Model Results Operation and Maintenance (O& M) Results Cost-Benefit Analysis Results Conclusions

Similar documents
Hydrology 101. Impacts of the Urban Environment. Nokomis Knolls Pond Summer June 2008

BMP 6.4.4: Infiltration Trench

Need to Verify Model TSS Reduction Estimates

SUBSURFACE INFILTRATION SYSTEM DESCRIPTION. Alternative Names: Sump, Drywell, Infiltration Trench, Infiltration Galleries, Leach Fields

Structural Stormwater Pollution Reduction Targeting Floatables, Gross-Pollutants, and Trash in Myrtle Beach

City of Fairmont Storm Water Pollution Prevention Plan (SWPPP) January 23, 2017

COON CREEK WATERSHED DISTRICT PERMIT REVIEW. Spring Lake Park Schools Westwood Middle School st Avenue NE, Spring Lake Park, MN 55432

Water in New Orleans. Jennifer Roberts. Sewerage & Water Board of New Orleans

ENGINEERED SOLUTIONS

PRELIMINARY DRAINAGE REPORT NEWCASTLE FIRE STATION OLD STATE HIGHWAY

BMP #: Water Quality Inserts

MODEL Stormwater Local Design Manual. City of Centerville

Storm Water Management Standards

Vortex Separator. May be more cost-effective pre-treatment devices than traditional wet or dry basins.

Appendix G Preliminary Hydrology Study

Stormwater Local Design Manual For Houston County, Georgia

SAFL Baffle Research Summary

Pre-Treatment Bioretention Cells Bioswales IOWA STORMWATER MANAGEMENT MANUAL DECEMBER 16, 2015

INFLOW DESIGN FLOOD CONTROL SYSTEM PLAN 40 C.F.R. PART PLANT YATES ASH POND B (AP-B ) GEORGIA POWER COMPANY

Appendix 12. Pollutant Load Estimates and Reductions

Nutrient Management in. A presentation to the West Metro Water Alliance

BIOPOD TM BIOFILTER WITH STORMMIX BIOFILTRATION MEDIA. Inspection and Maintenance Guide

CITY UTILITIES DESIGN STANDARDS MANUAL

Grass Channel STORMWATER MANAGEMENT SUITABILITY KEY CONSIDERATIONS

B. Install storm drain inlet protection to prevent clogging of the stormsewer and sediment loads to downstream stormwater facilities or waterbodies.

4.8. Subsurface Infiltration

4.8. Subsurface Infiltration

ENGINEERED SOLUTIONS. Terre Arch Concrete Detention/Infiltration. Solutions Guide

APPENDIX L Hydrology and Stormwater Pond Analysis

Stormwater Management Fact Sheet: Porous Pavement

At least 2 feet above the seasonal high water table Overflow path or structure provided

Hydrologic Study Report for Single Lot Detention Basin Analysis

PART 3 - STANDARDS FOR SEWERAGE FACILITIES DESIGN OF STORM SEWERS

INFLOW DESIGN FLOOD CONTROL SYSTEM PLAN 40 C.F.R. PART PLANT YATES ASH POND 3 (AP-3) GEORGIA POWER COMPANY

Appendix F Storm Drain Cleaning Program

1. Base Conditions: October 1, 2004, land use conditions with no BMPs applied.

NEW CASTLE CONSERVATION DISTRICT. through. (Name of Municipality) PLAN REVIEW APPLICATION DRAINAGE, STORMWATER MANAGEMENT, EROSION & SEDIMENT CONTROL

INFLOW DESIGN FLOOD CONTROL SYSTEM PLAN PLANT BARRY ASH POND ALABAMA POWER COMPANY

SITE DESIGN ENGINEERING, LLC. 11 Cushman Street, Middleboro, MA P: F:

Wet Detention Ponds, MCTTs, and other Options for Critical Area Stormwater Control. Robert Pitt University of Alabama, Tuscaloosa, AL

ENVIRONMENTAL ENGINEERING LAND SURVEYING

DUKE UNIVERSITY CONSTRUCTION STANDARDS

INFLOW DESIGN FLOOD CONTROL SYSTEM PLAN 40 C.F.R. PART PLANT DANIEL ASH POND B MISSISSIPPI POWER COMPANY

Stormwater Management Criteria

Field Verification of Performance of an Engineered Phosphorus Removal Media Deployed in a Flow Based Stormwater Filter

Water Quality Design Storms for Stormwater Hydrodynamic Separators

INFLOW DESIGN FLOOD CONTROL SYSTEM PLAN 40 C.F.R. PART PLANT BOWEN ASH POND 1 (AP-1) GEORGIA POWER COMPANY

Chapter 6. Hydrology. 6.0 Introduction. 6.1 Design Rainfall

[Rev - 1] 06/

Rhode Island Stormwater Design and Installation Standards Manual-- Final Draft: Public Informational Session May 26, 2010 at CCRI

BMP #: Infiltration Basin

Rainfall, runoff and sediment transport in the Napa River watershed: now and a possible future

Background Where did CSO systems begin? Combined Sewer Overflow (CSO) Control. Background. Background. Background

UMD Storm Water Program Construction Requirements. Greg Archer, MBA Environmental Compliance Specialist

Estimated Construction Cost: $30,000-$110,000

Lyon Creek Cedar Way Stormwater Detention Dam Operation and Maintenance Manual

Fort Leonard Wood, Missouri. September 2013

Rhode Island Stormwater Design and Installations Standards Manual

9.93 lbs lbs 3/31/2012. McGee Watershed 12 cups of sediment. City Hall Watershed 6.1 cups of sediment. 6,700 SF Watershed. 7,700 SF Watershed

Municipal Stormwater Management Planning

Clean Water is Everyone s Business. A commercial & industrial property owner s guide to improving Lake Tahoe s clarity

Boise City Public Works General Drainage Plan Review Requirements Checklist

Standards for Soil Erosion and Sediment Control in New Jersey May 2012 STANDARD FOR SLOPE PROTECTION STRUCTURES. Definition

ALMY POND TMDL MANAGEMENT PLAN

Simple Method for Estimating Phosphorus Export

ENVIRONMENTAL ENGINEERING LAND SURVEYING

10.0 Storm Sewer Systems

CITY UTILITIES DESIGN STANDARDS MANUAL

Construction Inspection Checklists

STORMWATER RUNOFF AND WATER QUALITY IMPACT REVIEW

Suffolk Downs Redevelopment. Appendix G: Stormwater Management Supporting Documentation

Hydrodynamic Separation Product Calculator

Stormwater Quality Extended Detention Basin Operation and Maintenance (O&M) Manual. for: Located at: Prepared for: Prepared by:

STORMWATER MANAGEMENT

Features: The Most Advanced Name in water management solutions TM

CITY OF NORTH MYRTLE BEACH OCEAN OUTFALL PROGRAM

Jacobi, Toombs, and Lanz, Inc.

Handout 5: Stormwater Cost of Service

Porous Pavement Flow Paths

4.3.6 Surface Sand Filters

VERIFICATION STATEMENT

WELCOME TO THE CONSTRUCTION STORMWATER PERMIT WEBINAR

N.J.A.C. 7:8 Stormwater Management Rules - Design and Performance Standards. Nonstructural Strategies Assist with Strategy #2; See Page 3

Chapter 15 Catch Basin Inserts

III. INVENTORY OF EXISTING FACILITIES

Best Management Practice Fact Sheet 14: Wet Ponds

Municipal Stormwater Ordinances Summary Table

7/16/2012. Post Construction Best Management Practices (PCBMPs) Article VIII: Post Construction Best Management Practices

Product Catalogue. Not intended for design layouts; refer to the appropriate StormTech Design Manual for specific chamber design information.

Modelling Climate Change and Urbanization Impacts on Urban Stormwater and Adaptation Capacity

GUIDELINES FOR STORMWATER BACTERIA REDUCTIONS THROUGH BMP IMPLEMENTATION NY/NJ HARBOR TMDL DEVELOPMENT

6 STOREY CONDOMINIUM 7480 DERRY ROAD WEST, MILTON

Preliminary Drainage Analysis

StormTech Product Catalogue

Effectiveness of Coanda Screens for Removal of Sediment, Nutrients, and Metals from Urban Runoff

Engineering Hydrology. Class 16: Direct Runoff (DRO) and Unit Hydrographs

Erosion & Sedimentation Control Policy

4.3.3 Dry Extended Detention Ponds

Operation and Maintenance Manual

SECTION 2 DESIGN CRITERIA

Transcription:

BMP Performance and Outline Background Model Results Operation and Maintenance (O& M) Results Results Conclusions Melissa Baker, Water Resource Technician Capitol Region Watershed District, St. Paul, MN Background Capitol Region Watershed District Capitol Region Watershed District (CRWD) BMP Project Area BMPs BMP Stormwater Monitoring P8 Model BMP Operation and Maintenance 41 Square Miles Portions of 5 Cities Population: 245,000 42% Impervious Surfaces 4 Lakes (Como, Crosby, Loeb, McCarrons) All Runoff Ultimately Flows to the Mississippi River Arlington Pascal Stormwater Improvement Project Multi-Jurisdictional Project in the Como 7 Subwatershed Goals: Reduce Flooding in the Como 7 and Adjacent Subwatersheds Address Needed Storm Sewer Improvements Improve Water Quality by Reducing the Amount of Phosphorous Discharging to Como Lake Determine Equitable Distribution of Costs 1

Arlington Pascal Stormwater Improvement Project Original Project Cost: $2.5 Million 60 Storm Sewer Pipe No Water Quality Benefits Final Project Cost: $2.0 Million 18 Stormwater BMPs Stormwater Volume and Pollutant Reduction Benefits *Costs do not include bond interest Stormwater BMPs Constructed Underground Stormwater Storage and Infiltration System (Arlington-Hamline Facility) Regional Stormwater Pond (Como Park Regional Pond) 8 Underground 8 Final Total Project Capital Cost: $2.7 Million *Total Capital Cost = Construction + Design + Bond Interest Stormwater BMPs Treatment Train of BMPs Total Drainage Area: 190 Acres Combined Storage Area: 141,553 ft² Combined Storage Volume: 444,390 cf 2

Underground Stormwater Storage and Infiltration System (Arlington-Hamline Facility) Total Capital Cost: $799,000 Storage Volume: 85,813 cf Drainage Area: 50 Acres 849 Feet of 10-Foot Diameter, Corrugated, Perforated Metal Pipes Vortech Serves as a Pretreatment Unit Began Operation: Fall 2006 Before After Total Capital Cost: $1,364,000 Storage Volume: 301,871 cf 128 Acres Direct Drainage Area Also Receives Discharges From Gottfried s Pit in Roseville (540 Acres) Began Operation: December 2007 Normal Water Level High Water Level Underground Total Capital Cost: $400,000 Combined Storage Volume: 37,352 cf Combined Drainage Area: 23 Acres Comprised of an Aggregate Backfill with 2, 10-Inch Perforated Pipes 30 Sumped Catch Basins and 16 Sumped Manholes Serve as Pretreatment Units Began Operation: June 2007 Before After Total Capital Cost: $160,000 Combined Storage Volume: 19,354 cf Combined Drainage Area: 16 Acres All Were Operational in 2007 BMP Stormwater Monitoring 2007 & 2008 Arlington-Hamline Facility 2 (Trenches 4 and 5) 8 (2008 Only) BMP Monitoring Methods Inlet and Outlet Monitored (except ) Continuous Water Level and Flow Recorded Every 10 Minutes Water Quality Samples Collected During Storm Events For Each Storm Event and Monitoring Season: Determined Total Flow and Calculated Total Phosphorous (TP) and Total Suspended Solids (TSS) Loads Also Determined Total Solids Loads Removed 3

Rain Garden Monitoring Manual Crest Gauges Installed at the Lowest Point in Each Garden Measured Peak Water Level Reached During a Storm Event Total Solids Load Sum of: Total TSS Load Removed by BMP Settleable Solids Captured by BMP SettleableSolidsCaptured by Pretreatment Units Settleable Solidsare Particles Larger than Suspended Size (Debris Such as Floatables, Organic Matter, and Sediment). Settleable Solids were Measuredin Pretreatment Units for Arlington- Hamline Facility and Infiltration Trenches Settleable Solids Captured by Rain Gardens and Como Park Regional Pond Were Estimated P8 Model Simulated the Performance of Each BMP over an Entire Year Total Discharge and TP and TSS Loads Calibrated Using Actual Precipitation Data and 2008 BMP Monitoring Data Results for 2007, 2008, and an Average Precipitation Year ( ) BMP Operation and Maintenance Developed a Manual of Inspection and Maintenance Protocols Documented Activities Using Electronic Field Forms BMP, Activity, Staff, Time Staff Labor Rates Determined and Used to Calculate Labor Costs of Each Activity Determined Operation and Maintenance Costs 2007, 2008, Year BMPs Maintained 2007 & 2008 Arlington-Hamline Facility Vortech Unit 8 30 Sumped Catch Basins 16 Sumped Manholes 8 (2008 Only) Model Results Volume Reduction and Pollutant (TP & TSS) Removal Efficiencies Total Solids Removal Results 4

Removal Efficiencies Removal Efficiencies 100% 90% Volume 100% 90% TP 80% 80% 2007 2008 Arlington- Hamline Facility Como Park Regional Pond Infiltration Trenches Volume 100% NA 88% 98% TP 100% NA 90% 98% TSS 100% NA 94% 98% Volume 100% 27% 96% 100% TP 100% 45% 97% 100% TSS 100% 83% 98% 100% Volume 100% 0% 93% 100% TP 100% 30% 94% 100% TSS 100% 78% 96% 100% NA: Not Applicable 70% 60% 50% 40% 30% 20% 10% 0% URIS Como Park Regional Pond BMP 100% 90% 80% 70% 60% 50% 40% 30% TSS 70% 60% 50% 40% 30% 20% 10% 0% URIS Como Park Regional Pond 2007 2008 20% 10% 0% URIS Como Park Regional Pond Total Solids Removal Results Operation and Maintenance Results Arlington- Hamline Facility Como Park Regional Pond Infiltration Trenches Subwatershed Area (acres) 50 128 23 16 2007 2008 Rainfall (in) 29.72 29.72 29.72 29.72 Total Solids Load Removed (lbs) 70,142 NA 76,991 53,014 Total TSS Load Removed: BMP 16,420 NA 6,605 3,089 Settleable Solids Removed: BMP 28,130 NA NA 49,925 Settleable Solids Removed: Pretreatement Units 25,592 NA 70,386 NA Rainfall (in) 21.67 21.67 21.67 21.67 Total Solids Load Removed (lbs) 48,159 197,932 39,144 26,122 Total TSS Load Removed: BMP 5,869 30,175 4,158 1,305 Settleable Solids Removed: BMP 28,130 167,757 NA 24,817 Settleable Solids Removed: Pretreatement Units 14,160 NA 34,986 NA Rainfall (in) 26.02 26.02 26.02 26.02 Total Solids Load Removed (lbs) 51,110 210,434 39,767 26,597 Total TSS Load Removed: BMP 8,820 42,677 4,781 1,780 Settleable Solids Removed: BMP 28,130 167,757 NA 24,817 Settleable Solids Removed: Pretreatement Units 14,160 NA 34,986 NA Inspection and Maintenance Activities O & M Costs 2007, 2008, O & M Hours Arlington-Hamline Facility 2007, 2008, and Activities: Pipe Gallery Inspections Vortech Sediment Inspections Manhole Sediment Inspections Debris Removal From Vortech Unit Activities: Debris Removal From Pipe Gallery 2008 and Activities: Sluice Gate and Gate Valve Maintenance Debris Removal From Pond Perimeter and Outlet Structure Completed by City of St. Paul Activities: Bathymetric Survey of Pond Debris Removal From Pond(Dredging) 5

2007, 2008, and Activities: Manhole and Catch Basin Sediment Inspections Post-Rain Trench Infiltration Inspections Debris Removal From Sumped Catch Basins and Manholes Catch Basin Hood Inspections and Gasket Replacement Activities: Jet Out and Remove Debris Accumulated in Perforated Pipes 2007, 2008, and Activities: Monthly Inspections Post-Rain Inspections Maintenance Mulching, Weeding, Mowing, Leaf Removal O & M: Costs & Hours O & M Cost = Total Cost of Labor + Equipment and Materials + Contract Services Arlington-Hamline Facility APSIP Total: 2007 2008 O & M O & M Cost Hours Cost Hours O & M Cost $531 13 $2,025 14 $2,867 NA NA $6,558 78 $4,550 $5,509 138 $12,405 88 $12,339 $14,851 640 $7,544 406 $5,803 $20,891 791 $28,532 585 $25,559 Capital Costs Operating Costs Volume Reduction Costs TP Removal Costs Total Solids Removal Costs Capital Costs Volume Reduction and Pollutant Removal Costs ($/cf, $/lb) Operating Cost / Volume or Pollutant Reduction Reference Document: A Public Works Perspective Regarding Cost vs. Benefit for Various Stormwater Best Management Practices (BMPs) Utilized to Manage Stormwater (Minnesota Public Works Association, 2007) Total Capital Cost Amortized Over 35 Years Arlington-Hamline Facility APSIP Total: *Total Capital Cost = Construction + Design + Bond Interest 2007 2008 $24,605 $24,605 $24,605 NA $38,981 $38,981 $11,430 $11,430 $11,430 $4,578 $4,578 $4,578 $40,614 $79,595 $79,595 6

Operating Costs Sum of O & M Cost and Capital Cost 2007 2008 Arlington-Hamline Facility $25,136 $26,630 $27,473 NA $45,539 $43,531 $16,939 $23,835 $23,769 $19,429 $12,122 $10,381 APSIP Costs: $61,505 $108,127 $105,154 Volume Reduction and Pollutant Removal Costs Volume Reduction Costs= Operating Cost ($) / Volume Reduction (cf) Pollutant Removal Costs= Operating Cost ($) / TP or Total Solids Load Removed (lbs) Operating Cost TP Removal Cost ($/lb) Total Solids Removal Costª ($/lb) Volume Reduction Cost ($/cf) Arlington- Hamline Facility Como Park Regional Pond Infiltration Trenches 2007 $25,136 NA $16,939 $19,429 2008 $26,630 $45,539 $23,835 $12,122 $27,473 $43,531 $23,769 $10,381 2007 $1,007 NA $1,126 $3,494 2008 $2,517 $888 $2,221 $4,329 $1,828 $714 $1,909 $2,791 2007 $0.36 NA $0.22 $0.37 2008 $0.55 $0.23 $0.61 $0.46 $0.54 $0.21 $0.60 $0.39 2007 $0.03 NA $0.02 $0.06 2008 $0.07 $0.02 $0.03 $0.07 $0.05 NA $0.03 $0.04 Conclusions BMP monitoring is important BMPs are performing as or better than expected Properly designed, constructed, and maintained BMPs are exhibiting high removal efficiencies Volume reduction and pollutant removal costs are largely affected by volume and pollutant load reductions Pond had the lowest removal costs Few studies which have this type of comprehensive analysis Continue research Pretreatment units are very beneficial Questions Stormwater BMP Performance Assessment and Report is available online at: www.capitolregionwd.org 7