HomeMy WebLinkAbout2.c. Final Draft Comprehensive Water Supply PlanAGENDA ITEM: Final Draft Comprehensive Water Supply
Plan
AGENDA SECTION:
PREPARED BY: Andrew J. Brotzler, P.E., City Engineer 5
"AGEN f E
J`
r
ATTACHMENTS: Draft Plan
APPROVED BY:
RECOMMENDED ACTION: Discussion only.
4 ROSE
City Council Work Session: October 12, 2005
BACKGROUND:
MOUNT
CITY COUNCIL
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
With the recent adoption of the 42 Land Use plan, work has been progressing to complete an updated
comprehensive water supply plan for the City. The final draft Plan, a copy of which is attached, has been
reviewed and approved by the Utility Commission. At this time, staff and representatives from WSB
would like to present the final draft Plan to Council for discussion prior to presenting the Plan at a regular
meeting for Council consideration and adoption.
G. \ENGPROJ \Comprehensive Water Supply Plan \CWS10.12 -05 doc
Comprehensive Water
System Plan
WSB Project No. 1582 -00
701 Xenia Avenue South, Suite 300
Minneapolis, MN 55416 763 -541 -4800
November 4, 2005
Prepared for:
4 ROSEMOUNT
MINNESOTA
Prepared by:
s
WSB
,Isaociates, Inc
COMPREHENSIVE WATER SYSTEM PLAN
Comprehensive Water System Plan
City of Rosemount, MN
WSB Project No. 1582 -00
Prepared for the:
City of Rosemount
2875 145 Street West
Rosemount, MN 55068
November 4, 2005
Prepared by:
WSB Associates, Inc.
701 Xenia Avenue South, Suite 300
Minneapolis, MN 55416
763 -541 -4800 (TEL)
763 -541 -1700 (FAX)
WSB
Infrastructure 1 Engineering 1 Planning 1 Construction
Associates, Inc 9 9 9 701 Xenia Avenue South
Suite 300
Minneapolis, MN 55416
Tel 763 -541 -4800
fax 763 -541 -1700
November 4, 2005
Honorable Mayor and City Council
City of Rosemount
2875 145 Street West
Rosemount, MN 55068
Re: Comprehensive Water System Plan
City of Rosemount, MN
WSB Project No. 1582 -00
Dear Mayor and City Council Members:
Transmitted herewith is the Comprehensive Water System Plan for the above referenced project.
The report is a planning tool to help the City meet its short-term and long -term water demands.
We would be happy to discuss this report with you at your convenience. Please give us a call at
763 -541 -4800 if you have any questions.
Sincerely,
WSB Associates, Inc.
Kevin F. Newman, P.E.
Project Manager
Enclosure
srb
Minneapolis 1 St Cloud
Equal Opportunity Employer
CERTIFICATION
Prepared by:
Cmaprehenuve Water Sy‘te,, flan
City of Rmen,ount, MN
WSB Project No. 1582 -00
I hereby certify that this plan, specification, or report was prepared
by me or under my direct supervision and that I am a duly licensed
professional engineer under the laws of the State of Minnesota.
Date: November 4, 2005
Kevin F. Newman, P.E.
Joseph C. ard, E I T
Date: November 4, 2005
Quality Control Review by:
/ancy D. igler, .E.
Lic. No. 25198
Date: November 4, 2005 Lic. No. 42823
TITLE SHEET
LETTER OF TRANSMITTAL
CERTIFICATION SHEET
TABLE OF CONTENTS
1.0 Executive Summary 1
2.0 Introduction 2
3.0 General System Policies 3
3 1 Strategic Growth Management 3
4.0 Land Use 3
4.1 Land Use Breakdown 3
4.2 Developable Areas 3
4.3 Potential Ultimate Service Area 4
5.0 Existing Conditions 4
5.1 Current Service Areas 4
5.2 Existing Water System 5
5.2.1 Current Water Sources 5
5 2 2 Current Water Treatment 5
5.2.3 Current Water Storage 6
5.2.4 Current Water Distribution and Firefighting Capacity 6
5.2.5 Summary of Existing Deficiencies 8
6.0 Growth Projections 8
6.1 Projected Residential Growth 8
6.2 Projected Non Residential Growth 9
7.0 Existing and Future Water Demands 10
7.1 Estimated Unit Water Demand 10
7.2 Peak Day Water Demand 11
7.3 Projected Water Demand 12
8.0 Future Water Systems 12
8.1 General. 12
8.2 Background 13
8.3 Water Supply Needs 13
8.3.1 Future Source Requirements 13
8.3.2 Groundwater Modeling 14
8.4 Water Treatment Needs 14
8.4.1 Raw Water Quality. 14
8.4.2 Water Treatment Plant Capacity 15
8.4.3 Water Treatment Alternatives 16
8.5 Water Storage Needs 18
8.6 Trunk Water Main Looping 18
9.0 Capital Improvement and Upkeep Program 20
10.0 Water System Financing 20
Comprehensive Water System Plan
City of Rosemount, MN
WSB Project No. 1582 -00
TABLE OF CONTENTS
Figures
Figure 1
Figure 2
Figure 3
Figure 4
Figure 5
Figure 6
Figure 7
Figure 8
Figure 9
Figure 10
Figure 11
Figure 12
Figure 13
Figure 14
Figure 15
Figure 16
Figure 17
Figure 18
Figure 19
Figure 20
Figure 21
Figure 22
Figure 23
Figure 24
Figure 25
Figure 26
Figure 27
Figure 28
Figure 29
Tables
Table 1
Table 2
Table 3
Table 4
Table 5
Table 6
Table 7
Table 8
Table 9
Table 10
Table 11
Table 12
Table 13
Table 14
Table 15
Table 16
Comprehensive Water System Plan
City of Rosemount, MN
WSB Project No. 1582-00
TABLE OF CONTENTS (continued)
Land Use Plan
Gross Developable Acreages
Potential Ultimate Service Area
Existing Water Distribution System
Ultimate Trunk Water Main System
Trunk Water Main System Phasing
Rosemount Hourly Water Usage (Stepwise Water CAD
Population Projections
Daily Water Usage Pattern (Observed Data)
Existing System Average Day Pressure Contours
Existing System Peak Hour Pressure Contours
Existing System Minimum Hour Pressure Contours
Existing System Available Fire Flow
2010 System Peak Hour Pressure Contours
2010 System Minimum Hour Pressure Contours
2010 System— Available Fire Flow
2015 System— Peak Hour Pressure Contours
2015 System Minimum Hour Pressure Contours
2015 System Available Fire Flow
2025 System Peak Hour Pressure Contours
2025 System Minimum Hour Pressure Contours
2025 System Available Fire Flow
Ultimate System Peak Hour Pressure Contours
Ultimate System Minimum Hour Pressure Contours
Ultimate System Available Fire Flow
10 MGD Pressure Filter Option for Northwest WTP
10 MGD Gravity Filter Option for Northwest WTP
6 MGD Pressure Filter Option for Southwest WTP
6 MGD Gravity Filter Option for Southwest WTP
Gross Developable Acreage
Potential Ultimate Service Area
Historical Water Demand
Existing Well Information
Existing Elevated Water Storage Facilities
Population Estimates and Projections
West Side Serviced Population Projection by Land Use Type
East Side Serviced Population Projection by Land Use Type
Summary of Projected Water Usage for the City Service Area
Projected Water Usage for the West Side Service Area
Projected Water Usage for the East Side Service Area
Well Development Schedule
Water Treatment Needs
Projected Water Storage Needs
Water Storage Construction Schedule
Capital Improvement Plan
Appendix A
Water Treatment Plant Cost Estimates
Appendix B
Barr Engineering: Rosemount Well Field Study
Technical Memorandum
Comprehensive Water System Plan
City of Rosemount, MN
WSB Project No. 1582-00
TABLE OF CONTENTS (continued)
1.0 EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
This report represents a comprehensive water system plan to help the City of Rosemount meet its
short-term and long -term water demands,
The existing water distribution system consists of seven wells, three elevated storage tanks,
limited water treatment at each well site, and over 100 miles of water main ranging in size from
6 to 16 inches in diameter Also, the system is broken into two pressure zones, eastern and
western, by a pressure reducing valve.
The total well capacity is 6,400 gallons per minute (gpm) and firm capacity, assuming the largest
well out of service, of 4,800 gpm. However, one of the existing wells (Well No. 3) will be taken
out of service in the future and an eighth well (Well No. 14) is currently under construction.
Once Well No. 3 is taken out of service and Well No. 14 is in operation, the total well capacity
and firm capacity will be 7,100 gpm and 5,500 gpm, respectively Each well pumps into the
distnbution system after treatment with chlonne, fluoride, and polyphosphate.
System storage includes two towers in the western pressure zone, one tower under construction
in the western pressure zone to be completed in 2005, and one tower in the eastern pressure zone.
Existing system storage is 2,000,000 gallons (gal), which will increase to 3,500,000 gal after
completion of the Bacardi Tower.
The 2004 average water demand was approximately 2.1 Million Gallons per Day (MGD) and a
maximum day demand of 5.6 MGD. An extended period simulation (EPS) computer model
(WaterCAD v. 6.5) was used to evaluate the existing system's operating pressures and available
fire flow. The modeling results indicate a functional system without a fire event with seven
wells (including Well No. 12) in operation and the three existing towers in service. Although the
City currently provides adequate service and fire protection to the vast majority of development,
there are a few deficiencies and future challenges including:
Limited fire protection in the eastern pressure zone
The existing system is not capable of serving the proposed Air Cargo facility
In the event that the Air Cargo facility is developed, approximately 4 miles of trunk water main
will be necessary to serve the development, either additional wells will need to be constructed on
the east -side or construction of approximately 4 miles of trunk water main will be necessary to
serve the development from the western pressure zone. The limited fire protection in the eastern
pressure zone will be improved as development is increased. The future trunk mains will serve
development as needed and provide fire protection.
Rosemount has been experiencing considerable growth and anticipates growth to continue. In
the last five years, the population has increased approximately 40 Also, major business
development is anticipated with the possibility of constructing an Air Cargo facility in the
eastern area.
Comprehensive Water System Plan
City of Rosemount, MN
WSB Project No. 1582 -00
Page 1
The quantity and timing of future water demands were estimated in accordance with the City's
recently adopted land use plan, estimated developable acreage, and the water demand per acre
for each land use type (estimated unit water demand). Both average and peak day demands were
estimated. A peak day to average day demand ratio of 2.5 was used for demand. The resulting
projected average water demand is 4.58 MGD, 6.34 MGD, and 8.80 MGD in 5, 10, and 20 years,
respectively. These estimates include future industrial users and some existing areas that are
presently on individual wells joining the water system.
The water distribution system will expand as development requires service. An ultimate trunk
water main system has been developed to provide adequate service to the total City development.
If development occurs quicker than anticipated, construction phasing can be changed. However,
the ability of the trunk water main system to provide adequate service and fire flow depends
highly on the location of supply. If future supply locations are greatly changed, for instance an
inability to develop any wells in the eastern pressure zone, then main sizing may need to be
redeveloped.
Another variable in future water system phasing is treatment. As the City grows, water
customers typically will expect higher quality water. Therefore, water treatment will be
proposed m the future and it is only prudent to include it in the City's future plans. Due to the
location of these facilities around the City of Rosemount, large transmission mains would not be
required to provide service to customers. The Ultimate System shown in Figure 5 would include
mostly 12 -inch distribution mains located on the along section lines. Also, the existing 16 -inch
loop started by the City in the western pressure zone would be continued throughout the western
pressure zone. A 16 -inch trunk loop would serve as the backbone of the eastern pressure zone as
well.
2.0 INTRODUCTION
The City of Rosemount has experienced considerable growth in recent years and anticipates
similar growth to continue. The purpose of the comprehensive water system plan is to provide
the City with a plan to serve future development.
The existing water system consists of wells, storage, distribution, and limited treatment facilities
at each well location. This water system plan will review current water system demand and
existing system capabilities. The study will also project growth and resulting demand on the
system and recommend future system improvements necessary to meet increased demand. A
capital improvement plan will be presented and financing options will be discussed. Flexibility
in planning, design, and construction in the near term and long term are of high importance,
since such flexibility will allow savings in time and money when changes to the water system are
necessary.
Comprehenswe Water System Plan
City of Rosemount, MN
WSB Project No. 1582 -00
Page 2
3.0 GENERAL SYSTEM POLICIES
3.1 Strategic Growth Management
Strategic growth management is a key factor in a community's success as it grows. It is
important to promote new commercial and industnal development while also balancing
such growth with residential growth. Residential development needs to be guided in
terms of amount, type, location, and quality While accommodating growth, it is also
essential that environmental quality in Rosemount is protected. Rosemount's ability to
deliver reliable services must be maintained as the City grows and there needs to be an
awareness of all services, such as water (distribution system, wells, storage, and
treatment), sewer (trunk sewer system, wastewater treatment and discharge), storm water,
transportation, schools, and other public facilities and services.
Rosemount has exhibited a proactive approach to strategic growth management by the
development of an updated land use plan, discussed in section four, in conjunction with
this comprehensive water system plan. Combining the two plans will allow Rosemount
to meet its water service needs well into the future and continue its rapid growth while
maintaining a high quality of life.
4.0 LAND USE
4.1 Land Use Breakdown
Figure 1 is the current land use plan for the City of Rosemount. This plan was developed
by the City of Rosemount and separates the planning area into fifteen (15) different land
use categories. Land use is a cntical factor in determining future water demand because
different land uses exert different demands on the water system.
4.2 Developable Areas
The area within Rosemount's City limits is approximately 32.2 square miles or 20,600
acres. The existing developed area is approximately 9,100 acres including existing parks,
agricultural, and unserviced (residential and industrial) areas. Therefore, there is still
much land within City limits with development potential.
Each land use section's total acreage was calculated. Existing developed, whether
serviced or unserviced, and undevelopable areas (parks and agnculture) were subtracted
to obtain developable acreage. This is identified as "Gross" Developable Acreage
because it includes roads and common or public areas potentially included in
developments. The Gross Developable Acreage by land use categories is shown in
Figure 2 and summarized in Table 1.
Comprehenswe Water System Plan
City of Rosemount, .YIN
WSB Project No. 158240
Page 3
4.3 Potcntiai Ultimate Service Area
The potential ultimate service area quantifies gross developable acres in terms of those
most hkely to develop and when development is anticipated. The potential service area
development time frames were discussed with City staff. Projects in the planning stage
were taken into account as was a site's location in relation to existing developed areas
and existing services.
Currently, there is approximately 3,000 acres in the south central area of the City used by
the University of Minnesota Rosemount Research Center UMore Park). UMore Park
is bounded by CSAH 42 on the north, 160 Street/City limits on the south, Biscayne
Avenue on the west, and extends approximately 1 4 mile east beyond Blaine Avenue. This
3,000 acres excludes 165 acres for Dakota County Technical College located in the north
central portion of the 3,000 acres. Since the University's plans for UMore Park are
unknown, the time frame for development, if ever, is unknown. Therefore, development
and water service to this area has only been included in the ultimate service area.
Another unknown serviced area is the proposed Air Cargo facility located in the eastern
area. There has been no specific location proposed, but it would encompass 630 acres
somewhere between US 52, CSAH 42, 160 Street/City limits, and Emery Avenue. The
time frame for this development is unknown, but has been included in the 2010 service
area as a conservative measure.
Potential service areas are shown in Figure 3 and summarized in Table 2. The potential
service area is shown for the years 2005, 2010, 2015, 2025, and ultimate build out. In
addition, residential and non residential areas are identified. Growth is projected to occur
primarily by surrounding the existing western service area then expanding eastward, with
the exception of the Air Cargo facility included in the 2010 service area, and UMore
Park.
The 2005 service area shown in Figure 3 and described Table 2 is 4,911 acres. This
acreage is the total developed area discussed in section 4.2 of 9,112 (approximately
9,100), less developed unserved (2,412 ac of residential and industrial), and
undevelopable areas (1,789 ac). Agncultural, Rural Residential, and Parks were not
considered to be part of the ultimate service area.
5.0 EXISTING CONDITIONS
5.1 Current Service Areas
The existing water distnbution system for the City of Rosemount is shown in Figure 4. It
consists of two pressure zones, western and eastern. The eastern zone has a lower ground
elevation than the western, therefore, water supplied from the western zone could cause
main breaks in the eastern zone without a reduction in pressure. A pressure reducing
valve (PRV) connects the two zones, which allows the eastern zone to maintain a
constant downstream pressure regardless of flow supplied from the western zone. In
addition, it allows both pressure zones to act as one system relative to facility sizing and
fire protection.
Comprehenssve Water System Plan
City of Rosemouta, MN
WSB Project No 1582 -00
Page 4
The water distribution system currently serves an area of approximately 4,900 acres and
consists of both ductile iron and PVC water mains ranging from 6 inches to 16 inches in
diameter The western pressure zone has been developed and consists of an array of
mains, generally ductile iron, with a 16 -inch loop throughout the pressure zone. The
eastern pressure zone is largely undeveloped and is connected to the western pressure
zone via 16 -inch transmission main and PRV. Mains are sparsely located as are the
users.
Existing water demand is approximately 2.0 MGD on an average day and 5.6 MGD on a
peak day Historical water usage is shown in Table 3. The historical water usage shown
in Table 3 has been adjusted to correct for a substantial public /institutional meter reading.
Details are discussed in 7.1.
5.2 Existing Water System
Comprehensive Water System Plan
City of Rosemount, MN
WSB Project No. 1582-00
5.2.1 Current Water Sources
The City of Rosemount currently has seven wells in service. They are designated
Well No. 3, Well No. 7, Well No. 8, Well No. 9, Well No. 12, Well RR No. 1,
and Well RR No. 2. Well No. 14 is currently under construction and will most
likely be pumping into the system in 2006. Well Nos. 3, 7, 8, 9, 12, and 14 serve
the western pressure zone while Well RR Nos. 1 and 2 serve the eastern pressure
zone. Locations of the wells are identified on Figure 4.
All wells draw groundwater from the Jordan Aquifer and are then treated with
chlorine, fluoride, and polyphosphate in each well house. After treatment, water
is pumped into the distribution system. Detailed information for each of the wells
is found in Table 4.
The total capacity of the seven Rosemount wells is 6,400 gpm. The firm capacity
of the seven wells, which assumes the largest well out of service (Well No. 9), is
4,800 gpm. Abandonment of Well No. 3 is proposed because of the age and
condition of the equipment in the well house for Well No. 3. Abandonment of
Well No. 3 and the addition of Well No. 14 will increase the total and firm
capacity of the system to 7,100 gpm and 5,500 gpm, respectively.
To meet the needs of the existing water system, well firm capacity should equal or
exceed the peak day water demand in accordance with AWWA recommendations.
The highest peak day demand was 3,850 gpm, which occurred in 2001.
Therefore, after Well No. 12 is in service the existing supply needs will be met
5.2.2 Current Water Treatment
Water treatment is not mandatory for the City of Rosemount. As discussed in
section 5.2.1, the only treatment occurs at each well house. Raw water is treated
with chlonne, fluoride, and polyphosphate.
Page 5
Comprehensive Water System Plan
City of Rosemount, MN
WSJ) Project No. 1582 -00
5.2.3 Current Water Storage
There are three elevated storage facilities serving the City of Rosemount with a
fourth under construction. Of the three existing, two are located in the western
pressure zone and the third in the eastern. The fourth tower is located in the
western pressure zone. The locations of all the towers are identified on Figure 4.
The Chippendale Tower is a toro ellipsoidal tower with 500,000 gal of available
storage located at the northeastern corner of Chippendale Avenue and West 150
Street. The Connemara Tower is a 1,000,000 gal Hydropillar located northeast of
the intersection of Connemara Trail and Clover Lane. Another Hydropillar, the
Bacardi Tower, is located directly south of the intersection of Bacardi Avenue and
West 135 Street. It will store 1,500,000 gal upon completion in 2006. A
500,000 gal spheroid tower serving the eastern pressure zone is located southeast
of the intersection of US 52 and East 145 Street.
Since the system is pressurized by the well pumps, elevated water storage floats
on system pressure. Each of the towers in the western pressure zone has the same
overflow level of 1,105. Specific information on each tower is listed in Table 5.
5.2.4 Current Water Distribution and Firefighting Capacity
The existing water distribution system consists of two pressure zones connected
by a PRV, as discussed in section 5.1, and over 100 miles of water distribution
mains ranging in size from 6 inches to 16 inches (Figure 4). Some mains
connecting wells or towers to the distribution system are greater than 16 inches.
An extended period simulation (EPS) computer model (WaterCAD v.6.5) was
used to evaluate the existing water system's ability to provide adequate service
under a variety of conditions and provide fire protection. The EPS model
replicates the daily fluctuation of water demand versus time of day. The EPS
model offers a view of time varying features such as tank levels, water system
demand, and pump on and off operation, and available firefighting flow. Figure 6
is a graphical representation of the maximum day hourly water usage that was
used to develop the EPS computer model. The development of this curve and
other demands is discussed later in section 6.1.
Computer modeling of existing conditions was performed assuming the well
pumps were operating at their firm capacity (largest well out of service, Well No.
9) of approximately 4,800 gpm. The United States Geological Survey (USGS)
data and the City GIS system were used to assign elevations to the points in the
model. Hydrant flow tests were used to calibrate the model.
Twenty pounds per square inch (psi) of residual pressure at all nodes in the
system should be considered a minimum pressure for firefighting needs when
reviewing computer modeling outputs. According to the Insurance Services
Office (ISO), fire flow demands should be superimposed on the maximum day
diurnal demand curve (hourly water usage, Figure 7) after the peak hour demand
has occurred. At this point, storage facilities have been used for equalization of
demands and would be at a lower level than at other times of the day.
Page 6
Comprehensive Water System Plan
City of Rosemount, MTV
WSB Project No. 1582 -00
Water Distribution
Figures 10, 11, 12, and 13 show existing average day pressures, peak hour
pressures, minimum hour pressures, and available fire flow, respectively. During
peak hour conditions, system exhibits western zone pressures ranging from 27 psi
to 75 psi, and 45 to 85 psi in the east. Under minimum hour demands western
zone pressures range from 35 to 82 psi in the west and 48 to 93 psi in the east.
Water distribution mains are typically sized to deliver peak hour demands at
pressures in the range of 40 -110 psi in accordance with Amencan Water Works
Association (AWWA) engineering standards. In addition, it is recommended for
pressure fluctuation during the day to remain less than 30 psi.
System modeling indicates existing mains can deliver peak hour demands and
minimum hour demands to the City while maintaining pressures above 40 psi and
lower than 110 psi, except in the area of Danube Court/Danube Lane.
Homeowners in the Danube Court/Danube Lane area have installed individual
booster stations to increase service pressure. There are some small pockets in
other areas of the City with pressures slightly lower than 40 psi, however, they are
isolated. In addition, there is limited pressure fluctuation of 5 -10 psi between
peak hour and minimum hour demands. Existing demands are discussed in
section 7.
There have been sporadic complaints regarding low pressures according to public
works staff. These complaints typically come from a single house and not from
several in an area, and are usually caused by soil in the water meter. Once soil is
removed from the water meter the problem pressures are corrected for the user.
Homes on Clover Lane, in close proximity to the Connemara Tower, complained
of low pressures for irrigation systems when they were first constructed.
However, individual booster pumps may have been installed to correct this
problem.
Fire Protection
For fire protection, distribution mains should be able to deliver greater than 1,500
gpm for residential protection and 3,000 gpm for commercial. WSB met with the
City fire marshal to discuss the ISO rating. ISO determines fire insurance rates
based on the adequacy of the fire protection system. The ISO ranks cities on a
scale from 1 to 10 based on the fire department's communication system (10
the water supply system (40 and the fire department (50 with Class 1 being
the highest rating. Class 1 is comprised of the best fire departments, of which
there are only about 45 in the United States.
Based on discussions with the City Fire Marshall, buildings in the City of
Rosemount that are greater than 12,000 SF require a sprinkler system. Also,
buildings are rated the highest if they are within 1,000 feet of a hydrant capable of
providing 3,000 gpm for three hours Flint Hills Resources and most other
industnes in the vicinity of US Hwy 52 have their own holding ponds and provide
Page 7
their own fire protection. Currently, the City is not responsible for providing fire
protection to Flint Hills Resources and many of the industries on in the eastem
area.
The western pressure zone exhibits satisfactory fire protection as shown in Figure
13. In the eastem pressure zone, most mains have not been sized to deliver fire
flows as it is not developed with the exception of the industries providing their
own fire protection. Improvements to the eastside water system, including the
tower, were designed and constructed with the understanding that the system, as
proposed, would not be able to meet fire flow demands. The eastside water main
improvements were constructed to provide a more reliable source of water for
consumption to the commercial and residential users on the eastside, but not
eliminate all the deficiencies. Due to limitations of the existing eastside w ater
system it was not feasible to meet fire demands without major improvements.
5.2.5 Summary of Existing Deficiencies
Existing system deficiencies include:
Limited fire protection available in the eastern pressure zone
6.0 GROWTH PROJECTIONS
6.1 Projected Residential Growth
Rosemount's most current population estimate is 20,501. In the last five years,
Rosemount's population has grown 40 with the bulk of growth occumng in areas
receiving water service. According to the 2000 and 1990 censuses, populations were
14,619 and 8,632, respectively. Estimates of the population of the City of Rosemount as
published by the State Demographers Office for the years 1991 through 1999 are
presented in Table 6, along with the census data and current estimate. Figure 8 is a
graphical representation of the population trends.
Figure 8 shows two different scenarios. One scenario carries the last five years of growth
forward for 20 years. The other shows growth based on the current land use plan.
Through discussions with City staff it was determined that as development moves
eastward, the population density per acre would increase because the land is more
suitable for development. The assumption of increased residential density was
incorporated into the land use plan causing the difference between the projected land use
population and the continuation of the last five years of growth. The projected
population will be based on the land use plan for this comprehensive water system plan.
Currently, there is a large amount of property owned by the University of Minnesota in
the previously described UMore Park. Under the projected growth scenarios, this
property is considered ultimate growth, because there are no current development plans.
Most of this property is considered residential in the land use plan.
Comprehensive Water System Plan
City of Rosemount, MN
WSB Project No. 1582
Page 8
Also, much of the property identified for the Air Cargo facility would become residential
if the Air Cargo facility is not developed. Population projections do not account for that
increase. In the event the Air Cargo project is not constructed, the water demand from
the residential and business park, the backup and use, would not vary greatly from the
proposed Air Cargo facility due to the associated types of businesses.
Population projections based on the City's current land use plan are included in Table 6.
As shown, the difference between the current population based on the land use plan and
the City's current estimate is approximately 200 persons, which is a difference of 1.0
The minor margin of error between the given population and land use plan indicates the
population density assumptions for each land use type are accurate. Therefore,
population projections were based on those initial assumptions and then increased as
discussed in this section. All population density and residential and use assumptions are
listed on Tables 7 and 8. These tables show the projected population with water service
based on land use type for both the east and west pressure zones, and correspond with the
serviced population listed in Table 6.
6.2 Projected Non Residential Growth
In the past, Rosemount has attracted industnal and public /institutional growth. A major
industrial park consisting of Flint Hills Resources, an oil refinery serving much of the
upper Midwest, and several smaller industrial users is located west and east of US
Highway 52 and north of County Road 42. Dakota Technical College is located one mile
east of downtown, and the University of Minnesota owns approximately 3,000 acres
south of County Road 42 and east of Biscayne Avenue.
The non residential growth trend will most likely continue in the future with the potential
development of an Air Cargo handling facility in the eastern pressure zone. This
development would not consist of one major user, but of many individual
office /warehousing businesses (business park) coordinating efforts to transport material
to the Minneapolis /St. Paul International Airport.
Flint Hills Resources, Dakota Technical College, and Rosemount Public Schools
currently comprise the major non residential water users for the system. There are
growth opportunities for these users and these opportunities have been accounted for by
the City in the proposed land use plan. Also, these major users have been included in
determining the appropriate water demand per acreage per land use type. For example,
Flint Hills Resources uses City water, but they also supply their own water through
individual wells located on their property. It is assumed that this combination of usage
will continue into the future.
To estimate the quantity and timing of future non residential demands, a water demand
per acre was determined for each land use type (estimated unit water demand) and these
factors were combined with gross developable acreage and potential ultimate service area
to quantify future water demands.
Comprehenswe Wafer System Plan
City of Rosemount, MN
WSB Protect No. 1582-00
Page 9
7.0 EXISTING AND FUTURE WATER DEMANDS
7.1 Estimated Unit Water Demand
Different types of users will exert different demands on the water system. Table 3 shows
Rosemount's historical water demand according to residential, commercial,
public /institutional, industrial, and unaccounted water usage. Unaccounted water usage
may include such losses as flushing water mains, fire fighting, leaks, breaks, and meter
inaccuracies. Unaccounted water has remained around 10 of total usage, which is
consistent with most cities. Agricultural usage was assumed to be negligible. The vast
majority of water usage comes from residential, followed by unaccounted, then
commercial, public /institutional, and industrial.
Table 3 does not correspond directly to DNR water usage reports in the
public /institutional and total water categones because it has been adjusted for a missed
meter reading over an eight -year period. The meter reading was missed for an
institutional customer and was billed for in the first quarter of 2004. It was known that
the reading had been missed for eight years, and was therefore averaged out over that
time period to produce a more accurate representation of total and public /institutional
water usage.
The last two years (2003 -2004) of water usage have been consistent and are a good
representation of existing water demand from the various land use types with the
exception of the Industrial land use type. Industnal usage was consistent between 2002
and 2003, therefore, the average water usage per acre of industrial was determined from
these years. The average water usage for each land use type over these penods can be
broken down as follows: residential, 91 gallons per capita per day (gpcd); commercial,
785 gallons per acre per day (gpad); public /institutional, 230 gpad; and industnal, 55
gpad.
The residential, commercial, and public /institutional demands are all estimates consistent
with other communities; however, the industrial demand is skewed because of the large
land area consumed by Flint Hills Resources. Flint Hills Resources uses City water in
conjunction with their wells to satisfy their total water demand, therefore, they use City
water for only a portion of their needs. Estimated future demands per unit acre of
industrial should be more consistent with commercial/business park usage Residential
usage was moved slightly higher to account for the highest per capita usage year.
Estimated usage per acre includes unaccounted for system losses. The following
estimates are used in Tables 9, 10, and 11 for projected water demand: residential, 95
gpcd; commercial, 800 gpad; public/institutional, 250 gpad, future industnal, 800 gpad;
and existing industrial 55 gpad.
To estimate the quantity and timing of projected water usage, Tables 9, 10, and 11 tie the
estimated unit water demand to the land use plan to produce a schedule of projected
water usage. Table 9 shows the entire system usage, while Tables 10 and 11 show the
west and east side demands respectively.
Comprehensive Water System Plan
City of Rosemount, .NN
WSB Project No 1582 -00
Page 10
Based on the land use plan, average day water usage is expected to increase to 4.58 mgd
by 2010, to 6.34 mgd by 2015, to 8.80 mgd by 2025, and an ultimate service area usage
of 12 52 mgd. Peaking factors and demands are included in these tables.
These water demand estimates include existing industrial users and the future Air Cargo
facility, but no other major water users. Also, no major usage changes are anticipated
from Flint Hills Resources.
7.2 Peak Day Water Demand
Water consumption will vary greatly over different penods of the year and dunng
different hours of the day. The average daily demand is important for calculating
revenues and operating costs. However, peak day and peak hour demand is necessary for
sizing the water supply, treatment, storage, and distribution systems.
A review of the daily water records indicates peak day water usage of approximately 5.87
mgd in 2001, which equates to a peaking factor (Peak Day Demand/Average Day
Demand ratio) of 3.7. However, in 2004 the peak day demand was 5.55 mgd, a peaking
factor of 2.76. In some cases, the accuracy of the 2001 peak number as a true peaking
factor is somewhat suspect due to the variation in meter reading times from day to day
and water main flushing. Daily water usage meter readings may vary by up to two hours
each day, which could under or over estimate actual peak day readings. Water main
flushing may overestimate peak day water usage if water main flushing continues on a
schedule and adequate water reserves are available. Therefore, the availability of water
dunng water main flushing may actually create the illusion of a higher peak day water
usage in historical records.
Over the last six years, the average peaking factor for Rosemount has been 2.5 excluding
the extremely high year of 2001. In general, as City populations increase, peaking factors
decrease due to the increased variety of water usage in a larger City. Based on
discussions with City staff, historic water usage, and similar City trends, a peaking factor
of 2.5 will be used for the remainder of the report.
To develop a more accurate system model, hourly water usage for the City was studied.
Sizing of water distribution mains, storage, and supply are all influenced by the hourly
water usage on a peak day of water usage. Data for system water usage was studied over
June of 2005. June 6, 26, and 28 were some of the highest usage days and are shown in
Figure 9 as an example. This figure shows the ratio of water used per hour relative to the
average for the whole day. Results indicate that the highest demand for water occurs
from 5:00 8:00 a.m., with an additional peak in use between the hours of 8:00 12:00
p.m. During the hours of 5:00 8:00 a.m., hourly demand reaches 1.6 times or 60%
higher than the average over the entire day.
Comprehenswe Water System Plan
City of Rosemount, MN
WSB Project No. 1582-00
Page 11
This data was used to produce a stepwise pattern (Figure 7) for input to the EPS model.
Therefore, the system demands were higher during these hours of the day and
distnbution. supply, and storage were all analyzed for capacity relative to this demand
pattern. It is anticipated that as the City grows and industry and population becomes
more diverse, the hourly /average demand will decrease. However, to be conservative,
this demand pattern was used in each future model.
7.3 Projected Water Demand
The resulting projected water demands for Rosemount, calculated using gross
developable acres and the estimated unit water demand as descnbed in this section, are
shown in Tables 9, 10, and 11. These estimates include future residential, commercial,
public /institutional, and industrial users. In addition, projected water usage estimates
incorporate existing developed transition residential and general industnal currently on
individual wells into the City's service area. The maximum day demand expected in the
years 2010, 2015, and 2025 is 11.46 mgd, 15.84 mgd, and 21.99 mgd, respectively. The
ultimate maximum day demand for the City is estimated at 31.29 mgd.
8.0 FUTURE WATER SYSTEMS
8.1 General
Water systems may be comprised of supply, treatment, storage, and distribution. Water
treatment for Rosemount consists of chlorination, fluoridation, and polyphosphate at the
individual well houses. Water from the Rosemount wells does not exceed any of the Safe
Drinking Water Act (SDWA) pnmary drinking water standards. Therefore, additional
treatment is not mandatory. Water from the Rosemount wells does exceed secondary
standards for iron and manganese. The Secondary Standards for iron and manganese are
0.3 mg/1 and 0.5 mg/1, respectively. Considering the typical water quality from the
region, we anticipate future water supply wells to pump to treatment facilities prior to
distribution for softening.
Well and treatment plant capacity impact water storage requirements. Diurnal water
demand and fire protection requirements also impact water storage needs.
The location of water treatment facilities and water storage facilities impacts distribution
system requirements. Diurnal water demand and fire protection requirements also impact
distnbution system requirements.
City water system needs are met by first providing a water source capable of satisfying a
peak day water demand. When the source water is from groundwater, as is the case in
Rosemount, the peak day demand should be satisfied assuming the largest well is
temporarily out service (firm capacity). The ultimate water system includes two wells
out of service, one in the east and one in the west for firm capacity.
Comprehensive Water System Plan
City me Rosemount, MN
WSB Project No. 1582 -00
Page 12
If the wells are to pump to a treatment facility, as will probably be the case for
Rosemount, the treatment facility or treatment facilities' capacity should equal the peak
day water demand. If more than one treatment facility is providing water to a
community, as will be the case for Rosemount, the firm capacity of the wells supplying
each treatment facility shall equal the respective treatment facility capacity.
The storage capacity for a water system is used to satisfy system demands in excess of
peak day demands. These additional demands include peak hour demands and potential
fire suppression demands.
8.2 Background
The City of Rosemount is divided into two pressure zones. The eastern and western
pressure zones are connected via a PRV. Existing Well Nos. 3, 7, 8, 9, the 1,000,000 gal
Connemara Tower, and 500,000 gal Chippendale Tower are in service in the western
pressure zone. Well No. 12 and the 1,500,000 gal Bacardi Tower are currently under
construction in the western pressure zone. Well No. 12 will be in service before the end
of 2005 and the Bacardi Tower will be in service by the end of 2006. The eastern
pressure zone is serviced by Well Nos. RR1, RR2, and a 500,000 gal Tower. Treatment
consists of chlorination, fluondation, and polyphosphate addition as previously discussed.
System demands are currently much greater in the western pressure zone. Growth
projections associated with the City's comprehensive plan indicate water demand in the
western pressure zone will be greater and occur sooner than the eastern zone. Based on
growth projections, a large number of production wells will be necessary to service the
City of Rosemount 20 years into the future. Also, greater water treatment capability will
be necessary to serve the growing population and industry.
Considering existing facilities and current and projected water system demands, a water
system has been laid out which incorporates wells, treatment, storage, and distribution in
both pressure zones. Three treatment facilities are anticipated with two in the western
zone and one in the eastern zone. Each treatment facility will be a nucleus from which
the distribution system and associated storage will radiate. The system will be tied
together by 16 -inch trunk water mains. Possible locations for the western pressure zone
treatment facilities are in the vicinity of Well Nos. 12 and 14. The eastern pressure zone
treatment facility could be located to the east of the proposed Air Cargo facility
Ultimately, well water availability and water quality will greatly influence realized
treatment facility location and process.
8.3 Water Supply Needs
Comprehenswe Water System Plan
City of Rosemount, MN
WSB Project No. 1582 -00
8.3.1 Future Source Requirements
As previously discussed in section 8.1, the firm capacity of the system's wells
should equal the peak day demands. It is currently not a requirement for the
system, but it is prudent planning. Therefore, in the future model, it was assumed
the well pumping firm capacity would equal the peak day demands.
Page 13
Comprehensive Water System Plan
City of Rosemount, MN
WSB Project No. 1582 -00
Water demand projections were presented in the Existing and Future Demands
section of the report. To determine the number of wells that will be needed to
supply future demands, the highest projected maximum day demand was
compared with the adjusted base firm pumping capacity. As discussed in section
5.2, the current firm pumping capacity is 4,800 gpm (6 91 mgd). However,
abandonment of Well No. 3 is proposed and construction of Well No. 14 is
currently under way, which will provide the City with an adjusted firm capacity of
5,500 gpm (7.92 mgd). Using this adjusted firm pumping capacity as a basis for
future planning, the system will need 2337 mgd (31.29 mgd maximum day 7.92
mgd current firm pumping capacity) of additional well capacity to meet the
maximum day demands for the ultimate planning penod.
Three well field locations are proposed for providing the additional capacity to
meet the City's projected ultimate demand. Since the pumping capacity of three
of the City's existing wells range from 1,000 gpm to 1,300 gpm, a pumping
capacity of 1,000 gpm per well was assumed for future wells. A northwest well
field, with a total of seven wells, including Well No. 14, having a combined
capacity of approximately 10 mgd is proposed for the western area, along with a
southwest well field with a total of four wells, including Well No. 12, having a
combined capacity of 6 mgd. An eastern well field with eight wells having a
combined capacity of 11.5 mgd is proposed for supplying the projected ultimate
maximum day demands for the eastern portion of the City.
Based on growth projections, associated treatment facility construction, and
expansion projections, the well construction schedule shown in Table 12 was
developed. The schedule in Table 12 was used for the cost analysis which
follows.
Due to the large number of wells that will be needed, and the probability that
more than one well could be out of service at the same time due to failure or
maintenance, consideration should be given to providing the firm capacity for
future planning with two wells out of service; one well serving the western area
and one well serving the eastern area. This would require the construction of one
additional well in the eastern well field.
8.3.2 Groundwater Modeling
A technical memorandum summarizing the results of a well field study
conducted for the City is included in Appendix B.
8.4 Water Treatment Needs
8.4.1 Raw Water Quality
Water from the City's existing wells is, in general, good quality water The water
does not exceed any of the Safe Dnnking Water Act (SDWA) Pnmary Drinking
Water Standards, but does exceed Secondary Standards for iron and manganese.
The Secondary Standards for iron and manganese are 0.3 mg/1 and 0.05 mg/l.
Page 14
Comprehensive Water System Plan
City of Rosemount, MN
WSB Project No 1582 -00
Based on sampling and testing information, the iron and manganese
concentrations in the raw water from Well No 12 are 0.453 mg/1 and 0.072 mg/1,
respectively. The iron and manganese concentraions in the raw water from Well
No. 14 are 0.465 mg/1 and 0.112 mg/l, respectively.
Although exceeding the Secondary Standards will not impact a consumer's
health, the water quality will be undesirable for aesthetic reasons. Excessive iron
and manganese concentrations can cause red, black, brown, and yellow colored
water. Waters with concentrations above the Secondary Standards will typically
cause customer complaints if some form of water treatment is not used. These
complaints can be controlled either by sequestering or by removing the iron and
manganese.
The City of Rosemount currently uses polyphosphates to sequester iron and
manganese. Sequestenng does not remove the iron and manganese. The
polyphosphates chemically bind with the iron and manganese to reduce the
formation of precipitates, which cause, red, black, brown, and yellow water.
However, the chemical bond deteriorates with time.
Sequestenng, in general, is not recommended for waters with combined iron and
manganese concentrations greater than 1 mg/I or for waters with manganese
concentrations greater than 0.1 mg/1. At iron and manganese concentrations
greater than the recommended limits, sequestenng becomes less effective.
The most effective means of controlling red, brown, black, and yellow water
caused by iron and manganese is to remove the iron and manganese before it
enters the distnbution system.
Treatment for iron and manganese is a common practice. The removal of iron
and manganese from waters involves two basic processes; oxidation and filtration.
The oxidation process involves oxidizing the iron and manganese to insoluble
particles, which then can be removed by the filtration process.
8.4.2 Water Treatment Plant Capacity
Three treatment plants are proposed to serve the ultimate demands for the City.
These three water treatment plants would each be located near the proposed well
fields and sized to match the proposed well field design capacities. A proposed
northwestern water treatment plant and southwestern water treatment plant are
planned in the western pressure zone. The northwestern plant would be designed
to treat 10 mgd to match the proposed firm capacity of the northwest well field,
and the southwestern plant would be designed to treat 6 mgd to match the
proposed firm capacity of the southwest well field.
An eastern water treatment plant designed to treat 11.5 mgd to match the
proposed capacity of the eastern well field is proposed in the eastern pressure
zone.
Page 15
Comprehensive Water System Plan
City of Rosemount, MN
WSB Project No. 1582 -00
The combined capacity of the three water treatment plants would be 27.5 mgd. At
this combined treatment capacity, 100% of the projected ultimate average day
demands would be treated water, and approximately 88% of the projected
ultimate maximum day demands would be treated water The remaining portion
of the projected ultimate maximum day demand would be provided as untreated
water from existing Well Nos. 7, 8, 9, RR1 and RR2.
8.4.3 Water Treatment Alternatives
Two alternatives were evaluated for removal of iron and manganese from the
City's water supply. Alternative No 1 includes a treatment system for each of the
proposed plants, which would use pressure aeration for oxidation of the iron and
manganese followed by pressure filtration to remove iron and manganese.
Alternative No. 2 includes a treatment system for each of the plants, which would
use gravity aeration for oxidation of the iron and manganese followed by gravity
filtration for removal of iron and manganese. For both of these alternatives, space
would be allotted for the basic treatment processes involved with removal of iron
and manganese Unless required, no space is proposed for treatment of radium,
nitrate, or arsenic.
For Alternative No. 1, raw water from the production wells will be pumped to the
pressure aerators for oxidation of iron and manganese. Following the pressure
aerators, water will flow under pressure to the pressure filters for removal of iron
and manganese floc. Under normal operation, flow from the production wells
will be split evenly between the individual aerators and pressure filters. Four (4)
chemical feed systems are proposed, including hquid chlonne (sodium
hypochlonte), potassium permanganate, fluonde (fluorosilicic acid), and
polyphosphate. After filtration, the water will be fluondated and chlorinated and
then discharged to the distribution system. Continued feeding of polyphosphate
following treatment is recommended to provide corrosion control in the
distribution system. Potassium permanganate will be fed to the raw water after
aeration for regeneration of the manganese greensand, which is one layer of the
filter media. Finished water from the individual pressure filter cells will be used
for backwashing the filters. Filter backwash water will be discharged to two
below grade, cast -in- place, concrete backwash reclaim tanks for reuse and settling
of solids. Settled solids will be periodically pumped to the sanitary sewer.
Clarified backwash water will be recycled to the filter influent Lines.
The estimated capital costs for Alternative No. 1 treatment plants at each of the
three water treatment plant locations are summarized below. A breakdown of
these cost are included in Appendix A.
Cost for 10 MGD Northwest Water Treatment Plant: $8,600,000
a Cost for 6 MGD Southwest Water Treatment Plant: $6,226,000
Cost for 11.5 MGD Eastern Water Treatment Plant $9,405,000
Page 16
Comprehensive Water System Plan
City of Rosemount, MN
WSB Project No. 1582-00
For Altemative No. 2, raw water from the production wells will be pumped to
gravity aerators for oxidation of iron and manganese. Following the aerator(s),
water will flow by gravity to the gravity filters for removal of iron and manganese
floc. Under normal operation, the flow from the aerators will be split evenly
between the proposed gravity filters. After filtration, the water will flow to a
below grade, cast -in- place, concrete clearwell. Four (4) chemical feed systems
are proposed, including liquid chlorine (sodium hypochlonte), potassium
permanganate, fluoride (fluorosihcic acid), and polyphosphate. Finished water
from the clearwell will be chlonnated and fluoridated before being pumped to the
distnbution system Continued feeding of polyphosphate following treatment is
recommended to provide corrosion control in the distnbution system. Potassium
permanganate will be fed to the raw water after aeration for regeneration of the
manganese greensand, which is one layer of the filter media.
Finished water from the clearwell will also be used for backwashing the filters.
Filter backwash water will be discharged to two below grade, cast -in- place,
concrete backwash reclaim tanks for reuse and settling of solids. Settled solids
will be periodically pumped to the sanitary sewer. Clarified backwash water will
be recycled to the filter influent lines.
The estimated capital costs for Alternative No. 2 treatment plants at each of the
three water treatment plant locations are summarized below. A breakdown of
these cost are included in Appendix A
Cost for 10 MGD Northwest Water Treatment Plant: $9,928,000
Cost for 6 MGD Southwest Water Treatment Plant: $7,110,000
Cost for 11.5 MGD Eastern Water Treatment Plant $10,538,000
The City has identified potential locations for proposed northwestern and
southwestern water treatment plants. Figure 26 shows a conceptual layout for a
10 mgd pressure filter plant constructed at the northwestern plant site and Figure
27 shows a conceptual layout for a 10 mgd gravity filter plant constructed at the
same location. Figure 28 shows a conceptual layout for a 6 mgd pressure filter
plant constructed at the southwestern plant site and Figure 29 shows a conceptual
layout for a 6 mgd gravity filter plant constructed on the same site. No sites have
been identified for an eastern water treatment plant and therefore conceptual
layouts have not been included in this report.
Methods of phasing construction of the building and the equipment for the
proposed water treatment facilities should be incorporated in the planning, design,
and construction of all water treatment improvements. Flexibility should be
inherent in all efforts to allow for changing regulations and variations in source
water quality.
Page 17
8.5 Water Storage Needs
Sufficient storage capacity must be available to provide storage to balance peak demands
with water production capacity and to meet emergency needs. Equalization storage is
required to meet water system demands in excess of delivery capability and is sized to
provide demands in excess of the maximum demand up to the peak hour demand.
Typically, a water utility provides emergency storage to supply fire flow requirements
recommended by the ISO. As discussed in section 5, the maximum fire flow
recommended for Rosemount is 3,000 gpm available for a duration of 3 hours.
Table 14 quantifies the amount of water storage required to meet diurnal flow variations
and limited fire suppression requirements during a peak day event for the years 2010,
2015, 2020, 2025, and ultimate build out. Table 14 is based on an evaluation of past
diurnal demands for Rosemount and fire suppression capabilities of approximately 3000
gpm for a 3 -hour period.
The approximate location of storage facilities is based on distribution system extent at
year of need and distribution system layout and sizing to meet system demands and
limited fire suppression needs.
A combination of elevated and ground storage facilities is shown for the future water
system. An evaluation of elevated storage versus ground storage is recommended before
planning for the design and construction of new storage facilities. In general, the capital
cost for construction of elevated storage will be more expensive than ground storage.
However, because of the additional pumping and power requirements, operation and
maintenance cost for ground storage will be more expensive then elevated storage.
Elevated storage operates without relying on pumping or other powered facilities and is a
more reliable source of water for distribution in the event of a power failure. For ground
storage facilities, a back -up power supply is required to operate the high service booster
pumps during a power outage.
Table 15 presents the storage facility construction schedule and is based on meeting the
water demands associated with peak hour flows and fire suppression needs.
The schedule was used for the cost analysis which follows in a subsequent section.
8.6 Trunk Water Main Looping
The ability to transport flow between water sources, water storage, and water demand is a
key element in providing an economically responsible and reliable water system. A good
distribution system makes each element of the water system more effective across the
entire water system service area, reducing the cost for redundant individual facilities.
Water main looping also provides for redundant flow paths across the distribution system
so a reliable water source exists regardless of a single break in a water main.
Comprehenssve Water System Plan
City of Rosemount, MN
WSB Project No. 1582 -00 Page 18
The ultimate proposed trunk water main system and piping grid system is presented in
Figure 5. The system consists primarily of 12 -inch water main along section lines.
Trunk mains were distributed to serve each particular development in accordance with
the land use plan, therefore, mains serving smaller land use sections are smaller than 12-
inch. Demands were estimated for each of the land use types and locations and applied at
each of the locations. In addition, the City has already begun a 16 -inch trunk main loop.
This loop was continued throughout the western pressure zone and another 16 -inch loop
was created to serve the eastern pressure zone. The amount of looping and redundancy
presented in this figure provide adequate operating pressures and available fire flow
capacity to serve each land use type appropnately.
Phasing of the trunk improvements was determined by conducting computer modeling at
key years including 2010, 2015, 2025, and the ultimate service area. Figure 6 shows
phasing for the proposed ultimate trunk water main system. Modeling results are
presented in Figures 14 through 25 Figures include peak hour (of maximum day)
pressure contours, available fire flow contours, and minimum hour pressure contours.
Projected water demand (Tables 9, 10, and 11) and projected wells, water treatment, and
water storage capacity were used in the modeling. Water mains were added to meet
demands as they are projected to develop, unless they were needed earlier to meet
desirable system pressures and fire flows. Upgrades to existing water mains are proposed
as they are needed.
In the year 2015, an additional PRV is necessary to provide water to the eastem pressure
zone. This PRV will provide redundancy to the system in the event one is taken out of
service for maintenance. Also, in this year, demands in the eastern zone require more
transmission capacity since the water treatment plant is not slated for development until
the year 2025.
Pressure contours show some areas having less than 3,000 gpm fire flows on the
proposed future trunk mains. These lower fire flows are caused by dead ends in the trunk
main system at the borders of the eastern and western pressure zones. Additional mains
may be necessary in these areas in the future for water main looping; however, as more 8-
inch mains are constructed to serve individual homes it may become unnecessary to loop
the trunk mains.
Air Cargo Facility
Due to the unknown schedule of development for the Air Cargo facility, WSB modeled
potential alternatives for providing water to this area. The two options include:
1. Begin developing wells in the Air Cargo facility vicinity
2. Construct transmission mains from the western pressure zone to the Air Cargo
facility
As discussed in section 7, demands from the Air Cargo facility are expected to be similar
to a business park or industrial /mixed use development. The potential service options
were modeled as a part of the 2010 system. In this scenario, the only new development
in the eastern pressure zone would be the Air Cargo facility.
Comprehensive Water System Plan
City of Rosemount, MN
WSB Project No. 1582 -00
Page 19
To serve the development with transmission mains, another 16 -inch main would need to
be installed from the existing PRV to the intersection of CSAH 42 and Emery Avenue
and is recommended. The total length for this transmission main would be approximately
4 miles. Although this option seems expensive for the immediate future, ultimate system
demands will require a 12 -inch main be constructed along this same route. Therefore, the
only cost difference between would be to upsize this main.
9.0 CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT AND UPKEEP PROGRAM
The cost of improvements, including construction cost and annual operation, maintenance and
replacement costs have been estimated and used in developing a Capital Improvement Program
These costs will also be used in determining trunk fees, water access charges (WAC), and user
charges. The schedule of improvements for the next 20 years and their estimated construction
cost are presented in Table 16. Improvements are categorized in 5, 10, 15 and 20 -year
increments. Improvements include wells, water treatment, water storage, and trunk water mains.
Operation, maintenance, and replacement (OM &R) costs are not included in the capital
improvement program, but have been estimated and will be included in the calculation of user
rates that follows. Planning for a system's operation, maintenance and replacement is equally as
important as planning for capital improvements. The basis for OM &R cost estimates is
summarized in Table 17.
10.0 WATER SYSTEM FINANCING
Comprehensive Water System Plan
City of Rosemount, MN
WSB Project No. 1582 -00
Page 20
1
1
P11
1 11
1
n
G0
m
z
0
MN
Y S A
COMPREHENSIVE WATER SYSTEM PLAN
FOR THE CITY OF
ROSEMOUNT, MN
ve AS Nan
la AN-
w
z
0
m
0
711
111
z
1� 1
Pmts o
L ei [I; v.
alj Cy? 41111 rani
grovurse
ter NI
halm sepal
—nArAminny "um
Lithesw. 4
■0/11
1 .aya �I
sw �La La: 1 s 1
1 11111111
Alma
UNIRATI
SKS
1111111I
malt 1
III
COMPREHENSIVE WATER SYSTEM PLAN r a
FOR THE CITY OF
ROSEMOUNT MN
mac
0 —003
z
0
1 3 1
3J
D
0
O
m
0
m
z
NO 0
s
z A
0 m
z
A O
m Z
0
O y
D
z
`c, 0
m rn
rr
c
0
c c
z In
0 s
s
X
0
e
L li
m
0
0 0
c..z z
00 0
z
0 m
m m
A m
0O O
T 0
CO
A
N
O
m
z
n
0 0x
0 C
A yZ
m 0
O
Z
An
D 0 O
O m
O
rn
m
0
O
0
n�3
c r 0
0 x
0 -i
N.
M
0
z 0M
0
M Z
C
0
<0
1 z
O
A
N
C
0
KISS
Aropwe Sault BAs.
COMPREHENSIVE WATER SYSTEM PLAN
FOR THE CITY OF
ROSEMOUNT, MN
WIN
YrIED
Amoy
z
O
z
1 di
WSB
COMPREHENSIVE WATER SYSTEM PLAN
FOR THE CITY OF
ROSEMOUNT. MN
z«�
4.
YYSB
D I N W m
D E D D
Z z 2
r
m
0
m
z
0
c am r
r -ti°--r n T�'� t
tel
nom
Mal
ei
S
L
I �'L
St
COMPREHENSIVE WATER SYSTEM PLAN
FOR THE CITY OF
ROSEMOUNT, MN
c
g- 1
H
4 -H
1
1
I
1 I
F--- -1-- -H
1
I I -or' I I
1
0
5
z
0
n
ni
m
C N
0 O O
H N 0
-1 N
D
m
r
m
0
m
Z
Str
F
L L --I -J
A.
COMPREHENSIVE WATER SYSTEM PLAN
FOR THE CITY OF
ROSEMOUNT, MN
Mit AS NOM
A�
1.0
;10.8
3
0.6
0.4
0.2
0.0
00
Figure 7
City of Rosemount Hourly Water Usage
r
4.0 8.0
12.0
Time
(hr)
16.0
20.0 24.0
m \cad \watercad \ultimate water model wcd WS8 8 Associates, Inc. WaterCAD v6 5 [6.5120f]
09/08/05 07 02 00 AM Haestad Methods, Inc. 37 Brookside Road Waterbury, CT 06708 USA +1- 203 755 -1666 Page 1 of 1
CO
co
co
CD 0
Population
N co
0
0
8
O
0,
8
O
Historical Population
Future Population from Land Use Plan
Linear (Last Five Years Trend)
ow
CO
co
co
CD 0
Population
N co
0
0
8
O
0,
8
O
N
0
Peaking Hourly Demand /Daily Avg. Hour Demand)
0 0 0 0 u
Ka a OD N A 0)
07
N
I L
L 1
i
a
Pri ,,k
i I
At
I I
11#1
k
r
I it
i
l
NI
I
tie.
i.
m orn rn o)
N N
N N N o
0 o o O
cri
ul al
N
0
Peaking Hourly Demand /Daily Avg. Hour Demand)
0 0 0 0 u
Ka a OD N A 0)
07
N
0
1
c� o g.
ISM' IN ..aight )Pt,.i
r!e 3sr'F 144 tha
Mira r ali ke
i NEM
ir a
,n
le f ir.
i
st
COMPREHENSIVE WATER SYSTEM PLAN
FOR THE CITY OF
ROSEMOUNT, MN
maw n NMI)
z
n
n
m
WSB
TCSSMOr •71.1-1111C
COMPREHENSIVE WATER SYSTEM PLAN
FOR THE CITY OF
ROSEMOUNT, MN
tea con Ms mac amen ov ear
me mew r cm sem in cc ammo.
va, Inc tam Ism
�i�
ma. mum
mar
YYSB
COMPREHENSIVE WATER SYSTEM PLAN
FOR THE CITY OF
ROSEMOUNT, MN
ale tinter Mott 097
um PE us vne zanr e■ Isamu
m
wSB ..m m.
COMPREHENSIVE WATER SYSTEM PLAN
FOR THE CITY OF
ROSEMOUNT, MN
DC art CI Ma
I P.
wS3
COMPREHENSIVE WATER SYSTEM PLAN
FOR THE CITY OF
ROSEMOUNT, MN
slatultart
winz. 1+
rose 711111
St. IMINAli
P al MAIM
lir 1
Ilia VON
l‘iii
a
YYSU ••••.�mm
COMPREHENSIVE WATER SYSTEM PLAN
FOR THE CITY OF
ROSEMOUNT, MN
to
m
A
wsB ,o
COMPREHENSIVE WATER SYSTEM PLAN
FOR SHE CITY OF
ROSEMOUNT, MN
Mitt
°a°
84
2
O
C
A
9
A
m
m
N
«JO
COMPREHENSIVE WATER SYSTEM PLAN
FOR THE CITY OF
ROSEMOUNT, MN
XIS OEM 11.7 Aar ryry Inpa 117M7
Nam NO=
ILY
a
6
WSB
Iv
COMPREHENSIVE WATER SYSTEM PLAN
FOR THE CITY OF
ROSEMOUNT, MN
a
A
WsB
COMPREHENSIVE WATER SYSTEM PLAN
FOR THE CITY OF
ROSEMOUNT, MN
Mann no, ma porno WNW
11►'v71I r micarnates.
a l l i k riSt t au g 1 Its A
Maid
reimprob-,
sat _a
AzIal
Lev
g
I1_ �V
J S
�rr�tu�
ri
"NEW/
WSB
COMPREHENSIVE WATER SYSTEM PLAN
FOR THE CITY OF
ROSEMOUNT, MN
1
piffew Rpm
-no
WSB
COMPREHENSIVE WATER SYSTEM PLAN
FOR THE CITY OF
ROSEMOUNT MN
M0.11311+ 10,0m 1,
Eve Pt WITS
.y*
A
WSB
COMPREHENSIVE WATER SYSTEM PLAN
FOR THE CITY OF
ROSEMOUNT, MN
—m a c -r
WSB
1 R s +Ea' 4
Lu1inF :Mkt i sa
1111191 Ire 4
��1110
a kr
I IBS ra
IS1!
aftiatas
®mink
EWE
np:
Minor
1111rairm
lialbrey
RiffiVArtes
11111WAS
-Ira
COMPREHENSIVE WATER SYSTEM PLAN
FOR "ME CITY OF
ROSEMOUNT, MN
MY
Lata
11 grifte-1-17r4
N
iW 1 eit
be
I Mt b. Wm.
_r
witt
orasyswil
sessaalyari
walltaM
111111 17
1
1 .04
Siriis
ERMA
a
wss
COMPREHENSIVE WATER SYSTEM PLAN
FOR THE CITY OF
ROSEMOUNT, MN
Pann MB (An YUMMY
Sit IS
I
c
m
ws5 n..
COMPREHENSIVE WATER SYSTEM PLAN
FOR THE CITY OF
ROSEMOUNT, MN
14 yet ,f •CW OF IINAS
NOTED
rev a. I mous
I
c o
1
`11! o
v
III
i
0 �f�
1
e v v a
I dh
—05– ni A S 'e.— �+4 sve-- Y =in n_sv sag—
e
I l 1
0.---
—se
1 1
=-sn
_:ii� "va w_ —se —zn
\V
it DRIVEWAY
Q
CITY PROJECT 10 MGD PRESSURE FILTER OPTION PAGE
FOR NORTHWEST WTP FIGURE 26
I
p
I
I
i
N
i
V
1
AI I
I
l
V
m
A
V .0
I
ru me aORarE
A
0dc 2
10400
L o
b]
H RECLAIM
J
Wsmewnu
1 m RT
ci
a z l I" F
I
vv
_i
A m ...t
WSB
COMPREHENSIVE WATER SYSTEM PLAN
FOR THE CITY OF
m.,R.u,,..«.,P..
ROSEMOUNT, MN
.�...,..f,,..— l.m,
K..
7.
-1,
L:
.1--s-
s ,--_±=r, INC t4
r
1; 1, 0
c;u. 01
i I
r,
Id MI
Het-, IZEI I
i
h
L2_,
i
L
H
8":rd
PHA
ar
I
i l, 1
I
III I
r
N.
5
v s s.,—_,_•-n.,_ re C1,--
r- 1
1,_s
s s ss. es,
4.... „se-
I l i
i 1
s
ss.
,s,
frs
C
CITY PROJECT 10 MGD GRAVITY FILTER OPTION RAGE
FOR NORTHWEST WTP FIGURE 27
i 1
1
1
1
2 I
I
1
1
1
1
DRIvEWAY
I
sn
1-=
IN
Ii IS
Er
I2T.I
I
R[
DMGS
F D[WALY
I
N
i
DRAW.
FILTER pc
FF Urc 2 5I
GRAVU.
Fn[EF
RA. ',RASH eaLAN
TRNF
I
0 0 (D 0
000 l
El C
E
1
DE
I R..p 9
r,,E
c Ci
I
I i s
i
L
'5
2
e
r
MISS
COMPREHENSIVE WATER SYSTEM PLAN l -7-
FOR THE CITY OF
.....,-,L....-.........,..,.."...
ROSEMOUNT, MN 1
9
Q
i
I
A
COMPREHENSIVE WATER SYSTEM PLAN
FOR THE CITY OF
ROSEMOUNT, MN
NASH RECLAIM
IPNK ql
f x
F
1
n.ily
MI
uen F4
LRAM 11
II ILK X3
Ni V
ROL ROOM
1`—
I
coo
�ANK h H w a nl
0
,Y U0I
GRAM IY
FE TER •3
WSB
COMPREHENSIVE WATER SYSTEM PLAN
FOR THE CI Y OF
ROSEMOUNT, MN
Land Use
Acres
Urban Resiential
5,262
Medium Density Residential
530
High Density Residental
123
Transition Residential
137
Rural Residential
414
Public /Institutional
0
Business Park
1,857
Commercial°
502
General Industrial
802
Industrial/Mixed Use
699
Air Cargo'
630
Corporate Campus
512
Total
11,468
TABLE 1
Gross Developable Acreage
City of Rosemount, Minnesota
'Includes 2,480 acres in the Univ of Minn. Property
2 lncludes 199 acres in the Univ of Minn Property
3 lncludes 40 acres in the Univ of Minn Property
"Assumes existing Wastewater Facility is not developable
6 lncludes 296 acres in the Univ of Minn Property
6 lncludes 49 acres in the Univ of Minn. Property
T If Air Cargo Project is not completed land area will
become Urban Residential as shown in Figures land 2
M IWalerWastewaterWasomoun (11562- OOICIerlReportReport Tabled -Gross Dew Acres
TABLE 2
Potential Ultimate Service Area
City of Rosemount, Minnesota
'Ultimate residential includes 2,719 acres of potential residential development on the property owned by
the Univ of Minn.
2 Ultimate non residential includes 296 acres of potential business park and 49 acres of commercial
development on the property owned by the Univ. of Minn
M 'WcaerW t ewamnftoxmoom (l582-001ClerVhporoReport Tablee2 -Pot Ult Se" Area
2005 (ac)
2010 (ac)
2015 (ac)
2025 (ac)
Ultimate (ac)
Residential'
2,400
3,907
4,750
6,191
8,910
Non Residential`
2,511
3,796
4,897
6,366
7,698
Total
4,911
7,703
9,647
12,557
16,608
TABLE 2
Potential Ultimate Service Area
City of Rosemount, Minnesota
'Ultimate residential includes 2,719 acres of potential residential development on the property owned by
the Univ of Minn.
2 Ultimate non residential includes 296 acres of potential business park and 49 acres of commercial
development on the property owned by the Univ. of Minn
M 'WcaerW t ewamnftoxmoom (l582-001ClerVhporoReport Tablee2 -Pot Ult Se" Area
en
ro
a. 0
N
c co
N
C
C
C
o
O
E
a
w
0
z
0
0
o.
re
re
ra
to
U
:r:
3LU 9
984'Z
Z 401
r 1
LG
L48; Z
r
1 1 LS9
I
LB
39
V6
UL
4'
•5c
1 I
(GPh
I
IL LL
ZOL
099
■9171-
£L4
-6£ l
49 4
Lb l
ZZ4
60 Z
E9 L
LO
889
LE9
L44
469
99L
EEL
(MG)
Lb I
84
1.9
1 1-9 1
1-8
69
ieutsnpui
CO
0
ZL
62
L LE
i
leuogntgsui
lE
ZE
4£
LC
LE
Commenced
EC
6E 1
L4
94
1
99
I
99
Residential
1
LEE 1
i
804 1
914
924
1 91'4 1
1 •4
r
c
i
4
4
v
4
Z
4
4 1
L
c
4
a
4
I
4 •l
r
c
e
1 cnn7 11
C
aA�
C
s l 11
i 1
i0Z
iro
en
ro
a. 0
N
c co
N
C
C
C
o
O
E
a
w
0
z
0
0
o.
re
re
ra
to
U
U
uuc
004
.,U
5L
UUL
004
964
4£4
;sem
900Z
OL4
00Z' L
I „bZ
9L
£LL
00£'1.
,.4Z
09 7
044
864
68£
LsaM
0664
I „84
£9
9 8
06b
004
199M
9L6L
1 „9 L
89
404
OOZ' 4
LLb
88£
LsoM
Z96
.,Z4
Z6
ei�
Well No;1,
Year Installed
Service Area
Casing Depth (ft
Total Depth (ft
i
4
I MaIIC vvaler Level (II
7
u1 aW??wn Level (II
1
f
j
N
V t
ro
LL O
co y
C
A C
w
Lo
N C
CO A O
H -0 N
a o
w O
ro M
m O
W
0
X
W
L
d
0
0
r
d
N
N
co
W
0
0
a
0
C7
0
m
0
0
O
co
O
O
N
O
O
m
r
r
Ol
o
ro
U
d
w
l0
N
O
O
LO
O
m
w
0
0
LO
n
CO
O
V
O
co)
ui
0)
C
ro
O
O
0
O
O
O
0
O
O
O
O
0
O
0
LO
m
o)
U
ro
O
N
CC
U
Year
Total Population
Land Use Population'
Serviced Population I
1990
8622
1991
9129
1992
9750
1993
10478
1994
11086
1995
11721
1996
12272
1997
12772
1998
13146
1999
13544
11286
2000
14619
12361
2001
13537
2002
14714
2003
15890
2004
17067
2005
20501
20296
18038
2006
23213
21000
2007
26198
24030
2008
29251
27128
2009
32337
30259
2010
35458
33425
2011
37203
35265
2012
38948
37104
2013
40692
38944
2014
42437
40783
2015
44182
42623
2016
45534
43975
2017
46886
45327
2018
48237
46678
2019
49589
48030
2020
50941
49382
2021
52293
50734
2022
53645
52086
2023
54997
53438
2024
56348
54789
2025
57700
56141
I li/t/mate'
85639
84080 l
TABLE 6
Population Estimates and Projections
City of Rosemount, Minnesota
'Based on and use growth assumptions
2 Years 1999 -2004 based on City Figures of 2,258 unserved residents, and
years 2001 -2004 assume uniform total population growth
3 Ultimate population includes University of Minnesota Property as shown in
Figure 1, and construction of the Air Cargo Facility as shown in Figure 1
M 1 WaterWasrewarertRasemounr11 582- 001CIerlReporaRepan Tablesbpa table
0.
0
L0
0
a v
a o
mw
02
m c
m
n O
W 6 3
o E
m W
a C
a `o
o
E
N
a
N
0
W O O (O m 0] M1 m 0 c- M m CM M M m M Cfl a t7 M
N O M N m N m N V e- w m m m W mmm W m m
O
fO O h O M m f0 m O r- N- F N N- F F N r-- h M1
N N N M M M 0, M V 0 V 0 V O O 0 O V V V
b
0)
CC
b
E
0
0I
0)
C
0
a
2
3
N
0
0
0
a
0
N
4
o M 0 f0 F m m 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
0 0 0 0 0 0 0 N m V.
O N O M O 0 O N M a F F N h N h F h F N F
N N M M M M V* V V V O O V V V V 0 V V Q
O O O O O m m M1 m 0) N i0 m a V) m m Y) m 0)
O N V N m O O M N O V V` V` V V V' V
V m N N M M V M 0) h a a a N N m a m
0 0 0 0 0 M O O N Y) m 10 m m m m L0 N m a
O N V u) 0 O M m NI} h F F F F h M1 F F
o O O O O m m N m N a m m 10 10 m 10 10 m a
O N V m m O r m N N N N N N N N N N N N
O m? O) V m M N m m m m m m m o0 m m m
M. M m N V Y) F m 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
N N N N N M M M M M M M M M M M
O N 0 m M V 0 O 0 O 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
c0 t OM1mm O) m00000000000
-rcmiMNm tcD nn wm mm mmmmm mw Vm
0
N
0
0_
V 0 4)
O t0 m h
F M Oi 0
M m m (0 m 0 (O m tD m (D m m
m M t0 0 m m V m W m m W m m 0) W m m
N N N M M M V V V m m N 10 m 10 0) m (O m m m
0
3
a
N (D m m m m N (D N V V V V V V V V V V V
m W m m 1 O m N 0 V 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
m V M M M M m M N N F F h n h n N F 1` N n
N N N N N N N N N
1--1--1- N N N N N N N N N
N h N M N O Y) N m F F n n F n N N N N n
n M O O N M Y) m m m W W m W m W m 0) m m
d
Q
m dO) n•- m o 05 0 0) o M mm m m mm m m 2 2 2 2
M ae4O)o m m h0) mm mm 0)220) mmm m
N m M O O M m W N i0 m Y) 10 m N N m m 0 V)
L b
N M (ONO NN F N m M M M M M M mamma
v 0 1- n m m m W O m 0)M 0)i 0) m 0) 0)i m m 0)i m
`n m V F^ O N M V N N m m m N o m m m 10
d O M 0 m 0 O V m V m m m m m m m m m m m
Q N N N N N M M M M M M M M M M M M M M M M
0) m F m 0 O N M 0 m m N m 0 O cN N M V m
m O O O O O N N N N N N
m 000000000000000000000
N A N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N
Co
1y
N
0
NI
at
CO
CO
b
T
V7
n
q
N
h
n
tO
n
n
b
m
E
M
m
0
m
ll
c
C
N o
o b
0 b
0. 0
O o
M 0 m
M 0 0
a n
0 O
M 0 M
m 0
E 0
W b a
ro d O
To
T m
a c 0
b 0
m a W
a W m
C 2 m
d c C
O o -a
m m
�A¢
F
LL
O a m C
0 0 0
N N m
S
me
O c
O (i)
W W LL
m
b
W N C
O O W
U N y
0 0 0
V.
0 0
p. c M 0
0 n
m m
n n A O
CO
M m
n O ti
d on
j M a
a 0 E o
H n (0 0
W c m E
0 N v
m E
a m
m N b C
c m d 0
O m N
i m
m m C E
CC a m
C 0) J
e x 0) 0
3 c S m
Co a C c
b
W C W m 3
m
W r w
Served Residential Population 11
V (O t ER A r M 2 CO O
O OOOOO C M O N C 7 0 C 00 CO O 1 0 E OO CO
T- C) u) CO CO tC) O N (O CD O r CO V
co CO r- O r r r r
99EYL
Total Res Acreage
N N co O V CO C1 f� co op
0 0 0 0 0 0 CO N M C N r CD O T r
co v D r m r
ISI
L9flL
Medium Density Residenbal
Population I
CO co V N C co O (0 M O CO M O) CD
O O O O O O CO M C) Pr C M M N N N O O
co (O CD CO O r N M V CO co p._ O
909L
I na
N CO V C V r C7) r M CO CO O N
0 0 0 0 0 Co N r CD N CC M M ‘r N (O (S O D
1 z09
Acres
00000003 O'a N CD U1 0 V O 01 CO N rr CO
r N CO Tr Tr V CO CO CO CD r O co
99
Urban Residential"
poselndod
O C N o co O 1
O O O O O O.O'O O O C (O I O N u) r O N (D 04 N M Y) CD r CO CD r r
Z99ZL
pna
(O N CD Ch (N CO V
0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 C CO 4D r 0 N V CID O
O r r N 0 Ul CD el N N M f V
17914
saJov
VD V0
CD O) O O 0- N- CO u) 0
0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 M r (0 O) M f
r 0 V (O0 O01
96EL
iea� I�
)O co r O CO O r N M d' (O CO r co CD O N M d' (O
O 0 0 0 O N N N N N N
O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O
N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N
e ;ew II
0
a
F-
a)
0
a
m
J 0
.0 0
C 0
O C
1 •C
d E
CO O
a` C
CO CO C O
CC O
N N
3 O
0
O
0- O
7
U
0
N
0
9
00
w
0
a
O
m
E
0)
N
N
N
(0
0
a
et
N
c
(0
a
1_
4)
3
tL
0
O
O
N
0
CT
2n
O
a
m
0)
6)
0 r
c
C
d a)
N Q V
0. m c
m a c
o. o
O c 2
to
U 0
CJ (0 0 as
j a
a O
O r m
N 0 Cl
N E O
E O)
O N l0
N as
(0
.15 0 Q
E C O
N
C
0 O
N 0
41
Et a`
m c c 0 c
n m c)
0 a 0 m 0
c 0 j E 0
N a a 0
N
X p CO
W 01 0
'Ultimate Residential population based on land use plan residential areas and pi
2 Existing Industnal Use is approximately 55 gpad due to Flint Hills Resources la:
3 Projected water usage includes construction of the Air Cargo Facility, if not con:
r[iry .w.wriRteaavi -0MC7MINcorritmen rw.o-r
Residential
Commerical
Ave Daily
Y
at
Water U•e
rberate Campus
Projected
Total
Average
Daily Use
Projected
Peak Day
Demand
2 5xav
Protected Peak
Hour Demand
(1 fixpeak day)
Minimum Hour
Demand
(0 2xpeak day)
Year
Population
Population n
Av
Avg.
9 Y
Use at
Land Area,
yea
Ave Daily
Water Use at
9
ad s
800 gpad
GPD
GPD
GPD
MGD
MGD
MGD
MGD
2005
2%296
18,038
1,713,648
172
?37,600
0
209
523
837
105
2006
23,213
21,000
1,995,023
79
143200
0
258
645
1032
129
2007
26,198
24,030
2,282,350
186
148,800
0
3 07
7 68
12 29
1 54
2008
29,251
27,128
2,577,130
193
154400
0
357
893
1429
179
2909
32,337
30 259
2 574,635
200
160,000
D
4 08
10 19
16 30
2 04
2010
35458
33,425
3,175367
-207
165,600
0
4 58
11 46
18 33
2 29
2011
37,203
35,265
3,350,129
269
214,880
0
493
1233
1973 P
247
2012
38,948
37,104
3,524,891
330
264,160
0
528
1321
2114
264
2013
40,692
38,944
3699,553
392
313440
0
564
14 09
22 54
2 82
2014
42,437
40,783
3,874,415
453
62,720
0
5 99
14 97
23 94
2 99
2015
44,182
s 42623,
`4,049,177.
515
412,000
0
6.34
15.84
.2535
4- .,3.17
1
,•t
526
•,800
656
1640
2624
328
2017
46886
45,327
4,306,025
537
429,600
6 79
16 96
27 14
3 39
2018
48,237
46,678
4,434,449
548
438,400
7 01
17 52
28 04
3 50
2019
49589
48,030
4,562873
559
447,200
723
1809
2894
362
2020
50,941
49,382
4,691,29T
570
455000
7 46
18 65
29 83
3 73
2021
52,293
50734
4819,721
581
464,800
81,
20
7 73
19 32
30 90
3 86
2022
53,645
52,086
4,948,144
592
473,600
163,840
7 99
19 98
31 98
4 00
2023
54,997
53,438
5,076,568
603
482,400
245,760
826
20 65
33 05
413
2024
56,348
54,789
5,204,992
614
491 200
327,680
853
2132
3412
426
2025
57700 1 '456,141
5,333,416
625
500,000
T
11111
409,600
880
2199
3519
440
Uftimate') 85 84,080
7,987
674
539,200
409,600 V
12.52 I
31.29
p 5006
1 626
I
'Ultimate Residential population based on land use plan residential areas and pi
2 Existing Industnal Use is approximately 55 gpad due to Flint Hills Resources la:
3 Projected water usage includes construction of the Air Cargo Facility, if not con:
r[iry .w.wriRteaavi -0MC7MINcorritmen rw.o-r
'Ultimate Residential population based lent 2 Existing Industrial Use is approximatel
M IWarrWasrew ater1Rosemountl1582- 001CIWReporMepon TabIa10- W qy xnrer
lected
Projected Peak
Hour Demand
(1.6xpeak day)
Minimum Hour
Demand
(0.2xpeak day)
Year
Population
Served
Avg. Daily i k Day
Use at mand
95 gpccxavg
GPD IGD
MGD
MGD
2005
18,038
1,713,648 97
7.96-
0 -9g
2006
21,000
1,995,023 81
9 29
1.16
2007
24,030
2,282,850 66
10.65
133
2008
27,128
2,577,130 53
12.04
1.51
2009
30,259
2,874,635 40
13.44
168
2010
33,425
3,175,367129
14.86
1.86
2011
35,097
3,334,169 77
15 63
1.95
2012
36,768
3,492,971 126
16 41
2.05
2013
38,440
3,651,773 174
1718
2.15
2014
40,111
3,810,575 122
17.96
2.24
2015
41,783
3,969,377 1 71
18 74.'-
.2.34
2016
41,783
3,969,377 1 71
18 74
2.34
2017
41,783
3,969,377 1 71
1874
2.34
2018
41,783
3,969,377 1.71
18.74
2 34
2019
41,783
3,969,377 1 71
18 74
2 34
2020
41,783
3,969,377 1 71
1874
2.34
2021
41,783
3,969,377 1 71
18 74
2.34
2022
41,783
3,969,377 i 71
18 74
2.34
2023
41,783
3,969,377 i 71
18.74
2.34
2024
41,783
3,969,377 171
18.74
2.34
2025
41,783
3,969,377 1.71
18.74
"2341.'''
1 Ultimate'
69,722
6,623,582 1 03
Q
3046
D
3.81
'Ultimate Residential population based lent 2 Existing Industrial Use is approximatel
M IWarrWasrew ater1Rosemountl1582- 001CIWReporMepon TabIa10- W qy xnrer
'Ultimate Residential population based on land use plan residential areas are
2 Existng Industrial Use is approximately 55 gpad due to Flint Hills Resources
'Projected water usage includes construction of the Air Cargo Facility, if not c
MII W W»s ..Q5&- L91OOV.FenWO. T Mni". PO w,er
Commerical
p Campus
Projected
Total
Average
Projected
Peak Day
Demand
I (2 5xav• 1
MGD
Projected Peak
Hour Demand
(1 6xpeak day)
MGD
Minimum dour
Demand
(0 2xpeak day)
Year
Population
Served
Avg Daily
Use at
Land Area,
Ave
Water
aily
se at
Land l a
Ave Daily
Water Use at
95 qpcd
Acres
800
gpad
Acn
800 gpad
Daily Use
G
D
G
D
G
D
MGD
MGD
2005
3°
010
026
042
005
2006
r
0 26
0 64
1 03
0 13
2007
3'
0 41
1 02
1 64
0 20
2008
3'
0 56
1 41
2 25
0 28
2009
3'
0 71
1 79 l
2 86
0 36
2010
3°
0
0 87
2 17
3 47
43,
2011
1
8
15,
60
9
38,
80
3'
0
1 02
2 56
4 10
51
2012
3
6
31,
20
7
77,
60
3
0
1 18
2 95
4 73
59
2013
5
4
47,
80
1
6
116,
40
3f
0
1 34
3 35
5 36
67
2014
6
2
63,
40
1
4
155,
20
3f
0
1 50
3 74
5 98
75
2015
8
0
79.
00
2
3-
194,
00
3'
0
0
1 65
1 88
4-13"
4 69
5 25
6 61
7 51
8 41
83
94
05
2016
2192
206,
24
2
4
203,
00
3'
2017
3 544
336
48
2
5
212,
00
35
0
2 10
2018
4,895
465,
72
2
6
220,
00
3
0
0
2 33
5 81 I
9 30
16
2019
6,247
593,
95
2
7
229,
00
3
2 55
6 33
10 20
28
2020
7,599
-721,
19,
2
8
238,
00
3,
0
81,920
163,840
277
3 04
3 31
694
7 61
8 28
11.10
12 17
13 24
39
52
66
2021
8,951
850,
43
3
9
247,
00
3'
2022
10,303
978,
67
3
0
256,
00
3
2023
11,655
1107191
3
1
264,
00
3'
245,760
327,680
409,600
358
894
1431
79
2024
13,006
1,235,615
3
2
273,
00
3
3 85
411
9 61
1028
15 38
1645
-206
92
2025
14,358
1,364,039
3
3
282,
00
3'
Ultimate'
14,358
1
3
3
282,
00
31
409,600
4.90 I
12.26
1961
245
'Ultimate Residential population based on land use plan residential areas are
2 Existng Industrial Use is approximately 55 gpad due to Flint Hills Resources
'Projected water usage includes construction of the Air Cargo Facility, if not c
MII W W»s ..Q5&- L91OOV.FenWO. T Mni". PO w,er
East Peak Day
Demand
(am)
08L
01717
Ott
049'4
OL8
OZ8117
0174'L
049'8
OL9'8
West Peak
Day Demand
(gpm)
1 0917'£ 1
1
0170'17
017o'17
0917'9
0£ 4'8
0£4'8
0£1'8
13,210 I
13,210
Total Peak
Day Demand
(gpm)
1 029 1
0817'17
0817'17
096'L
000'44
12,950 I
1 OLZ'9
I O
21,720
System Firm
Capacity (gpm)
008'4
000'9 1
009'9
009'8
1 11,500 1
1 13,500 1
15,500
I 009'Z
Well Design
Capacity (gpm)'
009
00Z'4
000'1. 1
009'1. 1
00£' 4
0017
00V
003 1
000'£ 1
000'£ 1
000'Z
000' 1
000'E
000'17
Location or
Pressure Zone
)SeM
;seM
;seM
;seM
Ise; 1
Ise;
West (North)
12006 Out of service
West (North) 1
West (North)
Ise;
;Se;
West (South)
)se3
Year
Completed
1 bugslx3
1 6ugslx3
1 6ui ;six
1 6ui ;slx 1
1 6ugsix3 1
1 6u 1
1 6ugsix3
I 9002 1
1 2007 -2010 1
2010 -2015
2015 -2020
2020 -2025
Ultimate
Ultimate
Well Designation
1Well No 3
1Well No. 7
8 ON IIWMI
6 oN IIeMI
(Well No. 12
4 as nand
I WeII RR 2 1
(Well No 14
1 ON IIeMI
I
(Well No 15,16,17
1Well No 18, 19, 20
ZZ4Z 10 N lleMl
IVVcII No 23, 24
Well No. 25, 26, 27
Well No 28, 29, 30, 31
ea
tj
o
o
E
0
0
0
a)
1 8
a
N
a2
2
d
Treatment Plant
Capacity (mgd)
i
1
09
4'04
I
i
89
1 S 44
Z 9
Well Field
Capacity (mgd)
L 4
09
4'04
6Z
89
C4
944
09
Well Design
Capacity (gpm)
I 0 03' 4
000'£
000'E
000' Z
000'3
OOE'4
000'4
000'£
Well Field
Location
West (North) I
West (North)
West (North) I
4983
1se3
East
West (South)
West (South) 1
pe ;aldwo3
JeaA
9002 1
2007 -2010
0402 1
9403 1
940Z 1
2015 -2020
L OZOZ
2020 -2025 1
Ultimate
2025- Ultimate
2005
Ultimate
Ultimate
Well Designation
Well No. 14
!Well No 15,16,17
!Northwest WTP
!Well No 18, 19, 20
!Northwest WTP Expansion
!Well No. 21, 22
I
!East WTP
!Well No 23, 24
Well No 28, 29, 30, 31
East WTP Expansion
Well No 12
!Well No. 25, 26, 27
!Southwest WTP
co tts
to ea
cc
Ct
E
C
O
M
N
E
N
C
E
o
07
O
O
U)
0
U
3 _0
o
3
3 '3
cu
V-
3 0
m m
U
m
N
E E
J J
N N
cN
Ultimate 1
Z9ZI-
6Z LE
0£L'LZ
22.500
000'2
m
25,500
540,000 1
3,755,000 1
8,221, 000
P'!'-
3,500,000
9,016,000
9Z0Z
088
66LZ
15,272
15.500
000'2
m
18,500
540,000
2,639,000 1
5,617,000
3,500,000
5,296,000
0Z0Z
917 L
9991,
8V6'ZL
009' E L
000'2
009'91.
540,000
000'8EZ'Z
4,680,000
7;458,000_ 14
3,500,000
3,958,000
r S60Z
PE 9
179'91.
Z00'LL
009'1.1.
000'2
m
14,500 1
540,000
1,902,000 1
3,895,000
"6 .387)300 1
3,500,000
2,837,000
01
1 89 b _f
9 b'LL
1 996'L
009'9 J
000'2
m
009'11
540,000
1,375,000
2,667,000
;t a,szoao
3,500,000
1,082,000
900Z
60 Z
I erg 1
EE9'E
009'7 I
000'2
m
008'L 1
540,000
628,000
925,000
a3,;
2,000,000
93,000
1 Design Year
'Average Day Water Demand (mgd)
1
1
'Peak Day Water Demand (mgd)
1
Peak Day Water Demand (gpm) 1
1
Well Firm Capacity (gpm)
E
a
m
1
'Required Fire Fighting Rate (qpm)
1
'Total Conincident Demand (gpm)
1
I
1
'Required Fire Fighting Storage (gal)
1
1
'Equalization Storage (gal)
1
1
Emergency /Reserve Storage ‘gal)
Total. Sto'ra9€) tha AW„
Existing Storage' (gal)
Additional Storage Needed (gal)
1
1
'Required Fire Fighting Durati
ui f0
0
N
d
C
o
as
1 G
w
C
0
O
E
N
tb
O
K
0
O
a
o
U
0
C
E
C
0
0
to
E
0
C p
a
O N
0 a
0
o
W 0
0
V
a 3
m
to
I m -O o
at tL
a c
a)
p
U to
Q o
m co
m m 0
E E c
N O N
to 41 X
Q Q W
AilWalerWasfrwaler
L o
U 0 Lo
co 0
0 g
O
in U
o C
W o
cW 0
I V m
u O
N M
.O. O
CO z
a
3
0
Lit
co
0
-J
0
0)
A
0
0
0
co
0
0
U
co
W
Q
0
W
0
0)
O
N
0
tO
0
g
v
0
co
(0
O
N
0
0
04
N
0
N
Q
co
m
0
U
0
h
V
0
in
N
N
0
2
0
N_
0
R
0
V)
a
3
0
a
3
0
z
N
V
2
N
U
r
0
2
a
a
m
0
2
0
W
O
N
5
0))
(0
0
2
in
in
0
0
0
to
0)
a
m
m
w
0
ea
W
O
N
0
0
O
O
0
2
h
2
O
N_
0
m
0
N
a
0
a
W
W
0)
0
0
Q
E
E
w
O
0
z
0
04
04
0
W
0
E
0
5
0
a)
v
0
0
m
W
0
E
5
8
to
to
0
CO
CD
0
m
W
N
E
5
b
N
5
0)
N
5
5
in
N
0)
0
O
N
0
0
a.
0
.c
L9
Improvement
Engineer's Opinion of
Probable Project Cost
2005 dollars
0 -5 Years
Well No 15, 16, 17 (Northwest)
3,660,000
12 -inch, 18 -inch, 24 -inch Raw Water Piping from Wells to WTP
1,900,000
8 -inch trunk main (27,695 ft total /East 0 ft West 27,695 ft)
1,523,000
12 -1nch trunk main (88,028 ft. total /East 35,220 ft West 52,808 ft)
6,602,000
16 -inch trunk main (52,245 ft. total /East 37,800 ft West 14,445 ft)
4,963,000
Northwest Water Treatment Plant
9,928,000
6 -10 Years
Northwest Water Treatment Plant Ground Storage (2.0 MG)
2,100,000
Well No 18, 19, 20 (Northwest)
3,660,000
12 -inch 18 -inch Raw Water Piping from Wells to WTP
1,400,000
8 -inch trunk main (17,739 ft. total /East 4,459 ft West 13,280 ft)
976,000
12 -inch trunk main (48,044 ft. total /East 23,227 ft West 24,817 ft)
3,603,000
16 -inch trunk main (13,667 ft. total /East 0 ft West 13,667 ft)
1,298,000
Pressure Reducing Valve Station
150,000
East Side Elevated Storage 1 0 MG)
2,520,000
11 -20 Years
East Water Treatment Plant Ground Storage (2.0 MG)
2,100,000
Well No. 21, 22, 23, 24 (East)
4,880,000
12 -inch, 18 -inch, 24 -inch Raw Water Piping from Wells to WTP
1,100,000
8 -1nch trunk main (14,057 ft. total /East 14,057 ft West 0 ft)
773,000
12 -inch trunk main (92,552ft. total /East 92,552 ft West Oft)
6,941,000
16 -1nch trunk main (10,580 ft total /East 10,580 ft West 0 ft)
1,005,000
Eastside Water Treatment Plant
10,538,000
Ultimate
Well No 25, 26, 27 (Southwest)
3,660,000
12 -inch 18 -inch Raw Water Piping from Wells to WTP
1,400,000
Well No. 28, 29, 30, 31 (East)
4,880,000
12 -inch, 18 -inch, 24 -inch Raw Water Piping from Wells to WTP
1,100,000
Southwest Water Treatment Plant
7,110,000
East Side Elevated Storage 1 0 MG)
2,520,000
West Side Elevated Storage 1.5 MG)
3,150,000
Southwest Water Treatment Plant Ground Storage (1 5 MG)
1,790,000
8 -inch trunk main (38,201 ft. total /East 24,789 ft West 13,412 ft)
2,101,000
12 -inch trunk main (92,327 ft. total /East 9,350 ft West 82,977 ft)
6,925,000
16 -inch trunk main (29,922 ft total /East 0 ft West 29,922 ft)
2,843,000
TABLE 16
Capital Improvement Plan
Notes:
1 Costs are for budgeting purposes only, and are subject to change as projects are studied, designed and constructed.
2. Trunk main costs shown are for the total cost In many cases oversizing cost will apply instead of the entire
construction cost. In most cases oversizing cost is that above 8 -inch However, in some commercial /industrial areas,
the oversizing cost may be that above 12 -inch.
3 Project Costs include 20% for contingency and 20% for engineering, legal and administrative costs.
10 MGD Iron and Manganese Removal Pressure Filter Plant
Enginneers Opinion of Total Probable Project Cost
Otitariti ","�L1nt�PfiCe'�f`
1 Sitework/Mobilization
2 Building
3 Backwash Reclaim Tanks
Pressure Filters, Associated Piping
4 Equipment
5 Laboratory Furniture and Equipment
6 Backwash Reclaim Pumps
7 Backwash Reclaim Sludge Pumps
8 Chemical Storage and Feed Equipment
9 Process Piping and Equipment
10 Electrical
11 HVAC Plumbing
12 Instrumentation and Controls
13 Standby Generator and Transfer Switch
14 Landscaping
Subtotal
Contingencies (15
Total Estimated Construction Cost
Engineering, Administration, and Legal Fees (20
Total Estimated Project Cost
LS
LS
LS
LS
LS
LS
LS
LS
LS
LS
LS
LS
LS
LS
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
$500,000.00
$1,600,000.00
$386,000 00
$2,200,000.00
$25,000.00
$40,000 00
530,000 00
$60,000 00
$600,000.00
$150,000 00
$200,000 00
$300,000.00
$100,000 00
$25,000 00
$500,000 00
$1,600,000 00
$386,000.00
52,200,000 00
$25,000 00
$40,000 00
$30,000.00
$60,000.00
$600,000.00
$150,000 00
$200,000 00
$300,000 00
$100,000.00
$25,000.00
$6,216,000.00
$932,400.00
$7,148,400.00
$1,429,680 00
$8,578,080.00
6 MGD Iron and Manganese Removal Pressure Filter Plant
Enginneers Opinion of Total Probable Project Cost
1 Sitework/Mobilization
2 Building
3 Backwash Reclaim Tanks
Pressure Filters, Associated Piping
4 Equipment
5 Laboratory Furniture and Equipment
6 Backwash Reclaim Pumps
7 Backwash Reclaim Sludge Pumps
8 Chemical Storage and Feed Equipment
9 Process Piping and Equipment
10 Electrical
11 HVAC Plumbing
12 Instrumentation and Controls
13 Standby Generator and Transfer Switch
14 Landscaping
Subtotal
Contingencies (15
Total Estimated Construction Cost
Engineering, Administration, and Legal Fees (20
Total Estimated Project Cost
LS
LS
LS
LS
LS
LS
LS
LS
LS
LS
LS
LS
LS
LS
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
$400,000 00
$1,056,000 00
$330,000 00
$1,500,000 00
$20,000 00
$30,000.00
$25,000 00
$45,000 00
$460,000 00
$135,000.00
$170,000 00
$250,000 00
$75,000.00
$15,000 00
$400,000.00
$1,056,000 00
$330,000 00
$1,500,000 00
$20,000 00
$30,000 00
$25,000.00
$45,000 00
$460,000.00
5135,000 00
$170,000.00
$250,000.00
$75,000 00
$15,000.00
$4,511,000 00
$676,650.00
$5,187,650.00
$1,037,530 00
$6,225,180.00
11.5 MGD Iron and Manganese Removal Pressure Filter Plant
Enginneers Opinion of Total Probable Project Cost
1 Sitework/Mobilization
2 Building
3 Backwash Reclaim Tanks
Pressure Filters, Associated Piping
4 Equipment
5 Laboratory Furniture and Equipment
6 Backwash Reclaim Pumps
7 Backwash Reclaim Sludge Pumps
8 Chemical Storage and Feed Equipment
9 Process Piping and Equipment
10 Electncal
11 HVAC Plumbing
12 Instrumentation and Controls
13 Standby Generator and Transfer Switch
14 Landscaping
Subtotal
Contingencies (15
Total Estimated Construction Cost
Engineenng, Administration, and Legal Fees (20%)
Total Estimated Project Cost
LS
LS
LS
LS
LS
LS
LS
LS
LS
LS
LS
LS
LS
LS
1 $550,000 00
1 $1,700,000 CO
1 $400,000 00
1 $2,510,000.00
1 $25,000 00
1 $40,000.00
1 $30,000 00
1 560,000.00
1 $650,000 00
1 $150,000.00
1 5200,000.00
1 $350,000.00
1 5125,000.00
1 $25,000.00
5550,000 00
51,700,000 00
5400,000.00
52,510,000 00
525,000.00
$40,000.00
$30,000 00
560,000 00
$650,000 00
5150,000.00
$200,000 00
5350,000 00
5125,000.00
$25,000 00
$6,815,000 00
$1,022,250.00
$7,837,250.00
51,567,450 00
59,404,700.00
10 MGD Iron and Manganese Removal Gravity Filter Plant
Enginneers Opinion of Total Probable Project Cost
em`- Description
€nit,': "''`'Quantity' Unit `Frirdi''''.
1 Sitework/Mobihzation
2 Building
Head Tank Aerators
Concrete Gravity Filter Tanks and Splitter
3 Box
Filter Media, Troughs, Underdrain Block,
4 Associated Piping Equipment
5 Concrete Clearwell
6 Concrete Backwash Reclaim Tanks
7 Laboratory Furniture and Equipment
8 Vertical Turbine Backwash Pumps
9 Backwash Reclaim Pumps
10 Backwash Reclaim Sludge Pumps
11 Clearwell Discharge Pumps
12 Chemical Storage and Feed Equipment
13 Process Piping and Equipment
14 Electncal
15 HVAC Plumbing
16 Instrumentation and Controls
17 Standby Generator and Transfer Switch
18 Landscaping
Subtotal
Contingencies (15
Total Estimated Construction Cost
Engineering, Administration, and Legal Fees (20
Total Estimated Project Cost
LS
LS
EA
EA
LS
LS
LS
LS
EA
EA
EA
EA
LS
LS
LS
LS
LS
LS
LS
1 $500,000 00
1 $1,700,000 00
2 $135,000 00
6 $60,500.00
1 $1,700,000 00
1 $400,000 00
1 $386,000 00
1 $25,000 00
2 $35,000 00
2 $20,000 00
2 $15,000 00
3 $50,000.00
1 $60,000.00
1 $700,000 00
1 $150,000 00
1 $200,000.00
1 $300,000 00
1 $125,000 00
1 $25,000 00
$500,000.00
$1,700,000 00
$270,000 00
$363,000.00
$1,700,000.00
$400,000.00
$386,000 00
$25,000 00
$70,000 00
$40,000 00
$30,000.00
$150,000.00
$60,000.00
$700,000 00
$150,000.00
$200,000.00
$300,000.00
$125,000 00
$25,000.00
$7,194,000 00
$1,079,100 00
$8,273,100.00
$1,654,620 00
$9,927,720.00
6 MGD Iron and Manganese Removal Gravity Filter Plant
Enginneers Opinion of Total Probable Project Cost
1 Sitework/Mobilization
2 Building
Head Tank Aerators
Concrete Gravity Filter Tanks and Splitter
3 Box
Filter Media, Troughs, Underdrain Block,
4 Associated Piping Equipment
5 Concrete Clearwell
6 Concrete Backwash Reclaim Tanks
7 Laboratory Furniture and Equipment
8 Vertical Turbine Backwash Pumps
9 Backwash Reclaim Pumps
10 Backwash Reclaim Sludge Pumps
11 Clearwell Discharge Pumps
12 Chemical Storage and Feed Equipment
13 Process Piping and Equipment
14 Electrical
15 HVAC Plumbing
16 Instrumentation and Controls
17 Standby Generator and Transfer Switch
18 Landscaping
Subtotal
Contingencies (15
Total Estimated Construction Cost
Engineering, Administration, and Legal Fees (20
Total Estimated Project Cost
LS
LS
EA
EA
LS
LS
LS
LS
EA
EA
EA
EA
LS
LS
LS
LS
LS
LS
LS
1 $400,000.00
1 $1,100,000 00
1 $135,000 00
4 $60,500 00
1 $1,091,000.00
1 $350,000 00
1 $330,000 00
1 $20,000.00
2 $25,000.00
2 $15,000 00
2 $12,000 00
3 $35,000 00
1 $45,000 00
1 $550,000 00
1 $135,000 00
1 $170,000 00
1 $275,000 00
1 $85,000.00
1 $15,000.00
$400,000 00
$1,100,000 00
$135,000.00
$242,000 00
$1,091,000 00
$350,000 00
$330,000 00
$20,000.00
$50,000 00
$30,000 00
$24,000 00
$105,000.00
$45,000 00
$550,000.00
$135,000.00
$170,000.00
$275,000 00
$85,000 00
$15,000.00
$5,152,000.00
$772,800 00
$5,924,800.00
$1,184,960.00
$7,109,760.00
11.5 MGD Iron and Manganese Removal Gravity Filter Plant
Enginneers Opinion of Total Probable Project Cost
r`tterlitO I..
entity �tfnft t i
1 Sitework/Mobilization
2 Building
Head Tank Aerators
Concrete Gravity Filter Tanks and Splitter
3 Box
Filter Media, Troughs, Underdrain Block,
4 Associated Piping Equipment
5 Concrete Clearwell
6 Concrete Backwash Reclaim Tanks
7 Laboratory Furniture and Equipment
8 Vertical Turbine Backwash Pumps
9 Backwash Reclaim Pumps
10 Backwash Reclaim Sludge Pumps
11 Clearwell Discharge Pumps
12 Chemical Storage and Feed Equipment
13 Process Piping and Equipment
14 Electrical
15 HVAC Plumbing
16 Instrumentation and Controls
17 Standby Generator and Transfer Switch
18 Landscaping
Subtotal
Contingencies (15
Total Estimated Construction Cost
Engineering, Administration, and Legal Fees (20
Total Estimated Project Cost
LS
LS
EA
LS
LS
LS
LS
EA
EA
EA
EA
LS
LS
LS
LS
LS
LS
LS
1 $550,000.00
1 $1,800,000 00
2 $145,000 00
EA 8 $60,500 00
1 $1,802,000 00
1 $425.000 00
1 $400,000 00
1 $25,000.00
2 $40,000 00
2 $20,000 00
2 $15,000 00
3 $50,000.00
1 $60,000.00
1 $700,000.00
1 $150,000.00
1 $200,000 00
1 $300,000.00
1 $125,000 00
1 $25,000.00
$550,000.00
$1,800,000 00
$290,000 00
$484,000.00
$1,802,000 00
$425,000.00
$400,000 00
$25,000 00
$80,000.00
$40,000 00
$30,000 00
$150,000.00
$60,000 00
$700,000 00
$150,000 00
$200,000 00
$300,000 00
$125,000.00
$25,000.00
$7,636,000.00
$1,145,400 00
$8,781,400.00
$1,756,280 00
$10,537,680.00
Rosemount Well Field Study
Prepared for
City of Rosemount
October 2005
BARR
4700 West 7r street
Minneapolis, MN 55435 -4803
Phone: (952) 832 -2600
Fax: (952) 832 -2601
Rosemount Well Field Study
Table of Contents
1.0 Introduction 1
2.0 Background 2
3.0 Groundwater Modeling 3
4.0 Baseline Condition 5
5.0 Evaluation of Well Fields 6
5.1 Evaluation of Long Tenn Pumping 6
5.2 Impact on Aquifer Source 6
5.3 Potential for Well Interference 7
5.4 Known Contaminant Release Sites 8
5.5 Evaluation of Short Term Peak Pumping 9
6.0 Conclusions 10
7.0 References 11
List of Tables
Table 1 Projected Water Usage for the City Service Area
List of Figures
Figure 1 Approximate Groundwater Contaminant Plume Area
Figure 2 Base Pumping Head in PDC Aquifer
Figure 3 Base Pumping Head in Jordan Aquifer
Figure 4 Proposed Well Locations
Figure 5 Ultimate Scenario Drawdown PDC Aquifer
Figure 6 Ultimate Scenario Drawdown Jordan Aquifer
Figure 7 Peak Scenario Drawdown PDC Aquifer, Stress Period 1 of 3
Figure 8 Peak Scenano Drawdown PDC Aquifer, Stress Period 2 of 3
Figure 9 Peak Scenario Drawdown PDC Aquifer, Stress Period 3 of 3
Figure 10 Peak Scenano Drawdown Jordan Aquifer, Stress Period 1 of 3
Figure 11 Peak Scenario Drawdown Jordan Aquifer, Stress Period 2 of 3
Figure 12 Peak Scenano Drawdown Jordan Aquifer, Stress Period 3 of 3
Figure 13 Ultimate Pumping Scenario 10 -Yr Capture Zones
List of Appendices
Appendix 1 Approach to Future Well Siting, File Memorandum
P:\23 \19 \927 Rosemount Wellfield Study\Rsmt Wellfield Study Oct 2005 doe
1
1.0 Introduction
The City of Rosemount, Minnesota is in the midst of a comprehensive water system planning effort.
As part of the process, the City is planning the ultimate build out of its water system. Barr
Engineering is assisting in this effort by conducting a groundwater flow modeling study to identify
and evaluate future well fields.
This technical memorandum surnmanzes the results of the well field study conducted for the City
under subcontract to WSB Associates. The objectives of the well field study include:
(1) Evaluate where to locate new municipal water supply wells,
(2) Estimate how many wells are required to meet projected water demand,
(3) Estimate required well spacing needed to limit interference to acceptable levels
(4) Evaluate the technical feasibility of installing additional wells into the Jordan Sandstone aquifer,
(5) Evaluate the regulatory feasibility of installing additional wells into the Jordan Sandstone aquifer
by estimating the impact of the new wells on surrounding wells and natural resources,
(6) Review known contaminant releases in the area and provide general input regarding how the
proposed wells may be impacted by those releases.
The report will provide a brief discussion of the Background of the project followed by a section
describing the Groundwater Modeling effort which will include discussion of the Baseline
Condition used for comparison purposes. This will be followed by the actual Well Field
Evaluation, which will be broken down into Evaluation of Long Term Pumping and Impact on
the Aquifer Source which discusses allowable aquifer draw down as compared to what is predicted.
Next the report will cover Potential for Well Interference with nearby existing wells which will be
of particular interest to the Minnesota Department of Natural Resources (DNR) and may have
significant implications on certain wells field Locations, Known Contaminant Release, a section on
Evaluating Short Term Peak Pumping, and a Conclusion.
P:\23 \19\927 Rosemount Wellfield Study \Rsmt Wellfield Study Oct 2005.doc 1
2.0 Background
The City of Rosemount has seen a significant increase in development recently as have many metro
area communities. The City is primarily residential and commercial along its western edge where all
of it water system infrastructure, is currently concentrated. The Flint Hills Resources refinery
(formerly Koch) is located along the City's north eastern edge and is a significant presence that
affects water system planning. An additional feature affecting potential well locations in the City is
the large tract of University of Minnesota property located in the southem part of the City. All of
these were taken into account while preparing this study.
Until recently, the City operated six (6) municipal water supply wells including Well 3 (unique
number 211999), Well 7 (unique number 112212), Well 8 (unique number 509060), Well 9 (unique
number 554248), Rural Well 1 (unique number 457167, referred to as RW1), and Rural Well 2
(unique number 474335, referred to as RW2). In response to the growth noted above the City
recently put Well 12 into service and will be putting Well 14 into service in the near future. All
existing and proposed wells pump from the Jordan Sandstone aquifer. Well locations are shown on
Figure 1. It is also our understanding that the City plans to remove Well 3 from service in the near
future. Therefore, Well 3 was not including in the groundwater modeling done for this study.
The City's current permit with the Department of Natural Resources allows for an annual groundwater
appropnation of 788 million gallons per year (MGY). Projections provided by WSB Associates on
behalf of the City (Table 1) indicate that at ultimate build -out the Rosemount municipal water system
will provide an average off 12 78 million gallons per day (MGD) which translates to approximately
4.7 billion gallons per year (BOY). The projections also indicate that the ultimate peak day
requirement will be 31.95 MGD. To meet these increased demands the City will need to appropnate
additional water either from new wells or other sources.
The Minnesota Department of Natural Resources (MDNR) is responsible for managing the State's
groundwater resources. John Greer of Barr Engineenng spoke with Pat Lynch, MDNR Area
Hydrologist for Dakota County, on July 14 regarding the City's planning efforts, Mr. Lynch was not
aware of any water quantity issues or concerns at this time that could negatively impact the City's
plans to expand the municipal water supply. Mr. Lynch did say that the MDNR prefers to increase
groundwater appropriations incrementally and that they will look at a water supplier's conservation
efforts when reviewing an application for an increased appropriation.
P:123 191927 Rosemount Wellfield Study\Rsmt Wellfleld Study Oct 2005 doe 2
3.0 Groundwater Modeling
Barr Engineering evaluated three (3) proposed well field locations identified by WSB: two in the
western portion of Rosemount and one in the eastern portion of Rosemount Locations of these
proposed well fields are shown on Figure 2. They are called Well Field One which is the southwest
most field located near Well #12, Well Field Two which is located near Well #14 m the north central
part of the City and Well Field Three which is the east most well field.
A MODFLOW finite difference model based on the Scott and Dakota Counties groundwater model
prepared for the Minnesota Department of Health by Barr Engmeering (Barr, 1999; 2001) was used
to evaluate pumping from the Rosemount municipal wells in the Jordan Sandstone aquifer. This
MODFLOW model does not include any aquifers below the Jordan Sandstone. Barr Engineering
made modifications to the Scott and Dakota Counties groundwater model for this study in order to
more accurately simulate the variation of bedrock surface topography and variations in aquifer
hydraulic properties in the vicinity of Rosemount. The modeling pre- and post processing package
Ground Water Vistas (Rumbaugh and Rumbaugh, 2003) was used to facilitate preparation of the
changes to the MODFLOW model and to process the modeling results.
In some areas of the Minneapolis -St. Paul metropolitan area, the Jordan Sandstone aquifer and the
overlying Prairie du Chien Group aquifer are well connected hydraulically. Where these aquifers are
hydraulically well connected pumping from a municipal water supply well in the Jordan Sandstone
will have a measurable, and potentially significant, affect on the piezometric surface in the Prairie du
Chien Group aquifer in the vicinity of the municipal well. Results of a pumping test conducted as
part of the Rosemount wellhead protection area delineation work suggest that there is some leakage
from the Prairie du Chien (Barr, 2002) into the Jordan Sandstone. There are pnvate water supply
wells in the vicinity of Rosemount that are completed in the Prairie du Chien Group aquifer. Since
there is some leakage between the Prairie du Chien Group and Jordan Sandstone aquifers, the
possibility that pumping in the Rosemount municipal wells could affect water levels in the private
wells in the Prairie du Chien Group aquifer must be evaluated.
There are uncertainties associated with using the MODFLOW model to predict future drawdown.
These uncertainties include regional hydraulic head fluctuations, unlmown pumping in nearby Jordan
Sandstone aquifer wells, and well inefficiency In order to account for these uncertainties, a safety
factor was used in the evaluation of modeling results. The safety factor is an attempt to minimize the
chances of the piezometric head in the Jordan Sandstone aquifer being drawn below the top of the
P:V3 \191927 Rosemount Wellfield Study \Rsmt Weilfieid Study Oct 2005.doc 3
aquifer if one of the modeled scenarios were to be implemented. A safety factor of 30 to 50 feet has
been used m light of the transmissivity of the Jordan Sandstone aquifer. This safety factor also
allows for variations in weather conditions such as a prolonged drought or additional drawdown from
new pumping sources not included in this model.
P \927 Rosemount Wellfield Study\Rsmt Wellfield Study Oct 2005 doe 4
4.0 Baseline Condition
In order to discuss drawdown created by the pumping of a proposed well a baseline condition must
be determined. In this case baseline means the assumed static water level in each of the aquifers
evaluated This is significant because groundwater levels at a given location vary throughout any
given year and from year to year because of a number of items including precipitation, and when it
occurs, pumping from the aquifer and when it occurs, hot spells and when they occur. For the
purposed of predicting drawdown in this project the baseline is assumed to be 2003 conditions, which
is the last complete year for which data is available for surrounding pumping conditions. A related
assumption is that the baseline condition did not cause problematic interference with nearby wells.
It follows then that the drawdown predicted by groundwater modeling in this report will be noted
from the baseline piezometric conditions. For the Rosemount well field study, the baseline
piezometric condition for the Jordan Sandstone aquifer is based on historically measured
groundwater levels in nearby wells and the City's current permitted annual appropriation of 788
MGY. The baseline piezometric condition for the Jordan Sandstone was generated by first assigning
a pumping rate of 50 -gpm (approximately 26 3 MGY) each to Wells RW1 and RW2 and subtracting
the total volume pumped by Wells RW 1 and RW2 from the annual appropriation and then evenly
distributing the remaining volume (approximately 762 MGY) among Wells 7, 8, 9, 12, and 14. For
the baseline case, therefore, an average annual pumping rate of 280 gallons per minute (gpm) was
applied to Wells 7, 8, 9, 12, and 14. Pumping rates for high capacity pumping wells in the area
around Rosemount are assumed to be the 2003 water usage listed in the DNR's State Water Use
Database (SWUDs) converted to a pumping rate. The hydraulic head distribution in the Prairie du
Chien Group and Jordan Sandstone aquifers produced by the MODFLOW model under the baseline
pumping conditions is shown on Figures 2 and 3 respectively. These head distributions were used as
the initial or base line conditions to which all future pumping conditions will be compared.
PA23 \19 \927 Rosemount Wellfteld Study\Rsmt Wellfield Study Oct 2005_doc 5
5.0 Evaluation of Well Fields
As noted above three well fields were evaluated in this report. Well Field 1 is in the vicinity of
Well 12 and the while Well Field 2 is in the vicinity of Weil 14 (Figure 4). Well Field 3 is m the
southeastern comer of Rosemount (Figures 4). For this evaluation, four wells (including Well 12)
were placed in the Well Fieldl, seven wells (including Well 14) were placed in the Well Field 2, and
eight wells were placed in Well Field 3 (Figure 4). Wells were sited no closer than 1,700 feet apart
in Well Field 3 and no closer than 2,600 feet m Well Fields 1 and 2.
A preliminary evaluation of the western and eastern well fields was done by distributing projected
2020 pumping evenly among the existing and proposed wells and running the groundwater model in
steady state mode. This represents the annual average impact the proposed wells will have on
groundwater levels as compared to baseline conditions. Pumping from the municipal wells m the
western and eastern portions of Rosemount were modeled separately. This was done to quickly
identify any major problems (e.g., significant localized aquifer deficiencies or well interference) that
would indicate that changes to either well or well field locations would be necessary. No problems
were identified in the preliminary evaluation. Since this preliminary work did not include interaction
of all the proposed wells it is not presented here. Results of the preliminary evaluation are available
upon request.
5.1 Evaluation of Long Term Pumping
In order to evaluate the affect of long term pumping from existing and proposed Rosemount
municipal wells the projected ultimate water demand (Table I) was used. Since plans call for wells
RW1 and RW2 to be used sparingly, if at all, in the future the pumping rates for these two wells was
fixed at 50 -gpm each. Based on the projected ultimate water demand provided by WSB, and
accounting for the assumed pumping from wells RW1 and RW2, a pumping rate of 392 -gpm was
assigned to each of the 14 existing and proposed wells in the western part of Rosemount and a
pumping rate of 411 -gpm was assigned to each of the proposed wells in the eastern part of
Rosemount. The model was then run in steady state mode.
5.2 Impact on Aquifer Source
As indicated on Figures 5 and 6, the model predicts a maximum drawdown of approximately 27 feet
in the Prairie du Chien Group aquifer and approximately 40 feet in the Jordan Sandstone aquifer
under the ultimate water demand pumping scenano. Note that these are modeled water levels in the
P:\23 \19\927 Rosemount Wellfield Study\Rsmt Wellfield Study Oct 2005doc 6
aquifers not the level in the pumped wells which would be lower yet depending on well efficiencies.
There is 50 feet of available drawdown in the Prairie du Chien Group and 186 feet in the Jordan
Sandstone aquifers. This includes a safety factor as discussed above meaning that even if you were
to draw down the entire 50 feet of available drawdown in the Prairie du Chien the water level is still
30 to 50 feet above the top of the aquifer. Note that available drawdown is defined as the amount of
drawn down available in the aquifer before the water level would drop below the top of the water
bearing unit in which the measurement is made When the predicted drawdown modeled is Less than
the available drawdown the modeled condition is acceptable. If the predicted drawdown exceeded
what was available there is a possibility that the DNR would intervene to protect the affected
resource aquifer.
The predicted drawdowns in the two aquifers are less than the available drawdowns. Thus, from the
standpoint of stress on the aquifers, the model indicates that pumping to meet Rosemount's projected
ultimate water demand likely would not have any long term adverse impact on either the Prairie du
Chien Group or Jordan Sandstone aquifers. This means that the DNR would allow the aquifers to be
pumped as modeled here without limitations placed on the pumping rates to protect the aquifer itself.
5.3 Potential for Well Interference
The Iocations of private wells in the vicinity of Rosemount taken from the Minnesota Geological
Survey's County Well Index (CWI) are shown on Figures 5 and 6. The symbols are color -coded to
indicate the aquifer in which each of the private wells is completed. Based on model results there are
pnvate wells completed in the Prairie du Chien Group and Jordan Sandstone aquifers in areas where
the model predicts drawdown of more than 10 feet (Figures 5 and 6). This suggests that, depending
on pump setting depths, the possibility exists for pumping to meet the City's ultimate water demand
may adversely interfere with some private water supply wells in the vicinity of Rosemount. (It
should be noted that the possibility of adverse interference with private wells in the vicinity of
Rosemount exists under pumping to meet the projected 2020 water demand as well.) Should the
MDNR agree with an interference complaint that pumping from the Rosemount municipal wells in
the Jordan Sandstone aquifer results in degradation of performance of another owner's well then the
City would be required to rectify the situation. The required response could range from lowering of a
pump in the pnvate well to drilling a new well for the owner with the work paid for by the City.
Thus, potential well interference is something that should be considered as plans for municipal wells
are developed.
P:123 \191927 Rosemount Wetlfield Study \Rsmt Wellfield Study Oct 2005 doe 7
The model predicts that drawdown from pumping in the existing and proposed Rosemount wells to
meet the City's ultimate water demand will extend beyond the city limits into neighboring
municipalities including Apple Valley, Coates, Eagan, Hastings, Inver Grove Heights, and Lakeville.
These cities operate municipal water supply wells that pump from the Jordan Sandstone aquifer.
Thus, it is possible that pumping in the Rosemount wells may adversely affect wells in one or more
of these communities (and vice versa). Therefore, it is recommended that the City of Rosemount
maintain communication channels with the neighboring communities regarding water use and plans
for expansion of the municipal water systems with the goal of ensuring that all the municipalities can
meet their water demands in the future.
5.4 Known Contaminant Release Sites
The locations of known contaminant release sites including leaking underground storage tanks
(LUSTs) and non storage tank release sites in the vicinity of Rosemount available from MPCA files
are shown on Figure 13. No further remedial action is planned at some of these sites. Groundwater
contamination (not necessarily in the Prairie du Chien Group or Jordan Sandstone aquifers) may have
been or may still be associated with some of these release sites (this could include residual
contaminant levels associated with sites where no further remedial action is planned). Historical
boundaries of groundwater contaminant plumes (generally in or above the Prairie du Chien Group
aquifer) from industrial properties in the northeastern portion of Rosemount as well as from a source
on property owned by the University of Minnesota in the southern portion of Rosemount are also
shown on Figure 13.
Under the ultimate water demand pumping scenario, the groundwater model was used to identify the
areas from which groundwater is predicted to flow to existing or proposed Rosemount municipal
wells in 10 years or less. These predicted 10 -year groundwater time of travel zones, or 10 -year
capture zones, are shown on Figure 13. While the predicted 10 -year capture zones do not intersect
the historical groundwater contaminant plume boundanes they do encompass some of the known
contaminant release site locations.
In addition to this a meenng was held with the MPCA to discuss Rosemount's planned well field
expansions and the potential they may have to impact or be Impacted by contaminant releases and
groundwater contaminant plumes. Additional information related to that meeting and the resulting
proposed course of action that the City should take when siting wells in the future is included as
Appendix 1 at the end of this report.
PA23 \19 \927 Rosemount Wellfield Study\Rsmt Wellfield Study Oct 2005 doc 8
5.5 Evaluation of Short Term Peak Pumping
The effect of short term peak pumping from the existing and proposed Rosemount municipal wells
was also evaluated. This evaluation was done by rummng the model in transient mode with three
pumping periods to simulate one full year of pumping at ultimate build out pumping rates. The first
pumping period represents pumping from January, Day zero, to mid summer, Day 180, at average
annual pumping rates. The second pumping period, the peak demand period, represents an 18 day
stretch from day 181 to day 199 where all wells are running continuously to meet demand. The third
pumping period represents the return to normal pumping for the remainder of the year, Day 200 to
day 365.
In the second pumping period (i.e., the peak pumping penod) wells in the western well fields were
assigned a pumping rate of 953 -gpm and wells in the eastern well field were assigned a pumping rate
of 1027 -gpm These rates are based on the projected ultimate peak day demands provided to Barr
Engineering by WSB (Table 1). The length of the peak pumping period was set at 18 days based on
information provided by WSB. Wells RW1 and RW2 were assigned a pumping rate of 50 -gpm in all
three pumping periods.
The results of this modeling exercise are depicted on Figures 7 through 12. Figures 7 9 represent
the drawdowns predicted in the Prairie du Chien aquifer while Figures 10 12 represent drawdowns
in the Jordan aquifer. Figures 8 and 1I show the impacts of the peak pumping period. Predicted
drawdowns in the Prairie du Chien Group and Jordan Sandstone aquifers at the end of each of the
pumping periods are within the predicted available drawdowns in the aquifer. However, the
predicted drawdowns do indicate that there would be the possibility of adverse well interference
under this ultimate peak pumping scenario.
P:\23\I9 \927 Rosemount Wellfield Study\Rsmt Wellfield Study Oct 2005 doc 9
Based on the water use projections and other information provided by WSB, the modeling done for
this study suggests that it is technically feasible for the City to obtain sufficient water from the
Jordan Sandstone aquifer using existing and proposed wells to meet both the projected ultimate
average day and peak day water demand. Wells can be sited in proposed Well Fields 1, 2, and 3 as
planned by the City. Siting them in these locations does not draw down water levels below the top of
the aquifer. Modeling suggested that the ultimate average and peak day demands could be met by
siting three additional wells in Well Field 1 near Well 12, six additional wells in Well Field 2 near
Well 14 and eight new wells in Well Field 3. Wells should never be sited closer than 1,700 to
1,900 feet apart in Well held 3 and no closer than 2,600 to 2,800 feet apart in the Well Fields 1 and
2 in order to limit potential localized interference Wells spaced closer than this may result in
unacceptable interference between each other and have negative impacts on well capacity. From a
regulatory stand point no conditions were encountered that would make using the Jordan aquifer as a
source a significant problem, however, the modeling results did indicate that there is a potential for
adverse well interference with pnvate and possibly other municipal wells in the vicinity of
Rosemount. The DNR will get involved in well inference complaints and work with you to make sure
that corrections are made to the wells that are negatively impacted by those you install. If planned
for, the potential interference can be dealt with in the normal course of planning out your water
system by adding the impacted properties to your system or modifying their wells as needed Finally,
some of the ten year capture zones for the proposed wells do encompass known release sites. None
encompassed the large known contaminant plumes originating in south central or northeast
Rosemount. The City should follow the procedures recommended in Appendix 1 each time they site
a new well to make sure that potential contamination sources are identified and planned for in the
well design and construction process.
P ;\23\19 \927 Rosemount Wellfield Study \Rsmt Wetlfield Study Oct 2005.doc
6.0 Conclusions
10
7.0 References
Barr Engineering Company (Barr), 1999. Scott- Dakota Counties Groundwater Flow Model.
Prepared for the Minnesota Depai intent of Health. October, 1999.
Barr Engmeenng Company (Barr), 2001. Scott- Dakota Counties Groundwater flow Model Update,
prepared for Minnesota Department of Health, March 2001.
Barr Engineering Co. (Barr), 2002. "Wellhead Protection Area Delineations for the City of
Rosemount, Minnesota prepared for the City of Rosemount, Minnesota, April 2002.
Rumbaugh, J.O. and D.B Rumbaugh, 2003. Guide to Using Groundwater Vistas Version 4,
Environmental Simulations Inc.
P:123 \19 \927 Rosemount Wellfietd Study\Rsmt Wellfield Study Oct 2005.doc 11
Tables
Projected
Peak Day
Demand
(2.5xavg.)
GOP
D £Z'9 1
11 69'9 1
66 L
p 14.6 1
11 LEO
H 4421
ZO'£l
11 06'91
H 92'44
In9'94
179'94
11 Zl'L
0L'L l
0 LZ'81
11 98'84
U £4'61
11 01'0Z
H 9EOZ
£4'17
11 04ZZ
0 LL ZZ
p 96'61
Projected
Total
Average
Daily Use
DON
60
49'7
64'9
LL
l£'b 1
98'4
6Z5
999
469
9Z 9
Z9'9
u,
:d
90'L
1E'L
49'2
LEL
170'9
LE9
29'9
1788
446 1
8276
JeaA
900
900Z 11
LOOZ 11
800Z 11
600111
040? 11
Ll10Z 11
not 11
910? 11
4107 11
9 107 11
940Z 11
L1OZ 11
9107 J1
6 11
03OZ 11
IZOZ ]1
ZZOZ 11
£ZOZ 11
1 4Z0Z 11
9Z0Z 11
a7ew!76l1
P:1231191927 Aoseanotau Well field Stuelythlo from WSIODemancir to Barr 064745 xlsTatal
Total of All Well Fields
Western Well Fields
Eastern Well Field
Appendix 1
Approach to Future Well Siting, File Memorandum
BARR
To: File
From: Eric Dott, P.G., Senior Hydrogeologist
Subject: Approach to Future Well Siting
Date: October 26, 2005
Project: 23/19- 927 -JCG
c: John Greer
Internal
Memorandum
The purpose of this memorandum is to summarize our recommended approach for evaluating and
managing future well sites for potential groundwater contamination concerns, with the objective of
managing the City's environmental liability nsks and managing health nsks. Our recommended
approach is based in part on the discussions we had with Minnesota Pollution Control Agency
(MPCA) staff from the Voluntary Investigation and Cleanup (VIC) program and the Attorney's
General staff.
The pnmary groundwater contamination concern in the area of focus is the presence of at least one
known chlorinated solvent plume emanating from the former University of Minnesota Rosemount
Agricultural Research Center, located in south central Rosemount. The identified plume has been
reported by Delta Environmental Consultants, Inc. (2002) to migrate with the regional water table
aquifer flow toward the northeast, where it presumably discharges to the Mississippi River.
Throughout the eastern portion of the area of focus, the water table is approximately 35 to 75 feet
below ground surface within sand and gravel glacial outwash deposits.
Other release sites have been identified in the areas where wells are planned so sources of potential
shallow groundwater contamination may be present m the area of focus, however, the information
available at this time suggests that the other known sites are likely to be current or former petroleum
storage tank sites such as gas stations or individual tank installations (farm stead storage tanks). By
the nature of petroleum contamination, such impacts to groundwater tend to be focused at the water
table interface and/or are limited to a shallow dissolved -phase plume. Furthermore, petroleum
impacts tend to experience significant natural attenuation when conditions are sufficient for
microbial and other physical degradation or attenuation processes to occur. Consequently, the type
of contamination of significance to locating and designing new water supply wells in this area, is
contaminant releases that have the potential to result in a plume migrating significant distances
(farther than 0 25 miles) and/or contaminants that might have a tendency to sink through aquifer
material (i.e. more dense than water). With these considerations in mind we have developed the
following recommended approach for evaluating the potential for significant groundwater
contamination to be present or to be within the proposed area of influence.
P:\23 \191927 Rosemount Welifield Study\Rsmt Weinfeld Study Oct 2005 doe 1 -1
To: File
From: Enc Dott
Subject Approach tc Future Well Siting
Date: Octcoer 26, 2005
Project: 23/19 -927 -JCG
Copies. John Greer
Page 2
Based on our discussions with VIC staff, we recommend the following approach to evaluating future
water supply well Locations:
1. Identify a potential water supply well location with in the area of focus.
2. Perform a Phase I Environmental Assessment of the area of encompassed by a modeled
ten year capture zone of the proposed well.
3. If potential sources of contaminated groundwater are present within the ten year capture
zone- either relocate the proposed well or evaluate the treatability of the contaminants
present- if not treatable then relocate the proposed well;
4. If the suspected contaminant(s) are believed to be treatable and the City is willing to
construct and operate such a treatment system- gather groundwater data by installing a
small diameter sampling well at the proposed well site.
5. If no detectable contamination is found; proceed with well design.
6. If contamination is detected (i.e. an "identified release and the City still wants to install
a well at this location seek VIC program assistance.
7. Perform a pumping test and include groundwater quality testing at key observation wells
and from the pumped well.
8. Using a groundwater flow model of the area, evaluate whether a significant plume is
influenced or captured by the proposed pumping.
9. If a groundwater contaminant plume will be intercepted or otherwise affected by the
planned well installation- obtain assurances and/or technical review assistance from the
VIC program. Note that this assistance is not free and the City will be billed at the hourly
VIC rate for MPCA involvement (current rate as of the date of this report is 8150/hour).
10. Evaluate the need to mitigate risks or impacts that may be caused by planned water
supply extraction- this may include development of an operational contingency plan and
possibly a groundwater quality monitonng program for implementation during initial
operation of the supply well.
11. If appropnate, obtain a letter of no association from the MPCA. Ultimately, the City will
only be able to get a no association letter if contamination is found on the actual site they
intend to purchase. If the issue is potential impact to a plume, you should attempt to
obtain a letter from them documenting the plan for mitigating the impacts and noting that
you are not the party responsible for generating the plume in the first place.
Reference
Delta Environmental Consultants, Inc. 2002. 2001 -2002 Groundwater Monitoring Results:
University of Minnesota Rosemount Research Center, Rosemount, Minnesota Prepared for
Mr. David Douglas, MPCA, February 28, 2002.
P:\23\19 \927 Rosemount Wciifield Study \Rsmt Welllield Study Oct 2005.doc 1 -2
w� 5
F
3
c
0 W
m cc a
3 7 F o
L F Q N
Q Z NO
O Z O
re O
a U U
Q
U
0
Rosemount Wells
CWI Wells by Aquifer
Jordan
Jordan -St Lawrence
Multiple
PDC- Jordan
PDC
Ordovician Undiff
St Peter- PDC
St Peter
Quaternary
Head (approx 5' contours)
Potential Well Areas
n
Feet
0 5,00010,000 20,000 30,000
Meters
0 2,000 4,000 8,000
Figure 2
Base Pumping Head in PDC Aquifer
(based on SWUDS Appropriation)
Wells at 280 gpm
(RR1 and RR2 at 50 gpm)
City of Rosemount MN
Rosemount Wells
CWI Wells by Aquifer
Head (approx 5' contours)
Potential Well Areas
0
E
Feet
0 5,00010,000 20,000 30,000
Meters
0 2,000 4,000 8,000
Figure 3
Base Pumping Head inJordan Aquifer
(based on SWUDS Appropriation)
Wells at 280 gpm
(RR1 and RR2 at 50 gpm)
City of Rosemount MN
r r
ED Existing Rosemount Wells
Proposed Western Wells
Proposed Eastern Wells
CWI Wells by Aquifer
Jordan
Jordan -St Lawrence
Multiple
PDC- Jordan
PDC
Ordovician Undiff
St Peter- PDC
St Peter
Quaternary
Potential Well Areas
Feet
0 5,00010,000 20,000 30,000
Meters
0 2,000 4,000
8,000
Figure 4
Proposed Well Locations
City of Rosemount MN
r
P.4
o
Existing Rosemount Welis
Proposed Western Welis
Proposed Eastern Welis
CVV| Wells byAquifer
Jordan
Jordan-St Lawrence
Multiple
PDC-Jordan
PDC
Ordovician Undiff.
VtPet*r- PDC
St Peter
Quaternary
Drawdown From Baseline
Conditions (approx 1' contours)
Potential Well Areas
Feet
0 10,000 20,000
Meters
o 2,000 4,000 8.000
Figure 5
Ultimate Scenario- Drawdown PDC Aquifer
Western Welis at 392 gpm
Eastern Welis at 411 gpm
(RR1 and RR2 at 50 gpm)
Max PDCdravvdow/n=27ft(50ftavailable)
Max Jordan drawdown 40 ft (186 ft available)
City of Rosemount MN
Existing Rosemount Wells
Proposed Western WeHs
Proposed Eastern Welis
Quaternary
Drawdown From Baseline
Conditions (appmx1'contours)
Feet
0 10,000 20,000
MlOic
Meters
0 2,000 4,000 8,000
Figure 6
Ultirnate Scenario- Drawdown Jordan Aquifer
Western Welis at 392 gpm
Eastern Welis at 411 gpm
(RR1 and RR2at50gpmn}
Max PDCdnawduwn=27ft(5Ohavailable)
Max Jordan drawdown 40 ft (186 ft available)
City of Rosemount MN
tr t
e Existing Rosemount Wells
Proposed Western Wells
Proposed Eastern Wells
CWI Wells by Aquifer
Jordan
1 Jordan-St Lawrence
Multiple
PDC-Jordan
PDC
Ordovician Undiff
St Peter- PDC
St Peter
Quaternary
Drawdown (1 contours)
Potential Well Areas
0
0
Feet
10,000
Meters
0 2,000 4,000
Esc■=:=1
•r
a As_
te
lb
J le
:1:
v4et---
-0
irs
1
_L r e
a
Figure 7
Peak Scenario- Drawdown PDC Aquifer
Stress Period 1 of 3, From Day 0 to Day 180
Western Wells at 392 gpm
Eastern Wells at 411 gpm
(RR1 and RR2 at 50 gpm)
Max PDC drawdown 17 ft (50 ft available)
Max Jordan drawdown 30 ft (186 ft available)
City of Rosemount MN
Existing Rosemount Wells
Proposed Western Wells
Proposed Eastern Wells
CWI Wells by Aquifer
Jordan
Jordan -St Lawrence
Multiple
PDC- Jordan
PDC
Ordovician Undiff
St Peter- PDC
St Peter
Quaternary
Drawdown (1' contours)
Potential Well Areas
t
1 •,a!
1
wt.
Feet
0 10,000
Meters
0 2,000 4,000
ino
_a -__ark.•
I 7
Figure 8
Peak Scenario- Drawdown PDC Aquifer
Stress Period 2 of 3, 18 Days Long
From Day 181 to Day 199
Western Wells at 953 gpm
Eastern Wells at 1027 gpm
(RR1 and RR2 at 50 gpm)
Max PDC drawdown 26 ft (50 ft available)
Max Jordan drawdown 58 ft (186 ft available)
City of Rosemount MN
0
1
J
E
U
O
n
0
F
ED Existing Rosemount Wells
Proposed Western Wells
Proposed Eastern Wells
CWI Wells by Aquifer
Jordan
Jordan -St Lawrence
Multiple
PDC- Jordan
PDC
Ordovician Undiff
St Peter- PDC
St Peter
Quaternary
Drawdown (1' contours)
Potential Well Areas
S
0
go-
Feet
10,000
Meters
0 2,000 4,000
00
6f R
T
-4- •t—
r A*
—L,
a
Figure 9
Peak Scenario- Drawdown PDC Aquifer
Stress Period 3 of 3
From Day 200 to Day 365
Western Wells at 392 gpm
Eastern Wells at 411 gpm
(RR1 and RR2 at 50 gpm)
Max PDC drawdown 20 ft (50 ft available)
Max Jordan drawdown 33 ft (186 ft available)
City of Rosemount MN
Well Field One
Well Field Three
e Existing Rosemount Wells
Proposed Western Wells
Proposed Eastern Wells
CWI Wells by Aquifer
Jordan
Jordan -St Lawrence
Multiple
PDC- Jordan
PDC
Ordovician Undiff.
St Peter- PDC
St Peter
Quaternary
Drawdown (1' contours)
Potential Well Areas
f
Feet
0 10,000
•s
Meters
0 2,000 4,000
A
•t—
1
Figure 10
Peak Scenario- Drawdown Jordan Aquifer
Stress Period 1 of 3
From Day 0 to Day 180
Western Wells at 392 gpm
Eastern Wells at 411 gpm
(RR1 and RR2 at 50 gpm)
Max PDC drawdown 17 ft (50 ft available)
Max Jordan drawdown 30 ft (186 ft available)
City of Rosemount MN
3
3
6 4
LI=
2
a
8
ED Existing Rosemount Wells
Proposed Westem Wells
Proposed Eastern Wells
CWI Wells by Aquifer
Jordan
Jordan-St Lawrence
Multiple
PDC-Jordan
PDC
Ordovician Undiff
St Peter- PDC
St Peter
Quaternary
Drawdown (1 contours)
Potential Well Areas
WW
J\
0
8
A
T
I
s
e
1
f III so
0 It! it at
illfr- -4
J 1
i
ty 1 t itt,
0 1
0
i A t
I _L
Feet
10,000
Meters
0 2,000 4,000
/1
-tr 1,
'1
Figure 11
Peak Scenario- Drawdown Jordan Aquifer
Stress Period 2 of 3, 18 Days Long
From Day 181 to Day 199
Western Wells at 953 gpm
Eastern Wells at 1027 gpm
(RR1 and RR2 at 50 gpm)
Max PDC drawdown 26 ft (50 ft available)
Max Jordan drawdown 58 ft (186 ft available)
City of Rosemount MN
o`
co
8
2
m
0
I
e Exist ng Rosemount Wells
Proposed Western Wells
Proposed Eastern Wells
CWI Wells by Aquifer
Jordan
Jordan -St Lawrence
Multiple
PDC- Jordan
PDC
Ordovician Unddf.
St Peter- PDC
St Peter
Quaternary
Drawdown (1' contours)
ED Potential Well Areas
1 I
b
a d,
I•
Feet
0 10,000
Meters
0 2,000 4,000
00
a
•t
1, it
•i•
4
T
f—
L }_1
Figure 12
Peak Scenario- Drawdown Jordan Aquifer
Stress Period 3 of 3
From Day 200 to Day 365
Western Wells at 392 gpm
Eastern Wells at 411 gpm
(RR1 and RR2 at 50 gpm)
Max PDC drawdown 20 ft (50 ft available)
Max Jordan drawdown 33 ft (186 ft available)
City of Rosemount MN
e,0
111