m |
m (→References) |
||
(9 intermediate revisions by the same user not shown) | |||
Line 1: | Line 1: | ||
− | {{alert| | + | {{alert|''Reference to any specific commercial product, process, or service by trade name, trademark, service mark, manufacturer, or otherwise does not constitute or imply endorsement, recommendation, or favoring by the Minnesota Pollution Control Agency. ''|alert-info}} |
[[File:General information page image.png|right|100px|alt=image]] | [[File:General information page image.png|right|100px|alt=image]] | ||
Line 179: | Line 179: | ||
[[File:Minnetonka figure 3.jpg|300px|thumb|alt=rain guardian image|<font size=3>Rain Guardian Turret at the Inlet of the Shallow Stormwater Wetland Biofiltration Area [Google, 2019]</font size>]] | [[File:Minnetonka figure 3.jpg|300px|thumb|alt=rain guardian image|<font size=3>Rain Guardian Turret at the Inlet of the Shallow Stormwater Wetland Biofiltration Area [Google, 2019]</font size>]] | ||
− | As a part of the [https:// | + | As a part of the [https://www.minnetonkamn.gov/government/budget/capital-improvement-program City of Minnetonka’s 2016–2020 Capital Improvement Program], the 2016 Street Rehabilitation Project updated roadways, watermains, sanitary sewer pipes in the neighborhood around Libb’s Lake, near Grays Bay of Lake Minnetonka. The program also provided improved stormwater drainage and water quality treatment. Before this project, most of the stormwater runoff flowed overland directly to Libb’s Lake without treatment. |
During the project design, challenges included developing viable stormwater treatment options while accounting for site conditions (e.g., a [https://stormwater.pca.state.mn.us/index.php?title=Shallow_groundwater high groundwater table], rolling terrain, right-of-way limitations, and existing buildings with a history of flooding). To address these challenges, a pretreatment manhole sump was installed in-line along with a Rain Guardian Turret structure to capture stormwater runoff and provide pretreatment before entering a stormwater <span title="a bioretention practice having an underdrain. All water entering the practice is filtered through engineered media and filtered water is returned to the storm sewer system."> [https://stormwater.pca.state.mn.us/index.php?title=Bioretention '''biofiltration''']</span> area that discharges to Libb’s Lake. | During the project design, challenges included developing viable stormwater treatment options while accounting for site conditions (e.g., a [https://stormwater.pca.state.mn.us/index.php?title=Shallow_groundwater high groundwater table], rolling terrain, right-of-way limitations, and existing buildings with a history of flooding). To address these challenges, a pretreatment manhole sump was installed in-line along with a Rain Guardian Turret structure to capture stormwater runoff and provide pretreatment before entering a stormwater <span title="a bioretention practice having an underdrain. All water entering the practice is filtered through engineered media and filtered water is returned to the storm sewer system."> [https://stormwater.pca.state.mn.us/index.php?title=Bioretention '''biofiltration''']</span> area that discharges to Libb’s Lake. | ||
Line 271: | Line 271: | ||
====References==== | ====References==== | ||
− | *Blackstone Contractors, LLC. (2018, March). [ | + | *Blackstone Contractors, LLC. (2018, March). [https://blackstonecontractorsllc.com/projects/beacon-bluff-stormwater-demonstration/ Beacon Bluff Stormwater Demonstration Area]. Retrieved March 7, 2019 from Blackstone Contractors |
− | *Loucks Associates. (2013). | + | *Loucks Associates. (2013). Next Generation Stormwater Management. Retrieved March 7, 2019, from American Planning Association Minnesota Chapter |
− | *Saint Paul Port Authority. | + | *Saint Paul Port Authority. [https://saintpaulhistorical.com/items/show/348 Managing Stormwater for the Next Generation] Saint Paul Historical. Retrieved March 7, 2019. |
− | *Storm Water Solutions. (2015, August 27). [https://www.estormwater.com/ | + | *Storm Water Solutions. (2015, August 27). [https://www.estormwater.com/equipment/article/10982689/st-paul-stops-storm-water-sediment-trash St. Paul Stops Storm Water Sediment & Trash]. Retrieved March 11, 2019 from Storm Water Solutions |
*WSB & Associates, Inc. (2011). Beacon Bluff SAFL Baffle Installation. | *WSB & Associates, Inc. (2011). Beacon Bluff SAFL Baffle Installation. | ||
*WSB & Associates, Inc. (2015, April). 2014 [https://www.stpaul.gov/sites/default/files/Media%20Root/Public%20Works/1610-10%20Monitoring%20Report%20ENTIRE%20052215.pdf Stormwater Quality and Quantity Monitoring Program for the City of Saint Paul, Minnesota]. Retrieved March 7, 2019, from City of St. Paul | *WSB & Associates, Inc. (2015, April). 2014 [https://www.stpaul.gov/sites/default/files/Media%20Root/Public%20Works/1610-10%20Monitoring%20Report%20ENTIRE%20052215.pdf Stormwater Quality and Quantity Monitoring Program for the City of Saint Paul, Minnesota]. Retrieved March 7, 2019, from City of St. Paul | ||
Line 307: | Line 307: | ||
A 2017 monitoring study measured the effectiveness of the Preserver pretreatment device. The results indicated the practice functioned as intended and removed gross solids, [https://stormwater.pca.state.mn.us/index.php?title=Phosphorus phosphorus], and heavy metals. The <span title="an index (means of expression) indicating what sizes (particle size) of particles are present in what proportions (relative particle amount as a percentage where the total amount of particles is 100 %) in the sample particle group to be measured"> '''particle size distribution'''</span> of the removed material showed that most of the material (93.9 percent) was sand (between 75 and 2,000 microns), 2.7 percent of the material was silt (smaller than 75 microns), and 3.4 percent was <span title"large particles, including sediment, debris, and litter"> '''gross solids'''</span> (larger than 2,000 microns), as defined by the MPCA pollutant spectrum and treatment ranges. The removed material had a <span title="the ratio of the density of a substance to the density of a standard, usually water for a liquid or solid, and air for a gas"> '''specific gravity'''</span> of 1.91, indicating a high organic content caused by mature trees in the drainage area and an upstream stormwater wetland. The sump was full approximately halfway through the monitoring period, reducing the overall effectiveness of sediment removal. | A 2017 monitoring study measured the effectiveness of the Preserver pretreatment device. The results indicated the practice functioned as intended and removed gross solids, [https://stormwater.pca.state.mn.us/index.php?title=Phosphorus phosphorus], and heavy metals. The <span title="an index (means of expression) indicating what sizes (particle size) of particles are present in what proportions (relative particle amount as a percentage where the total amount of particles is 100 %) in the sample particle group to be measured"> '''particle size distribution'''</span> of the removed material showed that most of the material (93.9 percent) was sand (between 75 and 2,000 microns), 2.7 percent of the material was silt (smaller than 75 microns), and 3.4 percent was <span title"large particles, including sediment, debris, and litter"> '''gross solids'''</span> (larger than 2,000 microns), as defined by the MPCA pollutant spectrum and treatment ranges. The removed material had a <span title="the ratio of the density of a substance to the density of a standard, usually water for a liquid or solid, and air for a gas"> '''specific gravity'''</span> of 1.91, indicating a high organic content caused by mature trees in the drainage area and an upstream stormwater wetland. The sump was full approximately halfway through the monitoring period, reducing the overall effectiveness of sediment removal. | ||
− | Monitoring continued in 2018 in an attempt to establish a specific spring storm event (<span title="the initial surface runoff of a rainstorm. During this phase, water pollution entering storm drains in areas with high proportions of impervious surfaces is typically more concentrated compared to the remainder of the storm"> '''first flush'''</span>) as a proxy for sump maintenance activities; however, the results showed that loading was relatively uniform and did not correlate to a specific storm event size. The study’s final recommendation is to clean the sump after spring street sweeping. | + | Monitoring continued in 2018 in an attempt to establish a specific spring storm event (<span title="the initial surface runoff of a rainstorm. During this phase, water pollution entering storm drains in areas with high proportions of impervious surfaces is typically more concentrated compared to the remainder of the storm"> '''first flush'''</span>) as a proxy for sump maintenance activities; however, the results showed that loading was relatively uniform and did not correlate to a specific storm event size. The study’s final recommendation is to clean the sump after spring street sweeping. |
+ | |||
+ | For more information see [http://www.momentumenv.com/wp-content/uploads/2015/07/Preserver-Inspection-Maintenance-Manual.pdf Preserver Inspection & Maintenance Manual] | ||
====Lessons learned==== | ====Lessons learned==== | ||
Line 321: | Line 323: | ||
*Ramsey Conservation District. (2017). [http://www.momentumenv.com/wp-content/uploads/2018/02/Case-Study-Villa-Park-2017.pdf Preserver Case Study: Villa Park Stormwater Improvements]. Prepared by Momentum Environmental. | *Ramsey Conservation District. (2017). [http://www.momentumenv.com/wp-content/uploads/2018/02/Case-Study-Villa-Park-2017.pdf Preserver Case Study: Villa Park Stormwater Improvements]. Prepared by Momentum Environmental. | ||
*SRF Consulting Group, Inc. (2015). Upper Villa Park Infiltration and Reuse Subsurface Construction Plans. Sheet 6 of 29. Prepared for Capitol Region Watershed District. | *SRF Consulting Group, Inc. (2015). Upper Villa Park Infiltration and Reuse Subsurface Construction Plans. Sheet 6 of 29. Prepared for Capitol Region Watershed District. | ||
+ | |||
+ | <noinclude> | ||
+ | ==Related pages== | ||
+ | *[https://igeowater.com/mpca/#/intro Pretreatment selection tool] | ||
+ | *[[Overview and methods of pretreatment]] | ||
+ | *Overviews for different types of pretreatment practices | ||
+ | **[[Overview for pretreatment settling devices]] | ||
+ | **[[Overview for pretreatment screens]] | ||
+ | **[[Overview for pretreatment vegetated filter strips]] | ||
+ | *Information for specific types of pretreatment practices | ||
+ | **[[Design, construction, operation and maintenance specifications for pretreatment vegetated filter strips]] | ||
+ | ** [[Pretreatment - Hydrodynamic separation devices]] | ||
+ | **[[Pretreatment - Screening and straining devices, including forebays]] | ||
+ | **[[Pretreatment - Above ground and below grade storage and settling devices]] | ||
+ | **[[Pretreatment - Filtration devices and practices]] | ||
+ | **[[Pretreatment - Other pretreatment water quality devices and practices]] | ||
+ | |||
+ | :To see the above pages as a single page, [[Pretreatment practices combined single page|link here]] | ||
+ | |||
+ | [[Pretreatment sizing for basins and filters strips]] | ||
+ | |||
+ | [[Guidance for managing sediment and wastes collected by pretreatment practices]] | ||
+ | |||
+ | '''Tables''' | ||
+ | *[[Pretreatment tables]] - link to tabled information for pretreatment practices | ||
+ | *[https://stormwater.pca.state.mn.us/index.php?title=Hydrodynamic_separator_tables_combined Hydrodynamic separator tables] | ||
+ | *[https://stormwater.pca.state.mn.us/index.php?title=Screening_and_straining_devices_tables_combined Screening and straining devices tables] | ||
+ | *[https://stormwater.pca.state.mn.us/index.php?title=Above_ground_and_below_grade_storage_and_settling_tables_combined Above ground and below grade storage and settling tables] | ||
+ | *[https://stormwater.pca.state.mn.us/index.php?title=Filtration_tables_combined Filtration tables] | ||
+ | *[https://stormwater.pca.state.mn.us/index.php?title=Other_water_quality_devices_tables_combined Other water quality devices tables] | ||
+ | |||
+ | '''Other information and links''' | ||
+ | *[[Pretreatment - Additional considerations]] | ||
+ | *[[Case studies for pretreatment]] | ||
+ | *[[References for pretreatment]] | ||
+ | *[[Links for pretreatment]] | ||
+ | *[[Definitions for pretreatment]] | ||
+ | *[[Supporting material for pretreatment]] | ||
+ | *[[Photo gallery for pretreatment]] | ||
+ | |||
+ | [[Category:Level 3 - Case studies and examples/Case studies/BMPs]] | ||
+ | [[Category:Level 2 - Best management practices/Pretreatment practices]] | ||
+ | </noinclude> |
This page provides several case studies for pretreatment stormwater practices. Included are case studies for vegetated and rock filter strips, forebays, and proprietary settling devices.
Filter strips are sloped surfaces that rely on shallow distributed flow, typically through dense vegetation, to reduce flow velocity, allow particles to settle, and allow particle interception as their primary mechanism of pollutant removal. Pretreatment filter strips are not to be confused with treatment filter strips, which are designed and used as standalone structural stormwater BMPs. Concentrated or channelized flow is not appropriate for pretreatment vegetated filter strips.
In 2002, the City of Burnsville worked with Barr Engineering to design rain gardens in a residential neighborhood surrounding Crystal Lake to reduce the pollutant runoff into the lake. Using city funding and a grant from the Metropolitan Council, 17 rain gardens were installed along a street near Lake Crystal as part of a stormwater retrofit study (Land and Water Magazine, 2004). Vegetated filter strips provide stormwater pretreatment between the curb-cut and rain garden. The vegetated filter strip treats stormwater runoff that enters the rain garden by dissipating the flow to minimize erosion and remove sediment from the runoff via filtration and settling into the vegetation. This design reduces the total suspended solids (TSS) load to the rain garden and allows the rain garden to function as designed and minimize costly maintenance that results from sedimentation.
The homeowners are responsible for performing routine maintenance such as weeding, raking, and removal of accumulated sediment for the filter strips and rain gardens. The elevation of the filter strip increases over time because of solids settling into the vegetation, so the City of Burnsville has removed the vegetated filter strips, removed the sediment, and replaced the filter strips every five to seven years. Over the 15-year lifespan of the project, filter strips have been replaced twice by the city.
In 2017, the City of Fridley used grant money from the Mississippi Watershed Management Organization (MWMO) to retrofit curb bump-outs with bioswales to treat stormwater runoff and provide multiple benefits (e.g., traffic control, stormwater treatment, and improved aesthetics) to the neighborhood. Rock-lined filter strips provide pretreatment at the curb cutout before stormwater entered the bioswale. The rock filter strip treats stormwater runoff that enters the bioswale by dissipating the flow to minimize erosion and remove sediment from the runoff via filtration and settling. This design reduces the TSS load to the bioswale, which allows the bioswale to function as designed and minimize costly maintenance.
The City of Fridley inspects the rock-lined filter strips and bioswales annually and relocates existing rock, adds rock when needed, and inspects for buried rocks that may be causing damming at the inlet. If damming at the inlet is observed, the rock-lined filter strip can be cleaned, replaced, or an inlet structure can be added.
The Seidl’s Lake Park was an area for potential stormwater improvements identified in the City of South St. Paul’s Comprehensive Stormwater Management Plan, developed to improve the water quality within the city (City of South St. Paul, 2012). In partnership with the Dakota County Soil and Water Conservation District, an iron-enhanced sand filter and pretreatment forebay were designed to improve water quality in Seidl’s Lake by treating an untreated 15.5-acre subwatershed.
In 2016, the pretreatment cell was excavated and found to have accumulated 6 cubic yards of sediment and organic materials.
Water quality for the proposed 6.8-acre twin home development is provided by pretreatment and infiltration practices designed to infiltrate the water quality volume of 1.0 inch over the impervious area, utilizing an above ground infiltration basin and an underground infiltration rock trench. The pretreatment for the above ground infiltration basin is a wet basin with dead storage exceeding 25 percent of the water quality volume which is consistent with the Minnesota Stormwater Manual guidelines for pretreatment. Pretreatment of the underground infiltration rock trench is not required because only green space and disconnected roof runoff drains to the BMP [Westwood Professional Services, 2017].
Site layout for the above ground infiltration basin and pretreatment is shown below, which treats approximately 4.4 acres of the proposed development.
The stormwater BMP treatment train included an infiltration basin. Measures shall be taken during construction to protect this area during construction and after. Employ all appropriate erosion and sediment control BMPs and time the installation to prevent sediment from impacting the proposed infiltration basin.
Steep bluff slopes and existing trees limited stormwater management locations due to City ordinance prohibiting disturbance of such areas during development. Care was taken to avoid concentrated flows down the bluff areas [City of Savage, 2017].
As a part of the City of Minnetonka’s 2016–2020 Capital Improvement Program, the 2016 Street Rehabilitation Project updated roadways, watermains, sanitary sewer pipes in the neighborhood around Libb’s Lake, near Grays Bay of Lake Minnetonka. The program also provided improved stormwater drainage and water quality treatment. Before this project, most of the stormwater runoff flowed overland directly to Libb’s Lake without treatment.
During the project design, challenges included developing viable stormwater treatment options while accounting for site conditions (e.g., a high groundwater table, rolling terrain, right-of-way limitations, and existing buildings with a history of flooding). To address these challenges, a pretreatment manhole sump was installed in-line along with a Rain Guardian Turret structure to capture stormwater runoff and provide pretreatment before entering a stormwater biofiltration area that discharges to Libb’s Lake.
The sump treats runoff that entered the system upstream, while the Rain Guardian Turret and stormwater biofiltration area treat overland flow from Park Lane. The Rain Guardian Turret chamber treats runoff before it enters the shallow stormwater wetland biofiltration area directly from the roadway and removes sediment, coarse debris, and trash. The pretreatment system captures 0.5 pound of total phosphorus and 576 pounds of TSS annually (WSB & Associates, 2015).
The sump manhole is truck vacuumed to remove deposited sediment and debris. Per the final feasibility study for this project, maintenance occurs twice annually at an estimated cost of $450 per year (WSB & Associates, 2015).
To maintain the designed functionality of the Rain Guardian Turret, the City of Minnetonka intends to clear debris from the top grate, remove debris from inside the chamber, and clean the filter wall. In addition to performing regular maintenance, markers are recommended to be placed at the inlet in the winter months to alert snow plows of their locations and prevent snow piles from forming on top of the practice (Anoka Conservation District).
Because of the shallow nature of the storm sewer system, the Rain Guardian Turret was selected primarily for its minimal cover requirements to discharge stormwater from the reconstructed Park Lane into the new stormwater wetland. The Rain Guardian Turret has the added benefit of providing additional pretreatment, reducing maintenance needs, and increasing the lifespan of the stormwater wetland.
As part of the City of New Brighton’s reconstruction of Rice Creek Road in 2005, proposed storm improvements included installing new storm sewer and treatment devices. The storm sewer ultimately discharges to Long Lake. Because the lake is impaired for nutrients, the Rice Creek Watershed District required stormwater treatment. The Environment21 V2B1 Model 4 treatment devices remove floatable debris and sediment from the storm sewer before discharging into Long Lake [Gulliver et al, 2007]. The V2B1 device is a pretreatment device and as such removes trash, sand, and gravels. This case study is an example of pretreatment without a downstream BMP, however pretreatment provided by the V2B1 device benefits the downstream Long Lake.
The system was designed for the 10-year design storm event with a peak intensity of 4.6 inches per hour, with the V2B1 Model 4 installed in-line with the new storm sewer. The Environment21 V2B1 Model 4 consists of two connected manholes, a 5-foot-diameter settling chamber and a 5-foot-diameter floatables trap. Based on the performance assessment, anticipated TSS removal is 65 percent [Fyten et al, 2008].
At part of the City’s MS4 program and documented on their MS4 form, twice a year in the spring and fall, the city-owned vacuum truck removes debris and sediment from structures. Debris and sediment are then hauled to a contained spoil pile (where the City stores possibly-contaminated soils) for testing. Barr Engineering conducts tests to determine if the soil is contaminated, then the soil is hauled to the appropriate location.
The site was included as part of a field performance study on underground stormwater treatment devices by the University of Minnesota and the Minnesota Department of Transportation. The study found that the hydraulic conditions of the storm sewer system produced a backwater effect inside the treatment manholes during a runoff event, which results in a reduced velocity at the inlet pipe. Slower velocities may reduce the mixing energy and provide more opportunities for settling. However, coarse particles are unlikely to remain in suspension and may increase sediment deposition in the inlet pipes until a large event flushes the system [Gulliver et al, 2007].
Additional Environment21 V2B1 Model 4 case studies are available for the City of Fridley and the City of Wayzata from the manufacturer’s website.
On a former brownfield , the Saint Paul Port Authority took title of the 46.5-acre brownfield with the intention of redeveloping the site. The site drains a 144-acre area that flows into the Phalen Creek tunnel and, ultimately, to the Mississippi River without any stormwater treatment. Runoff from the watershed typically contained high levels of sediment and contaminants (Saint Paul Port Authority). Flows from the existing 45-inch storm pipe on Duchess Street were diverted onto the site, along with two other storm sewer outfalls, and into the new stormwater treatment system. The diverted flows first went through a SAFL baffle then into an infiltration basin that can return the treated water via an overflow back to the Phalen Creek tunnel.
The SAFL baffle is in a 6-feet deep with a 6-foot diameter sump designed to trap sand, trash, and floatables. The SAFL baffle is upstream of the infiltration basin and reduces scouring of previously deposited sediments in the sump by reducing turbulence during high flows. A trash hood (model 30R Snout from Best Management Products, Inc) installed on the outflowing pipe prevents trash and other floatables from leaving the sump. This design reduces the floatables and TSS load to the infiltration basin, allowing the practice to function as designed, maintain storage capacity of the system, and minimize costly maintenance (Storm Water Solutions, 2015).
The St. Paul Sewer Maintenance Division vacuums out the SAFL Baffle structure 3 times per year. During the first 4 months of use, 130 cubic feet (roughly 13,000 pounds) of sediment were removed. Even with the pretreatment, infiltration rates in the infiltration basin have been decreasing on an annual basis, likely due to sediment accumulation in the BMP. Maintenance conducted on the infiltration basin last fall noted the basin was still performing as an infiltration practice. Maintenance inspections have also found trash and floatables in the SAFL baffle (WSB & Associates, 2015).
In the fall of 2015, Capitol Region Watershed District (CRWD) partnered with the City of Roseville to construct an underground stormwater cistern and infiltration system. As a part of this project, pretreatment was used to treat stormwater before it enters the cistern. The pretreatment practice used was The Preserver™ by Momentum Environmental, a 5-foot diameter manhole with 3-foot sump catch basin and baffles designed to remove sand, trash, and floatables. The Preserver contains perforated baffles that dissipate inflowing stormwater and minimize scouring of previously deposited sediments in the sump. A skimmer at the outflow pipe prevents trash and other floatables from leaving the sump. This design reduces the TSS load to the cistern and infiltration system, which allows these practices to function as designed and to minimize more costly maintenance.
The City of Roseville routinely removes and disposes of sediment collected annually and estimates that 2,768 pounds of material are captured annually, including 0.526 pounds of total phosphorus.
A 2017 monitoring study measured the effectiveness of the Preserver pretreatment device. The results indicated the practice functioned as intended and removed gross solids, phosphorus, and heavy metals. The particle size distribution of the removed material showed that most of the material (93.9 percent) was sand (between 75 and 2,000 microns), 2.7 percent of the material was silt (smaller than 75 microns), and 3.4 percent was gross solids (larger than 2,000 microns), as defined by the MPCA pollutant spectrum and treatment ranges. The removed material had a specific gravity of 1.91, indicating a high organic content caused by mature trees in the drainage area and an upstream stormwater wetland. The sump was full approximately halfway through the monitoring period, reducing the overall effectiveness of sediment removal.
Monitoring continued in 2018 in an attempt to establish a specific spring storm event ( first flush) as a proxy for sump maintenance activities; however, the results showed that loading was relatively uniform and did not correlate to a specific storm event size. The study’s final recommendation is to clean the sump after spring street sweeping.
For more information see Preserver Inspection & Maintenance Manual
Additional case studies are available from the manufacturer’s website.
Pretreatment sizing for basins and filters strips
Guidance for managing sediment and wastes collected by pretreatment practices
Tables
Other information and links
This page was last edited on 28 December 2022, at 20:14.