district heating & cooling
TRANSCRIPT
DISTRICT SYSTEMSDISTRICT HEATING & COOLING
Prospect Park September, 2013
MINNEAPOLIS MINNESOTA
- Future Buildings
riVer rd e
UniVersitY aVe se
oaK
st s
e
es
eV
a ht
72
interCaMPUs transitwaY
es
ts
oir
at
no
es
ts
eir
e
esseX st se
orlin aVe se
ts
dl
ar
eM
e
FUlton st se
arthUr aVe se
4th st se
delaware st se
Yale aVeMalColM aVe se e
s e
Va r
Uo
MY
es
25th
aV
e se
MelBoUrne aVe se
es
eV
a h
t92
Barton aV
e se
ClarenC
e aVe se
sain
t Mar
Ys
aVe
26th
aV
e se
es
ts
dr
oF
de
B
23rd
aV
e se
sidneY Pl
es
ts n
ot
nr
oh
t
30th
aV
e se
Mal
Col
M a
Ve
se
BeaCon s t se
dartMoUth Pl
ProsPeCt ter
saint MarYs Pl
ar thUr Pl se
4th st se
5th st se
es
eV
a h
t72
27th
aV
e se
delaware st se
es
eV
a Ml
oCl
aM
es
ts
dr
oF
de
B
LRT
LRT
scale: 1” = 300’
Minneapolis st. Paul
Boiler
Waste heat recovery
Chiller
Combined heat and power plant
Solar thermal
Biogas
Thermal storage
Snow melt
Steam service pipe
Energy transfer station
Prospect Park September, 2013
MINNEAPOLIS MINNESOTA
- Future Buildings
riVer rd e
UniVersitY aVe se
oaK
st s
e
es
eV
a h
t72
interCaMPUs transitwaY
es
ts
oir
at
no
es
ts
eir
e
esseX st se
orlin aVe se
ts
dl
ar
eM
e
FUlton st se
arthUr aVe se
4th st se
delaware st se
Yale aVeMalColM aVe se e
s e
Va r
Uo
MY
es
25th
aV
e se
MelBoUrne aVe se
es
eV
a h
t92
Barton aV
e se
ClarenC
e aVe se
sain
t Mar
Ys
aVe
26th
aV
e se
es
ts
dr
oF
de
B
23rd
aV
e se
sidneY Pl
es
ts n
ot
nr
oh
t
30th
aV
e se
Mal
Col
M a
Ve
se
BeaCon s t se
dartMoUth Pl
ProsPeCt ter
saint MarYs Pl
arthUr P
l se
4th st se
5th st se
es
eV
a h
t72
27th
aV
e se
delaware st se
es
eV
a Ml
oCl
aM
es
ts
dr
oF
de
B
LRT
LRT
scale: 1” = 300’
Minneapolis st. Paul
Boiler
Waste heat recovery
Chiller
Combined heat and power plant
Solar thermal
Biogas
Thermal storage
Snow melt
Steam service pipe
Energy transfer station
P
Source: Ever-Green Energy
An evaluation of district heating and cooling options was provided by Evergreen Energy and included the following:
Summary diagram of potential district heating and cooling system components provided by Evergreen Energy.
▫ Connecting to the University of Minnesota’s existing district energy system.
▫ A localized energy production facility – possibly at or near the future Surley site.
▫ Utilization of current production assets in the district.
▪ Analysis of the load that could be served in the Area in the next five years, as well as over the next twenty-five years, including a broad review of existing buildings currently in the Area, and expected new building construction over the next twenty-five years. Ever-Green distributed a building survey to existing building owners in the Area which helped facilitate data collection for existing building data.
▪ Quantified current and future building energy needs, as well as identifying if any of the buildings have or will have energy production assets that may be integrated into a district energy system.
▪ Cost and technical feasibility of serving the district energy system’s energy production needs through the following mechanisms:
P. 22 District Systems & Green Fourth Concepts
DISTRICT SYSTEMS
PDistrict energy systems produce steam, hot water or chilled water at a central plant. This energy is then piped underground to individual buildings for space heating, domestic hot water heating, and air conditioning. As a result, individual buildings served by a district energy system do not need their own boilers, furnaces, chillers, or air conditioners. Buildings connected to a district heating network receive a reliable heating service with stable rates due to the increased fuel flexibility and efficiencies. Other valuable benefits:
▪ Improved energy efficiency
▪ Enhanced environmental protection
▪ Fuel flexibility between fossil and alternative fuel options
▪ Ease of operation and maintenance
▪ Stable energy rates
▪ Reliability
▪ Comfort and convenience for customers
▪ Decreased life-cycle costs
▪ Decreased building capital costs
▪ Improved architectural design flexibility
Hot water district energy systems typically consist of a centralized production facility, distribution network consisting of supply and return piping, and consumers of thermal energy.
INTEGRATION OF DISTRICT HEATING SYSTEMSBACKGROUND
Combined heat and power (CHP) is a very efficient process in which waste heat from power generation is captured and used for heating.
COMBINED HEAT AND POWER (U OF M)
STEAM TO HW ENERGY TRANSFER STATIONSimilar to integration with the CHP plant, incorporating an energy transfer station with the University of Minnesota’s existing steam distribution network can provide another source of hot water to the network.
BIOGAS
As an alternative to fossil fuels, biogas could be generated through anaerobic digestion of spent grain from the Surly Brewery and other biodegradable material.
In cold climates, snowmelt systems can be added to sidewalks, walkways, and streets to eliminate snow and ice build-up. By utilizing low-grade heat for a snowmelt system, snowplowing and snow melt chemicals can be reduced or eliminated.
Along with boilers installed at a central plant, satellite and supplemental boilers can be incorporated. These can be dispatched during peak or low load periods and provide greater system redundancy.
SUPPLEMENTAL OR SATELLITE BOILERS
SNOWMELT
Combined Heat & Power (CHP) is one approach to capturing waste heat. This unused energy can also be captured from industrial processes or boilers and utilized to supply a district heating network.
WASTE HEAT
Solar thermal panels can be installed on building roofs, existing silos, and open areas to capture the sun’s energy and use it to supplement the needs of domestic hot water and building space heat.
SOLAR THERMAL AND CHP
THERMAL STORAGE
Incorporation of thermal storage offers a unique opportunity to repurpose existing grain silos to store hot water.
District cooling is the process of distributing chilled water from a central generation source for cooling and air-conditioning.
DISTRICT COOLING POSSIBILITIES
An electric driven chiller utilizes electric energy to generate chilled water for cooling purposes.
ELECTRIC CENTRIFUNGAL CHILLERS
Installing a chiller with a “free cooling” function allows the chiller to operate without running its compressor during certain times of the year.
FREE COOLING
Absorption units can be driven by waste heat and low-grade heat, such as solar energy.
ABSORPTION AND ADSORPTION CHILLERS
THERMAL STORAGEChilled water storage allows chilled water to be generated and stored during non-peak electricity periods.
Integrated community energy systems utilize multiple energy sources and technologies to effectively meet current and future energy needs. They offer a mix of fossil fuels and renewables and rely on an effective district heating and cooling infrastructure
District Systems & Green Fourth Concepts P. 23
DISTRICT SYSTEMS
The Prospect Park area of Minneapolis is on the verge of undergoing a transformation, driven in part by the upcoming start of Green Line light rail transit. This area has been identified as a potential cutting edge community that could represent an integrated approach to all four key attributes of a healthy, thriving sustainable community (research and innovation, culture of creativity and learning, environmental resilience and sustainability, and an active, lively public realm).
The vision for the Prospect Park community energy system is for it to become an integrated energy system, utilizing renewable fuels, multiple energy sources, and innovative technologies to reliably meet the community’s energy needs and provide resilience for the market volatility of fossil fuels fuels. This integrated energy approach evaluates all sources of energy within a community and optimizes the system efficiency by reducing waste and serving the needs of the community with local resources.
In Prospect Park, it has been identified that the district heating system could integrate combined heat and power, waste heat recover, biogas, hot water storage, solar thermal and snowmelt systems, along with traditional gas-fired boilers to meet the needs of the area. With regard to district cooling, the vision for Prospect Park includes the integration of chilled water storage with adsorption or absorption cooling, free cooling, solar cooling and traditional electric driven chillers. The Prospect Park Vision Map (page 08) provides a visual representation of how Prospect Park’s integrated energy system could operate. Phase I of Implementation
Through the first phase of major development, the area is expected to add 3.6 million square feet of mixed use development. Prospect Park community leaders have identified the first phase of development to occur primarily along Fourth Street SE and University Avenue, in between Malcolm Avenue and 27th Avenue SE. This
development is expected to occur over the next seven to ten years. The purpose of this document is to identify a model for serving Phase I customers while establishing an integrated energy foundation to eventually achieve the vision for the Prospect Park community.
The energy usage for each building was estimated under the proposed Phase 1 scenario. Table 1 provides the building type, square footage, and estimated heating and cooling loads of prospective Phase I buildings. These individual loads were used to estimate the expected load of the district energy system, along with the distribution system sizing and initial capital costs for the district energy system.
Trench Feet Projected Cost
Main Lines 4,000 $ 3,200,000
Service Lines 750 $ 800,000
Grand Total 4,750 $ 4,000,000
Trench Feet Projected Cost
Main Lines 4,000 $2,700,000
Service Lines 750 $ 600,000
Grand Total 4,750 $ 3,300,000
Square Footage Heating Cooling
MMBtu MMBtu/hr Tons Ton-hrs
Commercial/Retail 150,000 5,535 3.26 180 162,000
Office 150,000 5,760 3.39 345 310,500
Residential 160,000 5,360 3.15 160 144,000
Residential 160,000 5,360 3.15 160 144,000
Residential 80,000 2,680 1.58 80 72,000
Residential 80,000 2,680 1.58 80 72,000
Arts Center 50,000 2,120 1.25 60 54,000
Residential 120,000 4,020 2.36 120 108,000
Residential 120,000 4,020 2.36 120 108,000
Residential 160,000 5,360 3.15 160 144,000
Residential 160,000 5,360 3.15 160 144,000
Residential 160,000 5,360 3.15 160 144,000
Residential 160,000 5,360 3.15 160 144,000
Research 250,000 10,600 6.24 575 517,500
Residential 160,000 5,360 3.15 160 144,000
Total 2,120,000 74,935 44 2,680 2,412,000
HEATING COOLING
snowmelt $1,500,000
distribution (heating) $4,000,000 distribution (Cooling) $3,300,000
Production (heating) $1,600,000 Production (Cooling) $2,600,000
Heating Subtotal $7,100,000 Cooling Subtotal $5,900,000
engineering (10%) $700,000 engineering (10%) $600,000
general Conditions (15%) $1,100,000 general Conditions (15%) $900,000
Contingency (25%) $1,800,000 Contingency (25%) $1,500,000
Total $10,700,000 Total $8,900,000
Heating and Cooling Total $19,600,000
Land Use Average Daily Demand (GPD)
Peak Daily Demand (CFS)
surly destination Brewery 137,000 0.424
Mn innovation Park (office and Manufacture)
10,830 0.034
Mn innovative Park (research 1) 112,190 0.347
Mn innovative Park (research 2) 15,100 0.047
Mixed Use 1 361,760 1.679
Mixed Use 2 373,570 1.734
Mixed Use residential 82,200 0.509
Total 1,092,650 4.773
Table 1: Projected Phase I Buildings and Loads
The total estimated Phase I annual heating and cooling loads are 75,000 MMBtu and 2.4 million ton-hours, respectively. The anticipated peak loads, based on 1,700 heating full load hours and 900 cooling full load hours are 44 MMBtu/hr and 2,700 tons. These numbers will be utilized to estimate the size and cost of the initial central plant.
In addition to providing comfort to buildings, Phase I could also include the installation of a snowmelt system for the community. The building to building snowmelt system would create a unique experience on 4th Street SE and eliminate the need for snow removal, snow plows, and the introduction of salt or other chemicals along that corridor. Snowmelt systems provide communities around the world with a mechanism to maintain a thriving central district throughout the winter, regardless of weather conditions.In Prospect Park, the snowmelt system could extend from building to building along 4th street. The width of the snowmelt system was assumed to be 80 feet and it is projected to extend a length of 1,700 feet from 27th Avenue SE to Malcolm
Avenue SE. The estimated cost for the snowmelt is $1.5 million.
The Phase I hot water and chilled water distribution systems include approximately 5,000 trench feet of service and main piping for each system. The hot water pipe sizes range from 3 to 8 inches in diameter and the chilled water ranges from 4 to 12 inches in diameter. The projected cost for the hot water distribution network is $4 million and chilled water is $3.3 million, as reflected in Tables 2 and 3. Coordination of this work with other development in the area can offer an opportunity to reduce installation costs by as much as 35%.Figure 1 provides one possible route for the initial distribution system, although actual routing will be developed once a more detailed development plan is established.
Figure 1: Proposed Phase I Distribution Route, clouded areas run along the Central Corridor Light Rail. Actual routing is to be determined in the next phase of development.
P
DISTRICT HEATING AND COOLING
INTRODUCTION
SYSTEM VISION
ENERGY USAGE
SNOWMELT SYSTEM
DISTRIBUTION
P. 24 District Systems & Green Fourth Concepts
DISTRICT SYSTEMS
Trench Feet Projected Cost
Main Lines 4,000 $ 3,200,000
Service Lines 750 $ 800,000
Grand Total 4,750 $ 4,000,000
Trench Feet Projected Cost
Main Lines 4,000 $2,700,000
Service Lines 750 $ 600,000
Grand Total 4,750 $ 3,300,000
Square Footage Heating Cooling
MMBtu MMBtu/hr Tons Ton-hrs
Commercial/Retail 150,000 5,535 3.26 180 162,000
Office 150,000 5,760 3.39 345 310,500
Residential 160,000 5,360 3.15 160 144,000
Residential 160,000 5,360 3.15 160 144,000
Residential 80,000 2,680 1.58 80 72,000
Residential 80,000 2,680 1.58 80 72,000
Arts Center 50,000 2,120 1.25 60 54,000
Residential 120,000 4,020 2.36 120 108,000
Residential 120,000 4,020 2.36 120 108,000
Residential 160,000 5,360 3.15 160 144,000
Residential 160,000 5,360 3.15 160 144,000
Residential 160,000 5,360 3.15 160 144,000
Residential 160,000 5,360 3.15 160 144,000
Research 250,000 10,600 6.24 575 517,500
Residential 160,000 5,360 3.15 160 144,000
Total 2,120,000 74,935 44 2,680 2,412,000
HEATING COOLING
snowmelt $1,500,000
distribution (heating) $4,000,000 distribution (Cooling) $3,300,000
Production (heating) $1,600,000 Production (Cooling) $2,600,000
Heating Subtotal $7,100,000 Cooling Subtotal $5,900,000
engineering (10%) $700,000 engineering (10%) $600,000
general Conditions (15%) $1,100,000 general Conditions (15%) $900,000
Contingency (25%) $1,800,000 Contingency (25%) $1,500,000
Total $10,700,000 Total $8,900,000
Heating and Cooling Total $19,600,000
Land Use Average Daily Demand (GPD)
Peak Daily Demand (CFS)
surly destination Brewery 137,000 0.424
Mn innovation Park (office and Manufacture)
10,830 0.034
Mn innovative Park (research 1) 112,190 0.347
Mn innovative Park (research 2) 15,100 0.047
Mixed Use 1 361,760 1.679
Mixed Use 2 373,570 1.734
Mixed Use residential 82,200 0.509
Total 1,092,650 4.773
Trench Feet Projected Cost
Main Lines 4,000 $ 3,200,000
Service Lines 750 $ 800,000
Grand Total 4,750 $ 4,000,000
Trench Feet Projected Cost
Main Lines 4,000 $2,700,000
Service Lines 750 $ 600,000
Grand Total 4,750 $ 3,300,000
Square Footage Heating Cooling
MMBtu MMBtu/hr Tons Ton-hrs
Commercial/Retail 150,000 5,535 3.26 180 162,000
Office 150,000 5,760 3.39 345 310,500
Residential 160,000 5,360 3.15 160 144,000
Residential 160,000 5,360 3.15 160 144,000
Residential 80,000 2,680 1.58 80 72,000
Residential 80,000 2,680 1.58 80 72,000
Arts Center 50,000 2,120 1.25 60 54,000
Residential 120,000 4,020 2.36 120 108,000
Residential 120,000 4,020 2.36 120 108,000
Residential 160,000 5,360 3.15 160 144,000
Residential 160,000 5,360 3.15 160 144,000
Residential 160,000 5,360 3.15 160 144,000
Residential 160,000 5,360 3.15 160 144,000
Research 250,000 10,600 6.24 575 517,500
Residential 160,000 5,360 3.15 160 144,000
Total 2,120,000 74,935 44 2,680 2,412,000
HEATING COOLING
snowmelt $1,500,000
distribution (heating) $4,000,000 distribution (Cooling) $3,300,000
Production (heating) $1,600,000 Production (Cooling) $2,600,000
Heating Subtotal $7,100,000 Cooling Subtotal $5,900,000
engineering (10%) $700,000 engineering (10%) $600,000
general Conditions (15%) $1,100,000 general Conditions (15%) $900,000
Contingency (25%) $1,800,000 Contingency (25%) $1,500,000
Total $10,700,000 Total $8,900,000
Heating and Cooling Total $19,600,000
Land Use Average Daily Demand (GPD)
Peak Daily Demand (CFS)
surly destination Brewery 137,000 0.424
Mn innovation Park (office and Manufacture)
10,830 0.034
Mn innovative Park (research 1) 112,190 0.347
Mn innovative Park (research 2) 15,100 0.047
Mixed Use 1 361,760 1.679
Mixed Use 2 373,570 1.734
Mixed Use residential 82,200 0.509
Total 1,092,650 4.773
Trench Feet Projected Cost
Main Lines 4,000 $ 3,200,000
Service Lines 750 $ 800,000
Grand Total 4,750 $ 4,000,000
Trench Feet Projected Cost
Main Lines 4,000 $2,700,000
Service Lines 750 $ 600,000
Grand Total 4,750 $ 3,300,000
Square Footage Heating Cooling
MMBtu MMBtu/hr Tons Ton-hrs
Commercial/Retail 150,000 5,535 3.26 180 162,000
Office 150,000 5,760 3.39 345 310,500
Residential 160,000 5,360 3.15 160 144,000
Residential 160,000 5,360 3.15 160 144,000
Residential 80,000 2,680 1.58 80 72,000
Residential 80,000 2,680 1.58 80 72,000
Arts Center 50,000 2,120 1.25 60 54,000
Residential 120,000 4,020 2.36 120 108,000
Residential 120,000 4,020 2.36 120 108,000
Residential 160,000 5,360 3.15 160 144,000
Residential 160,000 5,360 3.15 160 144,000
Residential 160,000 5,360 3.15 160 144,000
Residential 160,000 5,360 3.15 160 144,000
Research 250,000 10,600 6.24 575 517,500
Residential 160,000 5,360 3.15 160 144,000
Total 2,120,000 74,935 44 2,680 2,412,000
HEATING COOLING
snowmelt $1,500,000
distribution (heating) $4,000,000 distribution (Cooling) $3,300,000
Production (heating) $1,600,000 Production (Cooling) $2,600,000
Heating Subtotal $7,100,000 Cooling Subtotal $5,900,000
engineering (10%) $700,000 engineering (10%) $600,000
general Conditions (15%) $1,100,000 general Conditions (15%) $900,000
Contingency (25%) $1,800,000 Contingency (25%) $1,500,000
Total $10,700,000 Total $8,900,000
Heating and Cooling Total $19,600,000
Land Use Average Daily Demand (GPD)
Peak Daily Demand (CFS)
surly destination Brewery 137,000 0.424
Mn innovation Park (office and Manufacture)
10,830 0.034
Mn innovative Park (research 1) 112,190 0.347
Mn innovative Park (research 2) 15,100 0.047
Mixed Use 1 361,760 1.679
Mixed Use 2 373,570 1.734
Mixed Use residential 82,200 0.509
Total 1,092,650 4.773
Table 2: Hot water distribution probable cost
Table 3: Chilled water distribution probable cost
The Phase I hot water system is projected to include three (3) 19 MMBtu/hr (5.5 MW) boilers, distribution pumps, and miscellaneous related equipment. The system will require approximately 3,400 square feet and has estimated projected cost of $1.6 million, not including the cost of the building. The Phase I chilled water system is projected to include three (3) 1,200 chillers, chiller and distribution pumps, cooling towers, and miscellaneous equipment. The chilled water system will require approximately 5,700 square feet and has a projected cost of $2.6 million, not including the building.
Figure 2: General plant layoutThe total expected size of the central plant is estimated at 9,100 square feet.
The total projected capital cost for the initial Phase 1 development is shown in table 4. The projected costs are based upon Ever-Green Energy’s past experience in constructing similar systems as well as working with the local construction companies. The opinion of probable cost accounts for the central plant equipment, distribution system, and snowmelt system. It does not account for the cost of each customer building interface and HVAC system or the actual building.
Table 4: Opinion of Probable Cost for the Phase I District Energy SystemThe heating and cooling systems have been priced out separately and in actuality may share some of the installation costs reducing the overall capital costs.
Implementation of Phase I of the Prospect Park district energy system will require significant focus across multiple components. To reach the overall vision, the next stage of development should include finalization of a business plan for the system, along with finalization of other various elements of the system’s structure. In order to gain project financing, the following areas will all require more significant focus: Additional detail is provided in the schedule diagram on Page 7.Business Structure, Operating Model and Business Plan: The organizational structure of the business will need to be decided upon and established. Governance of the business and how it will be operated and managed will also need to be established. A business plan establishing the strategic direction of the business should also be established.Financing Strategy: The financing plan for the business needs to be established so that development period activities may be geared toward the needs of the financing entities.Plant Location: The location of the initial energy center will need to be determined, preferably somewhere near the Phase I customer buildings and within another structure (such as a parking ramp).Customer Contracts: The structure of the energy
PPRODUCTION
OPINION OF PROBABLE COST
IMPLEMENTATIONrate and the term of the agreements will need to be set. The energy service agreements will also need to be drafted.Customers Signed: Customer proposals need to be developed based upon the newly established contracts. The Phase I load will also need to be signed to the contracts to support project financing.System Expansion Plan: The Prospect Park stakeholders and the business should determine what a prudent growth strategy for the system beyond Phase I of implementation might be. Design: Design of the system will need to be completed enough to support the securing of permits, easements and lump-sum construction prices.Franchise or Easements: The business will require approvals to route the distribution lines through public right of ways and across private properties.Construction Contracts: Contracts for all equipment and construction will need to be signed prior to project financing being secured.Community Outreach: The business should develop a strong relationship with the local community and advance an outreach program that maintains the community stakeholders as partners in the system development and management.The amount of time required to finalize plans for each of these components will be dependent upon a number of factors, both internal and external.
District Systems & Green Fourth Concepts P. 25
DISTRICT SYSTEMS
P
PUBLIC UTILITIESWATER NETWORK WATER NETWORK
Water line
Minneapolis Water provides domestic and fire protection water service in the project area.
• A new 16” water main was constructed in University Avenue SE from 29th Avenue SE to the east to the City limit with the CCLRT Project.
• There is existing 16” water main from 29th Avenue SE to a 48” transmission water main in Oak Street to the west.
• There is an existing 16” water main in Malcolm Avenue SE from University Avenue SE to the Transit Way.
• There is existing 16” water main in 4th Street SE from Malcolm Avenue SE to the west eventually connecting to the 48” transmission water main in Oak Street SE. This water main was modified as a part of the CCLRT Project.
There is generally adequate water main infrastructure in the project area. The future extension of 27th Avenue SE to the north may allow for extension of trunk water main north of the Transit Way looping back to Malcolm Avenue SE.
There are no planned improvements in the project area. Minneapolis Water is doing mostly rehabilitation work on water main, including cement lining. The rehabilitation work is generally coordinated with CIP roadway projects, like Green Fourth. There is adequate domestic water supply to the project area and the proposed development. Minneapolis Water feels that fire demand may be a limiting factor for development. Confirmation of fire flow is the responsibility of the developer.
Minneapolis Water likes to see one hydrant at each intersection with spacing not to exceed 600 feet. Each new building generally requires one domestic and one fire service. Combined services are allowed, with the domestic service size not exceeding a quarter of the combined service size. Separate services are preferred because they generally provide for better water quality.
SANITARY SEWER NETWORK
SEWER PIPE NETWORK
Sanitary sewer
Storm sewer
The City of Minneapolis Public Works Surface Water and Sewers Department provides sanitary sewer service in the project area. There is a large trunk sanitary sewer system in University Avenue SE that drains west to a 96” MCES sanitary sewer interceptor in Oak Street SE. The trunk sanitary sewer is 33” brick from Malcolm Avenue SE to 29th Avenue SE, 39” concrete pipe from 29th Avenue SE to 25th Avenue SE, and 45” concrete pipe to Huron Boulevard. This trunk sanitary sewer system is generally serving the project area, with 15” clay to 24” clay lateral trunk sanitary sewers. These laterals are sized to accommodate growth over the current land use.
Surface Waters & Sewers does not have any capital projects planned in the project area. They are doing lining projects and manhole reconstructs, usually coordinated with other CIP roadway projects, like Green Fourth. Surface Waters & Sewers confirmed that there are no condition assessments or known sanitary sewer issues in the project area. The Rain Leader Disconnect Program looks at illegal roof rain leader connections to sanitary sewer system and requires disconnecting of illegal connections. It is not clear the status of rain leader disconnects in the project area, but demolition and redevelopment generally accomplishes these disconnects.
Sanitary sewer is typically designed at the centerline of the roadway, with water main typically 10 feet off centerline. Private (dry) utilities are located within the right-of-way and are typically placed within a zone behind the curb. Joint trenches – combination of gas, electric, communications utilities - are not typical in the City of Minneapolis.
A water and sewer demand analysis was done for the project area to compare to the capacity of existing sanitary system.
The capacity of the smallest lateral trunk sanitary sewer system in the project area is a 15”, which as a capacity of approximately 4.8 CFS. The capacity of the 39” concrete trunk sanitary sewer in University Avenue SE at 25th Avenue SE is approximately 19.5 CFS. The trunk sanitary sewer system in the project area has the capacity to accommodate
Note: Water network information provided in this section is for a purpose of discussion only. It requires further work and review with Minneapolis Public Works.
P. 26 District Systems & Green Fourth Concepts
DISTRICT SYSTEMS
STORMWATER
WATERSHED1867 HISTORIC WATER BODY
MISSISSIPPI WATERSHED MANAGEMENT ORGANIZATION (MWMO) BOUNDARY BRIDAL VEIL PIPESHED
P
Our study examined possible development scenarios along Green 4th that can reduce rates and volume of stormwater directly entering into conventional stormwater pipe system while allowing maxim ground water recharge and improving water quality.
The impact to the Bridal Veil Creek (BVC) watershed was assessed with Floodplain / stormwater modeling of existing and proposed redeveloped conditions. Barr performed modeling of the 100-year flooding associated with proposed conditions in the BVC watershed for proposed changes to Green 4th Street and the identified private parcels for redevelopment, incorporating water quality treatment in four proposed scenarios:
Green 4th, which which sits in the Bridal Veil Creek pipeshed (BVC), is a part of Mississippi River Watershed that once was filled with large wetlands, prairie, and a creek that ran through the site and cascaded down to Mississippi River via the Bridal Veil Waterfall.
The 1867 Survey map from Metropolitan Design Center’s study shows how the Green 4th site sits within a larger network of wetlands and BVC. As the area developed into a rail yard and an agricultural distribution center, along with the expansion of street car communities like Prosepct Park and University of Minnesota, the wetland was drained into underground stormwater pipe which replaced the Bridal Veil Creek.
Responding to concerns about climate change, conservation of quality ground water resources, as well as urban ecology, many studies suggest incorporation of Low Impact Development (LID) strategies as a guide to enhance quality of life in American cities.
We explore how much of an impact design alternatives explored in Green 4th development scenario can have for the health of the surrounding environment and the hydrologic system.
▪ 1A. Minimum Treatment Standard (0.4 inches) applied to BOTH Private Property and Green 4th
▪ 1B. Minimum Treatment Standard (0.4 inches) applied to ONLY Private Property
▪ 2A. Maximum Treatment Standard (1.1 inches) applied to BOTH Private Property and Green 4th
▪ 2B. Maximum Treatment Standard (1.1 inches) applied to ONLY Private Property
Barr then compared the changes to existing conditions flooding throughout the entire BVC watershed. The proposed redevelopment and water quality practices generally result in decreased flooding in the BVC watershed, most significantly in the stormsewer network adjacent to Green 4th Street. Scenario 2A, Maximum Treatment Standard (1.1 inches) applied to BOTH Private Property and Green 4th, results in thegreatest flooding decrease in the most locations. Results are shown in the attached figures for allscenarios.
!(
!(!(
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
(
(
(
(
(
(
(
(
(
(
(
(
(
(
(
(
(
(
(
(
(
(
(
(
(
(
(
(
(
(
(
!
!!!
!!
!!
!
! !
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!!
!
!
(
(((
((
((
(
( (
(
(
(
(
(
(
(
(
(
(
(
(
(
(
(
((
(
(
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!!
!
!
!
!
!(
(
(
(
(
(
(
(
(
(
(
(
(
(
(
(
(
(
(
(
(
(
(
(
(
(
(
(
(
(
(
(
(
(
(
(
(
(
(
(
(
(
(
(
(
(
(
(
(
(
((
(
(
(
(
(Minneapolis saint Paul
280
45675
456736
456737
4567122
456734
4th st se
oak
st
se
ont
ario
st s
e
27th
ave
se
essex st se
erie
st
se
Mal
colm
ave
se
25th
ave
se
intercampus transitway
delaware st se
23rd
ave
se
Fulton st se
arthur ave se
wes
tgat
e d
r
huron st
5th st se
University ave se
29th
ave
se
will
iam
s av
e se
w territorial rd
Ber
y st
26th
ave
se
orlin ave se
e r iver rd
robbin
s st
sidney Pl
30th
ave
se
saint Marys ave se
Cla
rence ave seseymour ave se
washington ave se
Bedfo
rd st se
hur
on s
t se
Beacon st se
territorial rd
inter Campus transit way
dartmouth ave se
Barto
n ave se
Prospect ter se
washington ave se
5th st se
hur
on s
t se
Ba
rr F
oo
ter:
arc
gis
10
.2, 2
01
3-11
-22
16
:44
File
: \\
bar
r.co
m\g
is\P
roje
cts\
23\
27
\13
13
\Ma
ps\r
ep
ort
s\F
igu
re 3
_1
Pro
pos
ed
1b
Co
ndi
tion
Cha
ng
es.m
xd U
ser:
KJM
Figure 3.1
Change in node 100 Year Flooding dePth0.4 in of infiltration (Minimum treatment) in Private only
green 4th street, Minneapolis, Minnesota
Existing Condition Node Flood Depth!( 0 Ft. - 0.5 Ft. (101 total)
!( 0.5 Ft. - 1.0 Ft. (113 total)
!( greater than 1 Ft. (54 total)
Proposed Condition Node Flooding Decrease!( 0 Ft. – 0.1 Ft. (130 total)!( 0.1 Ft. – 0.25 Ft. (0 total)!( 0.25 Ft. – 0.5 Ft. (0 total)!( greater than 0.5 Ft. (1 total)
!(locations whereFlooding is eliminatedBridal Veil CreektunnelshedProposed development4th street Project areaMunicipal Boundaries
Minneapolis
saint Paul
roseville
Falcon heights
§̈¦94
§̈¦35w
§̈¦94280
51
55
65
!;N
0 800400
Feet
District Systems & Green Fourth Concepts P. 27
Apendix
RATE CONTROL
The City’s stormwater rate control standards for redevelopment are that the rate of runoff generated in proposed conditions for up to the 100-year, 24-hour event must not be greater than the existing conditions, unless the area has been identified as a problematic flooding area by the City. While the BVC watershed does have some flooding problems and the BVC tunnel system is overcapacity in the 100-year event, discussions with City Public Works staff revealed that this is not a high priority flooding area, and thus would likely be subject to the City’s standard rate control rules.
Due to the fact that the BVC watershed is already highly developed and imperviousness quite high within proposed Green 4th and the nearby proposed development, it is unlikely that rate control will be a significant concern in new development in this area. The City’s current zoning requires new development to retain 20% of the development for green space (pervious), and due to the highly-impervious nature of the existing conditions, it was determined that likely only a few private parcels would need rate control to ensure that proposed runoff rates would not exceed existing conditions. In these locations, the existing pervious cover is greater than 20%, meaning that redevelopment could result in greater stormwater runoff. The model incorporates rate control at these locations.
VOLUME CONTROL
The City’s water quality rules require that proposed private development reduce total suspended solids (TSS) from the development by 70% on an annual basis. MWMO has determined through previous work that this City requirement approximates the treatment provided by infiltration/filtration practices that capture 0.4 inches of runoff from the tributary impervious surfaces. This treatment requirement does not apply to City roads (i.e., a reconstructed Green 4th). The 0.4-inch standard is hereafter referred to as the “minimum treatment standard”.
The Minnesota Pollution Control Agency (MPCA) has developed a higher treatment standard that
P
STORMWATER
approximates native hydrology. The proposed standard developed by MPCA provides volume control treatment of 1.1 inches of runoff over the tributary impervious surfaces. The 1.1-inch standard is hereafter referred to as the “maximum treatment standard”.
QUALITY
Stormwater – Modeling and ResultsBarr performed modeling of the 100-year flooding associated with proposed conditions in the BVC watershed for proposed changes to Green 4th Street and the identified private parcels for redevelopment, incorporating water quality treatment in eight (8) proposed scenarios:
1A. Minimum Treatment Standard (0.4 inches) applied to BOTH Private Property and Green 4th1B. Minimum Treatment Standard (0.4 inches) applied to ONLY Private Property 2A. Maximum Treatment Standard (1.1 inches) applied to BOTH Private Property and Green 4th2B. Maximum Treatment Standard (1.1 inches) applied to ONLY Private Property
Barr then compared the changes to existing conditions flooding throughout the entire BVC watershed. The proposed redevelopment and water quality practices generally result in decreased flooding in the BVC watershed, most significantly in the stormsewer network adjacent to Green 4th Street. Scenario 2A, Maximum Treatment Standard (1.1 inches) applied to BOTH Private Property and Green 4th, results in the greatest flooding decrease in the most locations.
Stormwater – Separate or Shared Systems
Cost Estimate 107410.9231
Item
Treatment Volume
(CF)
Impervious Surface
Treated (SF)
Estimated Construction Cost per CF Treatment
Estimated Construction
CostsEstimated
Design CostsLifespan
(Years, n)
Annual O&M Costs (i=4%)
O&M Present Value
Total Present Value
Annualized Capital
Costs, i=4%
Total Annual
Cost (2012$) Assumptions
Private Treatment Enhanced Iron CostRainwater Garden 100 $16.18 $1,618 $243 10 $125 $1,014 $2,875 $229.46 $354 CF Fe (tons) Tons/1cf $2K/ton6 Overflow Structures @$10K each 60,000.00$ 6,000.00$ 50 $3,072.31 $3,072 Marion RWGs 4122 4.5 0.001092 2.183406Roof liner $18,918.89 $1,891.9 25 $1,332.14 $1,332 Green Roof 17027 SF Liner $/SY $10 Quote for poly linerPublicPermeable Pavement 27,000.00$ 2,700.00$ 25 88.20$ $1,901.16 $1,989 Pavers 1800 SF $/SF 15.00$ O&M/SF 0.049$ Tree Trenches 139,408.00$ 13,940.80$ 40 900.00$ $7,747.72 $8,648 Tree Trench 1600 cf $/cf 87.13 O&M/SF 0.50$
Design Construction Capital CostAnnualized Capital Cost
Annual Operations and Maintenance Total Annual Cost Unit Quantity
SEPARATE TREATMENTRooftop Rain Gardens $14,400 $122,100 $136,500 $10,500 $3,300 $13,900 80% 70% 82%RWG $6,481 $43,208 $49,689 $6,126 $3,337 $9,463 CF 2,670 1,867 2,800liner $1,891.9 $18,918.89 $20,811 $1,332 $1,332structures 6000 60000 $66,000 $3,072 $3,072Public Treatment $5,800 $51,700 $57,500 $4,400 $1,200 $5,500 80% 70.3% 81.6%
Permeable Pavers-30th 2700 27000 $29,700 $1,901 88.2 $1,989
(75% to 4th, 25% to 30th) CF - North 543 380 570
Tree Trenches-30th 1182.321 11823.206 $13,006 $657 76.3290872 $733 CF - South 390 273 410RWG on 4th $1,936 $12,906 $14,842 $1,830 $997 $2,827TOTAL $20,200 $173,800 $194,000 $14,900 $4,500 $19,400
COMBINED TREATMENT $12,300 $94,800 $107,100 $10,500 $4,500 $15,000 80% 70.2% 81.6%Permeable Pavers-30th 2700 27000 29700 1901.155295 88.2 1989.355 3,204 2,240 3,360Tree Trenches-30th 1182.321 11823.206 13005.5266 657.0845838 76.3290872 733.4137 391 273 410RWG on 4th $8,397 $55,977 $64,374 $7,937 $4,324 $12,260 CF
Cost Estimate 107410.9231
Item
Treatment Volume
(CF)
Impervious Surface
Treated (SF)
Estimated Construction Cost per CF Treatment
Estimated Construction
CostsEstimated
Design CostsLifespan
(Years, n)
Annual O&M Costs (i=4%)
O&M Present Value
Total Present Value
Annualized Capital
Costs, i=4%
Total Annual
Cost (2012$) Assumptions
Private Treatment Enhanced Iron CostRainwater Garden 100 $16.18 $1,618 $243 10 $125 $1,014 $2,875 $229.46 $354 CF Fe (tons) Tons/1cf $2K/ton6 Overflow Structures @$10K each 60,000.00$ 6,000.00$ 50 $3,072.31 $3,072 Marion RWGs 4122 4.5 0.001092 2.183406Roof liner $18,918.89 $1,891.9 25 $1,332.14 $1,332 Green Roof 17027 SF Liner $/SY $10 Quote for poly linerPublicPermeable Pavement 27,000.00$ 2,700.00$ 25 88.20$ $1,901.16 $1,989 Pavers 1800 SF $/SF 15.00$ O&M/SF 0.049$ Tree Trenches 139,408.00$ 13,940.80$ 40 900.00$ $7,747.72 $8,648 Tree Trench 1600 cf $/cf 87.13 O&M/SF 0.50$
Design Construction Capital CostAnnualized Capital Cost
Annual Operations and Maintenance Total Annual Cost Unit Quantity
SEPARATE TREATMENTRooftop Rain Gardens $14,400 $122,100 $136,500 $10,500 $3,300 $13,900 80% 70% 82%RWG $6,481 $43,208 $49,689 $6,126 $3,337 $9,463 CF 2,670 1,867 2,800liner $1,891.9 $18,918.89 $20,811 $1,332 $1,332structures 6000 60000 $66,000 $3,072 $3,072Public Treatment $5,800 $51,700 $57,500 $4,400 $1,200 $5,500 80% 70.3% 81.6%
Permeable Pavers-30th 2700 27000 $29,700 $1,901 88.2 $1,989
(75% to 4th, 25% to 30th) CF - North 543 380 570
Tree Trenches-30th 1182.321 11823.206 $13,006 $657 76.3290872 $733 CF - South 390 273 410RWG on 4th $1,936 $12,906 $14,842 $1,830 $997 $2,827TOTAL $20,200 $173,800 $194,000 $14,900 $4,500 $19,400
COMBINED TREATMENT $12,300 $94,800 $107,100 $10,500 $4,500 $15,000 80% 70.2% 81.6%Permeable Pavers-30th 2700 27000 29700 1901.155295 88.2 1989.355 3,204 2,240 3,360Tree Trenches-30th 1182.321 11823.206 13005.5266 657.0845838 76.3290872 733.4137 391 273 410RWG on 4th $8,397 $55,977 $64,374 $7,937 $4,324 $12,260 CF
Cost Estimate 107410.9231
Item
Treatment Volume
(CF)
Impervious Surface
Treated (SF)
Estimated Construction Cost per CF Treatment
Estimated Construction
CostsEstimated
Design CostsLifespan
(Years, n)
Annual O&M Costs (i=4%)
O&M Present Value
Total Present Value
Annualized Capital
Costs, i=4%
Total Annual
Cost (2012$) Assumptions
Private Treatment Enhanced Iron CostRainwater Garden 100 $16.18 $1,618 $243 10 $125 $1,014 $2,875 $229.46 $354 CF Fe (tons) Tons/1cf $2K/ton6 Overflow Structures @$10K each 60,000.00$ 6,000.00$ 50 $3,072.31 $3,072 Marion RWGs 4122 4.5 0.001092 2.183406Roof liner $18,918.89 $1,891.9 25 $1,332.14 $1,332 Green Roof 17027 SF Liner $/SY $10 Quote for poly linerPublicPermeable Pavement 27,000.00$ 2,700.00$ 25 88.20$ $1,901.16 $1,989 Pavers 1800 SF $/SF 15.00$ O&M/SF 0.049$ Tree Trenches 139,408.00$ 13,940.80$ 40 900.00$ $7,747.72 $8,648 Tree Trench 1600 cf $/cf 87.13 O&M/SF 0.50$
Design Construction Capital CostAnnualized Capital Cost
Annual Operations and Maintenance Total Annual Cost Unit Quantity
SEPARATE TREATMENTRooftop Rain Gardens $14,400 $122,100 $136,500 $10,500 $3,300 $13,900 80% 70% 82%RWG $6,481 $43,208 $49,689 $6,126 $3,337 $9,463 CF 2,670 1,867 2,800liner $1,891.9 $18,918.89 $20,811 $1,332 $1,332structures 6000 60000 $66,000 $3,072 $3,072Public Treatment $5,800 $51,700 $57,500 $4,400 $1,200 $5,500 80% 70.3% 81.6%
Permeable Pavers-30th 2700 27000 $29,700 $1,901 88.2 $1,989
(75% to 4th, 25% to 30th) CF - North 543 380 570
Tree Trenches-30th 1182.321 11823.206 $13,006 $657 76.3290872 $733 CF - South 390 273 410RWG on 4th $1,936 $12,906 $14,842 $1,830 $997 $2,827TOTAL $20,200 $173,800 $194,000 $14,900 $4,500 $19,400
COMBINED TREATMENT $12,300 $94,800 $107,100 $10,500 $4,500 $15,000 80% 70.2% 81.6%Permeable Pavers-30th 2700 27000 29700 1901.155295 88.2 1989.355 3,204 2,240 3,360Tree Trenches-30th 1182.321 11823.206 13005.5266 657.0845838 76.3290872 733.4137 391 273 410RWG on 4th $8,397 $55,977 $64,374 $7,937 $4,324 $12,260 CF
P. 28 District Systems & Green Fourth Concepts
DISTRICT SYSTEMS
P
STORMWATER MANAGEMENT OPTIONSPrivate Public R.O.W
Private Public R.O.W
1. CONVENTIONAL - SEPARATE SYSTEMS
2. CONVENTIONAL PLUS - SEPARATE SYSTEMS
In conventional stormwater conveyance systems, the water is treated in the realm in which it falls. If rain falls on private property, that property is responsible for treating it, the same holds true for public property. There should be no crossover between realms, treatment must remain separate. This is the standard for many cities across the globe. It offers redundancy and ensures there is no grey area of responsibility.
Similar to the first system discussed, rainwater is treated in the realm in which it falls. The unique difference in the ‘conventional plus’ system is that some small low-impact development (LID) techniques have been instituted in the public ROW.LID’s such as rain gardens that take water from the sidewalk and/or the street and treat it before allowing infiltration to occur.Again, responsibility remains squarely the onus of each entity .
District Systems & Green Fourth Concepts P. 29
DISTRICT SYSTEMS
Private Public R.O.W
Private Public R.O.W
3. SHARED SYSTEM - PRIVATE STORMWATER TREATMENT INSTALLED IN PUBLIC R.O.W
4. SHARED SYSTEM BEST PRACTICES - RESTORATIVE APPROACH
Building off the ‘convential plus’ system, the shared system begins to blur the lines between the responsible party and infers that we are all responsible. Creating LID’s such as rain gardens near the edges of properties allows for a portion of the water from the public realm to be treated in the private realm. The private realm often has less utilities in place than the public ROW, which may allow for greater depth of planting and better infiltration
The ‘restorative’ approach would showcase the best LID practices and techniques available. Different curb types to allow water to flow through from the street, rain gardens and infiltration strips, pervious pavement, bioswales, and plant choices that thrive on the disruption caused by rain events and possible standing water that will accompany them.The line between public and private treatment is nearly erased in this example and responsibility is shared between the city and the private entities.
P. 30 District Systems & Green Fourth Concepts
DISTRICT SYSTEMS
P
STORMWATER INSTALLATIONS FOR PRIVATE PROPERTY AND PUBLIC R.O.W
POTENTIAL SHARED SYSTEM APPROACHThis vignette depicts a potential shared system where the private realm would capture some stormwater via infiltrating planters and pervious walkways. The public realm would also capture and infiltrate stormwater via pervious paving, curb inlets, and both shallow and deep raingardens. All of these LID’s would infiltrate water and direct the remnant overflow to the public system. This approach takes much strain off of the public system due to the amount of infiltration that is planned.
District Systems & Green Fourth Concepts P. 31
DISTRICT SYSTEMS
As the mandate to create great places for people (not just parks or streets or individual buildings) takes center stage, innovative but tested approaches bring needed focus to effectively bridge vision to implementation. We have a greater responsibility than ever to address issues of the day, whether related to development, energy, sustainability, social justice, environmental protection, or economics (all related to sound city-building).
The reconstruction of existing 4th Street – the profound metamorphosis into GREEN FOURTH – presents a unique opportunity within the Prospect North District to demonstrate our ability to thoughtfully integrate physical design features with district infrastructure. How to successfully blend a signature design aesthetic with 21st Century functional efficiencies.
The adjacent chart serves to illustrate (in the simplest terms) baseline project components and City project budget – plus – additional funding provided by the Metropolitan Council and potential project enhancements – plus – a fully integrated systems approach, potential project enhancements and costs.
Note: additional cost evaluation and other financial information has been prepared by Prospect Park 2020, SRF Consulting Group, Christina Smitten and other sources.
TYPICAL STREET SECTION
CONVENTIONAL
BUDGET: $1.4 MIL.(BASELINE
PUBLIC WORKS)
CONVENTIONALPLUS
BUDGET :ADD $500 K
(METCOUNCILGRANT)
INTEGRATED SYSTEMS
BUDGET :ADD $3 MIL.
(PRIVATE / PUBLICFUNDING)
STORMWATERMANAGEMENT
STACKED SOLUTIONS...CLOSED LOOP SYSTEMS
GREEN FOURTH
P. 32 District Systems & Green Fourth Concepts
SUMMARY RECOMMENDATIONS
+ PLUS
+ PLUS
DISTRICT SYSTEMS
green wall
Boutique hotel solar
powerPark
stormwater
harvesting & use
stormwater
harvesting & use
Community garden
roof deck
energy productionfrom vibration
adaptive reuse
Park &recreation
iconicBldg.
event Center
stormwater infiltration for groundwater recharge
district cooling& heating
downtown MPls & river View
29th. lrt station Plaza
RESTORATIVE CLOSED-LOOP DISTRICT INFR
ASTR
UC
TU
RE
SY
ST
EM
PARKINGCOMMERCIAL
RESIDENTIAL
PARKINGCOMMERCIALOFFICERESIDENTIAL
Pavegen: Paving system that
generates electricity
innowattech: Parasitic energy harvesting
P
The Prospect North District is uniquely positioned to become an innovative model for sustainable redevelopment due to its scale and the adopted vision for its physical transformation. Much as the public realm should be conceived in toto, district-wide systems to manage water and waste, harvest renewable energy sources and promote health and wellness through design should also be seamlessly developed in conjunction with physical design of both the public and private realms.
Closed-loop systems at a district scale are gaining momentum globally due to significant advances towards ‘regenerative’ solutions, transcending sustainability benchmarks in favor of restorative outcomes and thriving cities. There are now numerous successful examples, allowing us to directly study new communities that are not only beautiful places to be, but also progressive and responsible developments designed in direct response to the challenges of our time.We strongly believe that Prospect North should advance these concepts, with a willingness to innovate . . . to become a district that demonstrates new development concepts, provides measureable outcomes that encourage others, and still meets financial feasibility targets to deliver successful projects.
DISTRICT SYSTEMS
Urban Living, Western Harbour, Malmö Sweden Solar array parking Cincinnati Zoo & Botanical Garden Urban agriculture in Cleveland OH
District Systems & Green Fourth Concepts P. 33
APPENDIX
P. 34 District Systems & Green Fourth Concepts
District Systems & Green Fourth Concepts P. 35
WORKSHEETS, MAPS & DIAGRAMS
Apendix
P
SURFACE FLOW & 100 YEAR FLOOD
Surface water flow
Water volume low >0.5 ft
Water volume medium <0.5 ft, >1 ft
Water volume high <1 ft
2 ft contour line
Potential Developments
Pipeshed boundary
P. 36 District Systems & Green Fourth Concepts
Apendix
PStormwater pipe
Water volume low >0.5 ft
Water volume medium <0.5 ft, >1 ft
Water volume high <1 ft
2 ft contour line
Potential Developments
Pipeshed boundary
District Systems & Green Fourth Concepts P. 37
Apendix
0.4 INCH RAINFALL VOLUME REDUCTION --- PRIVATE DEVELOPMENT ONLY
!(
!(!(
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
(
(
(
(
(
(
(
(
(
(
(
(
(
(
(
(
(
(
(
(
(
(
(
(
(
(
(
(
(
(
(
!
!!!
!!
!!
!
! !
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!!
!
!
(
(((
((
((
(
( (
(
(
(
(
(
(
(
(
(
(
(
(
(
(
(
((
(
(
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!!
!
!
!
!
!(
(
(
(
(
(
(
(
(
(
(
(
(
(
(
(
(
(
(
(
(
(
(
(
(
(
(
(
(
(
(
(
(
(
(
(
(
(
(
(
(
(
(
(
(
(
(
(
(
(
((
(
(
(
(
(Minneapolis saint Paul
280
45675
456736
456737
4567122
456734
4th st se
oak
st
se
ont
ario
st s
e
27th
ave
se
essex st se
erie
st
se
Mal
colm
ave
se
25th
ave
se
intercampus transitway
delaware st se
23rd
ave
se
Fulton st se
arthur ave se
wes
tgat
e d
r
huron st
5th st se
University ave se
29th
ave
se
will
iam
s av
e se
w territorial rd
Ber
y st
26th
ave
se
orlin ave se
e r iver rd
robbin
s st
sidney Pl
30th
ave
se
saint Marys ave se
Cla
rence ave seseymour ave se
washington ave se
Bedfo
rd st se
hur
on s
t se
Beacon st se
territorial rd
inter Campus transit way
dartmouth ave se
Barto
n ave se
Prospect ter se
washington ave se
5th st se
hur
on s
t se
Ba
rr F
oo
ter:
arc
gis
10
.2, 2
01
3-11
-22
16
:44
File
: \\
bar
r.co
m\g
is\P
roje
cts\
23\
27
\13
13
\Ma
ps\r
ep
ort
s\F
igu
re 3
_1
Pro
pos
ed
1b
Co
ndi
tion
Cha
ng
es.m
xd U
ser:
KJM
Figure 3.1
Change in node 100 Year Flooding dePth0.4 in of infiltration (Minimum treatment) in Private only
green 4th street, Minneapolis, Minnesota
Existing Condition Node Flood Depth!( 0 Ft. - 0.5 Ft. (101 total)
!( 0.5 Ft. - 1.0 Ft. (113 total)
!( greater than 1 Ft. (54 total)
Proposed Condition Node Flooding Decrease!( 0 Ft. – 0.1 Ft. (130 total)!( 0.1 Ft. – 0.25 Ft. (0 total)!( 0.25 Ft. – 0.5 Ft. (0 total)!( greater than 0.5 Ft. (1 total)
!(locations whereFlooding is eliminatedBridal Veil CreektunnelshedProposed development4th street Project areaMunicipal Boundaries
Minneapolis
saint Paul
roseville
Falcon heights
§̈¦94
§̈¦35w
§̈¦94280
51
55
65
!;N
0 800400
Feet
P
Minneapolis saint Paul
280
45675
456736
456737
4567122
456734
4th st se
oak
st
se
ont
ario
st s
e
27th
ave
se
essex st se
erie
st
se
Mal
colm
ave
se
25th
ave
se
intercampus transitway
delaware st se
23rd
ave
se
Fulton st se
arthur ave se
wes
tgat
e d
r
huron st
5th st se
University ave se
29th
ave
se
will
iam
s av
e se
w territorial rd
Ber
y st
26th
ave
se
orlin ave se
e r iver rd
robbin
s st
sidney Pl
30th
ave
se
saint Marys ave se
Cla
rence ave seseymour ave se
washington ave se
Bedfo
rd st se
hur
on s
t se
Beacon st se
territorial rd
inter Campus transit way
dartmouth ave se
Barto
n ave se
Prospect ter se
washington ave se
5th st se
hur
on s
t se
Ba
rr F
oo
ter:
arc
gis
10
.2, 2
01
3-11
-22
16
:44
File
: \\
bar
r.co
m\g
is\P
roje
cts\
23\
27
\13
13
\Ma
ps\r
ep
ort
s\F
igu
re 1
_1
Pro
pos
ed
1a
Co
ndi
tion
Cha
ng
es.m
xd U
ser:
KJM
Figure 1.1
Change in node 100 Year Flooding dePth0.4 in of infiltration (Minimum treatment) in both Private
and green 4th street
green 4th street, Minneapolis, Minnesota
Existing Condition Node Flood Depth!( 0 Ft. - 0.5 Ft. (101 total)
!( 0.5 Ft. - 1.0 Ft. (113 total)
!( greater than 1 Ft. (54 total)
Proposed Condition Node Flooding Decrease!( 0 Ft. – 0.1 Ft. (146 total)!( 0.1 Ft. – 0.25 Ft. (1 total)!( 0.25 Ft. – 0.5 Ft. (0 total)!( greater than 0.5 Ft. (1 total)
!(locations whereFlooding is eliminatedBridal Veil CreektunnelshedProposed development4th street Project areaMunicipal Boundaries
Minneapolis
saint Paul
roseville
Falcon heights
§̈¦94
§̈¦35w
§̈¦94280
51
55
65
!;N
0 800400
Feet
Source: Barr Engineering
P. 38 District Systems & Green Fourth Concepts
Apendix
Source: Barr Engineering
0.4 INCH RAINFALL VOLUME REDUCTION --- PRIVATE DEVELOPMENT + GREEN 4TH.
P
Minneapolis saint Paul
280
45675
456736
456737
4567122
456734
4th st se
oak
st
se
ont
ario
st s
e
27th
ave
se
essex st se
erie
st
se
Mal
colm
ave
se
25th
ave
se
intercampus transitway
delaware st se
23rd
ave
se
Fulton st se
arthur ave se
wes
tgat
e d
r
huron st
5th st se
University ave se
29th
ave
se
will
iam
s av
e se
w territorial rd
Ber
y st
26th
ave
se
orlin ave se
e r iver rd
robbin
s st
sidney Pl
30th
ave
se
saint Marys ave se
Cla
rence ave seseymour ave se
washington ave se
Bedfo
rd st se
hur
on s
t se
Beacon st se
territorial rd
inter Campus transit way
dartmouth ave se
Barto
n ave se
Prospect ter se
washington ave se
5th st se
hur
on s
t se
Ba
rr F
oo
ter:
arc
gis
10
.2, 2
01
3-11
-22
16
:58
File
: \\
bar
r.co
m\g
is\P
roje
cts\
23\
27
\13
13
\Ma
ps\r
ep
ort
s\F
igu
re 4
_1
Pro
pos
ed
2b
Co
ndi
tion
Cha
ng
es.m
xd U
ser:
KJM
Figure 4.1
Change in node 100 Year Flooding dePth1.1 in of infiltration (Maximum treatment) in Private only
green 4th street, Minneapolis, Minnesota
Existing Condition Node Flood Depth!( 0 Ft. - 0.5 Ft. (101 total)
!( 0.5 Ft. - 1.0 Ft. (113 total)
!( greater than 1 Ft. (54 total)
Proposed Condition Node Flooding Decrease!( 0 Ft. – 0.1 Ft. (121 total)!( 0.1 Ft. – 0.25 Ft. (23 total)!( 0.25 Ft. – 0.5 Ft. (4 total)!( greater than 0.5 Ft. (2 total)
!(locations whereFlooding is eliminatedBridal Veil CreektunnelshedProposed development4th street Project areaMunicipal Boundaries
Minneapolis
saint Paul
roseville
Falcon heights
§̈¦94
§̈¦35w
§̈¦94280
51
55
65
!;N
0 800400
Feet
Minneapolis saint Paul
280
45675
456736
456737
4567122
456734
4th st se
oak
st
se
ont
ario
st s
e
27th
ave
se
essex st se
erie
st
se
Mal
colm
ave
se
25th
ave
se
intercampus transitway
delaware st se
23rd
ave
se
Fulton st se
arthur ave se
wes
tgat
e d
r
huron st
5th st se
University ave se
29th
ave
se
will
iam
s av
e se
w territorial rd
Ber
y st
26th
ave
se
orlin ave se
e r iver rd
robbin
s st
sidney Pl
30th
ave
se
saint Marys ave se
Cla
rence ave seseymour ave se
washington ave se
Bedfo
rd st se
hur
on s
t se
Beacon st se
territorial rd
inter Campus transit way
dartmouth ave se
Barto
n ave se
Prospect ter se
washington ave se
5th st se
hur
on s
t se
Ba
rr F
oo
ter:
arc
gis
10
.2, 2
01
3-11
-26
07
:28
File
: \\
bar
r.co
m\g
is\P
roje
cts\
23\
27
\13
13
\Ma
ps\r
ep
ort
s\F
igu
re 2
_1
Pro
pos
ed
2a
Co
ndi
tion
Cha
ng
es.m
xd U
ser:
KJM
Figure 2.1
Change in node 100 Year Flooding dePth1.1 in of infiltration (Maximum treatment) in both Private
and green 4th
green 4th street, Minneapolis, Minnesota
Existing Condition Node Flood Depth( 0 Ft. - 0.5 Ft. (101 total)
!( 0.5 Ft. - 1.0 Ft. (113 total)
!( greater than 1 Ft. (54 total)
Proposed Condition Node Flooding Decrease!( 0 Ft. – 0.1 Ft. (111 total)!( 0.1 Ft. – 0.25 Ft. (28 total)!( 0.25 Ft. – 0.5 Ft. (6 total)!( greater than 0.5 Ft. (2 total)
!(locations whereFlooding is eliminatedBridal Veil CreektunnelshedProposed development4th street Project areaMunicipal Boundaries
Minneapolis
saint Paul
roseville
Falcon heights
§̈¦94
§̈¦35w
§̈¦94280
51
55
65
!;N
0 800400
Feet
District Systems & Green Fourth Concepts P. 39
Apendix
Source: Barr Engineering
TRAFFIC & PARKING PMAP1: PHASE 1. LAND USE ASSUMPTION
MAP2: FULL BUILD-OUT
P. 40 District Systems & Green Fourth Concepts
6
5
5
4
3
2
1
riVer rd e
UniVersitY aVe se
oaK
st s
e
27th
aV
e se
interCaMPUs transitwaY
onta
rio s
t se
erie
st s
e
esseX st se
orlin aVe se
eMer
ald
st
FUlton st se
arthUr aVe se
4th st se
delaware st se
Yale aVeMalColM aVe se
seY
MoU
r aV
e se
25th
aV
e se
MelBoUrne aVe se
29th
aV
e se
Barton aV
e se
ClarenC
e aVe se
sain
t Mar
Ys
aVe
26th
aV
e se
Bed
For
d st
se
23rd
aV
e se
sidneY Pl
thor
nton
st s
e
30th
aV
e se
Mal
Col
M a
Ve
se
BeaCon st se
dartMoUth Pl
ProsPeCt ter
Brid
al V
eil C
ir
saint MarYs Pl
arthUr P
l se
4th st se
5th st se
27th
aV
e se
27th
aV
e se
delaware st se
Mal
Col
M a
Ve
se
Bed
For
d st
se
LRT
LRT
6
55
5 3
2
2
2
1
1
1
2
2
22
riVer rd e
UniVersitY aVe se
oaK
st s
e
27th
aV
e se
interCaMPUs transitwaY
onta
rio s
t se
erie
st s
e
esseX st se
orlin aVe se
eMer
ald
st
FUlton st se
arthUr aVe se
4th st se
delaware st se
Yale aVeMalColM aVe se
seY
MoU
r aV
e se
25th
aV
e se
MelBoUrne aVe se
29th
aV
e se
Barton aV
e se
ClarenC
e aVe se
sain
t Mar
Ys
aVe
26th
aV
e se
Bed
For
d st
se
23rd
aV
e se
sidneY Pl
thor
nton
st s
e
30th
aV
e se
Mal
Col
M a
Ve
se
BeaCon st se
dartMoUth Pl
ProsPeCt ter
Brid
al V
eil C
irsaint MarYs Pl
arthUr P
l se
4th st se
5th st se
27th
aV
e se
27th
aV
e se
delaware st seM
alC
olM
aV
e se
Bed
For
d st
se
LRT
LRT
6
5 4
3
2
2
2
2
2
2
22
1
4
Apendix
*All data related to traffic has not been approved by City of Minneapolis Public Works. Before moving forward this will need formalization, validation, and approval.
P
District Systems & Green Fourth Concepts P. 41