Shawn TracyRestoration SpecialistMetro Conservation Districts (MCD)MCD SWCD’sAnoka – Carver – Chisago – Hennepin – Isanti ...
Anoka                         Ecological               Wright   Restoration   Carver                        MCD Washington...
Dan Anderson: http://www.flickr.com/photos/stonebridgedapper/            Urban                                            ...
What it is                             It is not  Urban stormwater retrofitting          …a hydraulic or storm sewer  Iden...
Why an SRA?  Massive effort needed to affect  change in WQ  Disproportionate (insufficient)  funding resources  Disproport...
The Plus Side  >30 years of pollutant  accumulation, behavior and  washoff data available  >20 years of BMP performance  d...
1-Selection of Subwatershed2-Ananlysis of SW’s Catchments  3-Analysis of BMP’s by site
Scoping and Remote Data collectionDesktop AnalysisField ReconnaissanceTreatment modeling and cost analysisReport
Scoping   Water body needs   LGU needs   Existing data review (quality and needs)   Budgets and timeframes   Stakeholder c...
Scoping and Remote Data collectionDesktop Analysis   Catchment and/or pipeshed delineation   Delineate and classify land u...
Scoping and Remote Data collectionDesktop AnalysisField Reconnaissance   Visit existing BMPs   Confirm/modify land-use and...
Scoping and Remote Data collectionDesktop AnalysisField ReconnaissanceTreatment modeling and cost analysis   Development a...
Scoping and Remote Data collectionDesktop AnalysisField ReconnaissanceTreatment modeling and cost analysisReport   Summary...
Subwatershed   Catchment   Site                                  S1                    C1            S2  SW #1            ...
Existing                                 Stormwater                                    Ponds                              ...
Extended                                Detention         Existing          Pond                                       Wet...
Pleasant Lake Stormwater Retrofit Assessment, 2011
Laek McKusick existing stormwater routing diagram, MSCWMO
Lily Lake Stormwater Retrofit Assessment, 2009, Middle St. Croix WMO
Pleasant Lake Stormwater Retrofit Assessment, 2011
Pleasant Lake Stormwater Retrofit Assessment, 2011
Pleasant Lake Stormwater Retrofit Assessment, 2011
Pleasant Lake Stormwater Retrofit Assessment, 2011
Howard Lake Stormwater Retrofit Assessment
34-Acre Medium Density    Residential Area Pollutant       Amt/yearWater Runoff    963,715 ft3    TSS          12,900 lbs ...
EXISTING                                                           CONDITIONS                RETROFIT OPTIONS  Catchment-b...
Catchment or Retro Type Qty of     TP       TP      Volume Overall Est. O&M         Total Est.                            ...
http://www.metrocd.org/
Tracy - Urban Subwatershed Stormwater Retrofit Analysis
Tracy - Urban Subwatershed Stormwater Retrofit Analysis
Tracy - Urban Subwatershed Stormwater Retrofit Analysis
Tracy - Urban Subwatershed Stormwater Retrofit Analysis
Tracy - Urban Subwatershed Stormwater Retrofit Analysis
Upcoming SlideShare
Loading in …5
×

Tracy - Urban Subwatershed Stormwater Retrofit Analysis

676
-1

Published on

Published in: Technology, Real Estate
0 Comments
0 Likes
Statistics
Notes
  • Be the first to comment

  • Be the first to like this

No Downloads
Views
Total Views
676
On Slideshare
0
From Embeds
0
Number of Embeds
0
Actions
Shares
0
Downloads
7
Comments
0
Likes
0
Embeds 0
No embeds

No notes for slide
  • Describe the MCD partnership as a Joint Powers group serving 11 counties in the Metro area in 4 overall services
  • Our process uses on multi-agency partnerships
  • Our current focus is Urban subwatershed analysis with an agricultural component currently being developed
  • We apply analyses to three scales….1st decide which SW to work within (TMDL, Non-Degradation Plan, MS4 city requirements, existing WQ data, willing and able partner)2nd decide which catchments in the SW (described in following slides)3rd decide which sites within catchments (described…)After analysis completed, we can assist with selection of prime sites for optimized return on investment to assist in allocation cost share $Entire process ensures that the selection of individual BMP projects are in the optimal location, and have the optimal site-specific site design, to provide the best return on investment (best location, best project, best price)
  • There are 7 BMP locations we first screen each catchment for that are conducive to stormwater retrofits – each area has a set of specific bmps that are then considered
  • …these are the bmp families we considered
  • Map existing stormwater network and analyze performance – look for easy and inexpensive modifications to add or improve WQ treatment
  • Routing map
  • Screen each catchment for areas conducive to retrofits of various forms
  • Field reconnaissance investigation – considers site-specific limitations when selecting specific BMP’s
  • Identification of prime sites for bmp locations – provides a select list of addresses to visit when doing education and outreqach (canvasing for potential site installations) as opposed to random acts of conservation
  • Each prime catchment (those modeled for new treatment), is anlalyzed at three levels of treatment and reported on in a Catchmetnt Profile within the report
  • The top 10, or so, catchments, in terms of cost/benefit optimization, are presented in a summary table.
  • Tracy - Urban Subwatershed Stormwater Retrofit Analysis

    1. 1. Shawn TracyRestoration SpecialistMetro Conservation Districts (MCD)MCD SWCD’sAnoka – Carver – Chisago – Hennepin – Isanti – Ramsey –Scott – Sherburne – Washington - Wright
    2. 2. Anoka Ecological Wright Restoration Carver MCD Washington ChisagoSubwatershed Stormwater Assessment MCD Stormwater BMP Design Sherburne LRP Hennepin Scott Isanti Education Ramsey
    3. 3. Dan Anderson: http://www.flickr.com/photos/stonebridgedapper/ Urban Google Earth Sub-WS Restoration Rural/Ag
    4. 4. What it is It is not Urban stormwater retrofitting …a hydraulic or storm sewer Identification of the highest analysis/planning tool value stormwater BMP retrofit …primarily used for street- practices by location (e.g., $/LB- scaping or park development TP/YR) (secondary benefit) A Water Quality planning tool …an elaborate excuse just to get Supplement to existing analyses in more raingardens One (major) consideration in Capitol Improvement planning A Precise and relative model Labor investment and quantity/quality of geospatial and W.Q. data affects accuracy
    5. 5. Why an SRA? Massive effort needed to affect change in WQ Disproportionate (insufficient) funding resources Disproportionate (insufficient) labor resources TMDL implementation guidance Assurance of “bang-for-buck”Challenges Little-to-no outfall and source- area field data Limited time and budgets 25 SRA’s completed in 2.5 years by SWCD’s with at least 5 more currently being worked on
    6. 6. The Plus Side >30 years of pollutant accumulation, behavior and washoff data available >20 years of BMP performance data with more recent, state-of- science research (bench and field) Midwest city data (loading) Several water quality models based on this research If outfall data exists, can be calibrated to improve accuracy Can easily be modified (build- scenarios) Repeatable (precise) 25 SRA’s completed in 2.5 years by SWCD’s with at least 5 more currently being worked on Multiple-year to-do-list based on value (lbs/$/yr)
    7. 7. 1-Selection of Subwatershed2-Ananlysis of SW’s Catchments 3-Analysis of BMP’s by site
    8. 8. Scoping and Remote Data collectionDesktop AnalysisField ReconnaissanceTreatment modeling and cost analysisReport
    9. 9. Scoping Water body needs LGU needs Existing data review (quality and needs) Budgets and timeframes Stakeholder consensusDesktop AnalysisField ReconnaissanceTreatment modeling and cost analysisReport
    10. 10. Scoping and Remote Data collectionDesktop Analysis Catchment and/or pipeshed delineation Delineate and classify land uses Delineate and classify permeable surface soils Analyze existing WQ treatment / base load model First-tier elimination of catchments for retrofitting First-tier determination of WQ potential treatmentsField ReconnaissanceTreatment modeling and cost analysisReport
    11. 11. Scoping and Remote Data collectionDesktop AnalysisField Reconnaissance Visit existing BMPs Confirm/modify land-use and storm sewer data Confirm/modify initial BMP-family selection Selection of 1° and 2° BMP sites (parcels) Site-specific data collectionTreatment modeling and cost analysisReport
    12. 12. Scoping and Remote Data collectionDesktop AnalysisField ReconnaissanceTreatment modeling and cost analysis Development and optimization of BMP design Iterations of “train” and/or level of treatment by BMP quantity – load reduction estimates Estimates of installation and life-cycle costs Life-Cycle Cost analysisReport
    13. 13. Scoping and Remote Data collectionDesktop AnalysisField ReconnaissanceTreatment modeling and cost analysisReport Summary table – catchments ranked based on performance ($/lb/LCyr) Catchment profiles Analysis methods and data References
    14. 14. Subwatershed Catchment Site S1 C1 S2 SW #1 C2 S3 C3 S4 C… S5 S…
    15. 15. Existing Stormwater Ponds Storage Above Public Land Roadway Culverts STORMWATER BMP LOCATION Storage LargeParking Lots ANALYSIS Below Outfalls Within Storage in Conveyance ROW System
    16. 16. Extended Detention Existing Pond Wet Ponds ModificationOther Wetlands BMPS Swales Bioretention Infiltration Filtration
    17. 17. Pleasant Lake Stormwater Retrofit Assessment, 2011
    18. 18. Laek McKusick existing stormwater routing diagram, MSCWMO
    19. 19. Lily Lake Stormwater Retrofit Assessment, 2009, Middle St. Croix WMO
    20. 20. Pleasant Lake Stormwater Retrofit Assessment, 2011
    21. 21. Pleasant Lake Stormwater Retrofit Assessment, 2011
    22. 22. Pleasant Lake Stormwater Retrofit Assessment, 2011
    23. 23. Pleasant Lake Stormwater Retrofit Assessment, 2011
    24. 24. Howard Lake Stormwater Retrofit Assessment
    25. 25. 34-Acre Medium Density Residential Area Pollutant Amt/yearWater Runoff 963,715 ft3 TSS 12,900 lbs TP 35 lbs TKN 128 lbs Copper 0.73 lbs Lead 1.34 lbs Zinc 5.80 lbs First Tier possible BMP locations Lindstrom Retrofit Assessment, 2009, Chisago SWCD
    26. 26. EXISTING CONDITIONS RETROFIT OPTIONS Catchment-based Base Marginal Network Treatment By BMPCost/Benefit Analysis Loading Treatment Level 1 Level 2 Level 3 Existing BMP performance (%TP) 54% New Net % New Net % New Net % TP (lb/yr) 25.2 13.7 1.0 58% 1.9 62%Treatment TSS (lb/yr) 7887 6698 261 88% 357 89% Volume (acre-feet/yr) 21.90 0.00 0.00 0% 2.40 11% Square feet of practice (or, CU FT of Exc. 3 ft below 1500 storage for WP, ED, SW) outlet Moderately Extended Not yet BMP Type Wet Pond Complex Detention advisedMarginal Costs Bioretention Materials/Labor/Design $30,000 $51,000 Unit Promotion & Admin Costs* $250 $254 Total Project Cost** $30,250 $54,803 Annual O&M $0 $1,125 Term Cost/lb/yr (30 yr) $1,008 $1,554 add 6 RG in Retrofit Scenario: exc 3 ft on P27 19
    27. 27. Catchment or Retro Type Qty of TP TP Volume Overall Est. O&M Total Est. 3 1 Pond ID 100 ft Reduction Reduction Reduction Cost Term Term BMPs (%) (lb/yr) (ac-ft/yr) (years) Cost/lb- TP/yr LILY-03 B 12 10 5 4 $19,900 30 $313 LILY-04 B, PS, VS 8 10 3.3 2.9 $14,150 30 $313 LILY-01 B 11 10 4.4 3.6 $17,650 30 $315 LILY-02 B 11 10 4.5 3.7 $18,000 30 $315 LILY-12 B 18 10 3.2 2.5 $12,000 30 $316 LILY-07 B, VS 20 20 7 5.8 $24,000 30 $318 LILY-09 B 11 20 4.3 3.6 $18,450 30 $337 LILY-22 B 14 20 2.5 4.2 $22,320 30 $352 LILY-10 B, PS, F 7 10 2.9 2.4 $15,225 30 $353 LILY-21 B 12 20 2.2 3.6 $19,325 30 $353 2 P13-W PM n/a 50 20 0 $130,000 15 $433 2 P18-W PM n/a 50 30 0 $265,000 15 $589 Lily Lake Stormwater Retrofit Assessment, 2009, Middle St. Croix WMO
    28. 28. http://www.metrocd.org/

    ×