East Kittsondale Subwatershed: Urban Stormwater Retrofit Assessment

Transcription

1 East Kittsondale Subwatershed: Urban Stormwater Retrofit Assessment Prepared by: for the Capitol Region Watershed District Funded in part by the Metro Conservation District from Clean Water Funds

2 East Kittsondale Subwatershed: Urban Stormwater Retrofit Assessment Prepared for the Capitol Region Watershed District by: Samantha Kreibich, Ramsey Conservation District CRWD Staff: Mark Doneux, Administrator Anna Eleria, Water Resource Project Manager Bob Fossum, Program Manager Britta Suppes, Monitoring Coordinator Corey Poland, Water Resource Technician - Permit Inspector Elizabeth Beckman, Education & Outreach Coordinator Forrest Kelly, Regulatory and Construction Program Manager Gustavo Castro, Water Resource Specialist Joe Sellner, Water Resource Technician Jordan Jessen, Water Resource Technician Lindsay VanPatten, Education and Administrative Assistant Michelle Sylvander, Office Manager Nate Zwonitzer, Urban BMP Specialist Sarah Wein, Water Resource Technician CRWD Board of Managers: Joseph Collins, President Mary Texer, Vice President Michael Thienes, Treasurer Seitu Jones, Secretary Shirley Reider, Manager Front photograph: Courtesy of the Capitol Region Watershed District

3 3 East Kittsondale Subwatershed Assessment Contents Map of Study Area... 7 Executive Summary... 8 Project Rankings and Page Numbers... Error! Bookmark not defined. Project Rankings and Page Numbers... Error! Bookmark not defined. Methods Retrofit Scoping Desktop Retrofit Analysis Retrofit Reconnaissance Investigation Design Your Own Detention or Infiltration Systems Capitol Region Watershed District Rule C Analysis/Cost Estimates Retrofit Neighborshed Delineation Retrofit Modeling & Sizing Retrofit Types Retrofit Cost Estimates Catchment Retrofit Results East Kittsondale: Catchment Project ID: EKD1-Residential Rain Gardens Project ID: EKD1- Commercial Underground Infiltration Trenches Project ID: EKD1-School Underground Detention and Reuse Project ID: EKD1 Alley Project East Kittsondale: Catchment Project ID: EKD2- Residential Rain Gardens Project ID: EKD2-Alley Project East Kittsondale: Catchment Project ID: EKD3-Residential Rain Gardens Project ID: EKD3-Institutional Projects Project ID: EKD3-Multifamily Rain Gardens Project ID: EKD3-Commercial Projects Project ID: EKD3-Park Projects Project ID: EKD3-Alley Project... 34

4 4 East Kittsondale Subwatershed Assessment East Kittsondale: Catchment Project ID: EKD4-Residential Rain Gardens Project ID: EKD4-Multifamily Projects Project ID: EKD4-Institutional Projects Project ID: EKD4-Alley Project East Kittsondale: Catchment Project ID: EKD5-Residential Rain Gardens Project ID: EKD5-Commercial Projects Project ID: EKD5-Alley Project East Kittsondale: Catchment Project ID: EKD6-Residential Rain Gardens Project ID: EKD6-Commercial Pervious Pavement Project ID: EKD6-Alley Project East Kittsondale: Catchment Project ID: EKD7-Residential Rain Gardens Project ID: EKD7-Multifamily Projects Project ID: EKD7-Alley Project East Kittsondale: Catchment Project ID: EKD8-Residential Rain Gardens Project ID: EKD8-Multifamily Rain Gardens Project ID: EKD8-Institutional Underground Infiltration Project ID: EKD8-Alley Project Project ID EKD9-Residential Vegetated Swales East Kittsondale: Catchment Conclusion References Appendix A WINSLAMM Standard Land Use Codes RESIDENTIAL LAND USES COMMERCIAL LAND USES INDUSTRIAL LAND USES

5 5 East Kittsondale Subwatershed Assessment INSTITUTIONAL LAND USES OTHER URBAN LAND USES FREEWAY LAND USES Appendix B: Curb cut raingarden, with 1.5-2ft perimeter wall, in a residential area Bioretention Design Residential Rain Garden - WinSLAMM Design Underground Infiltration - WinSLAMM Design Appendix C Appendix D Full Catchment Rankings...81

6 6 East Kittsondale Subwatershed Assessment This page is intentionally left blank

7 7 East Kittsondale Subwatershed Assessment

8 8 East Kittsondale Subwatershed Assessment Executive Summary This study will examine optimal locations for placing cost-effective water quality improvements within a highly developed region in the Capitol Region Watershed District (CRWD), known as the East Kittsondale (EKD) subwatershed. This subwatershed is an 1860-acre portion of land located in the southeast corner of Ramsey County and St. Paul, Minnesota. It consists primarily of high-density residential areas with portions of commercial and institutional land use. Consisting of nearly 70% residential land use, there are also large portions of major urban highways, including Ayd Mill road, which follows the railroad, Interstate 94, located near a commercial development, and Interstate 35E. The EKD subwatershed does not consist of any natural or constructed water bodies and instead is connected by an extensive stormsewer system, which ultimately discharges to the Mississippi River. This section of the CRWD has consistently demonstrated increased levels of runoff volume and pollutants, particularly Total Phosphorous (TP) and Total Suspended Solids (TSS). The result of this analysis will be a prioritized list of the most cost-effective locations for retrofitting water quality improvement projects or best management practices (BMPs). Over 200 projects were identified in the following report. These projects will help improve existing water quality, provide benefits to the impaired Mississippi River, and enhance the quality of a surface water drinking source that serves a large portion the metropolitan population, including the entire southern half of Ramsey County. Due to the highly developed nature of the EKD subwatershed, locations for BMP projects were limited; therefore, this study focused primarily on placing residential boulevard rain gardens, pervious pavement, and underground infiltration trenches. These BMPs are appropriate because of their effectiveness in removing TP while requiring minimal space. Approaches outlined in the analysis will focus on ranking projects based on the total project cost per pound of phosphorous removed for each project. The outlined projects are merely a model and are meant only as a starting point for future watershed planning. Other considerations for installation prioritization should include areas prone to flooding, timing of future construction, and project visibility. While the proposed projects aim to reach these considerations, more elaborate planning and research should be completed prior to the installation of any of these projects. Significant efforts, however, were made to provide the most accurate and precise estimates for pollutant loading and reduction, along with estimated costs to reach these removal rates. Areas that drain to the Mississippi River were delineated using GIS subwatershed information that was previously determined, as well as maps of stormwater conveyance features. The subwatershed was further divided into 9 smaller stormwater drainage areas, or catchments. For each catchment, modeling of stormwater volume and pollutants was completed using the software WinSLAMM. The program calculates pollutant and stormwater volume loads based off specific land use and reductions based off specified BMPs. Land use areas were delineated, and then modeled based off the calculated area of each land use. Any existing BMPs found in the catchments were modeled to calculate pollutant reductions, which helped us determine base loading for each catchment. Portions of the subwatershed have pre-existing underground infiltration trenches. These were installed as part of the City of St. Paul s, RSVP programs, or Residential Street Vitality Program. Projects identified were modeled with existing treatment, including street sweeping, to determine the overall pollutant reductions achieved for each proposed site. The results of the 60 most cost-effective projects are summarized in the table below.

9 9 East Kittsondale Subwatershed Assessment Project Rank Catchment ID Retrofit Type Projects Identified TP Reduction (lb/yr) TSS Reduction (lb/yr) Volume Reduction (ac-ft/yr) Total Project Cost Estimated Operations & Maintenance (2012 Dollars) Estimated cost/ 1,000lb- TSS (30-year) Estimated cost/ Page # lb-tp (30-year) 1 EKD7 Res_ RG Moderately Complex Bioretention $3,348 $75 $257 $ EKD7 Res_ RG Moderately Complex Bioretention $5,016 $150 $392 $ EKD9 Res_ Swale Swale $3,676 $150 $1,304 $ EKD9 Res_ Swale Swale $4,786 $225 $1,326 $ EKD9 Res_ Swale Swale $2,954 $75 $1,483 $ EKD3 Comm_ PP Permeable Pavement $2,880 $75 $454 $ EKD2 Res_ RG Moderately Complex Bioretention $7,314 $225 $1,205 $ EKD2 Res_ RG Moderately Complex Bioretention $13,158 $450 $1,415 $ EKD2 Res_ RG Moderately Complex Bioretention , $20,950 $750 $1,362 $ EKD2 Alley_ PP Permeable Pavement , $65,568 $75 $1,440 $ EKD1 Res_ RG Moderately Complex Bioretention $5,274 $225 $1,560 $ EKD3 Alley_ PP Permeable Pavement , $65,568 $450 $1,679 $ EKD1 Res_ RG Moderately Complex Bioretention $10,548 $450 $1,720 $ EKD4 Res_ RG Moderately Complex Bioretention $12,063 $630 $1,665 $ EKD3 MF_ RG Simple Bioretention $8,014 $300 $1,936 $ EKD3 MF_ RG Simple Bioretention $14,558 $600 $1,941 $ EKD4 Res_ RG Moderately Complex Bioretention , $25,242 $1,350 $1,782 $ EKD1 Res_ RG Moderately Complex Bioretention $21,096 $900 $1,900 $ EKD3 Res_ RG Moderately Complex Bioretention $24,846 $900 $2,171 $ EKD6 Res_ RG Moderately Complex Bioretention $8,790 $375 $2,075 $ Catchment Key

10 10 East Kittsondale Subwatershed Assessment Project Rank Catchment ID Retrofit Type Projects Identified TP Reduction (lb/yr) TSS Reduction (lb/yr) Volume Reduction (ac-ft/yr) Total Project Cost Estimated Operations & Maintenance (2012 Dollars) Estimated cost/ 1,000lb- TSS (30-year) Estimated cost/ Page # lb-tp (30-year) 21 EKD5 Alley_ UG Underground Infiltration , $22,984 $19,576 $1,825 $ EKD3 Res_ RG Moderately Complex Bioretention , $50,170 $1,875 $2,306 $ EKD4 School_ UG Underground Infiltration , $275,403 $2,250 $1,657 $ EKD3 School_ RG Moderately Complex Bioretention $3,418 $75 $1,852 $ EKD5 Alley_ UG Underground Infiltration , $44,622 $21,998 $1,873 $ EKD5 Res_ RG Moderately Complex Bioretention $5,722 $270 $2,438 $ EKD6 Res_ RG Moderately Complex Bioretention $20,016 $900 $2,274 $ EKD5 Alley_ UG Underground Infiltration , $88,431 $22,198 $2,000 $ EKD3 Res_ RG Moderately Complex Bioretention , $98,870 $3,750 $2,492 $ EKD5 Comm_ UG Underground Infiltration , $12,609 $4,818 $2,714 $ EKD3 Park_ RG Moderately Complex Bioretention $15,930 $150 $2,849 $ EKD6 Res_ RG Moderately Complex Bioretention , $43,950 $1,875 $2,393 $ EKD4 Res_ RG Moderately Complex Bioretention , $50,174 $2,700 $2,166 $ EKD8 Res_ RG Moderately Complex Bioretention $8,835 $375 $2,962 $ EKD5 Comm_ UG Underground Infiltration , $22,984 $5,924 $2,332 $ EKD5 Res_ RG Moderately Complex Bioretention $12,063 $630 $2,536 $ EKD5 Res_ RG Moderately Complex Bioretention $23,585 $1,260 $2,633 $ EKD8 Res_ RG Moderately Complex Bioretention $16,978 $750 $3,089 $ EKD2 Alley_ PP Permeable Pavement , $129,456 $225 $2,480 $ EKD8 Res_ RG Moderately Complex Bioretention $33,540 $1,500 $3,236 $ Catchment Key

11 11 East Kittsondale Subwatershed Assessment Project Rank Catchment ID Retrofit Type Projects Identified TP Reduction (lb/yr) TSS Reduction (lb/yr) Volume Reduction (ac-ft/yr) Total Project Cost Estimated Operations & Maintenance (2012 Dollars) Estimated cost/ 1,000lb- TSS (30-year) Estimated cost/ Page # lb-tp (30-year) 41 EKD3 Park_ RG Moderately Complex Bioretention $30,390 $300 $3,402 $ EKD4 MF_ RG Moderately Complex Bioretention $5,722 $225 $2,349 $ EKD5 Alley_ PP Permeable Pavement , $94,463 $150 $2,693 $ EKD2 Alley_ UG Underground Infiltration , $33,748 $3,320 $2,797 $ EKD3 Comm_ RG Moderately Complex Bioretention $19,002 $675 $1,749 $ EKD6 Alley_ UG Underground Infiltration , $44,622 $6,900 $2,973 $ EKD3 Alley_ PP Permeable Pavement , $129,456 $975 $2,889 $ EKD2 Alley_ UG Underground Infiltration , $55,545 $4,080 $3,036 $ EKD8 MF_ RG Moderately Complex Bioretention $7,254 $150 $3,320 $ EKD5 Comm_ UG Underground Infiltration , $110,398 $10,960 $3,440 $1, EKD6 Alley_ UG Underground Infiltration , $99,412 $9,479 $3,445 $1, EKD5 Alley_ PP Permeable Pavement , $373,247 $600 $3,313 $1, EKD8 Alley_ UG Underground Infiltration , $44,622 $2,300 $3,409 $1, EKD7 MF_ RG Moderately Complex Bioretention $7,254 $75 $1,790 $1, EKD6 Alley_ UG Underground Infiltration , $209,377 $16,683 $3,602 $1, EKD5 Alley_ PP Permeable Pavement , $187,246 $300 $3,403 $1, EKD4 Alley_ UG Underground Infiltration , $55,545 $450 $3,659 $1, EKD1 Alley_ UG Underground Infiltration $22,984 $1,202 $3,417 $1, EKD7Alley_ UG Underground Infiltration $12,609 $566 $3,627 $1, EKD4 Alley_ PP Permeable Pavement , $382,975 $975 $3,563 $1, Catchment Key

12 12 East Kittsondale Subwatershed Assessment Methods In this analysis, the methods used were based on models developed by the Center for Watershed Protection (CWP). In summary, these investigative methods included Retrofit Scoping, Desktop Retrofit Analysis, Retrofit Reconnaissance Field Investigation, and Retrofit Ranking. After these methods were completed, a Analysis based on cost estimates was completed for each project. In addition to the CWP methods, a design tool developed by Contech solutions, known as, Design Your Own Detention or Infiltration Systems, was used in order to model sizing for underground infiltration trenches. A summary of the methods used are described below. Retrofit Scoping Each catchment was analyzed using standard land use files within WinSLAMM to determine a base load of TP. The WinSLAMM parameters and standard land use files used are in Appendix A. These base loads were calculated in order to determine which catchments had the greatest pollutant loads, which would give them first consideration when deciding which identified retrofit practices to install. Although the pollutant base loads may be higher than in reality, the consistent parameters were used in the modeling so that an overall precise comparison could be made between the catchments. More accurate and precise pollutant loads for each retrofit opportunity found within the drainage areas were calculated and are discussed below in the Analysis/Cost Estimates. Desktop Retrofit Analysis A desktop search was conducted for each of the nine catchment areas to identify potential retrofit opportunities before completing a field reconnaissance. GIS layers including topography, hydrology, soils, watershed/subwatershed boundaries, parcel info/boundaries, high-resolution aerial photography, and the storm drainage infrastructure data were reviewed to determine potential retrofit placement. Several factors and key locations were considered during the desktop analyses, which were conducive to retrofitting opportunities. These locations included areas well known for installing retrofit projects including schools and churches. Retrofit Reconnaissance Investigation After identifying potential retrofit sites through the desktop search, a field investigation was conducted to evaluate each site. During the investigation, the drainage area and stormwater infrastructure mapping data were verified. Site constraints were assessed to determine the most feasible retrofit options as to eliminate sites from consideration. The field investigation also revealed additional retrofit opportunities that were unnoticed during the desktop search, specifically those that dealt with poor drainage. These areas were considered a priority and became a potential project location. Design Your Own Detention or Infiltration Systems Contech Solution's Design Your Own Detention or Infiltration Systems offered a useful tool for designing and sizing infiltration trenches. To determine the sizing, the underground infiltration trenches were modeled based off a site-by-site analysis by using the calculated impervious area, and the CRWD Rule C that provided the required treatment needed to treat 1 inch of runoff.

13 13 East Kittsondale Subwatershed Assessment Capitol Region Watershed District Rule C Analysis/Cost Estimates Retrofit Neighborshed Delineation After the retrofit sites were identified, each of their individual drainage areas or neighborsheds, consisting of runoff from surrounding streets, buildings, parking lots, and landscaped areas, etc., were delineated using drainage data gathered in the field and GIS contour data. See example below. This information, in conjunction with the NRCS soil survey data, was used to model the pollutant loads from each of the sites. A representative residential "neighborshed" was delineated to determine the percentage of streets, landscaped areas, roads, sidewalks, and buildings. These source area percentages were then applied over the whole residential land use areas. The source area acreages were manually entered into the WinSLAMM program under the appropriate land use type in which the site was located. To maintain consistency, all file data used in WinSLAMM, listed in Appendix A, was the same for each site modeled. Retrofit Modeling & Sizing The retrofit type and dimensions, conducive to the landscape and size of each neighborshed, was then chosen and incorporated into the WinSLAMM model to determine its capability to reduce TP. The retrofit types identified include simple bioretention, and moderately complex bioretention. The majority of residential bioretention BMPs modeled were all sized at 120 square feet. Only boulevards larger than 8 feet were considered in this analysis. The soil class determined which type of bioretention cell could be installed for each location. An example neighborshed and the source areas that are entered in to WinSLAMM Retrofit Types Bioretention: The bioretention referred to in this report, also referred to as a curb cut or boulevard rain garden, takes stormwater runoff off line for treatment, and utilizes the current stormwater conveyance system for overflow. Depending on the soil type at the location being constructed, the bioretention basins consist of a depression utilizing native soils for infiltration or replacing current soil with an engineered soil and native vegetation plantings more conducive to infiltration. At some sites, an underdrain with connection to the existing stormsewer system may be needed if infiltration capability is limited by underlying soils or if infiltration cannot be allowed due to soil compaction or other conditions.

14 14 East Kittsondale Subwatershed Assessment It is important to properly design and install the engineered soils so that the bioretention basins take no less than 24 hours but no more than 48 hours to drain. The bioretention basins fell within the categories, listed below, depending on where the site was located within the landscape. Simple Bioretention - includes native vegetation, a curb cut and forebay, but no engineered soils or under-drains. May include a retaining wall if the grade is steep. Moderately Complex Bioretention - includes native vegetation, engineered soils, a curb cut, forebay, and no retaining walls. The soils in this area are composed of urban land that consists primarily of silty-sand components. Due to the urban landscape, the area was modeled as a silt-loam and any bioretention features would require engineered soils to provide adequate drainage. A schematic of the retrofit types and example modeling parameters used within WinSLAMM of each retrofit type are in Appendix B. Pervious Pavement: Pervious pavement is pavement, which allows for water to seep through and infiltrate into the natural substrate. In general, pervious pavement can treat 1/3 of the total impervious area. This criterion was used for site analysis. Design is available in Appendix B. Underground Infiltration: Underground infiltration systems allows runoff to be stored in underground piping, then via void space, allows the water to percolate into the subsoil This treats the water as it infiltrates. Design is available in Appendix B. Retrofit Cost Estimates Each retrofit identified was then assigned estimated materials, design, and installation cost given its square foot of treatment. These cost estimates were derived from The Center of Watershed Protection manuals and recent installation costs were provided by personal contacts. A unit promotion and administrative costs were calculated with a total project cost and annual maintenance. A 30 year term cost/tp-removed for each retrofit was then calculated for the life cycle of that retrofit, which was calculated from the total cost + (30 year * annual maintenance) / (30 year * TP (lb/yr)). Catchment Retrofit Results CATCHMENT EKD1 EKD2 EKD3 EKD4 EKD5 EKD6 EKD7 EKD8 EKD9 Area (acres) Volume ac-ft/year TSS (lb/year) 93,333 31,756 93,709 56,084 45,335 75,568 4,958 60,997 12,716 TP (lb/year) POLLUTANTS/ACREAGE TSS(lb/acre) TP (lb/acre) RANK TP EKD9 EKD1 EKD6 EKD5 EKD8 EKD2 EKD7 EKD3 EKD4 TP (lb/acre) RANK TSS EKD1 EKD9 EKD6 EKD5 EKD2 EKD8 EKD7 EKD3 EKD4 TSS(lb/acre)

15 15 East Kittsondale Subwatershed Assessment East Kittsondale: Catchment 1 Catchment 1 Description Catchment 1 is the farthest upstream and begins the East Kittsondale subwatershed. This catchment is the most commercial catchment of the subwatershed and consists of large areas of industrial, residential, highway, & institutional land use. A section of Interstate 94 runs adjacent to a large commercial and industrial development. Portions of Concordia University are also included in this catchment. This catchment ranked highest in TSS and second highest in TP of the nine catchments. Existing Existing Catchment Summary Acres Dominant Land Cover Commercial Parcels 416 Volume (acre-feet/yr) TP (lb/yr) TSS (lb/yr) Besides bi-annual street sweeping which takes place in the spring and the fall, there are no other existing stormwater treatment practices in this catchment. Therefore, any projects identified in this catchment would be a beneficial improvement to the water quality in this uppermost catchment. Existing Conditions Base Loading Net % Existing Loading TP (lb/yr) % TSS (lb/yr) 93, % 89,393 Volume (acre-feet/yr) % Number of BMP's 1 BMP Size/Description Bi-Annual Street Sweeping Retrofit Recommendation During a field reconnaissance, several areas were discovered which were lacking proper drainage and treatment. Multiple underground infiltration trenches were identified in order to remediate drainage issues in the limited space available, including trenches in parking lots, roadways, and a sports field. Specifically, corroded intersections off Hamline Avenue crossing Interstate 94 were in need of serious drainage improvements. The commercial development in the northeast corner of the catchment was built prior to stormwater regulations and therefore consists of a high percentage of impervious area that remains untreated. Retrofitting underground infiltration trenches into existing storm sewer infrastructure could provide added treatment while being minimally invasive to commercial parking. Even though these features are underground, informational signage could provide educational outreach in this highly visible area. In addition to numerous residential curb cut rain gardens, an underground detention system was identified which could serve as stormwater treatment and sports field irrigation for a large portion of Concordia University and the surrounding landscape.

16 16 East Kittsondale Subwatershed Assessment

17 Cost 17 East Kittsondale Subwatershed Assessment Project ID: EKD1-Residential Rain Gardens Location: South of Interstate 94 from Snelling and Hamline Ave Map Sites: Drainage Area: 45 Residential Acres Description: To treat the residential neighborhoods within Catchment 1, twelve curb cuts rain garden locations were identified, though more may exist. Ideal rain garden locations are generally placed upstream of a stormsewer catch basin to treat the stormwater before it reaches the catch basin. To simulate likely homeowner participation, scenarios for 3, 6, and 12 rain gardens were modeled. The results of the pollutant and volume reductions are summarized in the table below. EKD1_Residential Rain Gardens Cost/Removal Analysis TP (lb/yr) 0.8 2% 1.5 3% 2.7 2% TSS (lb/yr) 257 4% 466 5% 844 4% Volume (acre-feet/yr) 0.7 0% 1.1 0% 2.1 0% Number of BMP's BMP Size/Description 360 sq. ft. 720 sq. ft. 1,440 sq. ft. BMP Type Moderately Complex Bioretention Moderately Complex Bioretention Moderately Complex Bioretention Materials/Labor/Design $5,004 $10,008 $20,016 Promotion & Admin Costs $270 $540 $1,080 Probable Project Cost $5,274 $10,548 $21,096 Annual O&M $225 $450 $ yr Cost/1,000lb-TSS $1,560 $1,720 $1, yr Cost/lb-TP $501 $534 $594

18 Cost 18 East Kittsondale Subwatershed Assessment Project ID: EKD1- Commercial Underground Infiltration Trenches Drainage Area: 75 Commercial Acres Cub Foods at University Avenue Area UG: 4.1 acres Hamline Ave N Area UG:.82 acres Hamline Ave S Area UG:.6 acres Location: North of Interstate 94, along railway Cub Foods at University Avenue Map Site: 101 Hamline Ave N Map Site: 121 Description: Hamline Ave S Map Site: 122 Several underground infiltration projects were identified in commercial parking lots and streets. The first is a parking lot at Cub Foods located off University Ave in the Northern portion of the catchment. If installed, this project would help treat the runoff coming off a large impervious area. Other underground trench locations were identified off Hamline Ave, just north and south of where the road passes over Interstate 94. These areas were identified as having poor drainage, which causes large corroded areas on the roadways. If either of these projects is installed, they will help to improve not only water quality, but will increase the road quality as well. Given the similar sizes of the infiltration trenches, they were modeled as 1 individual trench, and then together as 2 trenches. EKD1_Commercial Underground Infiltration Cost/Removal Analysis Cub Foods Hamline N and S Hamline N TP (lb/yr) 5.1 4% 1.8 2% 1.1 3% TSS (lb/yr) 3,039 7% 576 5% 359 5% Volume (acre-feet/yr) % 1.4 0%.9 1% Number of BMP's BMP Size/Description 1,680 sq. ft. 600 sq. ft. 360 sq. ft. BMP Type Underground Infiltration Underground Infiltration Underground Infiltration Materials/Labor/Design $154,140 $55,050 $33,030 Promotion & Admin Costs $233 $495 $718 Probable Project Cost $154,373 $55,545 $33,748 Annual O&M $10,603 $1,202 $ yr Cost/1,000lb-TSS $5,182 $7,390 $4, yr Cost/lb-TP $3,088 $2,412 $1,293

19 19 East Kittsondale Subwatershed Assessment Underground Infiltration Drainage Areas EKD1- Commercial Underground Infiltration Trenches (Sites 101, 121, and 122) and School Underground Detention and Reuse (Site 115); Infiltration trenches would treat the green shaded area

20 Cost 20 East Kittsondale Subwatershed Assessment Project ID: EKD1-School Underground Detention and Reuse Location: Barnes Field, Concordia University located at Selby and Hamline Ave Map Site: 115 Drainage Area: 32 Institutional Aces, 23 Industrial Description: Area UG: 18 Acres A large area of Concordia University and the surrounding industrial development is connected through stormwater infrastructure that runs directly through Barnes Field, making it an ideal location for capturing stormwater for treatment and reuse. This could be made possible by placing an underground detention and irrigation system in the sports field. If installed, this project would help treat runoff from 18 acres of industrial and institutional land use. Specifically for this project, as it deals with irrigation and detention times, additional progressive modeling and analysis would be required prior to any installation. EKD1_Institutional and Industrial Detention/Reuse Cost/Removal Analysis 1 TP (lb/yr) % TSS (lb/yr) 5,537 10% Volume (acre-feet/yr) % Number of BMP's 1 BMP Size/Description 6,048 sq. ft. BMP Type Underground Infiltration Materials/Labor/Design $554,904 Promotion & Admin Costs $495 Probable Project Cost $555,399 Annual O&M $10, yr Cost/1,000lb-TSS $5, yr Cost/lb-TP $2,436

21 21 East Kittsondale Subwatershed Assessment Project ID: EKD1 Alley Project Location: Any of the 5 Alleys shown in Catchment 1, see map below Drainage Area:.66 Total Acres of Alleys Description: Scenarios of 3, 2, and 1 alleys found in Catchment 1 were modeled as pervious pavement and underground infiltration trenches to compare the cost-benefit for each type of water quality improvement project. Alley projects were sized to treat one-third the total alley area; for example, a 1.0-acre alley would be treated by.33 acres of pervious pavement. The results are summarized below. The analysis demonstrates that the underground infiltration is the most cost-effective project. Map of alleys located in Catchment 1

22 Cost Cost 22 East Kittsondale Subwatershed Assessment EKD1_Alleys Pervious Pavement Cost/Removal Analysis TP (lb/yr) 2.5 3% 3.0 3% 3.2 3% TSS (lb/yr) 804 5% 962 5% 1,013 5% Volume (acre-feet/yr) 1.8 1% 2.3 1% 2.3 1% Number of BMP's BMP Size/Description 9,583 sq. ft. 19,166 sq. ft. 28,750 sq. ft. BMP Type Permeable Pavement Permeable Pavement Permeable Pavement Materials/Labor/Design $95,832 $191,664 $287,496 Promotion & Admin Costs $1,680 $1,680 $1,680 Probable Project Cost $97,512 $193,344 $289,176 Annual O&M $75 $150 $ yr Cost/1,000lb-TSS $4,136 $6,855 $9, yr Cost/lb-TP $1,330 $2,198 $3,083 EKD1_ Alleys Underground Infiltration Cost/Removal Analysis TP (lb/yr) 1.1 2% 1.8 3% 2.3 3% TSS (lb/yr) 359 5% 576 5% 733 5% Volume (acre-feet/yr) 0.9 0% 1.4 1% 1.8 1% Number of BMP's BMP Size/Description 120 sq. ft. 240 sq. ft. 360 sq. ft. BMP Type Underground Infiltration Underground Infiltration Underground Infiltration Materials/Labor/Design $11,010 $22,020 $33,030 Promotion & Admin Costs $1,599 $964 $718 Probable Project Cost $12,609 $22,984 $33,748 Annual O&M $802 $1,202 $1, yr Cost/1,000lb-TSS $3,403 $3,417 $3, yr Cost/lb-TP $1,111 $1,094 $1,185

23 23 East Kittsondale Subwatershed Assessment East Kittsondale: Catchment 2 Catchment 2 Description Catchment 2 lies downstream from Catchment 1 and upstream from Catchment 3. This area is the third smallest of the catchments and land use is primarily high-density residential with areas of urban roads and railways. Ayd Mill Road runs through the center of the catchment along the railway and historic Summit Avenue runs through the southern part of the catchment. Existing Catchment Summary Acres 121 Dominant Land Cover Residential Parcels 437 Volume (acre-feet/yr) TP (lb/yr) 97.0 TSS (lb/yr) 27,847 Existing Conditions In addition to the bi-annual street sweeping, 13 residential rain gardens were identified during desktop analysis reconnaissance. These rain gardens were used to determine the pollutant loading for the existing conditions. Existing rain gardens provide 1680 sq. feet of treatment, treating 1.4 lbs of total phosphorous, 3,909 pound of suspended solids, and 1.1 acre-feet of runoff. Existing Conditions Base Loading Net % Existing Loading TP (lb/yr) % 97.0 TSS (lb/yr) 31,756 3,909 12% 27,847 Volume (acre-feet/yr) % 87.4 Number of BMP's 14 BMP Size/Description 13 Rain Gardens totaling 1680 sq. ft 1 Bi-Annual Street Sweeping Retrofit Recommendations The majority of the projects identified in Catchment 2 were residential curb cuts. Overall, more than 10 sites were identified as possible locations for curb cut rain gardens. Scenarios for 10, 6, and 3 rain gardens were modeled and are described below. A rain garden placed on Summit Avenue could offer a highly visible project, which could provide public education and outreach.

24 24 East Kittsondale Subwatershed Assessment

25 Cost 25 East Kittsondale Subwatershed Assessment Project ID: EKD2- Residential Rain Gardens Location: Residential Boulevards from Dayton Ave to Summit Ave Map Sites: Drainage Area: 95 Acres of High-Density Residential Description: To treat the residential neighborhoods within Catchment 2, thirteen boulevard rain garden locations were identified, though more may exist. Ideal rain garden locations are generally placed upstream of a stormsewer catch basin to treat the stormwater before it reaches the catch basin. To simulate likely homeowner participation, scenarios for 3, 6, and 10 rain gardens were modeled. The results of the pollutant and volume reductions are summarized in the table below. EKD 2_ Residential Rain Gardens Cost/Removal Analysis TP (lb/yr) 1.4 7% 2.2 8% 3.4 9% TSS (lb/yr) % % 1,063 16% Volume (acre-feet/yr) 1.1 3% 1.8 4% 2.6 5% Number of BMP's BMP Size/Description 360 Sq. Ft 720 Sq. Ft 1,200 Sq. Ft BMP Type Moderately Complex Bioretention Moderately Complex Bioretention Moderately Complex Bioretention Materials/Labor/Design $5,004 $10,008 $16,680 Promotion & Admin Costs $2,310 $3,150 $4,270 Probable Project Cost $7,314 $13,158 $20,950 Annual O&M $225 $450 $ yr Cost/1,000lb-TSS $1,205 $1,415 $1, yr Cost/lb-TP $342 $402 $422

26 26 East Kittsondale Subwatershed Assessment Project ID: EKD2-Alley Project Location: Any of the 10 Alley Locations in Catchment 2 Drainage Area: 4.04 Total Acres of Alleys Description: Scenarios of 5, 3, and 1 alleys found in Catchment 2 were modeled as both pervious pavement and underground infiltration trenches in order to compare the cost-benefit for each type of water quality improvement project. Alley projects were sized to treat one-third the total alley area; for example, a 1.0-acre alley would be treated by.33 acres of pervious pavement. The results are summarized below. Analysis demonstrated that underground infiltration is the most cost-effective option. Alley locations in Catchment 2

27 Cost Cost 27 East Kittsondale Subwatershed Assessment EKD 2_ Alleys Pervious Pavement Cost/Removal Analysis TP (lb/yr) % % % TSS (lb/yr) 1,570 17% 1,831 18% 1,927 18% Volume (acre-feet/yr) 3.7 6% 4.3 7% 4.6 7% Number of BMP's BMP Size/Description 6,389 Sq. Ft 12,778 Sq. Ft 19,166 Sq. Ft BMP Type Permeable Pavement Permeable Pavement Permeable Pavement Materials/Labor/Design $63,888 $127,776 $191,660 Promotion & Admin Costs $1,680 $1,680 $1,680 Probable Project Cost $65,568 $129,456 $193,340 Annual O&M $75 $225 $ yr Cost/1,000lb-TSS $1,440 $2,480 $3, yr Cost/lb-TP $452 $775 $1,104 EKD 2_ Alleys Underground Infiltration Cost/Removal Analysis TP (lb/yr) 2.6 8% % % TSS (lb/yr) 1,063 16% 1,589 17% 1,954 18% Volume (acre-feet/yr) 3.4 6% 3.8 6% 4.7 7% Number of BMP's BMP Size/Description 120 Sq. Ft 360 Sq. Ft 600 Sq. Ft BMP Type Underground Infiltration Underground Infiltration Underground Infiltration Materials/Labor/Design $11,010 $33,030 $55,050 Promotion & Admin Costs $1,599 $718 $495 Probable Project Cost $12,609 $33,748 $55,545 Annual O&M $2,988 $3,320 $4, yr Cost/1,000lb-TSS $3,206 $2,797 $3, yr Cost/lb-TP $1,326 $868 $943

28 28 East Kittsondale Subwatershed Assessment East Kittsondale: Catchment 3 Catchment 3 Description Catchment 3 is the largest in East Kittsondale and is composed of high-density residential areas, with portions of commercial development along Grand and Summit Avenue. Ayd Mill road and the rail way run directly through this catchment. A multifamily townhome development, Wilder Park, lies in the southeast corner of the catchment and provided ideal locations for placing bioretention. Existing Catchment Summary Acres Dominant Land Cover Residential Parcels 1664 Volume (acre-feet/yr) TP (lb/yr) TSS (lb/yr) 93,709 Existing Conditions As part of the City of Saint Paul s RSVP program, three underground infiltration trenches were installed beneath the roadways to treat the street runoff. In total, the three underground infiltration trenches along with street sweeping treated 21 pounds of phosphorous, 5.3 acre-feet of runoff. These trenches were modeled based off as-built data provided by the CRWD and the City of Saint Paul. Existing Conditions Base Loading Net % Existing Loading TP (lb/yr) % TSS (lb/yr) 108,617 14, % 93,709 Volume (acre-feet/yr) % Number of BMP's 4 BMP Size/Description Bi-Annual Street Sweeping 3 Underground Infiltration Trenches Retrofit Recommendations The majority of projects identified in this catchment were residential rain gardens because the land use is primarily residential and multifamily. The most visible projects would be located along Summit Avenue. One underground detention project was identified which could double as field irrigation for Saint Paul Summit School. In addition, two underground infiltration areas were identified in alleys, which lie along in commercial developments. Areas of pervious pavement were also identified.

29 29 East Kittsondale Subwatershed Assessment

30 Cost 30 East Kittsondale Subwatershed Assessment Project ID: EKD3-Residential Rain Gardens Location: Residential Boulevards throughout the Catchment Map Sites: and Drainage Area: 341 Acres of High-Density Residential Description: To treat the residential neighborhoods within Catchment 3, nearly 70 boulevard rain garden locations were identified, though more may exist. Ideal rain garden locations are generally placed upstream of a stormsewer catch basin to treat the stormwater before it reaches the catch basin. To simulate likely homeowner participation, scenarios for 12, 25, and 50 rain gardens were modeled. The results of the pollutant and volume reductions are summarized in the table below. EKD 3_ Residential Rain Gardens Cost/Removal Analysis TP (lb/yr) 2.9 7% 5.7 7% % TSS (lb/yr) % 1,538 15% 2,827 16% Volume (acre-feet/yr) 8.0 4% % % Number of BMP's BMP Size/Description 1,440 Sq. Ft 3,000 Sq. Ft 6,000 Sq. Ft BMP Type Moderately Complex Bioretention Moderately Complex Bioretention Moderately Complex Bioretention Materials/Labor/Design $20,016 $41,700 $83,400 Promotion & Admin Costs $4,830 $8,470 $15,470 Probable Project Cost $24,846 $50,170 $98,870 Annual O&M $900 $1,875 $3, yr Cost/1,000lb-TSS $2,171 $2,306 $2, yr Cost/lb-TP $596 $622 $671

31 Cost 31 East Kittsondale Subwatershed Assessment Project ID: EKD3-Institutional Projects Location: St. Thomas More Church, Summit Ave Map Sites: 359 Mt. Zion Temple, Summit Ave Map Site: 374 St. Paul Academy and Summit School Map Site: 364 Drainage Area: 19 Total Acres of Institutional Land Use Potential underground detention/reuse site at St. Paul Academy and Summit School Description: To treat the institutional land use in this catchment, 3 different types of projects were identified, including pervious pavement, rain gardens, and underground infiltration. St. Thomas More Church has a large parking lot that could be converted into pervious pavement to help treat the stormwater runoff in a limited space. A rain garden located off a parking lot near Mt. Zion Temple on Summit Avenue could help treat a large, currently untreated parking lot. Lastly, an underground infiltration site at the Saint Paul Academy and Summit School could provide a unique opportunity for stormwater reuse for irrigation for the sport's field. More extensive modeling and analysis would be required for stormwater reuse. EKD 3_ Institutional Cost/Removal Analysis 1 1 UG Detention & Reuse TP (lb/yr) 1.7 6% 0.3 6% 3.9 7% TSS (lb/yr) % % 1,640 15% Volume (acre-feet/yr) 7.8 4% 5.5 3% 7.8 4% Number of BMP's BMP Size/Description 19,602 Sq. Ft 120 Sq. Ft 1,200 Sq. Ft BMP Type Permeable Pavement Moderately Complex Bioretention Underground Infiltration Materials/Labor/Design $196,020 $1,668 $110,100 Promotion & Admin Costs $1,680 $1,750 $298 Probable Project Cost $197,700 $3,418 $110,139 Annual O&M $75 $75 $6, yr Cost/1,000lb-TSS $7,540 $1,852 $6, yr Cost/lb-TP $3,921 $630 $2,685

32 Cost 32 East Kittsondale Subwatershed Assessment Project ID: EKD3-Multifamily Rain Gardens Location: Wilder Park Townhomes off Ayd Mill Road and Lexington Ave Map Sites: Lexington Commons Homeowner Association Map Sites: Other Apartments Map Sites: Drainage Area: 16 Acres of Multifamily Land Use Description: Wilder Park Townhomes are located in a low-lying area, with little stormwater infrastructure. Lexington Commons is located just north of Wilder Park and had ideal locations for placing rain gardens. These rain gardens were modeled as simple bioretention because there is no curb to consider in these areas. Other rain garden locations were positioned at various apartment complexes throughout the catchment. Multifamily site locations EKD 3_ Multifamily Cost/Removal Analysis 4 8 TP (lb/yr) 1.0 6% 1.9 6% TSS (lb/yr) % % Volume (acre-feet/yr) 5.7 3% 6.2 3% Number of BMP's 4 8 BMP Size/Description 480 Sq. Ft 960 Sq. Ft BMP Type Simple Bioretention Simple Bioretention Materials/Labor/Design $5,424 $10848 Promotion & Admin Costs $2,590 $3,710 Probable Project Cost $8,014 $14,558 Annual O&M $300 $ yr Cost/1,000lb-TSS $1,936 $1, yr Cost/lb-TP $567 $571

33 Cost 33 East Kittsondale Subwatershed Assessment Project ID: EKD3-Commercial Projects Location: Spectacle Shoppe, Grand Ave Map Site: 360 Karuna Chiropractic, Saint Clair Ave Map Site: 317 Drainage Area: 22 Acres of Commercial Land Use Description: Due to the limited space available in commercial areas, boulevard rain gardens and pervious pavement was found to be the most feasible projects in these areas. EKD 3_ Commercial Cost/Removal Analysis 1 9 TP (lb/yr) 0.7 6% 1.5 6% TSS (lb/yr) % % Volume (acre-feet/yr) 1.1 2% 1.6 2% Number of BMP's 1 9 BMP Size/Description 720 Sq. Ft 1,080 Sq. Ft BMP Type Permeable Pavement Moderately Complex Bioretention Materials/Labor/Design $1,200 $15,012 Promotion & Admin Costs $1,680 $3,990 Probable Project Cost $2,880 $19,002 Annual O&M $75 $ yr Cost/1,000lb-TSS $454 $1, yr Cost/lb-TP $244 $872 Project ID: EKD3-Park Projects Location: Summit Ave and Marshall Ave Map Site: 301, Drainage Area: 10.5 Acres of Park Land Use Description: Summit Avenue has large boulevard space, making it an ideal location for a large rain garden. Based on homeowner participation, scenarios for 2 and 4 rain gardens were identified. Rain gardens located in this area would provide excellent exposure and outreach for citizens; however, given that Summit Avenue is in a historic district, additional planning and cooperation would be required. Additionally, parking stalls along Marshall Ave could utilize pervious pavement to help capture street runoff.

34 Cost 34 East Kittsondale Subwatershed Assessment EKD 3_ Park Cost/Removal Analysis Park PP Park RG Park 2 RG TP (lb/yr) 0.1 6% 1.0 6% 1.6 6% TSS (lb/yr) 47 14% % % Volume (acre-feet/yr) 5.3 3% 5.7 3% 6.2 3% Number of BMP's BMP Size/Description 1,350 Sq. Ft 1,000 Sq. Ft 2,000 Sq. Ft BMP Type Permeable Pavement Moderately Complex Bioretention Moderately Complex Bioretention Materials/Labor/Design $13,500 $13,900 $27,800 Promotion & Admin Costs $1,680 $2,030 $2,590 Probable Project Cost $15,180 $15,930 $30,390 Annual O&M $75 $150 $ yr Cost/1,000lb-TSS $12,362 $2,849 $3, yr Cost/lb-TP $5,810 $681 $821 Project ID: EKD3-Alley Project Location: Any of the 52 Alley Locations in Catchment 3 Drainage Area: 14.5 Acres of Alleys Description: Scenarios of 26, 13, and 6 alleys found in Catchment 3 were modeled as both pervious pavement and underground infiltration trenches to compare the costbenefit for each type of water quality improvement project. Alley projects were sized to treat one-third the total alley area; for example, a 1.0-acre alley would be treated by.33 acres of pervious pavement. The analysis determined that the underground infiltration would be the most cost-effective option (results summarized below). Alley locations in Catchment 3

35 Cost Cost 35 East Kittsondale Subwatershed Assessment EKD 3_Pervious Alleys Cost/Removal Analysis TP (lb/yr) % % % TSS (lb/yr) 1,570 17% 1,831 18% 1, % Volume (acre-feet/yr) 3.7 9% % % Number of BMP's BMP Size/Description 6,389 Sq. Ft 12,778 Sq. Ft 19,166 Sq. Ft BMP Type Permeable Pavement Permeable Pavement Permeable Pavement Materials/Labor/Design $63,888 $127,776 $191,664 Promotion & Admin Costs $1,680 $1,680 $1,680 Probable Project Cost $65,568 $129,456 $193,344 Annual O&M $450 $975 $1, yr Cost/1,000lb-TSS $1,679 $2,889 $4, yr Cost/lb-TP $527 $903 $1,358 EKD 3_ Alleys Underground Infiltration Cost/Removal Analysis TP (lb/yr) 4.7 7% 6.2 7% 7.0 8% TSS (lb/yr) 1,457 15% 1,920 15% 2,161 16% Volume (acre-feet/yr) 9.4 4% % % Number of BMP's BMP Size/Description 720 Sq. Ft 1,560 Sq. Ft 3,120 Sq. Ft BMP Type Underground Infiltration Underground Infiltration Underground Infiltration Materials/Labor/Design $66,060 $143,130 $286,260 Promotion & Admin Costs $433 $246 $149 Probable Project Cost $66,493 $143,376 $286,409 Annual O&M $8,200 $8,800 $9, yr Cost/1,000lb-TSS $7,149 $7,073 $8, yr Cost/lb-TP $2,216 $2,190 $2,650

36 36 East Kittsondale Subwatershed Assessment East Kittsondale: Catchment 4 Catchment 4 Description Catchment 4 is the 2 nd largest in the subwatershed and is a great area for families as it consists of residential, park, and institutional land use. Small portions of commercial land use lie along Randolph Avenue in the southern portion of the catchment. Edgcumbe Park and Cretin Durham Hall are located in this catchment. Multiple apartment complexes completely lack any on-site stormsewer infrastructure, and instead rely on drainage to the streets. Existing Catchment Summary Acres Dominant Land Cover Residential Parcels 1420 Volume (acre-feet/yr) TP (lb/yr) TSS (lb/yr) 56,084 Existing Conditions As part of the City of Saint Paul s RSVP program, four underground infiltration trenches were installed beneath the roadways to discretely treat urban runoff. These trenches help remove 76 pounds of phosphorous, 56,084 pounds of suspended solids, and 47.8 acre-feet of runoff. In addition to street sweeping, these trenches were modeled for their pollutant removal rates within the catchment. The table below outlines the base conditions and the treatment provided by the existing features. Existing Conditions Base Loading Net % Existing Loading TP (lb/yr) % TSS (lb/yr) 84,836 28, % 56,084 Volume (acre-feet/yr) % Number of BMP's 4 BMP Size/Description 4 Infiltration Trenches Totaling c.f. Bi-Annual Street Sweeping Retrofit Recommendations The majority of projects outlined in this included boulevard rain gardens. A few opportunities for underground infiltration exist, which would add to the pollutant removal success of the existing RSVP trenches. Another treatment option is for current RSVP trenches located south of Edgcumbe Recreational Area be retrofitted as stormwater reuse and irrigation.

37 37 East Kittsondale Subwatershed Assessment

38 Cost 38 East Kittsondale Subwatershed Assessment Project ID: EKD4-Residential Rain Gardens Location: Residential Boulevards throughout the catchment Map Sites: 401-2, 404, , , 436, 439, Drainage Area: 243 Acres of High-Density Residential Land Use Description: To treat the runoff from residential neighborhoods within Catchment 4, over 30 boulevard rain garden locations were identified, though more may exist. Ideal rain garden locations are generally placed upstream of a stormsewer catch basin to treat the stormwater before it reaches the catch basin. To simulate likely homeowner participation, scenarios for 7, 15, and 30 rain gardens were modeled. The results of the pollutant and volume reductions are summarized in the table below. EKD4_Residential Rain Gardens Cost/Removal Analysis TP (lb/yr) % % % TSS (lb/yr) % 1,230 35% 2,019 36% Volume (acre-feet/yr) % % % Number of BMP's BMP Size/Description Sq. Ft 1,800 Sq. Ft 3,600 Sq. Ft. BMP Type Moderately Complex Bioretention Moderately Complex Bioretention Moderately Complex Bioretention Materials/Labor/Design $11,676 $25,020 $50,040 Promotion & Admin Costs $387 $222 $134 Probable Project Cost $12,063 $25,242 $50,174 Annual O&M $630 $1,350 $2, yr Cost/1,000lb-TSS $1,665 $1,782 $2, yr Cost/lb-TP $543 $592 $705 Project ID: EKD4-Multifamily Projects Location: Apartments off Randolph Ave, Edgcumbe Rd, and James Ave Map Sites: Drainage Area: 6.9 Acres of Multifamily Residential Land Use Description: Pervious pavement and rain gardens were ideal projects to treat the runoff from multifamily neighborhoods within Catchment 4. Pervious pavement was used in areas, which were lacking open space for bioretention. The results of the pollutant and volume reductions are summarized in the table below.

39 Cost 39 East Kittsondale Subwatershed Assessment Apartments located off Randolph Avenue, ideal locations for pervious pavement EKD4_Multifamily BMPs Cost/Removal Analysis 3 3 TP (lb/yr) % % TSS (lb/yr) % % Volume (acre-feet/yr) % % Number of BMP's 3 3 BMP Size/Description 360 Sq. Ft 27,138 Sq. Ft BMP Type Moderately Complex Bioretention Permeable Pavement Materials/Labor/Design $5,004 $271,380 Promotion & Admin Costs $718 $1,680 Probable Project Cost $5,722 $273,060 Annual O&M $225 $ yr Cost/1,000lb-TSS $2,349 $8, yr Cost/lb-TP $831 $13,557

40 Cost 40 East Kittsondale Subwatershed Assessment Project ID: EKD4-Institutional Projects Location: Edgcumbe Recreational Center Map Sites: 435, 417, and 423 Drainage Area: 30 Acres of Institutional Land Use Area UG: 7 Acres Description: To treat the runoff from institutional areas within Catchment 4, underground infiltration, rain gardens, and pervious pavement were ideal projects for these locations. Pervious pavement was used in areas, which were lacking drainage and open space. The results of the pollutant and volume reductions are summarized in the table below. Above: Edgcumbe Recreational Center Site, trench would treat the green shaded area EKD4_Institutional Sites Cost/Removal Analysis TP (lb/yr) % % % TSS (lb/yr) 6,899 42% % % Volume (acre-feet/yr) % % % Number of BMP's BMP Size/Description 3, Sq. Ft 360 Sq. Ft 392 Sq. Ft. BMP Type Underground Infiltration Moderately Complex Bioretention Permeable Pavement Materials/Labor/Design $275,250 $5,004 $3,920 Promotion & Admin Costs $153 $718 $674 Probable Project Cost $275,403 $5,722 $4,594 Annual O&M $2,250 $270 $75 30-yr Cost/1,000lb-TSS $1,657 $2,425 $2, yr Cost/lb-TP $625 $1,536 $2,236

41 41 East Kittsondale Subwatershed Assessment Project ID: EKD4-Alley Project Location: Any of the 51 Alley Locations in Catchment 4, see map below Drainage Area: 10.4 Total Acres of Alleys Description: Scenarios of 26, 13, and 5 alleys found in Catchment 4 were modeled as both pervious pavement and underground infiltration trenches to compare the cost-benefit for each type of water quality improvement project. Alley projects were sized to treat one-third the total alley area; for example, a 1.0- acre alley would be treated by.33 acres of pervious pavement. The results are summarized below; underground infiltration was analyzed as being the most cost-effective. Alley locations in Catchment 4

42 Cost Cost 42 East Kittsondale Subwatershed Assessment EKD4_ Alleys Pervious Pavement Cost/Removal Analysis TP (lb/yr) % % % TSS (lb/yr) 1,437 36% 3,856 38% 5,149 40% Volume (acre-feet/yr) % % % Number of BMP's BMP Size/Description 14, Sq. Ft 38,130 Sq. Ft 76,259 Sq. Ft. BMP Type Permeable Pavement Permeable Pavement Permeable Pavement Materials/Labor/Design $146,652 $381,295 $762,590 Promotion & Admin Costs $1,680 $1,680 $1,680 Probable Project Cost $148,332 $382,975 $764,270 Annual O&M $375 $975 $1, yr Cost/1,000lb-TSS $3,702 $3,563 $5, yr Cost/lb-TP $1,182 $1,099 $1,642 EKD4_Alleys Underground Infiltration Cost/Removal Analysis TP (lb/yr) % % % TSS (lb/yr) 1,599 36% 3,365 38% 4,955 40% Volume (acre-feet/yr) % % % Number of BMP's BMP Size/Description Sq. Ft 1,560 Sq. Ft 3,120 Sq. Ft. BMP Type Underground Infiltration Underground Infiltration Underground Infiltration Materials/Labor/Design $55,050 $143,130 $286,260 Promotion & Admin Costs $495 $246 $149 Probable Project Cost $55,545 $143,376 $286,409 Annual O&M $450 $1,170 $2, yr Cost/1,000lb-TSS $3,659 $3,704 $4, yr Cost/lb-TP $1,083 $1,123 $1,267

43 43 East Kittsondale Subwatershed Assessment East Kittsondale: Catchment 5 Catchment 5 Description Catchment 5 lies upstream from Catchment 9 and 8. Like the entirety of the subwatershed, it is primarily residential, but it also encompasses commercial areas near Grand Avenue. Drainage and grading seemed to be an issue in this area, so ideal projects in this location included underground infiltration. Existing Conditions Existing Catchment Summary Acres Dominant Land Cover Residential Parcels 503 Volume (acre-feet/yr) TP (lb/yr) TSS (lb/yr) 45,335 Bi-annual street sweeping is the only existing treatment throughout this catchment. Any projects installed in this catchment would cause pollutant reductions and water quality improvements. Existing Conditions Base Loading Net % Existing Loading TP (lb/yr) % TSS (lb/yr) 46, % 45,335 Volume (acre-feet/yr) % Number of BMP's 1 BMP Size/Description Bi-Annual Street Sweeping Retrofit Recommendations Several underground infiltration trenches were identified in commercial areas due to poor drainage in these areas. The Grand Ave commercial parking lot had major flooding issues due to poor grading and lack of infrastructure. Infiltration trenches were identified as a possible solution in order to maintain parking capacity while providing solution to drainage and pollutant loads.

44 44 East Kittsondale Subwatershed Assessment

45 Cost 45 East Kittsondale Subwatershed Assessment Project ID: EKD5-Residential Rain Gardens Location: Residential Boulevards throughout the catchment Map Sites: Drainage Area: 122 Acres of High-Density Residential Land Use Description: To treat the runoff from residential neighborhoods within Catchment 5, 15 boulevard rain garden locations were identified, though more may exist. Ideal rain garden locations are generally placed upstream of a stormsewer catch basin to treat the stormwater before it reaches the catch basin. To simulate likely homeowner participation, scenarios for 3, 7, and 14 rain gardens were modeled. The results of the pollutant and volume reductions are summarized in the table below. EKD5_Residential Rain Gardens Cost/Removal Analysis TP (lb/yr) 0.7 2% 1.4 2% 2.7 3% TSS (lb/yr) 189 4% 407 4% 777 5% Volume (acre-feet/yr) 0.6 0% 1.2 1% 2.3 2% Number of BMP's BMP Size/Description 360 Sq. Ft 840 Sq. Ft 1,680 Sq. Ft BMP Type Moderately Complex Bioretention Moderately Complex Bioretention Moderately Complex Bioretention Materials/Labor/Design $5,004 $11,676 $23,352 Promotion & Admin Costs $718 $387 $233 Probable Project Cost $5,722 $12,063 $23,585 Annual O&M $270 $630 $1, yr Cost/1,000lb-TSS $2,438 $2,536 $2, yr Cost/lb-TP $658 $737 $758 Project ID: EKD5-Commercial Projects Location: Juut Salon at Grand Avenue Map Sites: 516 Goodrich and Victoria Ave Map Site: 517 Fairmount and Avon Alley Map Site: 518 Drainage Area: 20.9 Acres of Commercial Land Use Grand Ave - Area UG:.97 acre Goodrich & Victoria Ave - Area UG:.22 Acre Fairmount and Avon Alley - Area UG:.22 acres Description: To treat the runoff from commercial areas in Catchment 5, underground infiltration projects were identified. These projects would help solve the drainage areas in this large parking areas, which lacks infrastructure and space available for placing an above-ground project.

46 Cost 46 East Kittsondale Subwatershed Assessment EKD5_Commercial UG Alley Cost/Removal Analysis TP (lb/yr) % 7.7 6% 9.2 7% TSS (lb/yr) 4,256 12% 1,930 7% 2,869 9% Volume (acre-feet/yr) % 5.5 4% 6.8 5% Number of BMP's BMP Size/Description 1,200 Sq. Ft 120 Sq. Ft 240 Sq. Ft BMP Type Underground Infiltration Underground Infiltration Underground Infiltration Materials/Labor/Design $110,100 $11,010 $22,020 Promotion & Admin Costs $298 $1,599 $964 Probable Project Cost $110,398 $12,609 $22,984 Annual O&M $10,960 $4,818 $5, yr Cost/1,000lb-TSS $3,440 $2,714 $2, yr Cost/lb-TP $1,003 $680 $727 Example location of Grand Ave parking lot, near Juut Salon. An infiltration trench would treat the green shaded area.

47 47 East Kittsondale Subwatershed Assessment Project ID: EKD5-Alley Project Location: Any of the 16 Alley Locations in Catchment 5, see map below Drainage Area: 5 Acres of Alleys, modeled at.32 acres each Description: Scenarios of 8, 4, and 2 alleys found in Catchment 5 were modeled both as pervious pavement and as underground infiltration trenches to compare the cost-benefit for each type of water quality improvement project. Alley projects were sized to treat one-third the total alley area; for example, a 1.0-acre alley would be treated by.33 acres of pervious pavement. The analysis found underground infiltration as being the most cost-effective solution. The results are summarized below. Alley locations in Catchment 5

48 Cost Cost 48 East Kittsondale Subwatershed Assessment EKD5_Alley Pervious Pavement Cost/Removal Analysis TP (lb/yr) 3.8 4% 6.1 5% % TSS (lb/yr) 1,225 6% 1,922 7% 3,937 12% Volume (acre-feet/yr) 2.5 2% 4.3 3% 8.8 7% Number of BMP's BMP Size/Description 9,278 Sq. Ft 18,557 Sq. Ft 37,157 Sq. Ft BMP Type Permeable Pavement Permeable Pavement Permeable Pavement Materials/Labor/Design $92,783 $185,566 $371,567 Promotion & Admin Costs $1,680 $1,680 $1,680 Probable Project Cost $94,463 $187,246 $373,247 Annual O&M $150 $300 $ yr Cost/1,000lb-TSS $2,693 $3,403 $3, yr Cost/lb-TP $868 $1,072 $1,043 EKD5_Alley Underground Infiltration Cost/Removal Analysis TP (lb/yr) % % % TSS (lb/yr) 11,146 27% 12,539 30% 12,574 30% Volume (acre-feet/yr) % % % Number of BMP's BMP Size/Description 240 Sq. Ft 480 Sq. Ft 960 Sq. Ft BMP Type Underground Infiltration Underground Infiltration Underground Infiltration Materials/Labor/Design $22,020 $44,040 $88,080 Promotion & Admin Costs $964 $582 $351 Probable Project Cost $22,984 $44,622 $88,431 Annual O&M $19,576 $21,998 $22, yr Cost/1,000lb-TSS $1,825 $1,873 $2, yr Cost/lb-TP $616 $631 $671

49 49 East Kittsondale Subwatershed Assessment East Kittsondale: Catchment 6 Catchment 6 Description Existing Catchment Summary Catchment 6 is located just south of Interstate 35E. This is the Acres 273 furthest catchment downstream, and ultimately discharges the Dominant Land Cover Residential entire subwatershed into the Mississippi River. The 273-acre Parcels 1219 Volume (acre-feet/yr) subwatershed consists primarily of residential land use with TP (lb/yr) commercial areas along the southern portion of the site, following TSS (lb/yr) 75,568 West 7th St. Institutional areas are scattered throughout this area. This catchment ranked third highest in both TSS and TP loads of the 9 total catchments. Existing Conditions Besides bi-annual street sweeping, no other treatment type exists. If any of the identified projects were installed, they would increase the water quality in this catchment. A summary of the existing conditions is provided below. Existing Conditions Base Loading Net % Existing Loading TP (lb/yr) % TSS (lb/yr) 81,887 6,319 8% 75,568 Volume (acre-feet/yr) % Number of BMP's 1 BMP Size/Description Bi-Annual Street Sweeping Retrofit Recommendations Because of the residential nature of this catchment, placing many curb cut rain gardens in boulevards was identified as an ideal treatment option for the residential areas. Commercial developments surrounding West 7th St offered limited space for projects, so pervious pavement was often the best solution.

50 50 East Kittsondale Subwatershed Assessment

51 Cost 51 East Kittsondale Subwatershed Assessment Project ID: EKD6-Residential Rain Gardens Location: Residential Boulevards from Monroe Ct to Otto Ave Map Sites: Drainage Area: 206 Acres of High-Density Residential Land Use Description: To treat the runoff from residential neighborhoods within Catchment 6, over 25 boulevard rain garden locations were identified, though more may exist. Ideal rain garden locations are generally placed upstream of a stormsewer catch basin to treat the stormwater before it reaches the catch basin. To simulate likely homeowner participation, scenarios for 5, 12, and 25 rain gardens were modeled. The results of the pollutant and volume reductions are summarized in the table below. EKD6_Residential Rain Gardens Cost/Removal Analysis TP (lb/yr) 1.1 3% 2.4 4% 4.8 5% TSS (lb/yr) 322 8% 705 9% 1,396 9% Volume (acre-feet/yr) 0.9 0% 2.1 1% 4.1 2% Number of BMP's BMP Size/Description 600 Sq. Ft 1,440 Sq. Ft 3,000 Sq. Ft BMP Type Moderately Complex Bioretention Moderately Complex Bioretention Moderately Complex Bioretention Materials/Labor/Design $8,340 $20,016 $41,700 Promotion & Admin Costs $450 $1,080 $2,250 Probable Project Cost $8,790 $21,096 $43,950 Annual O&M $375 $900 $1, yr Cost/1,000lb-TSS $2,075 $2,274 $2, yr Cost/lb-TP $607 $668 $696

52 Cost 52 East Kittsondale Subwatershed Assessment Project ID: EKD6-Commercial Pervious Pavement Location: Commercial Areas surrounding West 7th Map Sites: Drainage Area: 22 Acres of Commercial Land Use Description: To treat the runoff from commercial areas, several pervious pavement locations were identified. These locations would help treat runoff where limited space is available. Scenarios were analyzed for pervious pavement 1, 2, and 4 different locations. Example location of pervious pavement, Site 631 EKD6_Commercial Pervious Pavement Cost/Removal Analysis TP (lb/yr) 0.4 3% 0.5 3% 0.7 3% TSS (lb/yr) 234 8% 322 8% 424 8% Volume (acre-feet/yr) 0.7 0% 0.9 0% 1.2 1% Number of BMP's BMP Size/Description 2,178 Sq. Ft 4,356 Sq. Ft 8,712 Sq. Ft BMP Type Permeable Pavement Permeable Pavement Permeable Pavement Materials/Labor/Design $21,780 $43,560 $87,120 Promotion & Admin Costs $1,680 $1,680 $1,680 Probable Project Cost $23,460 $45,240 $88,800 Annual O&M $75 $150 $ yr Cost/1,000lb-TSS $3,662 $5,149 $7, yr Cost/lb-TP $2,143 $3,316 $4,657

53 53 East Kittsondale Subwatershed Assessment Project ID: EKD6-Alley Project Location: Any of the 37 Alley Locations in Catchment 6, see map below Drainage Area: 5 Acres of Alleys, modeled at.23 acres each Description: Scenarios of 4, 9, and 19 alleys found in Catchment 6 were modeled both as pervious pavement and as underground infiltration trenches to compare the cost-benefit for each type of water quality improvement project. Alley projects were sized to treat one-third the total alley area; for example, a 1.0- acre alley would be treated by.33 acres of pervious pavement. The results are summarized below; analysis revealed that underground infiltration is the most cost-effective option.

54 Cost Cost 54 East Kittsondale Subwatershed Assessment EKD6_Alley Pervious Pavement Cost/Removal Analysis TP (lb/yr) 1.9 4% 2.1 4% 4.3 4% TSS (lb/yr) 609 8% 652 9% 1,351 9% Volume (acre-feet/yr) 1.5 1% 1.6 1% 3.2 1% Number of BMP's BMP Size/Description 11,805 Sq. Ft 26,528 Sq. Ft 56,192 Sq. Ft BMP Type Permeable Pavement Permeable Pavement Permeable Pavement Materials/Labor/Design $118,048 $265,280 $561,924 Promotion & Admin Costs $1,680 $1,681 $1,682 Probable Project Cost $119,728 $266,961 $563,606 Annual O&M $300 $675 $1, yr Cost/1,000lb-TSS $7,046 $14,684 $14, yr Cost/lb-TP $2,258 $4,559 $4,700 EKD6_Alley Underground Infiltration Cost/Removal Analysis TP (lb/yr) 9.6 7% % % TSS (lb/yr) 2,821 11% 3,713 12% 6,570 16% Volume (acre-feet/yr) 7.9 4% % % Number of BMP's BMP Size/Description 480 Sq. Ft 1,080 Sq. Ft 2,280 Sq. Ft BMP Type Underground Infiltration Underground Infiltration Underground Infiltration Materials/Labor/Design $44,040 $99,090 $209,190 Promotion & Admin Costs $582 $322 $187 Probable Project Cost $44,622 $99,412 $209,377 Annual O&M $6,900 $9,479 $16, yr Cost/1,000lb-TSS $2,973 $3,445 $3, yr Cost/lb-TP $874 $1,023 $1,061

55 55 East Kittsondale Subwatershed Assessment East Kittsondale: Catchment 7 Catchment 7 Description At only acres, Catchment 7 is the smallest catchment, but has the greatest pollutant load. This is likely due to the large arterial roads such as Lexington Pkwy and Randolph Ave passing through the area. The large number of urban roads greatly limited project locations. Land use is primarily residential, with a large multifamily development in southern most portion of the catchment. Existing Catchment Summary Acres Dominant Land Cover Residential Parcels 96 Volume (acre-feet/yr) TP (lb/yr) TSS (lb/yr) 4,958 Existing Conditions Besides bi-annual street sweeping, no other treatment exists. Any projects installed would improve the water quality in this catchment. The table below outlines the existing conditions for the catchment. Existing Conditions Base Loading Net % Existing Loading TP (lb/yr) % 18.3 TSS (lb/yr) 5, % 4,958 Volume (acre-feet/yr) % 19.2 Number of BMP's 1 BMP Size/Description Bi-Annual Street Sweeping Retrofit Recommendations Only 6 projects were identified in this catchment, due to lack of capacity for anything more. The arterial roads provided limited locations for placing boulevard rain gardens, so other project types were considered. The downhill sloping nature of the multifamily development resulted in limited drainage areas, as the site did not include any infrastructure. Pervious pavement and a rain garden were identified as treatment options to help alleviate any drainage issues that occur on site.

56 56 East Kittsondale Subwatershed Assessment

57 Cost 57 East Kittsondale Subwatershed Assessment Project ID: EKD7-Residential Rain Gardens Location: Residential boulevards off Lexington Pkwy Map Sites: Drainage Area: 16 Acres of High-Density Residential Land Use Description: To treat the runoff from residential neighborhoods within Catchment 7, 2 boulevard rain garden locations were identified, though more may exist. Ideal rain garden locations are generally placed upstream of a stormsewer catch basin to treat the stormwater before it reaches the catch basin. To simulate likely homeowner participation, scenarios for 1 and rain gardens were modeled. The results of the pollutant and volume reductions are summarized in the table below. EKD7_Residential Rain Gardens Cost/Removal Analysis 1 2 TP (lb/yr) % % TSS (lb/yr) % % Volume (acre-feet/yr) 1.8 9% % Number of BMP's 1 2 BMP Size/Description 120 Sq. Ft 240 Sq. Ft BMP Type Moderately Complex Bioretention Moderately Complex Bioretention Materials/Labor/Design $1,668 $3,336 Promotion & Admin Costs $1599 $964 Probable Project Cost $3,348 $5,016 Annual O&M $75 $ yr Cost/1,000lb-TSS $257 $ yr Cost/lb-TP $80 $117 Project ID: EKD7-Multifamily Projects Location: Lexington Pkwy and Randolph Ave Map Sites: Drainage Area: 4.35 Acres of Multifamily Land Use Description: To treat the runoff from the multifamily neighborhoods within Catchment 7, 3 projects were identified, including rain gardens and pervious pavement. The current site lacked drainage, so any installed projects would help alleviate any drainage issues while providing water quality improvement.

58 Cost 58 East Kittsondale Subwatershed Assessment EKD7_Multifamily BMPs Cost/Removal Analysis 1 Lot 1 Alley 1 RG TP (lb/yr) 0.6 8% 0.4 7% 0.3 7% TSS (lb/yr) % % % Volume (acre-feet/yr) 1.0 5% 0.7 3% 0.5 3% Number of BMP's BMP Size/Description 10,890 Sq. Ft 2,875 Sq. Ft 480 Sq. Ft BMP Type Permeable Pavement Permeable Pavement Moderately Complex Bioretention Materials/Labor/Design $108,900 $28,750 $6,672 Promotion & Admin Costs $1,680 $1,680 $582 Probable Project Cost $110,580 $30,430 $7,254 Annual O&M $75 $75 $75 30-yr Cost/1,000lb-TSS $10,777 $4,357 $1, yr Cost/lb-TP $6,268 $2,723 $1,056 Location of projects in multifamily development, located off Lexington Pkwy and Randolph Ave

59 59 East Kittsondale Subwatershed Assessment Project ID: EKD7-Alley Project Location: Any of the 3 Alley Locations in Catchment 7, see map below Drainage Area:.66 Total Acres of Alleys Description: Scenarios of all 3 alleys found in Catchment 7 were modeled both as pervious pavement and as underground infiltration trenches to compare the cost-benefit for each type of water quality improvement project. Alley projects were sized to treat one-third the total alley area; for example, a 1.0- acre alley would be treated by.33 acres of pervious pavement. The results are summarized below, and analysis revealed that underground infiltration is the most cost-effective option.

60 Cost Cost 60 East Kittsondale Subwatershed Assessment Alley Locations in Catchment 7 EKD7_Alley Pervious Pavement Cost/Removal Analysis TP (lb/yr) % % % TSS (lb/yr) % % % Volume (acre-feet/yr) 1.0 5% 1.1 6% 1.6 8% Number of BMP's BMP Size/Description 10,149 Sq. Ft 20,299 Sq. Ft 30,448 Sq. Ft BMP Type Permeable Pavement Permeable Pavement Permeable Pavement Materials/Labor/Design $101,495 $202,990 $304,484 Promotion & Admin Costs $1,680 $1,680 $1,680 Probable Project Cost $103,175 $204,670 $306,164 Annual O&M $75 $150 $ yr Cost/1,000lb-TSS $8,327 $15,460 $15, yr Cost/lb-TP $2,510 $4,648 $4,741 EKD7_Alley Underground Infiltration Cost/Removal Analysis TP (lb/yr) % % % TSS (lb/yr) % % % Volume (acre-feet/yr) 0.7 3% 0.9 5% 1.3 7% Number of BMP's BMP Size/Description 120 Sq. Ft 240 Sq. Ft 360 Sq. Ft BMP Type Underground Infiltration Underground Infiltration Underground Infiltration Materials/Labor/Design $11,010 $22,020 $33,030 Promotion & Admin Costs $1,599 $964 $718 Probable Project Cost $12,609 $22,984 $33,748 Annual O&M $566 $781 $1, yr Cost/1,000lb-TSS $3,627 $4,127 $4, yr Cost/lb-TP $1,096 $1,290 $1,316

61 61 East Kittsondale Subwatershed Assessment East Kittsondale: Catchment 8 Catchment 8 Description Catchment 8 is primarily residential land use, with commercial areas and portions of institutional land use surrounding Grand Ave. A large park development, Linwood Community Recreation Center, is located in the catchment, just north of Interstate 35E. Interstate 35E runs through the southern part of the catchment, cutting the catchment in half. Existing Catchment Summary Acres Dominant Land Cover Residential Parcels 793 Volume (acre-feet/yr) TP (lb/yr) TSS (lb/yr) 60,997 Existing Conditions As part of the City of Saint Paul s RSVP program, two underground infiltration trenches were installed beneath the roadways to treat the street runoff. Along with street sweeping, the two underground infiltration trenches treat approximately 9 acre-feet of volume, 7,912 pounds of suspended solids and 17 total pounds of phosphorous. In addition to bi-annual street sweeping, these trenches were modeled as existing conditions. The sizing of the infiltration trenches was based off as-built data provided by the CRWD and the City of Saint Paul. Retrofit Recommendations Existing Conditions Base Loading Projects identified in this catchment included rain gardens and an infiltration trench. Projects located in institutional areas offer great opportunities for grant funding Project ID: EKD8-Residential Rain Gardens Location: Residential Boulevards from Lincoln Ave to James Ave Map Sites: 803-5, 809, 811-2, 815, Drainage Area: 153 Acres of High-Density Residential Land Use Net % Existing Loading TP (lb/yr) % TSS (lb/yr) 68, % 60,997 Volume (acre-feet/yr) % Number of BMP's 3 BMP Size/Description 2 Underground Infiltration Trenches Bi-Annual Street Sweeping Description: To treat the runoff from residential neighborhoods within catchment 8, over 20 boulevard rain garden locations were identified, though more may exist. Ideal rain garden locations are generally placed upstream of a stormsewer catch basin to treat the stormwater before it reaches the catch basin. To simulate likely homeowner participation, scenarios for 5, 10, and 20 rain gardens were modeled. The results of the pollutant and volume reductions are summarized in the table below.

62 62 East Kittsondale Subwatershed Assessment

63 Cost 63 East Kittsondale Subwatershed Assessment EKD8_Residential Rain Gardens Cost/Removal Analysis TP (lb/yr) 0.9 8% 1.7 8% 3.2 9% TSS (lb/yr) % % % Volume (acre-feet/yr) 0.9 5% 1.7 5% 3.4 6% Number of BMP's BMP Size/Description 600 Sq. Ft 1,200 Sq. Ft 2,400 Sq. Ft BMP Type Moderately Complex Bioretention Moderately Complex Bioretention Moderately Complex Bioretention Materials/Labor/Design $8,340 $16,680 $33,360 Promotion & Admin Costs $495 $298 $180 Probable Project Cost $8,835 $16,978 $33,540 Annual O&M $375 $750 $1, yr Cost/1,000lb-TSS $2,962 $3,089 $3, yr Cost/lb-TP $724 $774 $818 Project ID: EKD8-Multifamily Rain Gardens Location: Boulevards located at Goodrich Ave to Linwood Ave Map Sites: 806-8, 810, 813-4, 816, 822 Drainage Area: 11.4 Acres of Multifamily Residential Land Use Description: To treat the runoff from multifamily developments within Catchment 8, 8 boulevard rain garden locations were identified, though more may exist. Ideal rain garden locations are generally placed upstream of a stormsewer catch basin to treat the stormwater before it reaches the catch basin. To simulate likely homeowner participation, scenarios for 2, 4, and 8 rain gardens were modeled. The results of the pollutant and volume reductions are summarized in the table below.

64 Cost 64 East Kittsondale Subwatershed Assessment EKD8_Multifamily Rain Gardens Cost/Removal Analysis TP (lb/yr) 0.4 8% 0.6 8% 1.2 8% TSS (lb/yr) % % % Volume (acre-feet/yr) 0.4 5% 0.7 5% 1.4 5% Number of BMP's BMP Size/Description 480 Sq. Ft 960 Sq. Ft 1,920 Sq. Ft BMP Type Moderately Complex Bioretention Moderately Complex Bioretention Moderately Complex Bioretention Materials/Labor/Design $6,672 $13,344 $26,688 Promotion & Admin Costs $582 $351 $212 Probable Project Cost $7,254 $13,695 $26,900 Annual O&M $150 $300 $ yr Cost/1,000lb-TSS $3,320 $3,708 $3, yr Cost/lb-TP $979 $1,261 $1,247 Project ID: EKD8-Institutional Underground Infiltration Location: St. Paul Childhood Center off Grand Ave Map Site: 834 Drainage Area: 10.1 Acres of Institutional, Area UG Drainage: 1.61 Acres Description: To treat the runoff from institutional areas in Catchment 8, an underground infiltration trench was identified. This location is in a 1.6-acre lot near the Grand Ave commercial development. The site has poor drainage due to inadequate grading and lack of infrastructure. An infiltration trench would alleviate drainage issues while providing adequate treatment and parking locations. Pictures of the site location are available in Appendix C. St. Paul Childhood Center underground infiltration project location, trench would treat the green shaded area.

65 Cost 65 East Kittsondale Subwatershed Assessment EKD8_School UG Infiltration Cost Removal/Analysis 1 TP (lb/yr) 1.6 8% TSS (lb/yr) % Volume (acre-feet/yr) 2.7 6% Number of BMP's 1 BMP Size/Description 600 Sq. Ft BMP Type Underground Infiltration Materials/Labor/Design $11,010 Promotion & Admin Costs $1,599 Probable Project Cost $12,609 Annual O&M $2, yr Cost/1,000lb-TSS $2, yr Cost/lb-TP $1,725 Project ID: EKD8-Alley Project Location: Any of the 25 Alley Locations found in Catchment 8, see map to the right. Drainage Area: 6.5 Acres of Alleys, modeled at.25 acres each Description: Scenarios of 3, 7, and 13 alleys found in Catchment 8 were modeled as both pervious pavement and underground infiltration trenches to compare the cost-benefit for each type of water quality improvement project. Analysis revealed underground infiltration as being the most cost-effective. The results are summarized below. Alley Locations in Catchment 8

66 Cost Cost 66 East Kittsondale Subwatershed Assessment EKD8_Alley Pervious Pavement Cost/Removal Analysis TP (lb/yr) 1.5 8% 3.0 9% 4.0 9% TSS (lb/yr) % % 1,237 13% Volume (acre-feet/yr) 0.9 5% 2.2 6% 2.9 6% Number of BMP's BMP Size/Description 10,890 Sq. Ft 25,410 Sq. Ft 47,190 Sq. Ft BMP Type Permeable Pavement Permeable Pavement Permeable Pavement Materials/Labor/Design $108,900 $254,100 $471,900 Promotion & Admin Costs $1,680 $1,680 $1,680 Probable Project Cost $110,580 $255,780 $473,580 Annual O&M $225 $525 $ yr Cost/1,000lb-TSS $8,064 $9,558 $13, yr Cost/lb-TP $2,607 $3,017 $4,190 EKD8_Alley UG Cost/Removal Analysis TP (lb/yr) 2.5 9% 3.6 9% 4.1 9% TSS (lb/yr) % 1,111 13% 1,275 13% Volume (acre-feet/yr) 1.9 6% 2.6 6% 3.0 6% Number of BMP's BMP Size/Description 360 Sq. Ft 480 Sq. Ft 1,560 Sq. Ft BMP Type Underground Infiltration Underground Infiltration Underground Infiltration Materials/Labor/Design $33,030 $44,040 $143,130 Promotion & Admin Costs $718 $582 $246 Probable Project Cost $33,748 $44,622 $143,376 Annual O&M $1,640 $2,300 $2, yr Cost/1,000lb-TSS $3,491 $3,409 $5, yr Cost/lb-TP $1,106 $1,052 $1,810

67 67 East Kittsondale Subwatershed Assessment East Kittsondale: Catchment 9 Catchment 9 Description Existing Catchment Summary This catchment consists primarily of highway and railway, with Acres Interstate 94 and 35E running through the majority of the Dominant Land Cover Highway catchment. Pleasant Arena, an ice skating area, is also located in this catchment. Due to the nature of this catchment, locations for runoff treatment off major roads were limited. Unlike the rest of the catchments, no alley improvement projects were analyzed. Parcels Volume (acre-feet/yr) TP (lb/yr) TSS (lb/yr) ,716 This catchment ranked the highest in TP and second highest in TSS of the 9 catchments. Existing Bi-annual street sweeping is the only existing treatment in this area; therefore, if any of the identified projects were to be installed they would help improve the water quality of stormwater coming from this catchment. The table below outlines the existing conditions. Existing Conditions Base Loading Net % Existing Loading TP (lb/yr) % 40.2 TSS (lb/yr) 13, % 12,716 Volume (acre-feet/yr) % 27.7 Number of BMP's 1 BMP Size/Description Bi-Annual Street Sweeping Retrofit Recommendations Only 3 projects were identified in this catchment, due to limited appropriate locations. It is recommended that all of these projects be installed due to the treatment they provide and the low cost of installation and maintenance. Project ID EKD9-Residential Vegetated Swales Location: Pleasant Avenue, just off Interstate 35E Map Site: Drainage: 3.5 Acres of Residential Land Use Description: Vegetated swales along Pleasant Avenue could provide treatment for street runoff at a low maintenance and total cost.

68 68 East Kittsondale Subwatershed Assessment

69 Cost 69 East Kittsondale Subwatershed Assessment EKD 9_Residential Vegetated Swales Cost/Removal Analysis TP (lb/yr) 0.8 2% 1.5 4% 2.1 5% TSS (lb/yr) 117 4% 209 5% 290 5% Volume (acre-feet/yr) 0.2 1% 0.3 1% 0.5 2% Number of BMP's BMP Size/Description 120 Sq. Ft 240 Sq. Ft 360 Sq. Ft BMP Type Simple Bioretention Simple Bioretention Simple Bioretention Materials/Labor/Design $1,356 $2,712 $4,068 Promotion & Admin Costs $1,598 $964 $718 Probable Project Cost $2,954 $3,676 $4,786 Annual O&M $75 $150 $ yr Cost/1,000lb-TSS $1,483 $1,304 $1, yr Cost/lb-TP $207 $180 $184

70 70 East Kittsondale Subwatershed Assessment Conclusion The above assessment analyzed potential water quality improvement projects for each individual catchment within the East Kittsondale subwatershed. If installed these projects could help reduce pollutant loads entering into the watershed that ultimately discharge into the Mississippi River. Monitoring by the Capitol Region Watershed District has indicated that current pollutant loads discharge at rates higher than the target concentration set forth by the Minnesota Pollutant Control Agency (MPCA) in the South Metro Mississippi Total Maximum Daily Load (TMDL) study. Target concentrations for the Mississippi River at Lamberts Landing are at 32 mg/l for TSS and.10mg/l for TP (See Appendix D). Capitol Region Watershed District monitoring indicated loads for East Kittsondale in 2013 at 90 mg/l and.25 mg/l for TSS and TP, respectively. In order to reach these MPCA standards within the East Kittsondale subwatershed, this would require TSS loads to be reduced by 36% and TP loads to be reduced by 40%. Moving forward, installing projects that would reduce the pollutant loads by these percentages would help the District reach the MPCA standards on TSS and TP. At the District's discretion, they can determine which projects would be best suited to complete this goal. The District can utilize this assessment by looking at the net treatment percent reduction for each project. It is important to note that this assessment is simply a snapshot of potential projects and is based off pollutant modeling, not monitoring. More extensive monitoring, design, and research would need to occur for each of the potential projects prior to installation. Additionally, funding opportunities, such as Clean Water Fund grants, should be utilized to help fund potential practices.

71 71 East Kittsondale Subwatershed Assessment References Barr Engineering, Best Management Practices Construction Costs, Maintenance Costs, and Land Requirements. Prepared for Minnesota Pollution Control Agency. June Capitol Region Watershed District, BMP Performance and Cost-Benefit Analysis: Arlington Pascal Project Prepared by Capitol Region Watershed District. March 9, City of Saint Paul, Stormwater Permit Annual Report Activities and 2013 Workplan. Prepared for Minnesota Pollution Control Agency; Nation Pollutant Discharge Elimination System. June 2013 Design Your Own Detention or Infiltration System. Urban Green Stormwater Solutions from Contech. Contech Solutions. Accessed March Schueler et. al Methods to Develop Restoration Plans for Small Urban Watersheds. Manual 2, Urban Subwatershed Restoration Manual Series. Center for Watershed Protection. Ellicott City, MD. Schueler et. al Urban Stormwater Retrofit Practices. Manual 3, Urban Subwatershed Restoration Manual Series. Center for Watershed Protection. Ellicott City, MD. WSB & Associate, Inc Stormwater Quantity and Quality Monitoring Report. Prepared for City of Saint Paul, MN. January 17, 2013.

72 72 East Kittsondale Subwatershed Assessment Appendix A. WINSLAMM modeling parameters and files used in the assessment File Name Date Created/ Last Modified Created By Description CPZ: These files contain the sediment particle size distributions developed from monitored data. The files area used in the evaluation of control practices that rely upon particle settling for pollution control. NURP.CPZ 5/16/88 Pitt/UA Summarizes NURP outfall particle size data PPD (Pollutant Probability Distribution) files describe the pollutant concentrations found in source areas. USGS/DNR pollutant probability distribution file from Wisconsin WI_GEO01.ppd 11/26/02 Horwatich/USGS monitoring data. PRR (Particulate Residue Reduction) files describe the fraction of total particulates that remains in the drainage system (curbs and gutters, grass swales, and storm drainage) after rain events end due to deposition. This fraction of the total particulates does not reach the outfall, so the outfall values are reduced by the fraction indicated in the.prr file. USGS/DNR particulate residue reduction file for the delivery WI_DLV01.prr 7/8/01 Horwatich/USGS system from Wisconsin monitoring data. RSV (Runoff coefficient file). These coefficients, when multiplied by rain depths, land use source areas, and a conversion factor, determine the runoff volumes needed by WinSLAMM. WI_SL06 Dec06.rsv 12/18/06 Horwatich/USGS USGS/DNR runoff volumetric coefficient file from Wisconsin monitoring data. Use for all versions of WinSLAMM starting from v STD (Street Delivery File): These files describe the fraction of total particulates that are washed from the streets during rains, but are subsequently redeposited due to lack of energy in the flowing water. WI_Com Inst Indust Dec06.std WI_Res and Other Urban Dec06.std Freeway Dec06.std 12/12/06 Horwatich/USGS 12/07/06 Horwatich/USGS 7/12/05 Pitt/UA USGS/DNR street delivery file from Wisconsin monitoring data. Use for all versions of WinSLAMM starting from v for Industrial, Commercial and Institutional land uses. USGS/DNR street delivery file from Wisconsin monitoring data. Use for all versions of WinSLAMM starting from v for Residential and Other Urban land uses. Street delivery file developed to account for TSS reductions due to losses in a freeway delivery system based upon early USDOT research. Renamed Freeway.std PSC (Particulate Solids Concentration): Values in this file, when multiplied by source area runoff volumes and a conversion factor, calculate particulate solids loadings (lbs). WI_AVG01.psc 11/26/02 Horwatich/USGS MN Minneapolis 59.RAN Parameter Start/End Date Winter Season Range Drainage System NA NA RAN (Rain Files): USGS/DNR particulate solids concentration file from Wisconsin monitoring data. A n event-record of rainfall for the year 1959, considered as an average year, in the form of Start Date, Start Time, End Date, End Time and Rainfall (in inches). Settings Description Defines the modeling period in reference to the rain file data. In this case, the entire one year period was selected (i.e., 01/02/59-12/28/59). Set to begin on November 7 th and end on March 17 th. Set to Curb and gutter, valleys, or sealed swales in fair condition.

73 73 East Kittsondale Subwatershed Assessment WINSLAMM Standard Land Use Codes RESIDENTIAL LAND USES High-density Residential without Alleys (HDRNA): Urban single-family housing at a density of greater than 6 units/acre. Includes house, driveway, yards, sidewalks, and streets. High-density Residential with Alleys (HDRWA): Same as HDRNA, except alleys exist behind the houses. Medium Density Residential without Alleys (MDRNA): Same as HDRNA except the density is between 2-6 units/acre. Medium Density Residential with Alleys (MDRWA): Same as HDRWA, except alleys exists behind the houses. Low Density Residential (LDR): Same as HDRNA except the density is 0.7 to 2 units/acre. Duplexes (DUP): Housing having two separate units in a single building. Multiple Family Residential (MFRNA): Housing for three or more families, from 1-3 stories in height. Units may be adjoined up-and-down, side-by-side; or front-and-rear. Includes building, yard, parking lot, and driveways. Does not include alleys. High Rise Residential (HRR): Same MFRNA except buildings are High Rise Apartments; multiple family units 4 or more stories in height. Mobile Home Park (MOBH): A mobile home or trailer park, includes all vehicle homes, the yard, driveway, and office area. Suburban (SUB): Same as HDRNA except the density is between 0.2 and 0.6 units/acre. COMMERCIAL LAND USES Strip Commercial (SCOM): Those buildings for which the primary function involves the sale of goods or services. This category includes some institutional lands found in commercial strips, such as post offices, courthouses, and fire and police stations. This category does not include buildings used for the manufacture of goods or warehouses. This land use includes the buildings, parking lots, and streets. This land use does not include nursery, tree farms, vehicle service areas, or lumberyards. Shopping Centers (SHOP): Commercial areas where the related parking lot is at least 2.5 times the area of the building roof area. Parking areas usually surrounds the buildings in this land use. This land use includes the buildings, parking lot, and streets. Office Parks (OFPK): Land use where non-retail business takes place. The buildings are usually multi-storied buildings surrounded by larger areas of lawn and other landscaping. This land use includes the buildings, lawn, and road areas. Types of establishments that may be in this category includes: insurance offices, government buildings, and company headquarters. Commercial Downtown (CDT): Multi-story high-density area with minimal pervious area, and with retail, residential and office uses.

74 74 East Kittsondale Subwatershed Assessment INDUSTRIAL LAND USES Medium Industrial (MI): This category includes businesses such as lumber yards, auto salvage yards, junk yards, grain elevators, agricultural coops, oil tank farms, coal and salt storage areas, slaughter houses, and areas for bulk storage of fertilizers. Non-Manufacturing (LI): Those buildings that are used for the storage and/or distribution of goods waiting further processing or sale to retailers. This category mostly includes warehouses, and wholesalers where all operations are conducted indoors, but with truck loading and transfer operations conducted outside. INSTITUTIONAL LAND USES Education (SCH): Includes any public or private primary, secondary, or college educational institutional grounds. Includes buildings, playgrounds, athletic fields, roads, parking lots, and lawn areas. Miscellaneous Institutional (INST): Churches and large areas of institutional property not part of CST and CDT. Hospital (HOSP): Multi-story building surrounded by parking lots and some vegetated areas. OTHER URBAN LAND USES Parks (PARK): Outdoor recreational areas including municipal playgrounds, botanical gardens, arboretums, golf courses, and natural areas. Undeveloped (OSUD): Lands that are private or publicly owned with no structures and have a complete vegetative cover. This includes vacant lots, urban fringe areas slated for development, greenways, and forest areas. Cemetery (CEM): This land use file covers cemeteries, and includes road frontage along the cemetery, and paved areas and buildings within the cemetery. FREEWAY LAND USES Freeways (FREE): Limited access highways and the interchange areas, including any vegetated rights-of-ways.

75 75 East Kittsondale Subwatershed Assessment Appendix B. Bioretention: Curb cut raingarden, with 1.5-2ft perimeter wall, in a residential area. Photo Courtesy of Rusty Schmidt. Bioretention Design

76 76 East Kittsondale Subwatershed Assessment Residential Rain Garden - WinSLAMM Design

77 77 East Kittsondale Subwatershed Assessment Underground Infiltration - WinSLAMM Design Design for Contech Solutions_Corrugated Metal Pipe Design

78 78 East Kittsondale Subwatershed Assessment Pervious Pavement- WinSLAMM Design Pervious pavement example

79 79 East Kittsondale Subwatershed Assessment Appendix C Proposed location for underground infiltration trench at St. Paul Childhood Center (Catchment 8)

80 80 East Kittsondale Subwatershed Assessment Appendix D