HomeMy WebLinkAbout3.a. U of M Stormwater NegotiationsAGENDA ITEM:
U of M Stormwater Negotiations
AGENDA SECTION:
Update
PREPARED BY:
Thomas D Burt, City Administrator
AGENDA NO. 2
a.
ATTACHMENTS:
Proposal
APPROVED BY:
COMMITTEE OF THE WHOLE: December 12, 2001
Staff meet with the U of M to discuss directing surface water on the University property The
University was very interested and has developed a plan that would study the impacts of the
impacts of urban development on hydrologic response of watersheds, water quality of streams
and aquifers, the ecological balance among complex plant and animal communities, and the
sociological well being of human communities
NOTES:
For discussion only
CITY OF ROSEMOUNT
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY FOR DISCUSSION
UMORE PARK
NATIONAL LIVING LABORATORY FOR INTERDISCIPLINARY URBAN /RURAL RESEARCH
A PRE- PROPOSAL SKETCH
12 OCTOBER 2001
DRAFT PREPARED BY ROBERT D SYKES ASSOCIATE PROFESSOR,
DEPARTMENT OF LANDSCAPE ARCHITECTURE
Participants in discussions to date:
Prof James Anderson, Dept of Soil Science and Director of the Water Resources Center
Tom Burt, City Administrator, City of Rosemount
Prof John Nieber, Dept of Biosystems and Agricultural Engineering
Steve Roos Research Fellow, Center for Rural Design
Assoc Prof Robert D Sykes, Dept of Landscape Architecture
Prof Dewey Thorbeck, Dept of Architecture and Director Center for Rural Design
Prof Bruce Wilson, Dept of Biosystems and Agricultural Engineenng
Prof Donald Wyse, Agronomy/Plant Genetics
Other interested parties expected to join the discussion:
John Carmody, Senior Research Fellow, College of Architecture and Landscape Architecture
Assoc Prof Steven Weeks, Department of Architecture
The pattern of development at the urban-rural edge of cities has presented several problems that
have recently called into question the appropnateness of business as usual with respect to the
fundamentals of that pattern The University's land at UMore Park offers a unique opportunity to engage
these problems and issues through long -range research studies at a unique facility
Vision. A unique and internationally recognized living laboratory for multidisciplinary research and
educational programs that address sustainable urban development issues including impacts of urban
development on the hydrologic response of watersheds, the w ater quality of streams and aquifers, the
ecological balance among complex plant and animal communities, as well as the health and sociological
well being of human communities
Opportunity The City of Rosemount has the need to establish a permanent route for stormwater
flow from areas around the UMore parcel to a regional receiving water They are m the process of
studying alternatives with Westw ood Professional Sen. ices, including pumping its excess storm water to
the Koch Refinery site It would be less expensive for them to route the water through UMore Park
providing the opportunity for the University to partner with the City to handle its storm water (illustrated
in the Master Plan for UMore Park) as part of an on -going research effort to control run -off from urban
development at the urban/rural edge If thoughtfully designed, this route presents possibilities for a
research facility at UMore that could have national significance It could help support research into
innovative stormwater management techniques, which could in turn gn e rise to research possibilities for
housing dc. elopment patterns, landscape alternatives, agriculture adjacent to housing, and
affordable/energy efficient/sustamable housing concepts at UMore
A proposal idea is being developed to take advantage of this opportunity by a group of faculty
called together by the Center for Rural Design This sketch presents, briefly, the general structure of the
idea as discussions to date have shaped it
Research Program Idea To create a hvmg laboratory of national stature to engage m long -range
studies of issues and problems pertaining to development and infrastructure at the rural /urban edge of
American cities This laboratory would be available to support well designed. long term studies in all
facets of community including (but not limited to) those pertaining to physical urban and rural design,
Manning policy, development controls, development finance, land tenure. stormwater management,
infrastructure design and maintenance practices, decentralized utilities (water sewer, energy), sustainable
de elopment, affordable housing, the use of landscape plants urban wetlands. and sociological issues of
community In all, the facility would be a place where the many disciplines within the university could
engage in related research in a common facility
Many of the issues and problems envisioned for exploration in this facility require that experiments
take place and be subject to the rigors of a functioning community For example, m order to perform
meaningful long range tests of storm water quality improvement techniques, they must be subjected to the
kinds of pollution generated by the activities associated w ith land uses of various types found in most
cities around the U S Traffic types and volumes must be those naturally occurring in various land uses,
so that the types of pollutants generated will be representative of actual expenence The same is true with
landscape maintenance with respect to mowing practices and the use of chemicals
The Living Laboratory. The research project would consist of a series of built small communities
that reflect conventional development approaches, current alternative approaches and novel approaches
designed by a team of individuals from all the disciplines engaged in the long range studies These
communities would include both residential and commercial /retail land uses of various types designed to
both attract residents and businesses to the Umore Park living laboratory communities They could be
entirely located within the UMore property or on a combination of UMore sites and sites in nearby City
of Rosemount on the north side of County Road 42
The number, types, and locations of such living laboratory communities will require much thought
and study However, it is anticipated that such communities would be located on UMore sites that are not
currently committed to other uses Of course, the locations and designs w ill depend very much on the
further refinement of this idea, the types of facilities needed and the disciplines involved to support
national or world -class long -range studies
Funding. Given the unique resource presented by the UMore site, long range base funding can be
generated from the facility itself The fact that the University does not want to sell land from the UMore
site presents a better alternative to selling lots for homes and sites for commercial buildings That
alternative is to lease lots through land leases A portion of the annual lease payments to the University
would be used to fund a pool of base research money that, together with the facility itself could be used
as match money to leverage larger research grants from federal, state and other sources for individual
projects
Land leases are common throughout the world, especially in Europe They have also been used here
In Minnesota for affordable housing development The general approach can be grasped by understanding
how the funding could be genes ated The cost of' finished lots and sites ready for development is usually
composed of 1/3 for the raw land. 1/3 for construction of land improvements. and 1/3 for "soft" costs
such as marketing. Interest, overhead and profit Since there would be no land cost with the and lease
approach, no interest on land loans, and no profit, funds normally allocated for those uses could be used
to fund the research seed pool This would be somewhere between 40% and 50% of the annual lease
payment For affordable housing with comparable for -sale lots valued at $25,000, this would yield an
annual average cash flow of about S1 million from 600 homes plus associated commercial sites This
example is probably low because of the affordable housing assumption Not all homesites need to be for
affordable housing In addition, after 30 years, the cost of site improvements and associated interest
would drop away leaving the full land lease payment a'. ailable for research funding Note that this
provides for a very long term funding source for the facility, because land leases often run for 99 years
and are subject to renewal In this way, the UMore site presents a unique resource from which to build a
research funding machine as well as a research facility
Governance as Research Infrastructure The University of Minnesota is, among other things, the
equivalent of a municipality in state law As such, it can establish planning zoning and building codes
that would be conducive to experimentation such as that described above Many innovations in
community design are shut out by conventional development controls and building standards One rich
area of experimentation would thus be the structure of such controls for the site, which would, in turn,
allow innovations to be fielded without having to contend with the cumbersome and unpredictable
political process that serves as a barrier in most municipalities The power and value of this potential for
"invisible" infrastructure cannot be overstated It would be unique in the state and nearly so nationally
Governance of Communities. The process of land leasing can also be used to create a system of
local governance for the communities created within UMore The lease can create a covenant between the
University and the residents businesses, as well as among the residents and businesses A local
government completely structured in the private sector could be used here rather than taking on the
burden of the University acting like the local governing authonty The precedent for this is the new
community of Seaside Florida, which used restrictive covenants to set up community associations as
private corporate equivalents of precincts and a town council with elected representatives to govern the
community Assuring residents' path to participating in county, state and federal governance has not yet
been explored, nor have regulatory interactions with higher levels of government
Governance of the Living Laboratory. Because of the many disciplines involved in such an
enterprise, governance of the and committed to this laboratory and in its immediate context would
require the establishment of a unique gm emance structure This would mean a transparent, participatory
gos ernance structure that assures a procedure for consideration of protects to be included in the facility
over time This will be necessary to protect and assure academic freedoms of the faculty of the University
that wish to participate This nature and structure governance structure is itself a researchable question, as
it w ould require something for which we have no clear precedent
Maintenance and Repairs. Streets and utilities normally managed and mamtamed by
municipalities can also be handled privately using the community governance structure described above
In Seaside, this is done via contracts between the community associations and the Seaside Corporation,
which acts like a public works department Police. fire protection and other such services can be
contracted with the City of Rosemount All of these costs would be paid by the members of the
community association(s) through assessments like those used by townhouse and condominium
associations
Immediate Request for Action. At this time two action items are requested
1 An expression of official interest and support to this current group of interested faculty to
approach and engage other members of the University Faculty representative of other
disciplines seen to be important to this idea
2 An indication of where acceptable locations for such a laboratory might be within the Umore
site, from the point of view of the management group
Evaluation of Infiltration Basins
Infiltration basins are increasing being used to reduce surface runoff from urban
watersheds Surface runoff is diverted into these basins Relatively large infiltration
rates allow this water to be removed by subsurface flow paths Different designs have
been proposed for infiltration basins The simplest designs consist of a single treatment
chamber Subsurface drainage is sometimes incorporated to improve hydraulic
efficiency More sophisicated designs use dual chambers, where the first chamber is
used to treat pollutants that are easily removed by settling The use of vegetation to
improve the effectiveness of the infiltration basin is often an important consideration
The layout of a potential study to evaluate the impacts of infiltration basin is shown m
Figure 1 A channel system is constructed so that surface runoff from Rosemount can
be diverted into one or more infiltration basins Five separate basins are shown in
Figure 1 and are given as examples of a possible experimental design This number
could increase or decrease depending on the availability of space and financial
resources, and the particular types of basin would be selected after the number has been
determined Furthermore, it is not necessary to study simultaneously the response of all
of the basins The size of each basin is partially dependent on the anticipated runoff In
the hypothetical layout of Figure 1, the first two infiltration basin are used to evaluate a
single chamber with and without subsurface dram tubes The other three basins are
used to consider the effectiveness of dual chamber designs, with and without
subsurface drainage The impact of vegetation is an important expenmental factor in
these basins
The myraid possible infiltration designs are too exhaustive to be examined by purely
experimental studies The best long -term approach for these designs is to use process
based models Current modeling approaches are limited by an inadequate
understanding of important processes in the basins For example, the reduction in
permeability by sediment deposition is an important but poorly understood process
Additional research is also needed to incorporate vegetation into the design Vegetal
growth and maintamence of different plant species are frequently neglected or
inadequately represented in process -based models In addition to these issues, solutions
to surface runoff problem often result in problems for ground water systems
Experimental research is needed to ensure that infiltration basins do not adversely
impact the adose zone and /or nearby aquifers
Another important benefit of the proposed research is usefulness of the proposed
research to educate practioners Demonstrations and field trips for engineers, city
planners, developers, and other citizens are powerful vehicle for dessimmating research
results
Infiltration
Basms
Cross
Section
Rosemount
��noff
Divert Runoff into Infiltration Basins
Sand Filters/
Drain tubes
Treatment
Chamber
Return
Flow
Surplus
Runoff
Water balance
An annual water budget for the infiltration basins on a volumetric basis can be written as
AS A A ET GW SD)
where P is precipitation depth, ET is evapotranspiration depth, RO is the runoff depth from
the watershed, GW is the depth of water discharged to ground water (subsurface) pathways,
SD is the depth of water through surface flows, A w«d is the watershed area. A is the total
surface areas of the infiltration basins, and AS is the change in stored water volume
To simplify, we will assume that, on average, the annual change in storage is negligible We
then obtain
13 ET GW SD_
Aw«aRO
+t
P P P A P
Annual precipitation for the area is roughly 30 inches, typical annual runoff depth is 5 inches
(i e RO/P 0 16) Solutions to the above equation for 5% 10 and 20% of RO/P are
given on the next page Therefore if the surface area of infiltration basin is 10% of the
watershed area, we conclude that 13 1 5, 2, and 3 for the three different runoff ratios
Annual lake evaporation is approximately 36 inches (i e ET /P =1 2 for ponded conditions
year round) For properly designed systems, the surface discharged depth on average, is
likely small relative to the ET and GW By using these alues_ we then conclude that the
water a\ ailable for infiltration from the basins are 9 inches, 24 inches, and 108 inches
respectively
C2
1
10
1
1
1•
1
1 1 1
10
A „a/A,
RO /P 20
(6 m)
100
r gtot&J
O
yvieL 7 0 a7'Z
U 1
vee
v w carir o
r