February 5, 2014 meeting packet

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

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

February 5, 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) Board discussion – Delegation of Erosion Control Permits (Kelley)

B) Permit Program/Rules Update (Kelley)

IV. Special Reports –

A) High Performance Green Infrastructure: Distributed Real-time Monitoring and Control,

Sharlene Harper, Geosyntec Consultants

B) Dellwood Gardens Rainwater Reuse Feasibility Study, Nate Zwonitzer, Charlene Harper

and Rich Pakonen

V. Action Items

A) AR: Approve Minutes of the January 22, 2014 Regular Meeting (Sylvander)

B) AR: Approve Request for Qualifications for Information Technology Services (Sylvander)

C) AR: Approve Request for Qualifications for Title Services (Eleria)

D) AR: Approve Letter of Understanding with the Office of the State Auditor (Sylvander)

E) AR: Authorize Letter of Interest for Future Office Space (Doneux)

VI. Unfinished Business

A. FI: Highland Ravine (Eleria)

B. FI: Curtiss Pond (Fossum)

VII. General Information

A) Administrator’s Report

VIII. Next Meetings

A) Wednesday, February 12, 2014 CAC Meeting Review

B) Wednesday, February 19, 2014 Meeting Agenda Review

IX. Adjournment

W:\04 Board of Managers\Agendas\2014\February 5, 2014 Agenda Regular Mtg.docx

Materials Enclosed

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

DATE: January 30, 2014 TO: CRWD Board of Managers FROM: Forrest Kelley, Regulatory and Construction Program Manager RE: Staff Issued Erosion and Sediment Control Permits

Background Currently, all permits are approved by the Board of Managers prior to being issued for work to commence.

Discussion Erosion control permits generally require less review time, and in most cases consist of straightforward Stormwater Pollution Prevention Plans identifying locations of silt fence, and inlet protection devices. Occasionally, contractors or land owners are not aware of the requirement to obtain CRWD Erosion Control permits for demolition projects, or grading work must occur before stormwater management solutions are determined. The ability for staff to review and approve Erosion Control Permits would reduce the time between plan submittal and the permit being issued. This would also reduce staff time preparing Board Packet materials. Staff suggest that complex or politically controversial projects that require a higher level of review still be brought to the Board of Managers for approval, and permits issued during the period between Meetings would be presented as regular updates.

Requested Action Delegate the Authority to Approve and Issue Erosion and Sediment Control Permits Determined to be in Compliance with CRWD Rule F to Staff. W:\07 Programs\Permitting\Board Memos\Board Memo Staff Issued ESC Permits (2).docx

February 5th, 2014 Regular Board Meeting

III. Permits A) Staff Issued Erosion and Sediment Control

Permits


DATE: January 29th, 2014 TO: CRWD Board of Managers FROM: Nate Zwonitzer, Urban BMP Specialist RE: Dellwood Gardens Rainwater Reuse Feasibility Study

Background Last fall CRWD was contacted by representatives for a redevelopment project on East 7th Street in St. Paul. The owner of the building was in the process of renovating to create an assisted living facility that serves minority urban populations. Hoping to reduce building overhead costs and maximize services provided to residents, the owner was curious about rainwater harvesting and reuse options. Exploring these options has recently become more important as the concern over regional water supplies grows. To learn more about rainwater harvesting opportunities, CRWD contracted with Geosyntec Consultants to complete a feasibility study for the property. Issues The enclosed feasibility study identifies several options for harvesting rainwater from the roof of Dellwood Gardens and using it for irrigation or a combination of irrigation and toilet flushing. It also discusses challenges to the project including building infrastructure requirements and plumbing code. The report describes the benefits provided by two reuse system types. First is a passive system with a valve that can be opened or closed seasonally to slowly draw down the tank and provide storage space for the next rain event. The second is a “smart system” called Opti-RTC designed by Geosyntec. This system uses NOAA weather predictions to determine timing and how much water should be discharged to maximize rainwater capture during a storm (flood protection). The technology is being explored for use in other CRWD projects to optimize BMP performance. Cost is a major factor in reuse systems. Potable water is very inexpensive in Minnesota, and potable water savings alone do not provide enough return on investment to justify reuse systems. Though difficult to quantify, other factors such as runoff reduction, energy reduction for treating/distributing potable water, and reduced stress on infrastructure add to the appeal of rainwater reuse systems. This a new area of stormwater management in Minnesota that will require additional analysis and discussion to determine appropriate settings to apply rainwater reuse, as well as how to incentivize their installation. CRWD will continue working with Dellwood Gardens to explore funding options, and the project may be submitted for a future round of Special Grants. Requested Action: None. Enclosures: Geosyntec Consultants Memo – Dellwood Gardens Rainwater Harvesting Feasibility Study W:\07 Programs\Stewardship Grant Program\2013\Dellwood Gardens\Bd Memo Dellwood Gardens Report 2-5-14.docx

February 5, 2014 IV. Special Report

B) Dellwood Gardens Rainwater Reuse (Zwonitzer)

9211 Arboretum Parkway, Suite 200 Richmond, VA 23236

PH 804.767.2206 FAX 804.767.2182

www.geosyntec.com

Memorandum

Date: 28 January 2014

To: Nate Zwonitzer and Gustavo Castro, CRWD

From: Charlene Harper, P.E. (VA & MD), LEED AP

Subject: Dellwood Gardens Rainwater Harvesting Feasibility Study

Introduction Dellwood Gardens is a redevelopment project located at 753 7th St. E. in St. Paul, MN. The existing building is being renovated to serve as an assisted living facility by the owner, Richard Pakonen of Pak Properties. The project architect is Robert Pakola of RP Building Solutions, LLC and financial guidance is being provided by Stephanie Hawkinson of the Landon Group. The Dellwood Gardens project team approached Capitol Region Watershed District (CRWD) about potential grant funding to install a rainwater harvesting system on the site. There are no stormwater management requirements associated with the project; however, the owner would like to reduce potable water consumption for irrigation and flushing.

CRWD engaged Geosyntec Consultants (Geosyntec) to study the feasibility and potential benefits of including rainwater harvesting at Dellwood Gardens. Geosyntec’s scope of work included the following tasks: identify site constraints, permits, stormwater management benefits, potable water reduction benefits, probable construction costs, and optimal system size for both a passively managed and an actively managed rainwater harvesting and reuse system. The following report provides the details and findings of the feasibility study.

Existing Site and Building Conditions The original building (portion parallel to E. 7th St.) was built in 1916, while the remaining building was added in 1974. An existing 8” storm drain pipe conveys drainage from the North, Central, Lower 1 and Lower 2 roofs to an existing storm sewer system in Greenbrier St. (refer to Figure 1, Appendix A). Lower roof 3 has a gutter and downspout system that discharges on grade near the intersection with the original building. There is an additional at grade discharge from an internal roof drain system at the first floor elevation adjacent to the loading area; this outfall carries a portion, and possibly all, of the original roof drainage. Although not shown on the record site plans, storm drain grate inlets were observed in the parking lot and are assumed to connect to the existing storm drain system beneath Dellwood Place. The roof drain inlets, internal roof drain piping, and finished floor elevations per record architectural drawings are shown on Figure 2, Appendix A.

Dellwood Gardens Rainwater Harvesting Feasibility Study

2

Roof

Per the facility manager, Mr. Neely, and the architect, Bob Pakola, much of the roof was replaced in approximately 1996/98; only the North Roof (refer to Figure 1, Appendix A) of the building was not replaced at that time and is therefore in need of immediate replacement. The roof system is a built-up tar and gravel roof with a typical life of 20 years +/-. Tar and gravel is not an allowable roofing material for rainwater harvesting and will therefore need to be replaced with an acceptable material, such as TPO, if harvesting is to be included at this site.

Regulatory Requirements, Guidance, and Permits Rainwater harvesting for stormwater management purposes is a new practice in Minnesota, and the regulatory requirements and guidelines are still under development. The following resources were used to determine system constraints and regulatory requirements:

• Metropolitan Council Stormwater Reuse Guide dated Fall 2011 (http://www.metrocouncil.org/wastewater-water/planning/water-supply-planning.aspx)

• Minnesota Pollution Control Agency (MNPCA) Stormwater re-use and rainwater harvesting wiki (http://stormwater.pca.state.mn.us/index.php/Stormwater_re-use_and_rainwater_harvesting)

• 2012 Minnesota Plumbing Code Chapter 4715 (https://www.dli.mn.gov/ccld/PDF/pe_code.pdf) • St. Paul Municipal Plumbing Code

(http://library.municode.com/index.aspx?clientId=10061&stateId=23&stateName=Minnesota&customBanner=10061.jpg&imageclass=L&cl=10061.txt)

• Capitol Region Watershed District Permitting Overview (http://www.capitolregionwd.org/permits/permitting-overview/) and Stormwater Management Guidance Material (http://www.capitolregionwd.org/permits/stormwater-guidance-material/)

Plumbing Code

There is ambiguity in the plumbing code related to stormwater reuse within the building (i.e. for flushing). The Minnesota Department of Labor and Industry (DLI) is the state plumbing code authority; however, St. Paul has its own plumbing authority through the Department of Safety and Inspections (DSI). Per conversations with Scott Sawyer (DLI plan reviewer), the State accepts reuse applications through the plumbing code part 4715.0330, Alternate Fixtures, Appurtenances, Materials, and Methods. Typically, the requests have been for irrigation or vehicle wash use; DLI has draft guidelines that they use for harvesting and reuse (included in Appendix B below). Dellwood Gardens plumbing permits will come from St. Paul, which, per conversations with Richard Jacobs (senior plumbing inspector, DSI), does not currently allow rainwater harvesting and reuse for flushing. The owner is pursuing solutions to address this restriction, and the feasibility study includes both ‘irrigation only’ and ‘irrigation plus flushing’ water use scenarios.

Installation of cisterns within the building will require an exception request to St. Paul DSI, regardless of end use of the harvested water. Cisterns within the building must conform to plumbing code requirements for materials, licensed contractors, etc.


3

MNPCA and Metro Council Guidelines

Per MNPCA, rainwater harvesting may only capture runoff from roof surfaces, and the following roof types are precluded from harvesting: tar and gravel, asphalt shingles, cedar shake. As mentioned above, the tar and gravel roof material must be replaced prior to installation of a rainwater harvesting system. Pre-treatment is encouraged, as is disinfection prior to reuse; MNPCA is contemplating restrictions for spray irrigation of crops, monthly water sampling requirements, and water quality parameters for a variety of constituents of concern. Geosyntec’s recommendations for system configuration, operation and maintenance are based on experience in multiple other localities and are included below.

Permits

The harvesting system will be installed within the building and the installation of the irrigation lines is not likely to disturb more than 10,000 sf; therefore, CRWD permits may not be required. A plumbing permit from St. Paul Department of Safety and Inspections is required (http://www.stpaul.gov/index.aspx?NID=1782). Generally, a permit for the potable water back-up line with back-flow prevention would be required from St. Paul Regional Water Services; however, there is a permit exemption for work within St. Paul and permitted by St. Paul DSI on existing plumbing systems with existing water service (http://www.stpaul.gov/index.aspx?NID=2501). The schematic plan takes advantage of the existing storm drain connection pipes; however, overflow storm drain lines may need to be connected to the existing parking lot storm drain system. A site plan permit may be required for the combination of garden, irrigation system, and overflow storm drain connections; Geosyntec recommends pre-application meetings to confirm permit requirements when the project design begins (http://www.stpaul.gov/index.aspx?NID=4682).

Optimal Sizing and Benefits Geosyntec studied a variety of cistern tank sizes, tank locations, water demand scenarios, and control methods. Appendix C contains a detailed modeling explanation and early iterations of system configurations. The final modeling configurations were as follows:

1. Irrigation Demand Only. a. Passively managed b. Opti-RTC

2. Flushing Demand for Phase II Toilets plus Irrigation Demand a. Passively managed b. Opti-RTC

3. Flushing Demand for Entire Building plus Irrigation Demand a. Passively managed b. Opti-RTC


4

Modeling Parameters

Each scenario includes a 40,000 gallon tank located in the mechanical room; captures runoff from 26,000 sf of roof (does not include lower roof 3); calculates a variable irrigation demand based on soil moisture and evapotranspiration rates; irrigates 5,000 sf by drip irrigation and 15,000 sf by spray irrigation; and assumes an irrigation season from the beginning of April through the end of September. Cumulative snow depth records from a NOAA weather station at the Minneapolis/St. Paul airport were used to estimate snow melt rates. Snow was converted to runoff using 10 inches of snow equal to 1 inch of water and included in the model as a constant flow rate whenever the cumulative depth decreased. All scenarios disallow irrigation 24 hours before or after a rainfall event; and, when flushing demands are included, the flushing demand is prioritized over the irrigation demand. In the Irrigation Only model, a drawdown orifice was included to provide 24 – 30 hour extended detention in the winter months; the orifice was assumed to be open from October through February, allowing the month of March for the cistern to refill. The stormwater management and potable water reduction benefits of each scenario were quantified using the EPA Stormwater Management Model (SWMM) run with a continuous simulation of 10 years of hourly historic rainfall data from a NOAA rain gage at the Minneapolis/St. Paul airport. Refer to Appendix C for additional, detailed information regarding modeling parameters.

Cistern Size

Tank sizes for rainwater harvesting systems can vary significantly based on site constraints, desired benefits, and project budget. A one inch water quality volume of 15,400 gallons (2,060 cf) was used as the minimum viable cistern size; a typical irrigation demand of one inch per week, 12,500 gallons (1,700 cf), was also used as an initial indication of minimum cistern size. Geosyntec investigated three potential cistern locations. An exterior cistern located underground adjacent to the existing roof drain discharge pipe (refer to Figure 3, Appendix A) would require significant excavation costs and be disruptive to recent courtyard landscaping. Rooms 1 and 2 (refer to Figure 2, Appendix A) are empty and available; however, a cistern in this location would require significant re-plumbing of the roof drain lines within the building. Figure 4, Appendix A shows two, 20,000 gallon cisterns located in the mechanical room. Per the owner, the existing boilers in the mechanical room will be removed in the summer of 2014. Moderate re-plumbing will be required, as well as a small wet well to pump water into the top of the tanks. A cistern location beneath the front lawn was not studied as it could not be gravity fed and would require significant excavation costs.

Passive versus Active (Opti-RTC) Cistern Management

A passively managed cistern is one in which the demand for water is the only method by which water is removed from the tank. There is an increased potential for runoff to bypass a passively managed cistern if the demand does not drain enough volume before the next storm event.

Opti-RTC (optimized real time consulting) is a system developed by Geosyntec that actively manages the water level in the cistern with the goal of attaining 100% wet weather capture. A computer program combines forecast information from NOAA (updated hourly) with real-time water level information and


5

site drainage characteristics to make decisions that maximize storm capture. If room is needed in the cistern, the program will open a valve to drain the tank down before the storm occurs by the amount needed to accommodate the predicted storm volume. Wet weather capture helps minimize downstream flooding and erosion issues and increases runoff volume captured for water quality treatment. Refer to Appendix C for additional, detailed information regarding Opti-RTC.

Modeling Scenario Results

The following results demonstrate that significant volume reduction and stormwater management benefits can be realized by including rainwater harvesting and reuse at Dellwood Gardens. Opti-RTC provides the greatest wet weather capture benefits, including maximizing snow melt capture. Additionally, the user interface dashboard and real-time feedback system will help the owner identify such maintenance issues as running toilets and leaking sprinkler heads. Although the passive system overflows more frequently during storm events, the water is more consistently available for use; therefore, the passive system shows a greater volume reduction/potable water use reduction benefit.

Stormwater Management Benefits

Cistern Size (gallons)

Irrigation Area (sf)

Toilet Flushing (gallons/day)

Runoff Volume Reduction (gallons/yr)

Wet Weather Flow Reduction (gallons/yr)

Passive* Opti-RTC* Passive* Opti-RTC*

40,000 20,000 0 211,177 (46%)

186,175 (41%)

281,378 (62%)

388,597 (85%)

40,000 20,000 500 367,643 (72%)

339,754 (66%)

367,643 (72%)

477,676 (93%)

40,000 20,000 2,000 470,837 (92%)

448,138 (87%)

470,837 (92%)

496,948 (97%)

*percent reduction compared to baseline runoff with no cistern of 513,036 gallons/yr (includes snow melt)

Potable Water Use Reduction Benefits


Irrigation Area (sf)

Toilet Flushing (gallons/day)

Potable Volume Reduction (gallons/yr)

Potential Water Bill Savings (lower bound)

Passive* Opti-RTC* Passive** Opti-RTC**

40,000 20,000 0 212,297 (23%)

190,304 (21%) $692 $620

40,000 20,000 500 358,530 (40%)

289,044 (32%) $1,170 $943

40,000 20,000 2,000 462,917 (51%)

440,050 (49%) $1,510 $1,435

*percent reduction compared to estimated annual total project potable water use for irrigation (174,000 gallons/yr) & flushing (730,000 gallons/yr) = 904,000 gallons/yr **based on $2.44/100 cf water charge; does not include $6.32/100 cf potential sewer charge reduction


6

Note: the potable volume reduction is slightly less than the stormwater volume reduction because the stormwater volume reduction includes the volume of water residing in the storage tanks.

System Elements The following elements are recommended for inclusion in the rainwater harvesting and reuse system at Dellwood Gardens:

• Pretreatment: WISY Filter and flow splitter installed on the main 6” roof drain collection pipe (refer to Figure 4, Appendix A). The WISY filter is a stainless steel mesh basket meant to capture debris and leaf litter; the first 0.1” of each runoff event will be diverted because it carries the highest concentration of bacterial pollutants. To maintain cistern water quality, it is imperative to keep organic litter out of the tanks as decomposition uses up the oxygen in the water. From this structure, rainwater will flow by gravity toward the mechanical room wet well.

• Mechanical: Wet well with pump installed in the mechanical room. Because the existing 6” roof drain is below the basement floor slab, the top of the cisterns in the mechanical room will be above the elevation of the roof drain line. There is too much pressure for a gravity feed into the bottom of a full tank; therefore, a pump will lift the inflow to the top of the cistern tank.

• Storage: Cisterns located in the mechanical room. Two 20,000 gallon tanks will be connected by equalizer pipes at the bottom of the tanks. Associated appurtenances include calming inlet, floating pump intake with screen, submersible pump, level sensor, and overflow pipe.

• Disinfection: Common disinfection methods include either UV or chlorine. UV is simple to operate and maintain, and is free of hazardous chemical use or storage. UV should be sufficient given the instantaneous demand of the plumbing and irrigation systems. Chlorine may be required for flushing if residual chlorides are required during plumbing permit review.

• Control System: Opti-RTC and/or smart irrigation system control unit. Opti-RTC is recommended to maximize the stormwater benefits, but also because of the dashboard for system feedback and information sharing.

• Irrigation 1: Geosyntec recommends drip irrigation lines for the vegetable garden beds. There is concern expressed in the PCA rainwater harvesting section for directly spraying food plants with harvested water. The disinfection process may be sufficient to address this concern; however, drip irrigation for the edible plants is an additional protective measure.

• Irrigation 2: Spray irrigation zones for lawn/planting beds. These zones will be treated as ‘sacrificial’ and other demand uses will be prioritized based on cistern water availability.

• Optional day tank with spigot: A tank sized to hold one day’s irrigation demand can be included as an above ground cistern, allowing residents the opportunity to fill sprinkler cans or directly water certain garden areas without using potable water.


7

Opinion of Probable Construction Costs Geosyntec prepared an opinion of probable construction costs for budgeting purposes, which includes a 15% contingency but does not include probable project design costs. Estimates for replacing the roof and re-plumbing roof drain piping within the building were prepared by RP Building Solutions. The cost estimate supporting documents are included in Appendix D.

Opinion of Probable Construction Costs

Task Budget

Rainwater Harvesting and Reuse System + 15% contingency $167,613

Re-plumbing roof drain lines (per RP Building Solutions) $41,500

Replacement of 7,400 sf North Roof ($5 - $6/sf for removing aggregate, adding board & TPO)

$37,000

Replacement of remaining roofs to be harvested (Central, Original, Lower 2, Lower 3) $77,915

Total Project Budget $324,028

Conclusions The results of the feasibility study conclusively demonstrate substantial benefits for both stormwater management and potable water use reduction, thereby meeting both the mission of CRWD and the owner’s project goals. The greatest benefits are seen with a year round dedicated water demand (flushing); however, should flushing not be allowed, the benefits found in the ‘irrigation only’ scenario are still significant enough to support moving forward with the project.

Next Steps:

• Explore the various funding options and finalize a project budget • Core test the existing roof layers to determine if an overlay can be done or if the existing roof

must be removed first • Continue to negotiate the allowance of harvesting for flushing use • Explore options to participate in the regulatory process to comment on proposed harvesting

requirements


Appendix A: Figures

(

(

@ @ @ @@ @

@

@

@

@

@

@

@

@

@ @ @

@

# #

#

S

S

Total Potential Irrigation Area = 20,000 ft2

+FFE = 209.8

+ FFE = 209.8

At grade dischargeper site observation

Existing 6" Sanitary SewerInv. 192.0

Existing 8" Storm DrainInv. 192.0

NorthRoof

LowerRoof 2

OriginalRoof

LowerRoof 3

LowerRoof 1

LowerRoof 4

CentralRoof

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

North Roof 7396.61 ft2

Central Roof 5052.96 ft2

Original Roof 7685.19 ft2

Lower Roof 1 3984.11 ft2




Table of Roof Areas

Site Contraints Map

St. Paul, Minnesota

Figure

1

P:\GI

S\De

llWoo

d Ga

rden

s - M

W10

32\R

epor

t 1\F

igure

1_Sit

eCon

strain

tsMap

.mxd

; RDW

; 19-D

ec-20

13;

Richmond, Virginia December 2013

50 0 5025 Feet

³

Legend

S Area Drain# Down Spout@ Roof Drain

Gas Line

(

Sanitary Sewer

(

Storm Sewer

Water Line

Proposed Irrigation Areas

Impervious Surfaces

Notes:Aerial imagery accessed via ArcGIS Online and provided by Microsoft on19 December 2013. Image is dated 4 April 2012.

FFE = Finished Floor Elevation (ft msl)

!/ !/ !/ !/!/ !/

!/

!/

!/

!/

!/

!/

!/

!/

!/ !/ !/

!/

"S

Mechanical RoomFFE = 191.14FFE = 197.52

FFE = 198.75

FFE = 197.52

4" RD

4" RD4" RD3" RD 3" RD

2" Area Drain

4" RD

6" RD

4" RD

6" RD

Interior Drainage Features Map

St. Paul, Minnesota

Figure

2

P:\GI

S\De

llWoo

d Ga

rden

s - M

W10

32\R

epor

t 1\F

igure

2_Int

erior

Feat

uresM

ap.m

xd; R

DW; 1

9-Dec

-2013

;


40 0 4020 Feet

³

Notes:Background map created from Sheet D1 of the "First Floor DemolitionPlan" designed by Lampert Architects (St. Paul, Minnesota), 1 July 2013.


Legend

"S Area Drain

!/ Roof Leader

Storm Sewer Below Ground Floor

Storm Sewer in Ground Floor Ceiling

charper

Typewritten Text

Rooms 1 and 2

charper

Typewritten Text

charper

Typewritten Text

charper

Typewritten Text

charper

Typewritten Text

(

(

(

@ @ @ @@ @

@

@

@

@

@

@

@

@

@ @ @

@

# #

#

S

S

((

(

(

Existing 6" Sanitary SewerInv. 192.0

Inv.Unknown

PotentialInteriorCistern

LowProfile

20KGallon

Flow Diversion& Screen

8-inch Drain& Overflow

Wet Well

To UV& Irrigation

Make-upWater Source

MW Top197 +/-

8" 191.75 +/-

8" RD Inv. 19218" Sump

8" Overflow@ 191.75 +/-

Bottom 189 +/-Submersible Pump

(Need Power)

Wet WellAccess Manhole

FloatingIntake

CalmingInlet

Make-upWater

6" Drain @ 189.0 +/-

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

Potential Cistern Configuration

St. Paul, Minnesota

Figure

3

P:\GI

S\De

llWoo

d Ga

rden

s - M

W10

32\R

epor

t 1\F

igure

3_Po

tent

ialCi

sternC

onfig

uratio

n.mxd

; RDW

; 18-D

ec-20

13;


50 0 5025 Feet

³

Legend

S Area Drain# Down Spout@ Roof Drain

Gas Line

(

Sanitary Sewer

(

Storm Sewer

Water Line

Proposed Irrigation Areas

Impervious Surfaces

Notes:Aerial imagery accessed via ArcGIS Online and provided by Microsoft on18 December 2013. Image is dated 4 April 2012.

Cistern diagram not to scale and for conceptual purposes only.

!/ !/ !/ !/!/ !/

!/

!/

!/

!/

!/

!/

!/

!/

!/ !/ !/

!/

"S

Mechanical RoomFFE = 191.14FFE = 197.52

FFE = 198.75

FFE = 197.52

4" RD

4" RD4" RD3" RD 3" RD

2" Area Drain

4" RD

6" RD

4" RD

6" RD

Interior

St. Paul, Minnesota

Figure

P:\GI

S\De

llWoo

d Ga

rden

s - M

W10

32\R

epor

t 1\F

igure

2_Int

erior

Feat

uresM

ap.m

xd; R

DW; 1

9-Dec

-2013

;

Richmond, Virginia January 2014

40 0 4020 Feet

³

Notes:Background map created from Sheet D1 of the "First Floor DemolitionPlan" designed by Lampert Architects (St. Paul, Minnesota), 1 July 2013.


Legend

"S Area Drain

!/ Roof Leader

Storm Sewer Below Ground Floor

Storm Sewer in Ground Floor Ceiling

charper

Rectangle

charper

Oval

charper

Line

charper

Oval

charper

Line

charper

Polygonal Line

charper

Polygonal Line

charper

Text Box

Add WISY Filter, Wet Well, 40K Gallon Tanks, Replumb Original Roof Drainage

charper

Line

charper

Rectangle


Appendix B: Plumbing Correspondence

1

Charlene Harper

From: Sawyer, Scott (DLI) <[email protected]>Sent: Friday, November 08, 2013 5:25 PMTo: Charlene HarperCc: Tran, Cathy (DLI)Subject: stormwater re-use in St Paul

Charlene, I located the documents that I was searching for when we were on the phone. Since the documentation I have is labeled “draft” and is primarily set up as a guide for in-house reviewers during plan review, I will cut and paste key sections of the document as they pertain to design. I am going to send info on stormwater re-use for toilet/urinal flushing or other approved nonpotable water uses inside of the building. There were two slightly different documents addressing re-use for irrigation systems, so I think I will leave it up to my supervisor to determine which information is more current. To my knowledge, most of the stormwater re-use we have seen is for irrigation use. Occasionally we see reuse for vehicle washing, and rarely do we see systems for flushing. I recommend talking with my supervisor, Cathy Tran, regarding the latest info for re-use. She will be back on Tuesday, Nov. 12. Please note that since this is an assisted living facility in the city of St. Paul, the city is the authority having jurisdiction. You should talk with their building department about their acceptance of reuse systems and their design requirements. The info below may be useful as a guideline, but there is no guarantee that the city of St Paul will agree with the items listed below. STORMWATER COLLECTION SYSTEM (flushing of Toilet/Urinal or other approved non-potable water uses inside building) Any proposed design will be reviewed as an alternative method in accordance with Minnesota Rules, part 4715.0330, Alternate Fixtures, Appurtenances, Materials, and Methods. General Design Requirements:

5. Provide storm drainage system shall be designed in accordance the Minnesota Plumbing Code.

6. Storm water collection must be from the building rooftop. There shall be no storage or placement of any

petroleum or other toxic storage tanks or other non-approved equipment discharge onto the roofs. 7. All systems shall include provisions for treating the water for re-use assure the water has been cleaned and

treated as proposed acceptable level that is acceptable to the Administrative Authority This shall include filtration and disinfection processes.

8. Tank Design:

2

a. Supporting evidence must be provided from the manufacturer that the storm water storage tank is constructed for the intended use. Any applicable associated recognized standards to support the proposed use, including the life expectancy of the tank must be provided.

b. All storage tanks shall be installed in accordance with the manufacturer’s installation requirements. When installed aboveground, the tanks shall be properly located, supported, and secured to the manufacturer’s requirements. When installed underground, the tank shall be structurally designed to withstand all loads including earth load and must be certified by a structural engineer.

c. Provisions shall be made to vent the storage tanks when the tanks can become airbound. d. Access to the storage tank must be provided for maintenance/inspections and must be at

least 24 inches in size; e. The storage tank(s) must be watertight and past an approved test in accordance with

Minnesota Rules, part 4715.2820, or as recommended by the manufacturer acceptable to the administrative authority. A test that is acceptable to the administrative authority and the manufacturer shall be performed on site to verify for watertight construction after installation. For safety, a hydrostatic or negative pressure tests for tanks may be used in lieu of the 5 pound air test (see Minnesota Rules, part 4715.2820).

9. The storage tank outlet piping shall not be smaller than the inlet piping from the storm water system to the

storage tank. The tank must connect to the storm sewer, discharge to grade in a non-public traffic area, or discharge to other approved point of disposal. The system must be designed to preclude surcharging.

10. Distribution Piping:

a. The water distribution piping after the collection system must be code approved pipe material in accordance with 4715.0520.

b. The distribution system must also be tested in accordance with 4715.2820. c. The water distribution sizing information must be sized in accordance with MN Plumbing Code. d. A 10-feet of separation shall be maintained between the any component/piping of the storm water

collection system and the potable water sytem. e. The system shall be colored (purple colored), tagged, and labeled accordingly, “NON-POTABLE WATER -

RAINWATER REUSE - DO NOT DRINK.

11. Make up water from the potable water system must be protected against contamination with an approved backflow preventer (e.g., an RPZ or airgap).

12. The Storm collection system, distribution piping, and all components shall be protected from corrosion. 13. A sampling tap must be installed on the supply line for testing purposes. To facilitate the required testing, a

sampling tap must be installed on the supply line near the point of use while the system is operating. Operations/Maintenance Requirements

14. A maintenance/operation program shall be in place as required in Item 1 above.

15. The water quality shall be maintained at safe and sanitary levels to protect public health. The water quality from

the treated water distribution system must be tested monthly. Records and results of these tests must be maintained and made available to our office upon request. The required water quality tests are as follows:

pH 6-9, <100 fecal coliform cfu per 100 mL, less than or equal to 5 mg TSS, water color, and noticeable odor.

3

Hope this gets you off to a good start. Scott Sawyer, P.E. Public Health Engineer Plumbing Plan Review and Inspections Unit Department of Labor & Industry 651/284-5803

1

Charlene Harper

From: Sawyer, Scott (DLI) <[email protected]>Sent: Thursday, December 19, 2013 8:01 PMTo: Charlene HarperCc: Tran, Cathy (DLI)Subject: RE: stormwater re-use in St Paul

Charlene, As far as I know, the Department of Labor & Industry (DLI) does not have a position regarding rainwater re-use. Since the code does not explicitly address re-use, when DLI is tasked with a plumbing plan review that includes rainwater reuse (for irrigation or for flushing), it is considered on a case-by-case basis as an alternate method as outlined in MN Rules 4715.0330. DLI’s acceptance of an alternate method is always contingent upon the local administrative authority, if there is one, providing documentation of their acceptance of the proposed alternate method and system design. Scott Sawyer Plumbing Plan Review - DLI From: Charlene Harper [mailto:[email protected]] Sent: Tuesday, December 17, 2013 3:57 PM To: Sawyer, Scott (DLI) Cc: Tran, Cathy (DLI) Subject: RE: stormwater re-use in St Paul I greatly appreciate your input below. By chance, is there a plan or timeline to formerly adopt the draft guidance that you’ve given below--especially as it relates to uses other than just irrigation? I now have 2 projects in St Paul that are extremely interested in harvesting for flushing, which is fantastic! However, St. Paul does not currently allow harvesting for uses other than irrigation and I believe that a formal state position (code, policy, or official guidance) might make them more comfortable or open to discussing it. Thank you! Charlene Charlene Harper, P.E., LEED AP Senior Engineer ------------------------------------------------------ Phone: 804-665-2815 cell: 804-393-9350

From: Sawyer, Scott (DLI) [mailto:[email protected]] Sent: Friday, November 08, 2013 5:25 PM To: Charlene Harper Cc: Tran, Cathy (DLI) Subject: stormwater re-use in St Paul Charlene,

1

Charlene Harper

From: Jacobs, Rick (CI-StPaul) <[email protected]>Sent: Wednesday, December 04, 2013 3:05 PMTo: Charlene HarperCc: Zangs, Tom (CI-StPaul); Sima, Anca (CI-StPaul)Subject: RE: Question regarding storm water use for flushing

Hi Charlene, Consideration would be made for rainwater harvesting from roof discharge for irrigation only. As you stated in your email, the state and city have no codes or guidelines at this time for using rainwater or greywater for fixture use. Engineered design plans would need to be submitted to and approved by both the Saint Paul Sewer Division (Anca Sima, Sewer plan review @ 651-266-6237)and the Department of Safety and Inspections(DSI Rick Jacobs, Senior Plumbing Inspections)if the tank is to be located outside the building on private property. If the design called for a potable water line to be installed for adding water during times of drought like conditions, the connection along with the proper potable water protection would be an approved, inspected, and permitted by Saint Paul Regional Water Services (SPRWS @ 651-266-6350).

Richard Jacobs Sr. Plumbing Inspector Department of Safety and Inspections 375 Jackson Street, Suite 220 Saint Paul, MN 55102 P: 651-266-9051 [email protected]

Making Saint Paul the Most Livable City in America

From: Charlene Harper [mailto:[email protected]] Sent: Tuesday, December 03, 2013 2:59 PM To: Jacobs, Rick (CI-StPaul) Subject: Question regarding stormwater use for flushing Good afternoon Mr. Jacobs, I just left you a voice message, but wanted to follow up with an email as well. I am working on stormwater concepts for an assisted living project in St. Paul and the owner would like to consider rainwater harvesting for flushing toilets as well as for irrigation. I don't see that stormwater harvesting/reuse is specifically addressed in either the State or St. Paul municipal plumbing codes--is it allowed in St. Paul? We would be proposing a dual pipe system (either tagged as non-potable or painted) and back flow protection to ensure that there is no cross-contamination with potable water.

2

If allowable, is there a special permitting process or special exception process that we would need to go through to flush with stormwater? We are just in the concept stage, but I'd like to identify if there are additional time or permit fee considerations that should be taken into account as I advise the client. Thank you for your time. Charlene Harper Senior Engineer cell: 804-393-9350

1

Charlene Harper

From: Jacobs, Rick (CI-StPaul) <[email protected]>Sent: Thursday, December 19, 2013 11:48 AMTo: Charlene HarperCc: Zangs, Tom (CI-StPaul)Subject: RE: Question regarding storm water use for flushing

Charlene, This MAY be allowed. This has never been suggested or allowed in this jurisdiction that I am aware of. Engineered design drawings with the request and reason for a deviation to the Minnesota Plumbing Code would be required. This request would need approval from the Sr. Plumbing Inspector at The Department of Safety and Inspections(DSI). From: Charlene Harper [mailto:[email protected]] Sent: Tuesday, December 17, 2013 12:03 PM To: Jacobs, Rick (CI-StPaul) Cc: Zangs, Tom (CI-StPaul); Sima, Anca (CI-StPaul) Subject: RE: Question regarding storm water use for flushing Thank you for your response and explanation on permitting. Would you allow a cistern located inside of a building for use as an exterior irrigation supply? Our intention would be divert water from the roof drains to the inside cistern, then route any overflow back to the storm drain system (not the floor drains). Best regards, Charlene Charlene Harper, P.E., LEED AP Senior Engineer ------------------------------------------------------ Phone: 804-665-2815 cell: 804-393-9350

From: Jacobs, Rick (CI-StPaul) [mailto:[email protected]] Sent: Wednesday, December 04, 2013 3:05 PM To: Charlene Harper Cc: Zangs, Tom (CI-StPaul); Sima, Anca (CI-StPaul) Subject: RE: Question regarding storm water use for flushing Hi Charlene, Consideration would be made for rainwater harvesting from roof discharge for irrigation only. As you stated in your email, the state and city have no codes or guidelines at this time for using rainwater or greywater for fixture use. Engineered design plans would need to be submitted to and approved by both the Saint Paul Sewer Division (Anca Sima, Sewer plan review @ 651-266-6237)and the Department of Safety and Inspections(DSI Rick Jacobs, Senior Plumbing Inspections)if the tank is to be located outside the building on private property.


Appendix C: Modeling


MODELING BACKGROUND

The purpose of the modeling effort was to provide the design basis for Real-Time Weather Forecasted Integrated Control System of the Rainwater Harvesting System at Dellwood Gardens in St. Paul, Minnesota. The model designed within has been created to estimate the ability of the integrated control system (OptiRTC) to operate within the framework of the proposed harvesting system at Dellwood Gardens. This analysis shows that OptiRTC, when combined with the proposed detention tank system, is best able to minimize wet weather discharges.

This system will include real-time monitoring and control system components that will function to retain water in the detention tank after a rainfall event for later reuse by the site’s irrigation and toilet flushing systems (“controlled” scenarios). The system will drain (or partially drain) the tank in anticipation of precipitation events, recovering volume for flood storage during the event. The “passive” scenario does not incorporate draining of the system to capture anticipated precipitation events and does not continuously monitor the water level within the cistern. The “passive” system detains runoff and uses it for irrigation or flushing of toilets if available. Modes for operating the system to recover flood storage may include:

1) Discharging to the storm sewer through the cistern draw-down orifice;

2) Irrigation of gardens and grass;

3) Toilet flushing; and

4) Post-storm dry weather release (aka extended detention).

The real-time controlled system integrates real-time monitoring and prediction of water level within the storage/detention tank, on-site meteorological data (e.g., site rain gage), and forecasted meteorological data from a nearby weather station to decide when and for how long the storage tank will discharge to the storm sewer system. The logic surrounding this decision-making process is adaptable and can be altered in coordination with permitting authorities according to site conditions to take into account irrigation or other site water use needs.

RAINWATER HARVESTING SYSTEM COMPONENTS

The harvesting system will include a detention vault, real-time controller (OptiRTC connected hardware components), pressure transducer or other level sensor(s) to measure water levels in the detention tank, flow meter(s) to determine discharge to the storm sewer, actuated control valve, a web dashboard, and infrastructure to operate the control system. The status of connected valves, and water levels in addition to onsite meteorological and forecasted weather data will be available for real-time monitoring through the site-specific web dashboard.

The OptiRTC platform will be used to operate the storage in a water conservation mode:

This function addresses the objective to minimize the use of municipal water for irrigation and toilet flushing.


It uses current storage levels in the detention tank and forecasted precipitation and other meteorological data (e.g., site rainfall gage) to determine when runoff water can be retained to provide for irrigation and toilet flushing needs.

Water usage data are added into the OptiRTC platform and can be analyzed for system optimization.

MODELING INPUTS AND ANALYSIS

An EPA Storm Water Management Model (SWMM) was developed to simulate on-site runoff flows through the detention tank system. The model accounts for water entering the system through runoff producing precipitation events and water exiting the system through the controlled outlet.

The drainage area for the proposed “passive” and “controlled” detention tanks for all modeling scenarios included an existing 100% impervious, 26,000 square feet roof.

Multiple scenarios which included varying tank sizes and varying water demands (i.e. irrigation and toilet flushing) were modeling within SWMM. The draw-down orifices were designed to drain the cisterns between 24-30 hours. The multiple scenarios are listed below:

• Scenario 1: 10,000 gallon cistern used to irrigate 20,000 square feet of gardens and grass;

• Scenario 2: 20,000 gallon cistern used to irrigation 20,000 square feet of gardens and grass;

• Scenario 3: 40,000 gallon cistern used to irrigation 20,000 square feet of gardens and grass;

• Scenario 4: 20,000 gallon cistern used to irrigate 20,000 square feet of gardens and grass and used to flush toilets at a demand of 500 gallons per day (Phase II only; based on no. of toilets x 10 flush per day x 1.6 gallons per flush); and

• Scenario 5: 20,000 gallon cistern used to irrigate 20,000 square feet of gardens and grass and used to flush toilets at a demand of 2,000 gallons per day (Phase I and II).

Note: these scenarios were based on cistern locations outside of the building; or, in the case of the 40,000 gallon cistern, a combination of multiple cisterns located both in and outside of the building. Following the team meeting on 12-20-2013, the cistern location was decided to be in the mechanical room.

In the modeling scenarios where irrigation was the only demand (i.e. Scenarios 1-3), the “passive” and “controlled” cisterns were placed in “winter” mode during the months of October through the end of February. During this time, rainfall instead of snow is expected to occur and therefore, the draw-down orifice would remain open, potentially providing peak flow mitigation if runoff was to occur. The draw-down orifice would then be closed in March to capture snow


melt runoff and runoff from any precipitation events in order to fill the tank and ensure water is available for irrigation starting in April. The month of March was the first month where the historical average high temperature was above freezing. According to the MN Rainwater Harvesting Guideline, irrigation typically occurs in MN during the months of April to end of September. A continuous irrigation demand was modeled within SWMM. When the soil moisture within the gardens or grass fell below 0.5-inches, a pump would turn on and irrigate 1-inch of water over the gardens or grass at a rate of 1cfs. Once the soil moisture increased by 1-inch, the pump would turn off. It was assumed within the irrigation models that the pervious areas would not be irrigated 24 hours before or after an anticipated storm event and irrigating could not deplete the depth of stored water in the cistern to less than 1-foot.

When toilet flushing is incorporated into the model, the cisterns are not placed in winter mode for both the “passive” and “controlled” scenarios. During these scenarios, it is anticipated that OptiRTC would run year-round.

The Smart Detention scenario simulates OptiRTCs water conservation mode. This scenario maximizes the storage in the detention tank, while minimizing discharge during rainfall events. When the anticipated necessary detention storage volume (due to an approaching rainfall event) exceeds the available storage in the tank, water is discharged through the controlled outfall before rainfall begins to regain storage capacity for the approaching rainfall event.

The OptiRTC system uses two-day precipitation forecasts, so at the beginning of each day, the model is aware of the precipitation for the current and next day. The forecast is updated on an hourly basis. The system then makes water distribution decisions based on both the predicted rainfall and the predicted runoff.

RESULTS: EARLY SYSTEM CONFIGURATIONS

The model results approximate the utility of the OptiRTC system in reducing site runoff during wet weather conditions compared to the standard detention scenario. The OptiRTC model results, compared to the standard detention results, are shown in Table 1, below. These models do not include snow melt, which was calculated and included in the final model configurations.

Table 1. Modeling Results over 10-Year Simulation Period (Scenarios 1-3)

Cistern Size

(gallons)

Irrigation Area (SQ.FT)

Volume Reduction Due to Irrigation (gallons/yr)

Wet Weather Flow Reduction

Passive (% Reduction

compared to no cistern)

Opti-RTC (% Reduction


Passive- Year Round (% reduction


Opti-RTC-Year Round (% Reduction


Passive- Irrigation

Months Only (% Reduction


Opti-RTC-Irrigation

Months Only (% Reduction


10K 20,000 126,380 (28%) 111,247 (24%) 161,510 (36%) 268,375 (59%) 120,140 (25%) 216,695 (63%)

20K 20,000 184,612 (41%) 158,016 (35%) 236,469 (52%) 344,871 (76%) 175,230 (51%) 279,905 (81%)

40K 20,000 211,177 (46%) 186,175 (41%) 281,378 (62%) 388,597 (85%) 208,586 (60%) 314,221 (91%)


The model results shows that the smart detention model run results in a 63% reduction (216,695 gallons) in wet weather discharge1 from the site during the irrigation months (when OptiRTC and irrigation are turned on), while the standard detention results show a 25% reduction for the 10,000 gallon cistern. The percent reductions increase as the cistern size increases. The model results show that the smart detention model run results in at least a 24% (111,247 gallon/yr) reduction in stormwater volumes from the site, while the standard detention results show a 28% decrease. The volume reduction for OptiRTC is less than the volume reduction for the standard detention system because OptiRTC uses two-day precipitation forecasts to determine when to discharge to the storm system in anticipation of a predicted storm event. If a storm event is anticipated within the next 48 hours, the valve will open if additional storage is required to fully capture the storm event, potentially decreasing the volume available for irrigation. The logic within OptiRTC can be altered according to site needs and can prioritize irrigation demand over wet weather discharges, if desired. The volume reduction is volume that would be used to irrigate the fields, reducing potable water costs.

The OptiRTC model results, compared to the standards detention results when stored water would be used for toilet flushing and irrigation are shown in Table 2, below.

Table 2. Modeling Results over 10-Year Simulation Period (Scenarios 4-5)

Cistern Size

(gallons)

Irrigation Area

(SQ.FT)

Toilet Flushing (GPD)

Volume Reduction Due to Irrigation and Toilet Flushing

(gallons/yr) Wet Weather Flow Reduction

Passive (% Reduction


Opti-RTC (% Reduction


Passive- Year Round (% reduction


Opti-RTC-Year Round (% Reduction


20K 20,000 500 293,081 (64%) 267,320 (59%) 293,081 (64%) 384,475 (85%)

20K 20,000 2,000 360,714 (79%) 338,088 (74%) 360,714 (79%) 397,326 (87%)

When irrigation and toilet flushing are used as the water demand on the cisterns, and OptiRTC is operating year-round, the 20,000 gallon cistern reduces wet weather flows by at least 85% (384,475 gallons), while the standard detention reduces wet weather flows by 64%. OptiRTC is able to regulate when the stormwater (or snow melt) runoff volumes enter the storm sewer system, reducing flooding in the area. The model results show that the smart detention model run results in at least a 59% (267,320 gallon/yr) reduction in stormwater volumes, while the standard detention shows at least a 64% reduction. Once again, this is due to when OptiRTC decides to discharge stored volume to be able to fully capture the anticipated storm event, reducing the volume available for irrigation.

1 Wet weather discharge is discharge that occurs under during a rainfall event (i.e., while it is raining).

Stormwater Management Benefits




Passive (% Reduction compared to no cistern)

Opti-RTC (% Reduction compared to no cistern)

Passive- Year Round (% reduction compared to no

cistern)

Opti-RTC-Year Round (% Reduction compared to no

cistern)

40K 20,000 500 367,643 (72%) 339,754 (66%) 367,643 (72%) 477,676 (93%)

40K 20,000 2,000 470,837 (92%) 448,138 (87%) 470,837 (92%) 496,948 (97%)

cumulative snow depth (from NOAA) and includes a constant inflow when the cumulative depth decreases (10" snow = 1" water)

prioritizes flushing over irrigation, doesn't irrigate if the tank is within 12" of empty

Water Use Reduction Benefits




Passive (gallons/yr) Opti-RTC (gallons/yr) Passive ($/yr) Opti-RTC ($/yr)

40K 20,000 500 358,530 289,044 $1,170 $943

40K 20,000 2,000 462,917 440,050 $1,510 $1,435

typical water use for irrigation (174,000 gallons/yr) + 2,000 GPD flushing (730,000 gallons/yr) without harvesting = 904,000 gallons/yr @ $2.44/100 cf = $2,949

Storm Sewer System ChargeCommercial = $1321 / acre

Can request a review of this fee based on stormwater management provided on site. Nearly 100% reduction of stormwater runoff

from 26,000 sf of roof credit potential of $660.50 reduction per year

Volume Reduction (gallons/yr) Wet Weather Flow Reduction

Water Used For Irrigation and Toilet Flushing Water Bill Savings at $2.44/100 CF


Appendix D: Probable Construction Costs

Schematic Budget: Opinion of Probable Costs

Item No. Units units cost/unit total cost NotesMobilization 1 Ea. $6,000.00 $6,000MH/Large clean-out 1 Ea. $750.00 $750 in floor for WISY Filter accessPre-treatment 1 Ea. $3,000.00 $3,000 WISY Filter w/ extended handleStorage 40K 40,000 Gallon $1.10 $44,000 storage, calming inlet, angled overflowWet Well w/ Pump 1 Ea. $3,000.00 $3,000 to enter storage tanksMechanical System 1 Ea. $45,000.00 $45,000 pump, filtration, UV, make-up water, commissioning

Irrigation System (20,000 sf) 1 LS $12,000.00 $12,000includes drip, mid-range rotors, spray heads, installation

Irrigation System controller 1 LS $7,000.00 $7,000includes wall mounted controller & turf guard starter package

Opti-RTC 1 LS $25,000.00 $25,000 dashboard, logic, level sensor, valve, controller panel

Budget $145,750Budget + 15% contingency $167,613

*does not include roof drain work inside building, roof material, replumbing original building, design, permitting


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

January 22, 2014 6:05 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

Mike Thienes

Shirley Reider

Seitu Jones

Mary Texer

Others Present

Mark Doneux, CRWD

Michelle Sylvander, CRWD

Forrest Kelley, CRWD

Nate Zwonitzer, CRWD

Bob Fossum, CRWD

Gustavo Castro, CRWD

Jim Mogen, Ramsey County

Attorney’s Office

Public Attendees Wes Saunders Pearce, City of

St. Paul

Anne Hunt, City of St. Paul

Todd Shoemaker, Wenck

Jared Olson, Ryan Company

Matt Holmboe, Solution Blue

B) Review, Amendments and Approval of the Agenda

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

VI. Unfinished Business item C. CAC Revitalization and item D. MAWD Resolution.

Motion 14-008: Approve the January 22, 2014 Agenda with additional items.

Reider/Texer

Unanimously approved

II. Public Comments – For Items not on the Agenda

There were no public comments.

III. Permit Applications and Program Updates

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

Mr. Kelley reviewed an extension request for Permit #13-027 Vintage on Selby. The permit was tabled with 12

conditions on October 2, 2013. The 60-day review period was extended at the November 20, 2013 meeting.

The 60-day review period extension for the permit expires on January 24, 2014. The applicant is planning

changes based on community input and has requested a second extension to the 60-day review period.

Motion 14-009: Approve the requested 60-day extension for Vintage on Selby.

Reider/Jones

February 5, 2014 Board Meeting

V. Action Item A) Approve Minutes

of January 22, 2014

DRAFT Regular Board Meeting

(Sylvander)



B) Permit # 13-036 Apex Auto (Kelley)

Mr. Kelley reviewed Permit #13-036 Apex Auto Salvage. The applicant is Apex Auto. The permit is for

improvements to existing auto salvage yard at Pennsylvania and 35E. The applicable rules are Stormwater

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

this project is 1.5 Acres and 1.4 Acres impervious surface.

Motion 14-010: Approve Apex Auto Salvage Permit #13-036 with five conditions.

1. Receipt of $7,000 surety and documentation of recorded maintenance agreement.

2. Provide a copy of the NPDES permit.

3. Clarify inconsistencies in sand filter design and provide 18 inches of sand filter above the drain tile. The

detail on Sheet C4 indicates 18” or 12” of “free draining gravel sand.” However, response #5 in the

“response to 13-036 permit review Apex Auto” memorandum indicates “6 inches of washed stone under

our pipe system with 18” of sand.”

4. Revise east underground elevations to correspond. Sheet C3 indicates draintile invert is 810.50 and 48”

CMP invert is 812.00. The detail on Sheet C4 indicates the draintile invert should be 24” below the 48”

CMP invert.

5. Add a note to the plans that the native soil base material shall be compacted prior to placement of the

sand filter layer to reduce infiltration from the bottom of the system.

Thienes/Texer


C) Permit # 14-001 Montana Greenbrier (Kelley)

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

Works. The permit is for residential street reconstruction near the intersection of Montana and Greenbrier. The

applicable rules are Stormwater Management (Rule C), Flood Control (Rule D), Erosion and Sediment Control

(Rule F). The disturbed area of this project is 3.39 Acres and 3.39 Acres impervious surface.

Motion 14-011: Approve Montana Greenbrier Permit #14-001 with four conditions.

1. Provide a copy of the NPDES permit.

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

3. Provide plan sheets 3-5; the provided plan sheets were blank.

4. Consider the following locations for volume reduction or filtration practices:

a. Walsh south of Hoyt,

b. Walsh north of Nebraska,

c. Walsh south of Nebraska,

d. Intersection of Payne, Parkway Drive, and Montana.

Reider/Jones


D) Permit # 14-002 Capitol Parking Ramp (Kelley)


Mr. Kelley reviewed Permit #14-002 Capitol Parking Ramp. No permit is needed. The applicant is the State of

Minnesota. The review is for the construction of a new parking ramp on the State Capitol Grounds. The review

was for consistency with Stormwater Management (Rule C), Flood Control (Rule D), Erosion and Sediment

Control (Rule F). The disturbed area of this project is 1.5 Acres and 1.47 Acres impervious surface.

Motion 14-012: Approve comment letter for Capitol Parking Ramp Permit #14-002 with two conditions.

1. Clarify dimensions on Detail 2 on Sheet 211.DT. The distance from the top of the clean, washed fine

filter aggregate to a distance inside the 72 inch CMP (not the invert, as is typical) is labeled as both 6

inches and 1.0 foot.

2. Revise HydroCAD model to include 12 inch pipe at 161.2 upstream of the 6” orifice.

Jones/Texer


E) Board discussion - Permitting Review Policy and Board Approval Process (Kelley)

Mr. Kelley summarized that Capitol Region Watershed District permitting staff review applications for

compliance with District Rules, and present recommendations to the Board of Managers for review and

approval. Per MN Statute 15.99, the District must approve or deny permit applications within 60 days of

receipt. If the District fails to deny a permit within the 60-day review period the permit is by default, approved.

Since 2007, permit applications received by the required submittal deadlines have been presented to the Board

at the following scheduled meeting with a staff recommendation. If there are items that significantly affect the

design of the proposed stormwater practices, or the number of issues to address is large, staff typically

recommend the application be “Tabled with Conditions”. Presenting a permit for the Board to “Table” is not

required by statute, and is not considered an action to approve or deny. Staff feel that the time expended to

create Board packet materials for a permit that will be tabled would be better spent coordinating with the

applicant and engineer to address the items of concern in order to ensure a staff recommendation of “Approve”

at a subsequent meeting.

Mr. Kelley will continue to track the dates that applications are received, and ensure that 60-day review period

extensions are requested and presented to the Board prior to expiration. The new BMP database will also assist

with this tracking. Mr. Kelley will also work to ensure permit conditions are clear and concise in order to

reduce the potential for different interpretations of approval conditions.

Mr. Kelley requested the Board of Managers provide review and comment on Permit Review Process, and

Direction to Initiate Policy and Present Applications for Board Action Upon Receiving a Recommendation to

Approve with Conditions. Discussion occurred.

F) Permit Program/Rules Update (Kelley)

Mr. Kelley gave an update on the permit program. In late February Mr. Kelley will be organizing the next TAC

meeting.

IV. Special Reports.

There were no Special Reports.


V. Action Items

A) AR: Approve Minutes of the January 8th, 2013 Regular Meeting (Sylvander)

Motion 14-013: Approve Minutes of the January 8th

, 2013 Regular Meeting.

Jones/Reider


B) AR: Approve Accounts Payable/Receivables for December 2013 (Sylvander)

Motion 14-014: Approve Accounts Payable/Receivables for December 2013.

Thienes/Texer


C) AR: Approve Lowertown Ballpark Special Grant Amendment (Zwonitzer)

Mr. Zwonitzer reviewed in September 2013 the Board of Managers awarded $510,000 in Special Grant funds.

Withdrawal of one project returned $65,000 of those funds to the program. Currently there is $80,000 remaining

as contingency funds. To provide needed match funds for a CWF grant application for Central High School,

$30,000 was allocated to the project. Central High School was not on the BWSR staff recommendation list and

will likely not receive funding which results in the $30,000 being returned to the Special Grant program. A total

of $110,000 is available for allocation.

The City of St. Paul was awarded $225,000 through the Special Grant program for stormwater elements at

Lowertown Ballpark. These funds can only be used for stormwater elements that treat runoff above and beyond

what is required by CRWD rules.

Mr. Zwonitzer introduced Wes Saunders Pearce from the City of St. Paul. As the ballpark design progressed, it

was determined that the below ground filtration would require a permit and therefore would be ineligible for

grant funds. It is recommended that those funds be made available to other aspects of the project. Additionally,

a unique opportunity to treat a portion of the adjacent Green Line Operation and Maintenance Facility (OMF)

roof through rainwater harvesting and reuse was identified. Experts in the area of rainwater reuse developed a

feasibility analysis, modeling, and cost estimates. Mr. Saunders Pearce reviewed a presentation explaining the

three scenarios available for the Lowertown Ballpark. The three opportunities presented: Option A incorporates

reuse for toilet flushing only using runoff from the ballpark, Option B allows for irrigation only and captures a

portion of the OMF roof, and Option C includes flushing and irrigation using runoff from OMF. The findings

reveal Option C treats the most water, and would be one of the first projects of its kind in the country.

Motion 14-015: To approve the originally awarded $90,000 designated for two 3,000 gallon cisterns and the

$56,500 for below ground filtration to be used to incorporate rainwater reuse in the project.

2. Award an additional $100,000 in Special Grant funds to be used to pursue Option C: rainwater reuse for

toilet flushing and ballfield irrigation. Total grant funding is not to exceed $325,000.

3. Funding is contingent on visible cisterns or two interactive kiosks in high traffic location if cisterns are not

visible. Kiosks will educate public on the reuse projects and be designed in cooperation with CRWD.

Thienes/Texer



VI. Unfinished Business

A. FI: Highland Ravine (Eleria)

Administrator Doneux provided an update on the Highland Ravine in place of Ms. Eleria. A homeowners

meeting is scheduled for February 3rd

. The agreements will be due in February. The meeting will cover a

timeline with a final completion date. Time will be available for questions and answers.

B. FI: Curtiss Pond (Fossum).

Mr. Fossum reviewed the final design plans from Houston Engineering. Changes in the design include a

$46,000 reduction in costs due to the design elimination of the swirl separators. The design change will also

reduce addition work required by the City of Falcon Heights maintaining the holding tanks. The sediment will

be captured in Curtiss pond.

Ms. Texer asked if the sediment toxicity has been tested in this area. Mr. Fossum replied that the sediment has

not been tested.

C. CAC Revitalization

Administrator Doneux gave an update on the December and January CAC Meetings. At the December 2013 the

CAC members discussed a list of ideas to revitalize the CAC Committee. At the January 2014 the CAC started

planning the 2014 calendar based on ideas covered at the December meeting. To bring closure to December

CAC meeting, Administrator Doneux recommended that the co-chair of the CAC and Board Members meet to

create a one page draft that summarizes adoption for a program to move forward. Manager Rieder and Manager

Texer will attend the meeting with the CAC co-chairs Gwen Willems and David Arbeit. President Collins and

Manager Jones will be the alternatives. The date will be announced via email.

D. MAWD Resolution

Ms. Texer gave an update on the MAWD Resolution. The annual planning session is scheduled for January

30th

, 2014. Ms. Texer will forward the resolution, regarding MAWD developing a Legislative agenda, on to the

MAWD Board Members from the Metro area.

VII. General Information

A) Administrator’s Report

Administrator Approved or Executed Agreements

Consultant Services Agreement with Geosyntec Consultants for rainwater reuse plan at Dellwood Gardens – not

to exceed $6,320

Board Approved or Executed Agreements

There were no new agreements.

General updates including recent and upcoming meetings and events


Sarah Wein will be starting on Tuesday, January 21, 2014 as the new Water Resource Technician

Students from Macalester College completed a report for CRWD synthesizing focus group data and information

from a literature review of current thinking about educational displays. The report makes recommendations for

future displays and initiatives to inform community members of clean water actions and can be found on our

website under CRWD Reports.

CRWD Staff, Corey Poland and Lindsay VanPatten will begin the Watershed Specialist Training program

through the University of Minnesota.

Lindsay VanPatten will be tabling and attending ‘Our Water in a Changing World – Climate Change and the

Urban Watershed’ on February 13, 2014 from 7:00 – 8:30 PM at the Science Museum of Minnesota. The event

is organized by FMR. The event is free. To register visit www.fmr.org

President Collins announced that Capitol Region Watershed District was awarded $360,000 grant from Boswer.

CRWD was ranked number one state wide.

1) Upcoming events and meetings

a) Next Board Meeting is Wednesday February 5, 2014 from 6:00 – 8:00 pm

b) Next CAC Meeting is Wednesday February 12, 2014 from 7:00-9:00 pm.

c) Blooming Saint Paul Awards Ceremony, January 27, 2013. Details to come.

d) Meeting with City of St. Paul Department Heads. This meeting was scheduled for February 5th

but

do to both Manager Thienes and President Collins out that night this meeting will be rescheduled.

Suggested new dates of the meeting are February 19th

, February 26th

or March 5th

.

e) Building tour scheduled with CB Richard Ellis is Wednesday, January 29th

.

f) Blooming St. Paul Award is Monday, January 27th

at St. Catherines.

2) Project Updates

No updates at this time.

VIII. Next Meeting

A) Wednesday, February 5, 2014 Meeting Agenda Review

B) Wednesday, February 12, 2014 CAC Meeting Review

IX. Adjournment

Motion 14-016: Adjournment of the January 22, 2014Regular Board Meeting at 7:50 p.m.

Reider/Texer

Unanimously Approved

Respectfully submitted,

Michelle Sylvander

http://www.fmr.org/


DATE: January 30, 2014

TO: CRWD Board of Managers

FROM: Michelle Sylvander, Office Manager

RE: Approve Request For Qualifications Information Technology Support Services

_________________________________________________________________________________

Background

In 2013 CRWD entered into an agreement with All Covered, Inc. for Professional IT Support. As part of

the IT Support, All Covered was hired to assess and advise on equipment, provide desktop support,

maintain and manage computer systems.

Issues

CRWD has formed a Technology Committee to review the needs of CRWD. Staff are requesting

authorization to solicit qualifications from professional vendors for Information Technology support

services. The qualified vendor will enable CRWD to improve information technology (IT) effectiveness,

enhance its quality of services, stabilize its support cost, and improve staff and organizational efficiency

and ensure safe and reliable access to District electronic records and data.

Request Action

Authorize staff to distribute Request for Qualifications for Information Technology Support Services.

enc: Request for Qualifications Information Technology Support Services

W:\04 Board of Managers\Memos\2014\Board Memo RFQ IT support 2014.docx

February 5, 2014

Board Meeting

V. Action Items – B) Approve

Request For Qualifications

Information Technology

Support Services

(Sylvander)

Page | 1

CAPITOL REGION

WATERSHED DISTRICT

INFORMATION TECHNOLOGY

SUPPORT SERVICES

Issue Date: January 28, 2014

Due Date: 3:00 P.M., February 28, 2014

REQUEST FOR QUALIFICATIONS

Page | 2

CAPITOL REGION WATERSHED DISTRICT

REQUEST FOR QUALIFICATIONS

INFORMATION TECHNOLOGY SUPPORT SERVICES

I. Introduction

The Capitol Region Watershed District is soliciting qualifications from professional vendors for

Information Technology support services. The qualified vendor will enable CRWD to improve

information technology (IT) effectiveness, enhance its quality of services, stabilize its support

cost, and improve staff and organizational efficiency and ensure safe and reliable access to

District electronic records and data.

II. Background Information

The Capitol Region Watershed District currently runs an internal Dell Power Edge T320 server

with fourteen workstations running Windows 7 and Windows XP, two laptops and two iPads.

The server holds 750 GB of data. The most commonly used software includes: Microsoft Office

Products, GIS, Sage, Flowlink, Pendragon, Microsoft Outlook. The Internet connection is with

Integra via T1 Access Bandwidth – 4.5 Mbps. The current system backup includes an offsite

back up with Carbonite and a shadow backup on server. Printing, faxing, scanning and coping

are done on a Konica Minolta C364e Color Document System. Maps are printed on a HP

Designjet T1100 plotter. See attached spreadsheet of basic workstation asset report.

III. Services Required

The following details services to be provided to the Capitol Region Watershed District in the

area of information technology:

1. Initial Assessment – Compile/update inventory of all information technology related

assets, assess system architecture and current processes, and make recommendations for

improved IT system performance. Perform a regular review of equipment, software, and

backup systems. Assist and advise CRWD with implementation of strategic planning for

budgeting, upgrading and developing short term and long term goals.

2. Desktop Applications Support - Performs basic support functions including installing

PCs, laptops, printers, peripherals, and office automation software; diagnosing and

correcting desktop application problems, configuring laptops, desktops, cell phones,

mobile network and similar devices for standard applications and identifying and

correcting end user hardware problems, and performing advanced troubleshooting.

Maintain and communicate with staff an up-to-date inventory of ALL CRWD IT related

hardware and software. Assist designated personnel with software and hardware

purchases. Assist in development of software/hardware policies and procedures. Log all

tasks performed and provide maintenance reports.

Page | 3

3. Server Administration Services – Manage computer systems and networks to included

complex application, database, messaging, web and other servers and associated

hardware, software, communication, operating systems necessary for the quality,

security, performance, availability, recoverability, and reliability of the system. Ensure

scheduled preventive maintenance for equipment. Update and report the maintenance

records on the equipment; develop operations, administrative and quality assurance back-

up plans and procedural documentation. Setup new users and edit or remove past users

on server. Server performance and capacity management services with reporting when

specified thresholds are reached. Configuration management, including changes,

upgrades, patches, etc. Support system wide software and other specialized software

products of Capitol Region Watershed District as it relates to the server(s) and associated

hardware. Management of user logins and security. Coordinate repair and maintenance

work with contracted repair vendors and ensure repairs are conducted in a timely fashion.

4. Network Administration Services – Activities include maintaining all CRWD network

equipment including switches, firewalls, routers, and other security devices. Assist with

the installation and maintenance of printers, network copiers/scanners, etc. Primary

maintenance including regular analysis, routine configuration changes, and installation of

patches and upgrades. Alert notifications to designated CRWD personnel in the event of

failure. Complete proactive monitoring of network equipment including bandwidth

utilization, and other performance indicators, with reporting when specified thresholds

are reached. Network performance and capacity management services, and network

troubleshooting. Maintain network documentation and procedures.

5. Security – Maintenance of virus detection programs on servers, email and all other

CRWD computers, laptops and equipment. Perform security audits as necessary and

upon request. Notify CRWD personnel immediately of suspected breaches of security or

intrusion detection. Configure CRWD system to enable remote access in a secure

environment and provide remote access of server folders for administration as requested

by personnel. Provide a full backup and recovery plan that can be accomplished in a

timely manner.

6. Strategic Planning – Engineering, planning, and design services for major system

enhancements, including installations and upgrades of new or existing systems.

Examples include major server upgrades, storage system upgrades, redesign of backup

systems, etc. Provide technical leadership for server technology issues. Make

recommendations for future purchasing and technology needs. Install new servers,

software and hardware and transfer data when acquired. Strategic planning, design, and

installation/upgrade of core network systems. Examples include major network

upgrades, provider changes, installation of “core” network devices, etc. Provide training

for staff on IT hazards/risks, backup/recovery processes and general software time saving

techniques. Provide help desk support from 8:00am – 5:00pm Central Standard Time

Monday thru Friday.

Page | 4

IV. Submittal Requirements

Seven (7) copies of the qualifications must be received by the Capitol Region Watershed District

prior to 3 P.M. on Friday, February 28, 2014. Your submittal may not exceed 15 pages. One (1)

copy should be submitted as a loosely-bound reproducible copy as well as one in a pdf format.

All copies of the qualifications must be plainly marked as “Information Technology Support

Services Qualifications”. Qualifications shall be delivered or mailed to:

Capitol Region Watershed District

1410 Energy Park Drive, Suite 4

St. Paul, MN 55108

Any questions regarding these qualifications are to be submitted to:

Michelle Sylvander, Office Manager

Capitol Region Watershed District

651-644-8888

[email protected]

1. Describe how your firm is in position to provide the services listed above and provide a

history of experience on providing similar services.

2. Describe your approach to providing these services and your methodology for providing

on-going support.

3. Provide the name, title, address, and telephone number of three references for clients

whom you have provided similar services. Please provide information referencing the actual

services provided, customer size (number of users), and the length of tenure providing

services to this client.

4. Staff Resources – Identify names of principals and key personnel who will actually

provide the information technology services. Summarize the experience and technological

expertise of these staff. Describe the role and responsibilities that each of these individuals

will have. Summarized resumes of these individuals should be appended to the

qualifications. The local availability of the staff that will be providing these services shall be

an important consideration.

5. Beyond the scope of this RFQ, what services (related or otherwise) does your

organization provide that may be of interest to CRWD?

6. Qualifications Summary – Summarize your qualifications and your firm’s qualifications.

Additionally you may articulate why your firm is pursuing this work and how it is uniquely

qualified to perform it. Include other pertinent information that helps CRWD determine your

overall qualifications.

7. Cost of Services

The qualifications must contain a fee schedule that includes hourly rates for proposed

Page | 5

services.

Describe how your services are priced, and any specific pricing you are able to provide.

Define any additional charges (e.g. travel expenses).

V. Evaluation Criteria and Process

A selection committee will conduct an evaluation of qualifications and will rate each submittal

based upon the following criteria:

Experience

Understanding of services to be provided

Personnel expertise

Compatibility with end users

Project approach

Satisfaction of clients/end users

VII. Miscellaneous

1. Capitol Region Watershed District reserves the right to reject any and all qualifications

for failure to meet the requirements contained herein, to waive any technicalities, and to

select the vendor which, Capitol Region Watershed’s sole judgment, is in the best interest

of the District.

2. CRWD further reserves the right to make such investigation as it deems necessary to

determine the ability of qualifiers to furnish the required services, and qualifiers shall

furnish all such information for this purpose as CRWD may request.

W:\01 Administration\COMPUTERS\CRWD IT Service RFP 2014.docx




FROM: Anna Eleria, Water Resource Project Manager

RE: Approve Request for Qualifications for TBI Easement Title Services Project

Background

Ownership and responsibility for the six-mile Trout Brook Storm Sewer Interceptor (TBI) was

transferred from Metropolitan Council to CRWD in 2006. Prior to completing transfer of ownership,

CRWD hired Sunde Surveying to conduct an assessment of TBI easements in 2004. Sunde mapped the

existing TBI easements and collected available easement documentation. During the easement

assessment, several issues were identified but these issues did not affect CRWD’s acquisition of TBI.

The issues include TBI sections without an easement, only 20-foot easements for sections of TBI when a

40-foot easement is desirable, easement boundaries not matching the actual location of TBI, no recorded

deed or other recorded documentation of the easements, and all TBI easements in the name of previous

owner, City of Saint Paul or Metropolitan Council.

Issues

CRWD staff seeks to hire a title company or other qualified professional to conduct a comprehensive

identification and assessment of the issues and resolve them accordingly. Enclosed is a draft request for

qualifications (RFQ). CRWD staff anticipates distributing the RFQ to at least three title companies and

has received title company recommendations from Sunde Surveying and Barr Engineering. Because the

scope of the issues (number of parcels involved, issue type(s), etc.) is not fully understood at this time, it

is difficult to estimate a budget for this work. Interested firms will be evaluated on their proposed

approach, tasks, deliverables and staff hourly rates. Funding for this work would come from Project

#320-14552, which has a 2014 budget of $41,800.

Action Requested

Approve request for qualifications for TBI Easement Title Services Project and authorize Administrator

to distribute to title companies or other qualified professional

enc: Draft TBI Easement Title Services Project RFQ

W:\06 Projects\Trout Brook Interceptor\Easements\Board Memos\BM TBI Easement RFQ 02-05-14.docx

February 5, 2014

V. Action Items – C) TBI

Easement Title Services Project

(Eleria)


REQUEST FOR QUALIFICATIONS CRWD Storm Sewer Easement Title Services Project

February 2014

Overview Capitol Region Watershed District (CRWD) owns, operates and maintains the Trout Brook Storm Sewer Interceptor (TBI), a six‐mile storm sewer tunnel that receives and conveys runoff from the Cities of Saint Paul, Roseville, Falcon Heights and Maplewood. For a majority of TBI pipe sections, there is a 20‐ or 40‐foot easement along the centerline of TBI. CRWD is seeking a title company to address several identified TBI easement issues that include, but are not limited to:

TBI sections without any easement;

Narrow easement widths of 20 feet yet 40‐foot easements are desired;

Easement boundaries that do not align with actual TBI locations;

Missing recorded easement documentation; and

Easements not in CRWD’s name. Work should be completed by December 31, 2014. Interested title companies or other qualified professionals are required to prepare and submit a statement of qualifications to CRWD by 4PM on Friday, February 28, 2014. CRWD Background Created in 1998, CRWD is a special purpose local unit of government that manages and protects part of the Mississippi River Basin and the wetlands, creeks, and lakes located within its boundaries. CRWD lakes include Como, Crosby and Loeb Lakes in Saint Paul and Lake McCarrons in Roseville. CRWD encompasses 40 square miles and includes parts of Falcon Heights, Lauderdale, Maplewood, Roseville, and St. Paul. It is located within Ramsey County and has a population of 245,000 people. For more information about CRWD, visit www.capitolregionwd.org. TBI Easement Issues Ownership and responsibility for the six‐mile Trout Brook Storm Sewer Interceptor was transferred from Metropolitan Council to CRWD in 2006. Prior to completing transfer of ownership, CRWD conducted an assessment of easements for TBI in 2004. Sunde Surveying

2

mapped the TBI easements and collected available easement documentation. This information is available for review on CRWD’s FTP site, https://capitolregionwd.sharefile.com/d/sc478180f37e4feeb, or in hard copy format at CRWD’s office. Please contact Anna Eleria at CRWD to schedule a date/time to review the materials at the office. See contact information below. During the easement assessment, several issues were identified but these issues did not affect CRWD’s acquisition of TBI. CRWD seeks to rectify the following issues through this project:

Some TBI sections do not have any easements. CRWD desires an easement for the entire length of TBI.

Some TBI sections only have a 20‐foot easement. CRWD seeks to obtain a 40‐foot easement for these TBI sections.

Some easement boundaries do not match with actual location of TBI. From the centerline of TBI, CRWD desires a 40‐foot easement, 20 feet on each side, which is consistent with the actual location of TBI.

For some TBI sections, CRWD only possesses City council file orders that indicate the intent and order for an easement. CRWD seeks to obtain the recorded deed or other recorded documentation for these TBI sections.

All the TBI easements are in the name of previous owner, City of Saint Paul or Metropolitan Council. CRWD desires the easements in its own name.

Instructions for Preparing and Submitting a Statement of Qualifications The interested title company will submit a statement of qualifications no greater than five pages in length that addresses the TBI easement issues identified above and includes the elements listed below. Similar project examples and client references can be provided in an appendix to the five‐page statement of qualifications. Title Company Qualifications

Brief background information of title company and their staff;

Descriptions and examples of previous easement research and acquisition; and

Description of work experience with environmental organizations and/or government units.

Scope of Work

Explain the overall approach to addressing the easement issues;

Describe the specific tasks and activities needed to carry out the project;

List of the deliverable(s) after the completion of each task; and

A list of staff who would be involved in the project and their hourly rates.

3

Please submit an electronic copy of your statement of qualifications by 4PM on Friday, February 28, 2014 and direct them and other inquiries regarding this project to:

Anna Eleria Capitol Region Watershed District 1410 Energy Park Drive, Suite 4 Saint Paul, MN 55108 [email protected] 651‐644‐8888




FROM: Michelle Sylvander, Office Manager

SUBJECT: Approve Letter of Understanding for 2013 Audit Services with Office of the State Auditor

Background

Each year the District contracts the State of Minnesota – Office of the State Auditor to conduct our annual audit.

Issues

The District annually executes a Letter of Understanding with the Office of the State Auditor. The audit will

begin around March 1st and is expected to be completed in mid-April. The results of the audit and copies of the

financial statements are included in our annual report. Staff will request the letter of understanding be reissued

with President Joe Collins name.

Requested Action

Authorize Board President and Administrator to execute the Letter of Understanding for 2013 Audit Services

with the Office of the State Auditor.

enc: December 19, 2013 Letter of Understanding, Office of the State Auditor

W:\02 Budget and Finance\Audit\2013\Board Memo LOU for 2013 1-30-14.docx

February 5, 2014 Board Meeting

V. Action Item – D) Approve Letter

of Understanding for 2013 Audit

Services with State Auditor

(Sylvander)




FROM: Mark Doneux

RE: Non-Binding Letter of Intent – 327 York Avenue, St. Paul

Background

At the January 8th

Board meeting, CRWD’s real estate consultants Michelle McGuire and Joe Hughes

from CB Richard Ellis presented the Districts the preliminary Needs Assessment as well as a review of

existing facilities. Michelle McGuire presented the findings of preliminary Market Analysis including a

financial analysis of three office facility options. Those options include build, buy and lease. Michelle

McGuire conducted a Board Workshop to further refine and clarify the Districts needs and priorities for

a future office space.

Issues

At the conclusion of the workshop it was agreed to conduct an office tour with the Board of Managers.

The tour was conducted on January 29th

and the Board viewed four potential office locations. As a

result of that tour, the Board may consider sending a non-binding letter of intent to agent for the 327

York Avenue property. Joe Hughes of CB Richard Ellis has drafted an example agreement and will be

at the Board meeting to discuss and review the letter.

Action Requested

Authorize Administrator to issue a Non-Binding Letter of Interest for the property located at 327 York

Avenue, St. Paul subject to review and approval of the Ramsey County Attorney

enc: Draft Non-Binding Letter of Interest for the property located at 327 York Avenue

W:\01 Administration\Facility Management\2012 Facility Planning\327 York\Board Memo Office Facility - Nonbinding Letter of Intent 1-31-14.docx

February 5, 2014

V. Action Items E)

Letter of Interest (Doneux)

Joseph Hughes

Senior Associate

CBRE, Inc.

Brokerage Services

C O M M E R C I A L R E A L E S T A T E S E R V I C E S

81 South 9th

Street

Suite 400

Minneapolis, MN 55402

612 336 4293 Tel

612 336 4320 Fax

[email protected]

www.cbre.com

February 6, 2014

Barry Birnberg

Northco Real Estate Services LLC

5353 Wayzata Blvd. #400

Minneapolis, MN 55416

RE: Non-binding Offer to Purchase 327 York Avenue, St. Paul, MN

Dear Barry,

On behalf of Capital Region Watershed District or their assigns (the “Buyer”), CBRE, Inc. has been

authorized to present this non-binding letter of interest to set forth the principal terms and conditions

under which the Buyer agrees to purchase the building located at 327 York Avenue in St. Paul, MN from

the "Seller" under the terms and conditions outlined below.

The principal terms and conditions upon which Buyer and Seller agree to proceed are as follows:

LOCATION: 327 York Avenue

PROPERTY

OWNERSHIP:

Please state

SIZE: Approximately 14,027 total square foot office building

PURCHASE PRICE: Subject to the terms of the Purchase Agreement, Buyer agrees to purchase,

and Seller agrees to sell, fee title to the Property for the purchase price in the

amount of one million one hundred seventy five thousand and 00/100 dollars

($1,175,000.00) (the "Purchase Price") to be paid in cash at or before Closing

Date as described below.

CLOSING DATE: To be determined between buyer and seller, but in no event sooner than

forty-five days following the due diligence period or later than January 15,

2015. Buyer’s current lease expires 3/31/15 and buyer is in need of time for

construction and move in.

Barry Birnberg

February 6, 2014

Page 2

EARNEST MONEY

DEPOSIT:

Buyer will deposit Fifteen Thousand and 00/100 Dollars ($15,000.00) as

earnest money (“Earnest Money”) upon execution of the Purchase Agreement,

which Earnest Money shall be held by a buyer-selected title company, in an

interest bearing account in accordance with an escrow agreement among

Buyer, Seller and Title. The balance of the Purchase Price will be paid by Buyer

in cash or by wire transfer of U.S. Funds to be received in the trust account of

Title on or before the Closing Date (as herein defined).

Seller Lease Back: In the event closing takes place prior to 12/1/14, buyer would prefer that

seller lease back the building until a period between 12/1/14 - 1/15/15. Rates

and Terms to be negotiated fairly in the Purchase Agreement.

PROPERTY

CONDITION:

Buyer will accept the property in its AS-IS, WHERE-IS condition, subject to the

due diligence rights and inspections defined below, and subject to any leases

currently in place. In addition, Seller will include in the purchase price all

furniture, fixtures, equipment, and personal property used in connection with

the property.

PURCHASE

AGREEMENT:

Parties shall execute a definitive Buyer drafted Purchase Agreement

incorporating in form and content, and setting forth in more detail, the

agreements of the parties with respect to this transaction, all as generally

outlined by this letter of interest. Such Purchase Agreement shall contain,

without limitation, the following reasonable covenants, representations and

warranties of Seller:

Seller is, and immediately prior to the Closing shall be, the fee owner

of the Property;

The Property is, or as of the Closing shall be, free and clear of all liens

(except as approved in writing by the Buyer) and Buyer’s non-

approved encumbrances;

Seller has full ability and authority to convey the Property;

Conveyance of the Property by Seller will not violate any terms of any

agreements, understandings, court orders, or government decrees to

which Seller is a party or otherwise bound;

To the extent available, Seller shall provide all environmental, wetland,

soil tests and survey in the Sellers possession;

The Seller shall deliver the property with all improvements

constructed in its “as is” condition;

Barry Birnberg

February 6, 2014

Page 3

Seller will be required to pay any levied, pending and deferred taxes

and special assessments prior to closing and shall disclose any and all

minimum assessment agreements, TIF agreements and/or property

tax agreements affecting the Property.

Such other covenants, representations and warranties as may be

appropriate to the terms of a transaction that may be mutually

agreed to by and between the parties.

PRORATIONS: It is Buyer’s expectation that all costs and expenses shall be prorated in

accordance with the terms and provisions of the Purchase Agreement to

include the following: (i) Seller shall provide at its expense a Commitment for

Title Insurance with copies of all exception documents; (ii) Seller shall, at its

expense, procure a certified ALTA/ACSM Land Title Survey and Phase I with

full details; (iii) Buyer and Seller will share equally in the cost of the Title

Insurance Premium, any Title Insurance Endorsements and the cost of

searches for bankruptcy, state and federal judgments and liens, and other

encumbrances and easements affecting the Property; (iv) Seller shall pay for

any State Deed Tax; (v) Real estate taxes will be prorated on a due and

payable basis on the day of closing; (vi) Seller will pay for any levied, pending

and deferred special assessment installments due and payable prior to

closing; and (vii) the closing fee charged by the Title Company will be split

equally between the parties (viii) all other closing costs will be paid or

prorated between the parties as is customary.

DUE DILIGENCE: Buyer shall have sixty (60) days following execution of a binding Purchase

Agreement to conduct, in its sole discretion, any and all due diligence

deemed necessary or desirable which may include without limitation review

of the condition of title to the Property, the environmental condition of the

Property, the condition of the soils and any wetland delineations, the

condition of all improvements and easements to the Property, and such

other matters deemed necessary or desirable. Any invasive testing including,

but not limited to, phase II environmental studies and soil borings shall

require prior written approval by Seller. Buyer will also need confirmation

from the city that Buyer’s use is compatible with the current zoning. In

addition, Buyer will use this period to establish an acceptable financing

source according to the terms by the Buyer’s sole discretion in acquisition of

the property.

Buyer shall have the right to one (1), thirty (30) day due diligence extension

periods. If buyer chooses to extend this period, buyer to increase the

“earnest Money” by $10,000.

The Due Diligence period release of contingencies is the sole discretion of

Barry Birnberg

February 6, 2014

Page 4

the Buyer, Buyer’s Earnest Money to become nonrefundable, along with

decreasing Buyer proceeds due at closing by this amount.

SELLERS CONDITIONS

PRECEDENT TO

CLOSING:

The only condition precedent to the performance of Seller's obligations

under the Purchase Agreement for the purchase the Property (and all

obligations related thereto), which condition precedent must be fulfilled or

satisfied to Seller's satisfaction shall be the execution and delivery by both

Seller and Buyer of a definitive and legally binding Purchase Agreement.

EARLY ACCESS:

Effective as of the date of acceptance by Seller of this letter of interest,

through the Closing Date or earlier termination of the Purchase Agreement,

Seller shall grant Buyer and Buyer's representatives reasonable access to the

Property, and shall otherwise cooperate in full with Buyer in all reasonable

respects, for purposes of enabling Buyer to undertake such due diligence

investigation, testing and analysis of the Property as may be expressly or

impliedly contemplated herein.

ASSIGNMENT: Buyer may assign all rights, title, interest and obligations under this letter of

interest and subsequently executed Purchase Agreement any time prior to

Closing to any affiliated entity.

GOOD FAITH: This letter of interest evidences the parties' intent to proceed in good faith to

undertake preparation of a Purchase Agreement in accordance with the

terms of this letter of interest, and to proceed with diligence on the various

undertakings envisioned by this Letter of Intent. Seller shall make available to

Buyer within five (5) days of the date of full execution of this Letter of Intent

all records and other information relating to the Property in Seller’s

possession and created for/by Seller during the time of Seller’s ownership or

in anticipation of Seller’s initial acquisition of the Property, as may be

reasonably requested by Buyer, including but not limited to: (i) complete

records of all previous phase I and phase II environmental assessments, or

other environmental reports, performed at any time on the Property, (ii) any

title commitments or policies issued with respect to the Property,(iii) any

surveys of the Property, and (iv) and any documents, plans, and budgets

relating to improvements at the property

STANDSTILL PERIOD: Notwithstanding the fact that this letter proposal is not binding on either of

the parties and notwithstanding anything expressly or apparently to the

Barry Birnberg

February 6, 2014

Page 5

contrary herein, Seller recognizes that Buyer will be expending significant

resources on its due diligence of the property, and therefore, Seller shall not

offer the Property for sale to, or acquisition by, any other prospective

purchaser or conduct any negotiations for sale of the Property with any

other prospective purchasers for a period of time commencing on the date

hereof and continuing through and including the date of a definitive

Purchase Agreement. Buyer and Seller agree to include a similar “Standstill

Period” clause in the Purchase Agreement.

BROKERAGE: Buyer’s broker of record shall be CBRE, Inc. If a transaction is consummated,

CBRE shall be paid a commission of 4% of the Purchase Price by the Seller at

closing.

CONFIDENTIALITY /

NON-DISCLOSURE:

Seller, its agents and assigns agrees to keep any and all terms or conditions

of this letter of interest and Purchase Agreement, including the Buyer’s

name, in strict confidence and agrees not to disclose such confidential

information until such time as Buyer provides Seller with written

authorization to do so.

Seller execution and delivery of two copies of this letter of interest will

constitute its formal approval to enter into a Purchase Agreement in

accordance with the terms and conditions outlined herein. It is understood,

however, that this letter of interest shall be non-binding on both Buyer and

Seller.

If this letter of interest is acceptable, please have the Seller sign on the below acceptance page and return

a copy to our attention. If Seller, or any authorized representative of Seller, has not so signed and

delivered this letter of interest to Buyer on or before 5:00 p.m. (CDT), February 12, 2014, this Letter of

Intent, together with any offer to purchase contained herein, shall automatically terminate. Upon

acceptance by Seller, we will procure the signature of the Buyer and move directly to the drafting of a

Purchase Agreement.

Sincerely,

Barry Birnberg

February 6, 2014

Page 6

Joe Hughes

CBRE

612-336-4293

ACCEPTANCE OF TERMS:

The Parties hereto commit to work in good faith toward the negotiation and execution of a binding purchase

agreement for the 327 York Avenue, St. Paul, MN according to the terms and conditions outlined above.

SELLER:

BY: DATE: , 2014

Its:

BUYER:

Capital Region Watershed

BY: DATE: , 2014

Its:

CBRE © 2014 All Rights Reserved. All information included in this proposal pertaining to CBRE - including but not limited to its operations,

employees, technology and clients - are proprietary and confidential, and are supplied with the understanding that they will be held in confidence

and not disclosed to third parties without the prior written consent of CBRE. This letter/proposal is intended solely as a preliminary expression of

general intentions and is to be used for discussion purposes only. The parties intend that neither shall have any contractual obligations to the other

with respect to the matters referred herein unless and until a definitive agreement has been fully executed and delivered by the parties. The parties

agree that this letter/proposal is not intended to create any agreement or obligation by either party to negotiate a definitive lease/purchase and sale

agreement and imposes no duty whatsoever on either party to continue negotiations, including without limitation any obligation to negotiate in

good faith or in any way other than at arm's length. Prior to delivery of a definitive executed agreement, and without any liability to the other party,

either party may (1) propose different terms from those summarized herein, (2) enter into negotiations with other parties and/or (3) unilaterally


TO: CRWD Board of Managers and Staff

FROM: Mark Doneux, Administrator

RE: February 5, 2014 Administrator’s Report

Administrator Approved or Executed Agreements

Amendment No. 1 to Consultant Services Agreement with Houston Engineering Inc. for the BMP database. To

extend deadline to March 31, 2014.

Stewardship Grant Agreement for 2 rain gardens at 1375 Juliet Avenue, Saint Paul - $1,000.00

Board Approved or Executed Agreements

Consultant Services Agreement with the U of MN for Analysis of CRWD water quality data (2005 – 2012) and

development of two reports – $24,683.

Partner Grant Agreement with Public Art Saint Paul for the involvement of an artist in the planning of the

Western Avenue street reconstruction - $3,000.

Partner Grant Agreement with Great River Greening for youth involvement during planting at Trout Brook

Nature Sanctuary and staffing for the Science Area Teen Network Program - $5,000.

Partner Grant Agreement with Lower Phalen Creek Project for cooperative maintenance planning of Gateway

and Maria Bates rain gardens and installation of an interpretive sign at Maria Bates - $5,500.

Partner Grant Agreement with MN Health Advocates (Frogtown Green) for focused outreach, cooperative

maintenance planning and installation of an interpretive sign at the Minnehaha Mall Rain Gardens. - $12,000.

Consultant Services Agreement with Century College for Confined Space and First Aid training - $6,265.

General updates including recent and upcoming meetings and events

Anna Eleria presented the Green Line Green Infrastructure Project at the MPCA Collection Systems Conference

on January 29, 2014.

Forrest Kelley presented the use of underground stormwater systems at the Stearns County Contractor

Workshop on January 30, 2014.

1.) Upcoming events and meetings

a) Next Board Meeting is Wednesday February 19, 2014 from 6:00 – 8:00 pm

b) Next CAC Meeting is Wednesday February 12, 2014 from 7:00-9:00 pm.

2.) Project Updates - there are no updates at this time.

W:\04 Board of Managers\Correspondence\Administrator's Report 2014\Administrator's Report 2-5-14.docx


Documents

February 5, 2014 meeting packet