This site is currently undergoing revision. For more information, open this link.
This page is in development

Project Name

Project Overview

Narrative description of pretreatment project

Project Location:
Year Constructed:
Type of Pretreatment Practice: (e.g., forebay, proprietary settling device, etc.)
Specific Practice: (e.g., rock inlet, name of proprietary device)
Practice Owner:
Practice Designer:

Design Considerations

Design Cost:
Design Year:

Narrative description of contributing drainage area, including description of land use

List of existing impairments and TMDLs that the BMP drains to

Total Contributing Drainage Area (acres):
Total Impervious Area (acres):
Watershed Slope (%):
Downstream Structural Best Management Practice:
Design Pollutant Removal Performance:

Discussion of why that particular pretreatment system was chosen for that project location, specific rationale (e.g., site characteristics, ease of maintenance, etc.)

Description of sizing criteria used to design pretreatment practice

Construction Considerations

Construction Cost:
Construction Year:

Description of adverse site conditions/other construction challenges encountered during installation

Maintenance Considerations

List or description of types of maintenance practices used for the upkeep of the pretreatment system

Maintenance Frequency:
Maintenance Cost:
Disposal Cost:

Description of maintenance challenges, discussion of ease of maintenance

Discussion of any additional maintenance considerations

Results

Discussion of how the performance was measured or estimated

Measured or Estimated Pollutant Removal Performance:

For proprietary practices, did were the manufacturer claims met?

Discussion of lessons learned through the implementation of this pretreatment practice

Villa Park Stormwater Improvements - Preserver

Project Overview

Narrative description of pretreatment project

Project Location: Roseville, MN
Year Constructed:
Type of Pretreatment Practice: Proprietary settling device
Specific Practice: The Preserver
Practice Owner:
Practice Designer:

Design Considerations

Design Cost:
Design Year:

The total contributing drainage area to the Preserver was 242 acres, with 8 acres of direct drainage area. An estimated 30% of the direct drainage area to the Preserver was impervious (2.4 acres). The land use of the contributing drainage area was residential, with a mature tree canopy.

List of existing impairments and TMDLs that the BMP drains to

Total Contributing Drainage Area (acres): 242
Total Impervious Area (acres): ~30%
Watershed Slope (%):
Downstream Structural Best Management Practice: Irrigation cistern
Design Pollutant Removal Performance:

Discussion of why that particular pretreatment system was chosen for that project location, specific rationale (e.g., site characteristics, ease of maintenance, etc.)

Description of sizing criteria used to design pretreatment practice

Construction Considerations

Construction Cost:
Construction Year:

Description of adverse site conditions/other construction challenges encountered during installation

Maintenance Considerations

List or description of types of maintenance practices used for the upkeep of the pretreatment system

Maintenance Frequency:
Maintenance Cost:
Disposal Cost:

The mature tree canopy in the contributing drainage area contributed to heavy organic loads, including large debris. The total captured material would likely be greater with more frequent cleaning of the system - the sump was full approximately halfway through the monitoring period.

Discussion of any additional maintenance considerations

Results

Discussion of how the performance was measured or estimated

Measured or Estimated Pollutant Removal Performance: 2,768 lbs of material captured by the pretreatment device, including:
  • 0.526 lbs phosphorus
  • Significant heavy metals

For proprietary practices, did were the manufacturer claims met?

Discussion of lessons learned through the implementation of this pretreatment practice