximize the volume and TP removal. If the system is reduced in size to fall within the construction budget, it would remove approximately 28.2 lbs TP per year and would capture approximately 33,106 cubic feet of runoff during a 1-inch rainfall. Because of the large contributing area, connection to the existing storm sewer system would require splitting flows so that only the desired amount of flow would be directed to the underground system with the remaining flow bypassing the BMP. Site restoration costs in this location are expected to be lower than the options at the Parkview Site. Figure 6 provides the location and approximate size of the system. Site 5 – BMP Option D: Because of the potential for high groundwater and proximity to wetland, a filtration BMP would likely be the most appropriate type of BMP for this area. By raising storm sewer inlet elevations and constructing a filtration basin along the north side of the wetland, the phosphorus load from this watershed can be reduced by approximately 17 lbs/year. The size of Option D is constrained by the wetland limits and the site topography. The loading to the site is only 42.3 lbs, which limits the amount of phosphorus removal that is available to below the goal of 45 lbs/year and the volume reduction benefits would be minimal. Figure 7 illustrates the conceptual configuration of this BMP. In order to determine how Option C and Option D interact, a P8 model that combined both options was developed. Results can be found in Table 3 as “C + D”. Since a portion of the Option C loading is removed by Option D, the increase in TP removal from both together is not the sum of the two options individually. The treatment volume provided is the sum of the two BMP treatment volumes. When comparing the Simple Method and the P8 model results, there are reductions in loading when comparing Table 1 to Table 3, although the removal rates are comparable. This is expected due to the assumed contributing areas and the methodologies used by the Simple Method. However, based on expected TP removal efficiencies for infiltration and filtration Lake McCarrons Villa Park Subwatershed BMP CWP Project Subwatershed Analysis Report
Page 9
BMPs, two of the three options together can most likely meet and perhaps exceed the TP removal goal of 45 lbs.
G.
ESTIMATE OF PROBABLE CONSTRUCTION COSTS
It is important to provide a good estimate of probable construction costs for planning and decision making. Each option was analyzed and priced for the following major items:
Mobilization
Clearing and grubbing
Excavation
Pretreatment BMP installation
BMP construction, including above ground engineered soil or below ground pipe and ballast
Storm sewer modifications, structures, and connections
Erosion control practices during construction
Restoration, including seeding, mulch, sod, and landscaping
Any public utility relocations required to construct the BMP
A 25-percent contingency
Details of this cost analysis per option are presented in Appendix C. While efforts were made to include all potential cost items, not all contingencies can be anticipated at this feasibility stage. Hence, these are preliminary costs and can be expected to be modified as further data is obtained and BMP designs are progressed. The costs of the different options are quite varied, depending on the types of BMPs and the volume of water being treated. Table 4 shows the cost for each option, as well as the cost per pound of phosphorus removed (the same amount of phosphorus is assumed to be removed each year). According to the budget developed for the Lake McCarrons Subwatershed BMP Project 2012-2014 Work Plan, the estimated construction budget is $390,000. As can be seen in Table 4, none of the proposed options were able to meet both the TP removal and budget goals.
Lake McCarrons Villa Park Subwatershed BMP CWP Project Subwatershed Analysis Report
Page 10
Table 4: Estimates of Probable Construction Costs BMP Site
BMP Option
Probable Construction Cost (rounded up to nearest $1,000) $387,000 $1,557,000
Treatment Volume Provided (cubic-ft)
Approximate Cost per Cubic-Ft of Treatment Volume
Parkview A 28,314 $13.67 Parkview B 108,900 $14.30 B-Dale C $810,000 78,983 $10.25 Club Victoria D $290,000 19,602* $14.81 Wetland B-Dale Club & C+D $1,100,000 98,585 $11.16 Victoria Wetland *70% credit volume as per the CRWD’s Rules for Filtration BMPs.
H.
Total Phosphorus Removal (lbs/year)
Approximate Cost per Pound Phosphorus Removed
22.7 37.4
$17,057 $41,636
45.4
$17,832
17.0
$17,078
47.5
$23,158
RECOMMENDATIONS
The Villa Park wetland drainage area is relatively large and does produce a significant amount of phosphorus loading over the entire area. However, finding locations where it is possible to capture enough runoff to meet the TP reduction goal of 45 lbs per year within the proposed budget has proven to be challenging. Based on this analysis, we SRF recommends the following 1.
BMP Option C should be progressed into preliminary design. In order to meet the TP reduction goal of 45 lbs per year, additional construction budget will be needed. CRWD staff and Board of Managers should discuss the range of sizing options based on balancing the available budget with maximizing TP removal and volume reduction.
2.
A meeting with the B-Dale Club representatives should be held to discuss this option and impacts on ballfield availability during construction.
3.
The City of Roseville should pursue BMP Option D in connection with the future reconstruction of Victoria Street. SRF will provide the City with a concept design that can be carried forward into preliminary and final design when the Victoria Street reconstruction design commences.
I.
NEXT STEPS
The first step is to determine if the City of Roseville and the B-Dale Club are amenable to allowing a BMP under the softball fields. Next, the desired size of BMP Option C, based on Lake McCarrons Villa Park Subwatershed BMP CWP Project Subwatershed Analysis Report
Page 11
discussion surrounding budget and TP and volume reductions, should be determined. Once the size is determined, preliminary design will begin. Finally, additional data collection will occur for Options C and D. In order to verify the potential functionality of the selected BMPs and their locations, additional information will be needed. Field survey, utility locations, soil borings, and additional city as-built information will all be necessary to verify that the locations for these options are viable.
Lake McCarrons Villa Park Subwatershed BMP CWP Project Subwatershed Analysis Report
Page 12
Legend
Watershed
Villa Park Watershed
Capitol Region Watershed District
City Limits
Roseville City Limits
J:\Maps\7896\MXD\Report Figure 1.mxd
Lake McCarrons
[ 0
Project Location Map
Lake McCarrons Subwatershed BMP CWP Project Capitol Region Watershed District
10,000
20,000 Feet
Figure 1
DA 2
DA 1
DA 5
k j Site 5
k j Site 1 DA 3
k j Site 2 k j Site 3 k j Site 4
DA 4
J:\Maps\7896\MXD\Report Figure 2.mxd
Legend
k j
Proposed BMP Location
TP Load
<= 0.25 lb TP/ac/yr, <=12% Impervious
> 0.25 - 0.61 lb TP/ac/yr, >12%-38% Impervious
0
500
1,000 Feet
[
Total Phosphorus Loading and Drainage Areas Lake McCarrons Subwatershed BMP CWP Project Capitol Region Watershed District
> 0.61 - 0.99 lb TP/ac/yr, >38%-65% Impervious > 0.99 - 1.09 lb TP/ac/yr, >65%-72% Impervious > 1.09 - 1.34 lb TP/ac/yr, >72% Impervious
Figure 2
DA 2
DA 1
DA 5
k j Site 5
k j Site 1 DA 3
k j
k j Site 2
Site 3
Villa Park Wetland System
k j Site 4 DA 4 Legend J:\Maps\7896\MXD\Report Figure 3.mxd
k j
Proposed BMP Location
Potential BMP Treatment Areas BMP Site 1, DA 1: 100.5 ac BMP Site 2, DA 2: 123.1 ac
BMP Site 3, DAs 1 & 3: 130.1 ac
0
1,000
2,000 Feet
[
Potential BMP Locations and Drainage Area Map Lake McCarrons Subwatershed BMP CWP Project Capitol Region Watershed District
BMP Site 4, DAs 4 & 5: 248.5 ac BMP Site 5, DA 5: 114.4 ac
Figure 3
Phosphorus Removed: 22.7 lbs/yr (57%) Probable Construction Cost: $387,000 $/lb removal: $17,057/lb P removed
Diversion Structure Hydrodynamic Separator
J:\Maps\7896\MXD\Report Figure 4.mxd
Diversion Structure
Hydrodynamic Separator Surface Infiltration Basin
Legend Proposed Parkview School Surface BMP
Storm Sewer Existing
Proposed
ELEVATION
0
200
400 Feet
[
Option A- Parkview School (Site 1), Surface BMP Lake McCarrons Subwatershed BMP CWP Project Capitol Region Watershed District
Minor Contours (2')
Major Contours (10')
Figure 4
Phosphorus Removed: 37.4 lbs/yr (94%) Probable Construction Cost: $1,557,000 $/lb removal: $41,636
J:\Maps\7896\MXD\Report Figure 5.mxd
Subsurface Infiltration System
Diversion Structure
Legend Storm Sewer
Existing
Diversion Structure
Proposed
Proposed Parkview School Underground BMP
ELEVATION
0
200
400 Feet
[
Option B- Parkview School (Site 1), Underground BMP Lake McCarrons Subwatershed BMP CWP Project Capitol Region Watershed District
Minor Contours (2')
Major Contours (10')
Figure 5
Stand Alone, Option C- B-Dale Club, Underground BMP: Phosphorus Removed: 45.4 lbs/yr (54%) Probable Construction Cost: $810,000 $/lb removal: $17,832/lb P removed In Series, Option D- Victoria Street BMP and Option C- B-Dale Club, Underground BMP: Phosphorus Removed: 47.5 lbs/yr Probable Construction Cost: $1,100,000 $/lb removal: $23,158/lb P removed
Hydrodynamic Separator
Legend Proposed B-Dale Club Underground BMP
J:\Maps\7896\MXD\Report Figure 6.mxd
Subsurface Infiltration System
Storm Sewer Existing
Proposed
ELEVATION
Minor Contours (2')
Major Contours (10')
0
100
200 Feet
[
Option C- B-Dale Club (Site 4), Underground BMP Lake McCarrons Subwatershed BMP CWP Project Capitol Region Watershed District
Wetlands
NWI Wetlands
Figure 6
Phosphorus Removed: 17.0 lbs/yr (40%) Probable Construction Cost: $290,000 $/lb removal: $17,078/lb P removed
Filtration Basin
Legend Proposed Victoria Street Filtration BMP
Storm Sewer Existing
J:\Maps\7896\MXD\Report Figure 7.mxd
Proposed
ELEVATION
Minor Contours (2')
Major Contours (10')
0
100
200 Feet
Wetlands
[
Option D- Victoria Street (Site 5), Filtration BMP Lake McCarrons Subwatershed BMP CWP Project Capitol Region Watershed District
NWI Wetlands
Delineated Wetland
Figure 7
Appendix A – Soil Information Appendix B – Field Notes Appendix C – Cost Estimates
Appendix A Soil Information
93° 6' 44''
93° 8' 55''
Hydrologic Soil Group—Ramsey County, Minnesota Appendix A
Roselawn Ave
454B
4984200 4983600
Farrington St
4983300
Irene St
Hand Ave
Western Ave
Irene St
Bossard Dr
Cohan sey Blvd
7
861C Elmer St
Bl vd s ar
ro n
Ryan Ave
M cC
Moundsview Ave
Burke Ave
8 15
C
120
1033
Bayview Dr 264
861C
Stuber Rd
489000
489300
Map Scale: 1:13,700 if printed on A size (8.5" x 11") sheet.
0
150
300
600
0
500
1,000
2,000
489600
489900
Meters 900 Feet 3,000
Web Soil Survey National Cooperative Soil Survey
490200
490500
490800
491100
93° 6' 44''
488700
Natural Resources Conservation Service
102
W St
857C
1027
Avon St
8B
s ce
Shryer Ave
Ryan Ave
1040 29
857C
859B
158D
Skillman Ave
Shryer Ave
Cre
n nt L
4983000
Chatsworth St
541
Aglen St
Oxford St
Roselawn Ave
488400
456
Capitol Vw
Eldridge Ave
7
857
Autumn St
169C
Ryan Ave
Ryan Ave
158C
n o nt L Belm
541
102
1027
Ryan Ave
1039
Ala m e da
543
4984500
858C
4983900
Minnesota Ave
4982700
Grotto St Victoria St
Parker Ave
ll Dr
Auerbach St
Southhi
Hand Ave
Lovell Ave
159
Eld ridge Av e
45° 0' 53''
Gran dview Ave
1039
Sandhurst Dr
Sandhurst Dr
Parker Ave
491100
Irene Ct
Grotto St
Lexington Ave
Oxford St
1
7 02
490800
Sher re n St
1055
Shryer Ave
4983000
490500
159
1027
Burke Ave
Skillman Ave
4982700
490200
859B
860C
93° 8' 55''
Lovell Ave
Victoria Service Rd
4983900 4983600
158B
Nancy Pl 158C
Laurie Rd
Milton St
4984200
Sherren St
Eldridge Ave
44° 59' 50''
Grandview Ave
Cope Ave
Sherren St
4983300
Grandview Ave
Nancy Pl
Chatsworth St
Ln
Lovell Ln
e ll
Lov
489900
Western Ave
489600
Cohansey St
489300
Dale St
489000
4984500
488700
Saint Albans St
488400
45° 0' 52''
10/1/2012 Page 1 of 4
44° 59' 51''
Appendix A Hydrologic Soil Groupâ&#x20AC;&#x201C;Ramsey County, Minnesota
MAP LEGEND
MAP INFORMATION Map Scale: 1:13,700 if printed on A size (8.5" Ă&#x2014; 11") sheet.
Area of Interest (AOI) Area of Interest (AOI)
The soil surveys that comprise your AOI were mapped at 1:15,840.
Soils
Please rely on the bar scale on each map sheet for accurate map measurements.
Soil Map Units Soil Ratings
Source of Map: Natural Resources Conservation Service Web Soil Survey URL: http://websoilsurvey.nrcs.usda.gov Coordinate System: UTM Zone 15N NAD83
A A/D
This product is generated from the USDA-NRCS certified data as of the version date(s) listed below.
B B/D C
Soil Survey Area: Ramsey County, Minnesota Survey Area Data: Version 5, Jul 3, 2012
C/D
Date(s) aerial images were photographed:
D
The orthophoto or other base map on which the soil lines were compiled and digitized probably differs from the background imagery displayed on these maps. As a result, some minor shifting of map unit boundaries may be evident.
Not rated or not available Political Features
7/18/2003
Cities Water Features Streams and Canals Transportation Rails Interstate Highways US Routes Major Roads Local Roads
Natural Resources Conservation Service
Web Soil Survey National Cooperative Soil Survey
10/1/2012 Page 2 of 4
Appendix A
Hydrologic Soil Group–Ramsey County, Minnesota
Hydrologic Soil Group
Hydrologic Soil Group— Summary by Map Unit — Ramsey County, Minnesota (MN123) Map unit symbol
Map unit name
Rating
Acres in AOI
Percent of AOI
120
Brill silt loam
C
0.1
0.0%
158B
Zimmerman loamy fine sand, 0 to 6 percent slopes
A
3.2
0.4%
158C
Zimmerman loamy fine sand, 6 to 12 percent slopes
A
37.8
5.3%
158D
Zimmerman loamy fine sand, 12 to 25 percent slopes
A
47.3
6.7%
159
Anoka loamy fine sand, 0 to 3 percent slopes
A
27.2
3.8%
169C
Braham loamy fine sand, 6 to 15 percent B slopes
10.1
1.4%
264
Freeon silt loam, 1 to 4 percent slopes
C
0.1
0.0%
298B
Richwood silt loam, 2 to 6 percent slopes B
2.9
0.4%
454B
Mahtomedi loamy sand, 0 to 6 percent slopes
A
0.1
0.0%
456
Barronett silt loam
C/D
8.4
1.2%
541
Rifle muck
A/D
25.3
3.6%
543
Markey muck
A/D
2.4
0.3%
857
Urban land-Waukegan complex, 0 to 3 percent slopes
29.2
4.1%
857C
Urban land-Waukegan complex, 3 to 15 percent slopes
4.7
0.7%
858C
Urban land-Chetek complex, 3 to 15 percent slopes
93.3
13.1%
859B
Urban land-Zimmerman complex, 1 to 8 percent slopes
309.1
43.5%
860C
Urban land-Hayden-Kingsley complex, 3 to 15 percent slopes
44.2
6.2%
861C
Urban land-Kingsley complex, 3 to 15 percent slopes
25.2
3.6%
1027
Udorthents, wet substratum
27.5
3.9%
1033
Udifluvents
0.5
0.1%
1039
Urban land
6.9
1.0%
1040
Udorthents
0.2
0.0%
1055
Aquolls and histosols, ponded
1.8
0.2%
W
Water
2.6
0.4%
710.0
100.0%
B/D
Totals for Area of Interest
Natural Resources Conservation Service
Web Soil Survey National Cooperative Soil Survey
10/1/2012 Page 3 of 4
Hydrologic Soil Groupâ&#x20AC;&#x201C;Ramsey County, Minnesota
Appendix A
Description Hydrologic soil groups are based on estimates of runoff potential. Soils are assigned to one of four groups according to the rate of water infiltration when the soils are not protected by vegetation, are thoroughly wet, and receive precipitation from long-duration storms. The soils in the United States are assigned to four groups (A, B, C, and D) and three dual classes (A/D, B/D, and C/D). The groups are defined as follows: Group A. Soils having a high infiltration rate (low runoff potential) when thoroughly wet. These consist mainly of deep, well drained to excessively drained sands or gravelly sands. These soils have a high rate of water transmission. Group B. Soils having a moderate infiltration rate when thoroughly wet. These consist chiefly of moderately deep or deep, moderately well drained or well drained soils that have moderately fine texture to moderately coarse texture. These soils have a moderate rate of water transmission. Group C. Soils having a slow infiltration rate when thoroughly wet. These consist chiefly of soils having a layer that impedes the downward movement of water or soils of moderately fine texture or fine texture. These soils have a slow rate of water transmission. Group D. Soils having a very slow infiltration rate (high runoff potential) when thoroughly wet. These consist chiefly of clays that have a high shrink-swell potential, soils that have a high water table, soils that have a claypan or clay layer at or near the surface, and soils that are shallow over nearly impervious material. These soils have a very slow rate of water transmission. If a soil is assigned to a dual hydrologic group (A/D, B/D, or C/D), the first letter is for drained areas and the second is for undrained areas. Only the soils that in their natural condition are in group D are assigned to dual classes.
Rating Options Aggregation Method: Dominant Condition Component Percent Cutoff: None Specified Tie-break Rule: Higher
Natural Resources Conservation Service
Web Soil Survey National Cooperative Soil Survey
10/1/2012 Page 4 of 4
Appendix B Field Notes
SRF No. 7390 0260B
Page 1
FIELD WALK NOTES Lake McCarrons Subwatershed BMP CWP Project Wednesday, September 26, 2012, 2:00 p.m. to 4:30 p.m. Potential BMP Sites, City of Roseville
Field Walk Attendees: Kristine Giga, City of Roseville Deb Bloom, City of Roseville Forrest Kelley, CRWD David Filipiak, SRF Walter Eshenaur, SRF Angela Gorham, SRF Goals •
CRWD has established a goal of 45 lbs total phosphorus (TP) per year reduction to Lake McCarrons. This is the primary goal of the project.
•
The preferred method to achieve the TP removal is volume reduction to the Villa Park Wetland System. This was discussed during the walk.
Potential BMP Locations •
SRF has identified 5 potential locations (options) for BMP placement throughout the area draining to Lake McCarrons. The locations were selected based on the following criteria: o Located on public land; o Drainage area is large enough to remove up to the 45 lbs TP based on a 50% BMP removal rate; o Storm water conveyance systems have the potential to be modified to direct flow to the BMP location.
•
These locations are located throughout the project drainage area, and the loading reduction provided by them varies between 85 and 29 lb/year reduction of phosphorus based on preliminary computations. These loading values were calculated using the Simple Method and land use descriptions in the parcel information provided by the City.
Walk Through •
Figures 1-6 were used throughout the field walk.
•
Option 1 is located on the Parkview Center School grounds.
Lake McCarrons BMP Project
Page 2
o Kris mentioned that her school contact told her that they would like to remove the tennis courts located on the north edge of the school grounds. David also suggested that if the school would like to take the opportunity, it may be possible to rearrange the recreation area of the school to allow space along County B/Dale Street intersection for a BMP. o More information will be needed on the storm sewer running along Cty Rd B and Dale St. to determine what water can be directed to either of these locations, as well as to determine the best way to discharge any BMPs located here. o Soil borings would also be necessary. The group suspects that the school grounds primarily consist of sandy soils. o Information on what is being treated within the Hwy 36/Dale interchange would be needed to accurately determine what is coming to the proposed BMP. o This option may also be able to provide volume reduction. It may be that using this in conjunction with Option 2 or Option 5 would provide the best solution for both CRWD and the City of Roseville. •
Option 2 is located along the far northwest start of the chain of waters making up the Villa Park Wetland System. This area has the potential to work well for water quality purposes, but volume control may be challenging. o The groundwater in this area may be too high to allow the construction of a volume control BMP since the required three foot separation from the seasonal high groundwater level may not be attainable. o It appears that this area may be a wetland and may not be suitable for BMP construction since mitigation would be necessary.
•
Option 3 is located to the northeast of the start of the chain of waters making up the Villa Park Wetland System. o This area did not appear to be ideal for a BMP after the field walk. The pipes that would have to be brought into this area are located to the east of the proposed location, and the elevation change between the two areas will likely not permit a connection. Also, it is likely that the area will be considered a wetland based on observed wetland species.
•
Option 4 is located to the south of the ball field at the B Dale Club and was identified in one of the capstone projects. o It appears that this area will not be conducive to BMP construction due to presence of the ballfield or steep slopes and the potential loss of high quality vegetation.
•
Option 5 is located between County Rd B and Parker Ave along Victoria St. (just east of Burke Ave). o There is a wetland located here, but it may be possible to locate a BMP (or a couple of BMPs) either near the inlets to the wetland or near the outlet from this wetland to provide treatment for phosphorus removal. The inlet to the North seemed to be the most promising. Wetland delineation will need to be done for this area, and elevations will need to be obtained for the pipes connecting the wetlands on the east and west sides of Victoria St.
Lake McCarrons BMP Project
Page 3
o Given the dry weather it is difficult to tell if this site can provide any volume reduction, given much of the area is likely wetland with high groundwater. o Deb indicated the city plans to reconstruct Victoria in the near future and could perform storm sewer modifications at that time if this site is found to be feasible. They could also wrap the BMP construction into their plans to meet the CRWD goals and the needs of the project together.
Appendix C Cost Estimates
Preliminary Engineer's Cost Estimate Option A, Parkview School Recreation Area, Above Ground Infiltration
ITEM NUMBER 2021.501 2101.501 2101.506 2105.511 2105.607 2105.525 2504.601 2503.541 2503.541 2503.541 2503.541 2104.509 2104.501 2104.603 2506.502 2506.502 2506.516 2104.523 2506.521 2506.602 2506.502 2506.601 2506.601 2104.521 2557.603 2557.501 2511.501 2511.607 2511.511 2573.502 2573.602 2575.501 2575.502 2575.502 2575.502 2573.507 2575.511 2575.513 2575.519 2575.523 2575.532
ITEM DESCRIPTION
UNITS
MOBILIZATION (5%) CLEARING GRUBBING EXCAVATION TOPSOIL BORROW (ENGINEERED SOIL-70/30) TOPSOIL BORROW UTILITY RELOCATION 15" RCP PIPE (CL III) 18" RCP PIPE (CL III) 24" RCP PIPE (CL III) 48" RCP PIPE (CL IV) REMOVE MANHOLE OR CATCH BASIN REMOVE SEWER PIPE (STORM) ABANDON PIPE SEWER CONST DRAINAGE STRUCTURE DES 54-4020 DIVERSION STRUCTURE CASTING ASSEMBLY SALVAGE CASTING INSTALL CASTING CONNECT INTO EXISTING STORM SEWER SPECIAL DESIGN OUTLET STRUCTURE STORMCEPTOR (STC 1200) STORMCEPTOR (STC 900) SALVAGE FENCE INSTALL SALVAGED FENCE WIRE FENCE DESIGN 60-9322 RANDOM RIPRAP, CLASS II RANDOM RIPRAP INSTALLATION GRANULAR FILTER SILT FENCE, TYPE MACHINE SLICED TEMPORARY CONSTRUCTION ENTRANCE/EXIT SEEDING SEED, MIXTURE 150 SEED, MIXTURE 240 SEED, MIXTURE 310 LANDSCAPING MULCH MATERIAL, TYPE 3 MULCH MATERIAL, TYPE 9 DISK ANCHORING EROSION CONTROL BLANKET, CAT 3 FERTILIZER, TYPE 4 CONTINGENCY (25%)
LS ACRE ACRE CY CY CY EACH LF LF LF LF EACH LF LF EACH EACH EACH EACH EACH EACH EACH EACH EACH LF LF LF CY CY CY LF EACH ACRE LBS LBS LBS LS TON CY ACRE SY LBS LS
TOTAL UNIT PRICE QUANTITY 1 0 $ 1,800.00 0 $ 1,850.00 4163 $ 15.00 1840 $ 35.00 702 $ 27.50 3 $ 10,000.00 0 $ 26.75 132 $ 28.00 61 $ 35.50 25 $ 102.00 2 $ 360.00 61 $ 7.50 0 $ 2.75 4 $ 2,625.00 2 $ 720.00 2 $ 565.00 2 $ 184.50 4 $ 275.00 7 $ 550.00 1 $ 2,500.00 1 $ 14,630.00 1 $ 13,530.00 1200 $ 6.10 1200 $ 20.50 850 $ 15.40 0 $ 60.00 0 $ 30.50 0 $ 50.00 1200 $ 1.40 1 $ 1,450.00 1.42 $ 90.00 57 $ 1.60 52 $ 2.25 65 $ 15.00 1 0 $ 165.00 0 $ 63.00 0.15 $ 50.00 694 $ 1.00 170.4 $ 0.35 1 TOTAL ESTIMATED COST
COST $ $ $ $ $ $ $ $ $ $ $ $ $ $ $ $ $ $ $ $ $ $ $ $ $ $ $ $ $ $ $ $ $ $ $ $ $ $ $ $ $ $
14,750.00 62,445.00 64,400.00 19,305.00 30,000.00 3,696.00 2,165.50 2,550.00 720.00 457.50 10,500.00 1,440.00 1,130.00 369.00 1,100.00 3,850.00 2,500.00 14,630.00 13,530.00 7,320.00 24,600.00 13,090.00 1,680.00 1,450.00 127.80 91.20 117.00 975.00 10,000.00 7.50 694.00 59.64 77,437.54
$ 387,188
Appendix C Preliminary Engineer's Cost Estimate Option B, Parkview School Recreation Area, Above Ground Infiltration
ITEM NUMBER 2021.501 2101.501 2101.506 2105.511 2105.525 2504.601 2503.541 2503.541 2503.541 2503.541 2104.509 2104.501 2104.603 2506.502 2506.502 2506.516 2104.523 2506.521 2506.602 2506.502 2104.521 2557.603 2511.501 2511.607 2511.511 2573.502 2573.602 2575.501 2575.502 2575.502 2575.502 2571.507 2575.511 2575.513 2575.519 2575.523 2575.532
ITEM DESCRIPTION
UNITS
MOBILIZATION (5%) CLEARING GRUBBING EXCAVATION TOPSOIL BORROW UTILITY RELOCATION 15" RCP PIPE (CL III) 18" RCP PIPE (CL III) 24" RCP PIPE (CL III) 48" RCP PIPE (CL IV) REMOVE MANHOLE OR CATCH BASIN REMOVE SEWER PIPE (STORM) ABANDON PIPE SEWER CONST DRAINAGE STRUCTURE DES 54-4020 DIVERSION STRUCTURE CASTING ASSEMBLY SALVAGE CASTING INSTALL CASTING CONNECT INTO EXISTING STORM SEWER CONST DRAINAGE STRUCTURE DESIGN SPECIAL (STORMTECH SYSTEM) SALVAGE FENCE INSTALL SALVAGED FENCE RANDOM RIPRAP, CLASS II RANDOM RIPRAP INSTALLATION GRANULAR FILTER SILT FENCE, TYPE MACHINE SLICED TEMPORARY CONSTRUCTION ENTRANCE/EXIT SEEDING SEED, MIXTURE 150 SEED, MIXTURE 240 SEED, MIXTURE 310 LANDSCAPING MULCH MATERIAL, TYPE 3 MULCH MATERIAL, TYPE 9 DISK ANCHORING EROSION CONTROL BLANKET, CAT 3 FERTILIZER, TYPE 4 CONTINGENCY (25%)
LS ACRE ACRE CY CY EACH LF LF LF LF EACH LF LF EACH EACH EACH EACH EACH EACH CF LF LF CY CY CY LF EACH ACRE LBS LBS LBS LS TON CY ACRE SY LBS LS
TOTAL QUANTITY 1 0 0 7704 2283 3 0 389 110 387 2 61 0 3 2 3 0 3 6 108945 1200 1200 0 0 0 1200 1 2.44 98 183 0 0 0 0 0 0 292.8 1
UNIT PRICE
COST
$ $ $ $ $ $ $ $ $ $ $ $ $ $ $ $ $ $ $ $ $ $ $ $ $ $ $ $ $ $
1,800.00 1,850.00 15.00 27.50 10,000.00 26.75 28.00 35.50 102.00 360.00 7.50 2.75 2,625.00 720.00 565.00 184.50 275.00 550.00 8.00 6.10 20.50 60.00 30.50 50.00 1.40 1,450.00 90.00 1.60 2.25 15.00
$ $ $ $ $
165.00 63.00 50.00 1.00 0.35
$ $ $ $ $ $ $ $ $ $ $ $ $ $ $ $ $ $ $ $ $ $ $ $ $ $ $ $ $ $ $ $ $ $ $ $ $ $
59,321.00 115,560.00 62,782.50 30,000.00 10,892.00 3,905.00 39,474.00 720.00 457.50 7,875.00 1,440.00 1,695.00 825.00 3,300.00 871,560.00 7,320.00 24,600.00 1,680.00 1,450.00 219.60 156.80 411.75 102.48 311,436.91
TOTAL ESTIMATED COST $ 1,557,185
Appendix C Preliminary Engineer's Cost Estimate Option C, B-Dale Club, Subsurface Infiltration Pipe Gallery
ITEM NUMBER 2021.501 2101.501 2101.506 2104.501 2105.511 2105.525 2105.604 2451.511 2502.521 2503.541 2503.541 2503.603 2503.603 2503.603 2504.602 2504.602 2506.502 2506.502 2506.502 2506.516 2506.521 2506.602 2104.521 2557.603 2573.502 2573.602 2575.505 2575.523 2575.532
ITEM DESCRIPTION
UNITS
MOBILIZATION (5%) CLEARING GRUBBING REMOVE SEWER PIPE (STORM) EXCAVATION TOPSOIL BORROW (CV) GEOTEXTILE FABRIC TYPE II COARSE FILTER AGGREGATE (CV) 8" TP PIPE DRAIN 18" RCP PIPE (CL III) 36" RCP PIPE (CL III) 48" HDPE PIPE SEWER 48" HDPE MANIFOLD CONSTRUCT RISER 48" X 8" HDPE TEE 48" X 24" HDPE TEE CONST DRAINAGE STRUCTURE DES 48-4020 CONST DRAINAGE STRUCTURE DES 72-4020 STORMCEPTOR (STC 4800) CASTING ASSEMBLY INSTALL CASTING CONNECT INTO EXISTING STORM SEWER SALVAGE FENCE INSTALL SALVAGED FENCE SILT FENCE, TYPE MACHINE SLICED TEMPORARY CONSTRUCTION ENTRANCE/EXIT SODDING TYPE LAWN EROSION CONTROL BLANKET, CAT 3 FERTILIZER, TYPE 3 CONTINGENCY (25%)
LS ACRE ACRE LF CY CY SY CY LF LF LF LF LF LF EACH EACH EACH EACH EACH EACH EACH EACH LF LF LF EACH SY SY LBS LS
TOTAL UNIT PRICE QUANTITY 1 0 $ 1,800.00 0 $ 1,850.00 310 $ 7.50 7200 $ 15.00 2400 $ 27.50 2400 $ 3.50 3124 $ 32.00 126 $ 24.00 50 $ 28.00 310 $ 63.00 3600 $ 50.00 288 $ 50.00 6 $ 30.00 42 $ 1,400.00 2 $ 1,500.00 1 $ 2,400.00 2 $ 5,000.00 1 $ 25,800.00 3 $ 565.00 3 $ 275.00 2 $ 550.00 75 $ 6.10 75 $ 20.50 600 $ 1.40 1 $ 1,450.00 1560 $ 3.50 200 $ 1.00 113 $ 0.35 1 TOTAL ESTIMATED COST
COST $ $ $ $ $ $ $ $ $ $ $ $ $ $ $ $ $ $ $ $ $ $ $ $ $ $ $ $ $ $
30,842.00 2,325.00 108,000.00 66,000.00 8,400.00 99,968.00 3,024.00 1,400.00 19,530.00 180,000.00 14,400.00 180.00 58,800.00 3,000.00 2,400.00 10,000.00 25,800.00 1,695.00 825.00 1,100.00 457.50 1,537.50 840.00 1,450.00 5,460.00 200.00 39.48 161,918.37
$ 809,592
Appendix C Preliminary Engineer's Cost Estimate Option D, Victoria and Dale Street Above Ground Filtration
ITEM NUMBER 2021.501 2101.501 2101.506 2105.511 2105.607 2105.607 2503.541 2503.541 2104.501 2506.502 2506.502 2506.516 2506.521 2506.602 2511.501 2511.607 2511.511 2573.502 2573.602 2575.501 2575.502 2575.502 2573.507 2575.511 2575.513 2575.519 2575.523 2575.532
ITEM DESCRIPTION
UNITS
MOBILIZATION (5%) CLEARING GRUBBING EXCAVATION TOPSOIL BORROW (ENGINEERED SOIL-70/30) RAILROAD TRACK BALLAST (CV) 21" RCP PIPE (CL III) 36" RCP PIPE (CL III) REMOVE SEWER PIPE (STORM) CONST DRAINAGE STRUCTURE DES 66-4020 CONST DRAINAGE STRUCTURE DES 72-4020 CASTING ASSEMBLY INSTALL CASTING CONNECT INTO EXISTING STORM SEWER RANDOM RIPRAP, CLASS II RANDOM RIPRAP INSTALLATION GRANULAR FILTER SILT FENCE, TYPE MACHINE SLICED TEMPORARY CONSTRUCTION ENTRANCE/EXIT SEEDING SEED, MIXTURE 150 SEED, MIXTURE 310 LANDSCAPING MULCH MATERIAL, TYPE 3 MULCH MATERIAL, TYPE 9 DISK ANCHORING EROSION CONTROL BLANKET, CAT 3 FERTILIZER, TYPE 4 CONTINGENCY (25%)
LS ACRE ACRE CY CY CY LF LF LF EACH EACH EACH EACH EACH CY CY CY LF EACH ACRE LBS LBS LS TON CY ACRE SY LBS LS
TOTAL UNIT PRICE QUANTITY 1 0.51 $ 1,800.00 0.51 $ 1,850.00 10760 $ 15.00 540 $ 35.00 201 $ 37.00 239 $ 39.00 61 $ 63.00 285 $ 7.50 1 $ 3,300.00 1 $ 4,000.00 2 $ 565.00 2 $ 275.00 2 $ 550.00 16.8 $ 60.00 16.8 $ 30.50 8.5 $ 50.00 800 $ 1.40 1 $ 1,450.00 0.5 $ 90.00 20 $ 1.60 22 $ 15.00 1 $ 0 $ 165.00 0 $ 63.00 0.26 $ 50.00 1258.4 $ 1.00 60 $ 0.35 1 TOTAL ESTIMATED COST
COST $ $ $ $ $ $ $ $ $ $ $ $ $ $ $ $ $ $ $ $ $ $ $ $ $ $ $ $ $
11,060.00 918.00 943.50 161,400.00 18,900.00 7,437.00 9,321.00 3,843.00 2,137.50 3,300.00 4,000.00 1,130.00 550.00 1,100.00 1,008.00 512.40 425.00 1,120.00 1,450.00 45.00 32.00 330.00 13.00 1,258.40 21.00 58,063.70
$ 290,319