September 19, 2018 Board Packet

Regular Meeting of the Capitol Region Watershed District (CRWD) Board of Managers, for Wednesday, September 19, 2018 6:00 p.m. at the office of the CRWD, 1410 Energy Park Drive, Suite 4, St. Paul, Minnesota.

REGULAR MEETING AGENDA Materials Enclosed

I.

Call to Order of Regular Meeting (President Joe Collins) A) Attendance B) Review, Amendments, and Approval of the Agenda

II.

Public Comment – For Items not on the Agenda (Please observe a limit of three minutes per person.)

III.

Permit Applications and Program Updates (Permit Process: 1) Staff Review/Recommendation, 2) Applicant Response, 3) Public Comment, and 4) Board Discussion and Action.)

A) B) C)

Permit 10-014 Front-Victoria – Closure (Hosch) Permit 13-004 Episcopal Homes – Closure (Hosch) Permit 18-020 Albion Senior Community (Kelley)

IV.

Special Reports – Performance Review and Assistance Program, Dale Krystosek, BWSR

V.

Action Items A) AR: Approve Minutes of the September 5, 2018 Board Workshop (Sylvander) B) AR: Approve Minutes of the September 5, 2018 Regular Meeting (Sylvander) C) AR: Approve Accounts Payable/Receivables for August (Sylvander)

VI.

Unfinished Business A) 595 Aldine Building Update (Doneux) B) 2018 Rules Revisions (Kelley) C) 2020 Watershed Plan (Eleria) D) Como Lake Management Plan Update (Belden)

VII.

General Information A) Board of Manager’s Updates B) CRWD events update (Schwantes)

VIII. Next Meetings A) Wednesday, October 3, 2018 Board Workshop B) Wednesday, October 3, 2018 Regular Board Meeting C) Wednesday, October 17, 2018 CAC Meeting IX.

Adjournment

Our mission is to protect, manage and improve the water resources of Capitol Region Watershed District

September 19, 2018 III. Permit Applications A.-B. Permit Close Outs (Hosch)

DATE: TO: FROM: RE:

September 11, 2018 CRWD Board of Managers Elizabeth Hosch Permit Closeouts

Background Construction activity is complete for permits #10-014 Front-Victoria and #13-004 Episcopal Homes.

Issues Front-Victoria #10-014 This permit was issued for the reconstruction of select streets and utilities near Front and Victoria in St. Paul. The stormwater is treated through three underground infiltration trenches and a section of permeable pavers. The site is stable and the trenches are functional. Some maintenance is needed in the Victoria trench, which is expected given that this project has been in the ground for 7+ years. The City of St. Paul will be conducting this maintenance work. The site exceeded the cost cap, and per the policy at the time of approval, the additional cost was applied as credit in the volume bank. The as-built volume to be banked is 15,059 cf, an increase from the originally proposed banking of 14,791 cf. No surety was collected for this public project.

Episcopal Homes #13-004 This permit was issued for the redevelopment of property including and adjacent to the former Porky’s Drive-In at University west of Fairview in St. Paul. Stormwater requirements were met with an underground infiltration system. The site is stable and the infiltration system has been confirmed functional. $10,000 surety is available for return.

Action Requested Approve deposit of 15,059 cf into the St. Paul Public Works volume bank and Certificate of Completion for permit #10-014, Front-Victoria.

Approve $10,000 surety return and Certificate of Completion for permit #13-004, Episcopal Homes.

W:\07 Programs\Permitting\Board Memos\2018-09-19 Permit Closeout Board Memo.docx

Our Mission is to protect, manage and improve the water resources of Capitol Region Watershed District.

Capitol Region Watershed District Applicant:

Jay Portz Wedum Albion, LLC 2615 University Avenue, SE Minneapolis, MN 55414

Permit 18-020 Albion Senior Community Consultant: Brady Busselman Sambatek 12800 Whitewater Drive, Suite 300 Minnetonka, MN 55343

Description: New Senior Living Facility Stormwater Management: One underground infiltration chamber system District Rule: —C D F Disturbed Area: 2.25 Acres Impervious Area: 1.62 Acres STAFF RECOMMENDATION: Approve with 7 Conditions: 1. Receipt of $8,100 surety.

2. Receipt of documentation of maintenance agreement recorded with Ramsey County.

3. Provide plans signed by a professional engineer per the Minnesota Board of AELSLAGID. 4. Provide a copy of the NPDES permit.

5. Revise plans to address conditions 5a-5f in the permit report.

6. Include a site-specific maintenance plan that includes the following: a. List all stormwater management practices. b. Person(s) responsible for maintenance of stormwater devices(s). c. Frequency of inspection/ indicator that maintenance is needed. d. Description of inspection activities e. Description of maintenance activities 7. Revise HydroCAD to calculate times of concentration based on site conditions, or justify the "direct entry" value indicated in the model.

Permit Location Permit Report 18-020

Aerial Photo Board Meeting Date: 09-19-18

Capitol Region Watershed District Permit Report CRWD Permit #:

18-020

Review date:

September 7, 2018

Project Name:

Albion Senior Community

Applicant:

Jay Portz Wedum Albion LLC 2615 University Ave SE Minneapolis, MN 55414 615-789-3363 jayportz@wedum.org

Purpose:

Construction of a Senior Living Center and related parking and utilities.

Stormwater management consists of an underground StormTech infiltration system.

Location:

900 Albion Avenue, St. Paul, MN

Applicable Rules:

C, D, and F

Recommendation:

Approve with 7 Conditions

EXHIBITS: 1. Civil Plans (Sheets C1.01, C2.01, C2.02, C2.03, C3.01, C4.01, C4.02, C5.01, C5.02, C5.03, C6.01, C9.01, C9.02, L1.01, L1.02, L1.03), by Sambatek, dated 7/27/18, rcvd. 8/29/18.

2. Stormwater Management Plan, by Sambatek, dated 7/27/18, rcvd. 8/29/18.

3. Declaration for Maintenance of Stormwater Facilities (Draft), by Sambatek, not dated, rcvd. 8/29/18.

4. Maintenance Agreement Attachment A, by Sambatek, not dated, rcvd. 8/29/18.

HISTORY & CONSIDERATIONS: Future road project is not included in Phase I and is anticipated to be a separate permit application by the City.

Phase II existing conditions for the north section of the project shall be considered 100% pervious turf grass and will require a separate permit application.

RULE C: STORMWATER MANAGEMENT

W:\07 Programs\Permitting\2018\18-020 Albion Senior Community\18-020 Permit Report_R1.doc Page 1 of 5

Standards  Proposed discharge rates for the 2-, 10-, and 100-year events shall not exceed existing rates.  Developments and redevelopments must reduce runoff volumes in the amount equivalent to an inch of runoff from the impervious areas of the site.  Stormwater must be pretreated before discharging to infiltration areas to maintain the long-term viability of the infiltration area.  Developments and redevelopments must incorporate effective non-point source pollution reduction BMPs to achieve 90% total suspended solid removal.

Findings 1. A hydrograph method based on sound hydrologic theory is used to analyze runoff for the design or analysis of flows and water levels.

2. Runoff rates for the proposed activity do not exceed existing runoff rates for the 2-, 10-, and 100-year critical storm events. Stormwater leaving the project area is discharged into a well-defined receiving channel or pipe and routed to a public drainage system.

3. Stormwater runoff volume retention is achieved onsite in the amount equivalent to the runoff generated from 1.1-inch of rainfall over the impervious surfaces of the development. a. The amount of proposed impervious is 70,520 square feet. b. Volume retention required: 70,520 ft2 x 1.1 inches x 1 ft/12 inches = 6,474 ft3 Table 1. Proposed volume retention through abstraction (i.e. infiltration, reuse).

Volume 2-inch Volume Retention 1.1-inch Retention Runoff Runoff BMP Provided below Required (cu. ft.) (cu. ft.) outlet (cu. ft.) (cu. ft.)

Underground StormTech 12,442* 6,244 11,354 6,464 Total 11,354 cf *Volume retention calculation is based on HydroCAD, but was unable to be verified by the plans.

c. Banking of excess volume retention is not proposed. d. Infiltration volume and facility size has been calculated using the appropriate hydrologic soil group classification and design infiltration rate. e. The infiltration area is capable of infiltrating the required volume within 48 hours. f. It is unknown if stormwater runoff is pretreated to remove solids before discharging to infiltration areas. g. Groundwater mounding is not anticipated to affect adjacent properties and buildings.

4. Alternative compliance sequencing has not been requested.

5. Best management practices achieve 90% total suspended solids removal from the runoff generated on an annual basis 6. A maintenance agreement recorded with Ramsey County has not been submitted.

W:\07 Programs\Permitting\2018\18-020 Albion Senior Community\18-020 Permit Report_R1.doc Page 2 of 5

7. It is unknown if adequate maintenance access is provided for the underground system. A site-specific plan, schedule, and narrative for maintenance of the proposed stormwater management practices has not been submitted.

RULE D: FLOOD CONTROL Standards  Compensatory storage shall be provided for fill placed within the 100-year floodplain.  All habitable buildings, roads, and parking structures on or adjacent to a project site shall comply with District freeboard requirements.

Findings 1. There is no floodplain on the property according to FEMA. 2. All habitable buildings, roads, and parking structures on or adjacent to the project site comply with CRWD freeboard requirements.

RULE E: WETLAND MANAGEMENT Standard  Wetlands shall not be drained, filled (wholly or in part), excavated, or have sustaining hydrology impacted such that there will be a decrease in the inherent (existing) functions and values of the wetland.  A minimum buffer of 25 feet of permanent nonimpacted vegetative ground cover abutting and surrounding a wetland is required.

Findings 1. There are no known wetlands located on the property.

RULE F: EROSION AND SEDIMENT CONTROL Standards  A plan shall demonstrate that appropriate erosion and sediment control measures protect downstream water bodies from the effects of a land-disturbing activity.  Erosion Control Plans must adhere to the MPCA Protecting Water Quality in Urban Areas Manual.

Findings 1. Erosion and sediment control measures are not consistent with best management practices, as demonstrated in the MPCA manual Protecting Water Quality in Urban Areas.

2. Adjacent properties are protected from sediment transport/deposition.

3. Wetlands, waterbodies and water conveyance systems are not protected from erosion/sediment transport/deposition.

4. Disturbed area is greater than 1 acre; an NPDES permit is required. A SWPPP has not been submitted.

RULE G: ILLICIT DISCHARGE AND CONNECTION

W:\07 Programs\Permitting\2018\18-020 Albion Senior Community\18-020 Permit Report_R1.doc Page 3 of 5

Standard  Stormwater management and utility plans shall indicate all existing and proposed connections from developed and undeveloped lands for all water that drains to the District MS4.

Findings 1. New direct connections or replacement of existing connections are not proposed.

2. Prohibited discharges are not proposed.

Recommendation: Approve with 7 Conditions Conditions: 1. Receipt of $8,100 surety.

2. Receipt of documentation of maintenance agreement recorded with Ramsey County.

3. Provide plans signed by a professional engineer per the Minnesota Board of AELSLAGID. 4. Provide a copy of the NPDES permit.

5. Revise plans to address the following: a. Provide inlet protection for two additional inlets near the intersection of Albion and Lexington as well as two inlets near the intersection of Albion and Race. b. Revise pipe diameter on Sheet C6.01. Pipe diameter between the OCS and existing manhole is 12” on Sheet C6.01 and 18” in Detail 5 on Sheet C9.02 and in the HydroCAD. c. Clarify how pretreatment requirement is being met prior to discharge to the underground system. Maintenance Agreement Attachment A indicates catch basins in parking lot will have sumps, but these are not called out on the plans.

The Stormwater Management Plan Appendix E indicates an isolator row will be used in the StormTech system, but is not called out in plans. If sump manholes are to be used: i. The sump depth shall be four times larger than the outlet pipe per EPA guidance. ii. The drainage area to the inflow pipe shall be at least three times greater than the drainage area to the grate above per the University of Minnesota. The proposed sumps receive all flow from the grate.

Consider adding a manhole between the catch basin and the underground system with a sump to meet the desired pipe flow ratio. d. Ensure adequate maintenance access is provided to underground system.

Maintenance access is not explicitly called out in the plans. Provide at least one access point to each StormTech chamber row where feasible. e. Provide a system specific cross-section detail for the underground StormTech system with all relevant elevations and dimensions. Detail notes should include number of rows and chambers in each row. Volume retention and system modeling was unable to be verified in the plans. i. Include a rock specification on the cross-section detail. Specification shall include the following according to the Minnesota Stormwater Manual: 1. Double-washed, angular, uniform (uniformity coefficient of 2 or smaller) aggregate between 1.5 and 3.0-inch diameter.

W:\07 Programs\Permitting\2018\18-020 Albion Senior Community\18-020 Permit Report_R1.doc Page 4 of 5

2. Acceptable rock types: igneous and crystalline metamorphic (granite, rhyolite, gabbro, basalt, quartzite).

3. Unacceptable rock types: carbonate (limestone, dolomite, dolostone) and non-crystalline metamorphic (shale). ii. Add note to cross-section detail in plans stating that fabric shall be excluded from the bottom of the infiltration/filtration practice. iii. Add note to cross-section detail in plans stating the proposed volume in system below the low outlet. f. Revise SWPPP to include the following: i. Installation of infiltration/filtration practices shall be done during periods of dry weather and completed before a rainfall event.

Placement of engineered soils shall be on dry native soil only. ii. Excavation of infiltration areas shall be completed using a backhoe with a toothed bucket. iii. Native soils in infiltration areas shall be de-compacted to a minimum depth of 18 inches. iv. The bottom excavation surface of infiltration areas shall be level without dips or swales. v. During construction, stormwater must be routed around infiltration areas until all construction activity has ceased and tributary surfaces are cleaned of sediment. vi. Engineered soil shall remain uncontaminated (not mixed with other soil) before and during installation.

6. Include a site-specific maintenance plan that includes the following: a. List all stormwater management practices. b. Person(s) responsible for maintenance of stormwater devices(s). c. Frequency of inspection/ indicator that maintenance is needed. d. Description of inspection activities e. Description of maintenance activities 7. Revise HydroCAD to calculate times of concentration based on site conditions, or justify the "direct entry" value indicated in the model.

W:\07 Programs\Permitting\2018\18-020 Albion Senior Community\18-020 Permit Report_R1.doc Page 5 of 5

LEGEND PROPOSED CURB & GUTTER STORM SEWER SANITARY SEWER FORCEMAIN (SAN.)

D S LS

EXISTING

S S

WATERMAIN EASEMENT DRAINTILE GAS LINE ELECTRIC TELEPHONE FUTURE ROADWAY IMPROVEMENTS BY OTHERS PT:

UTILITY CONSTRUCTION NOTES

6 0.0 6+4

9 6.0 6+9

1.

THE UTILITY IMPROVEMENTS FOR THIS PROJECT SHALL BE CONSTRUCTED IN ACCORDANCE WITH THE "STANDARD UTILITIES SPECIFICATIONS" AS PUBLISHED BY THE CITY ENGINEERS ASSOCIATION OF MINNESOTA (CEAM), EXCEPT AS MODIFIED HEREIN. CONTRACTOR SHALL OBTAIN A COPY OF THESE SPECIFICATIONS.

1.3. A MINIMUM VERTICAL SEPARATION OF 18 INCHES AND HORIZONTAL SEPARATION OF 10-FEET BETWEEN OUTSIDE PIPE DIAMETERS IS REQUIRED AT ALL WATERMAIN AND SEWER MAIN (BUILDING, STORM AND SANITARY) CROSSINGS. 2.

PC: 5

ALL MATERIALS SHALL BE AS SPECIFIED IN CEAM SPECIFICATIONS EXCEPT AS MODIFIED HEREIN. 2.1. ALL MATERIALS SHALL COMPLY WITH THE REQUIREMENTS OF THE CITY.

+47.8

3

2.2. ALL SANITARY SEWER TO BE PVC SDR-35, UNLESS NOTED OTHERWISE. 2.2.1. ALL SANITARY SEWER SERVICES TO BUILDING SHALL BE PVC SCH 40 CONFORMING TO ASTM D2665.

CONNECT TO EXISTING STORM MANHOLE RE=795.9 IE=791.57 FIELD VERIFY 5+00

40

2.3. ALL WATERMAIN TO BE DUCTILE IRON - CLASS 52, UNLESS NOTED OTHERWISE.

'

2.3.1. ALL WATERMAIN TO HAVE 7.5-FEET OF COVER OVER TOP OF WATERMAIN. 2.3.2. PROVIDE THRUST BLOCKING AND MECHANICAL JOINT RESTRAINTS ON ALL WATERMAIN JOINTS PER CITY STANDARDS.

55 LF - 12" RCP @ 0.60%

' 40

2.4. ALL STORM SEWER PIPE TO BE SMOOTH INTERIOR DUAL WALL HDPE PIPE WITH WATER TIGHT GASKETS, UNLESS NOTED OTHERWISE.

CB 101 RE=796.30 IE=793.30

2.4.1. ALL STORM SEWER PIPE FOR ROOF DRAIN SERVICES TO BUILDING SHALL BE PVC SCH 40 CONFORMING TO ASTM D2665.

2.5. RIP RAP SHALL BE Mn/DOT CLASS 3.

39 LF - 12" HDPE @ 1.00%

OUTLET CONTROL STRUCTURE RE=798.0 IE=791.90

12" ROOF DRAIN CONNECTION IE=792.5

4+00

CB 200 RE=797.21 IE=794.00

33 LF - 12" PVC SCH 40 @ 1.52%

5 LF - 12" HDPE @ 1.00%

IE=793.95

CONNECT TO FUTURE SANITARY SEWER STUB IE=783.00 (VERIFY)

8" WATER SERVICE 6" SANITARY SEWER SERVICE IE=783.40

27 LF - 6" PVC SDR 26 @ 1.49%

PROPOSED BUILDING FFE=804 LFE=791

COORDINATE ALL BUILDING SERVICE CONNECTION LOCATIONS AND INVERT ELEVATIONS WITH MECHANICAL CONTRACTOR PRIOR TO CONSTRUCTION.

4.

ALL BUILDING SERVICE CONNECTIONS (STORM, SANITARY, WATER) WITH FIVE FEET OR LESS COVER ARE TO BE INSULATED FROM BUILDING TO POINT WHERE 5-FEET OF COVER IS ACHIEVED.

5.

CONTRACTOR SHALL TAKE ALL PRECAUTIONS NECESSARY TO AVOID PROPERTY DAMAGE TO ADJACENT PROPERTIES DURING THE CONSTRUCTION PHASES OF THIS PROJECT. CONTRACTOR WILL BE HELD SOLELY RESPONSIBLE FOR ANY DAMAGES TO THE ADJACENT PROPERTIES OCCURRING DURING THE CONSTRUCTION PHASES OF THIS PROJECT.

6.

SAFETY NOTICE TO CONTRACTORS: IN ACCORDANCE WITH GENERALLY ACCEPTED CONSTRUCTION PRACTICES, CONTRACTOR WILL BE SOLELY AND COMPLETELY RESPONSIBLE FOR CONDITIONS ON THE JOB SITE, INCLUDING SAFETY OF ALL PERSONS AND PROPERTY DURING PERFORMANCE OF THE WORK. THIS REQUIREMENT WILL APPLY CONTINUOUSLY AND NOT BE LIMITED TO NORMAL WORKING HOURS. THE DUTY OF THE ENGINEER OR THE DEVELOPER TO CONDUCT CONSTRUCTION REVIEW OF CONTRACTOR'S PERFORMANCE IS NOT INTENDED TO INCLUDE REVIEW OF THE ADEQUACY OF CONTRACTOR'S SAFETY MEASURES IN, ON OR NEAR THE CONSTRUCTION SITE.

7.

ALL AREAS OUTSIDE THE PROPERTY BOUNDARIES THAT ARE DISTURBED BY UTILITY CONSTRUCTION SHALL BE RESTORED IN KIND. SODDED AREAS SHALL BE RESTORED WITH 6 INCHES OF TOPSOIL PLACED BENEATH THE SOD.

8.

CONTRACTOR SHALL BE RESPONSIBLE FOR PROVIDING AND MAINTAINING TRAFFIC CONTROL DEVICES SUCH AS BARRICADES, WARNING SIGNS, DIRECTIONAL SIGNS, FLAGMEN AND LIGHTS TO CONTROL THE MOVEMENT OF TRAFFIC WHERE NECESSARY. TRAFFIC CONTROL DEVICES SHALL CONFORM TO APPROPRIATE MINNESOTA DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION STANDARDS.

9.

ALL SOILS TESTING SHALL BE COMPLETED BY AN INDEPENDENT SOILS ENGINEER. EXCAVATION FOR THE PURPOSE OF REMOVING UNSTABLE OR UNSUITABLE SOILS SHALL BE COMPLETED AS REQUIRED BY THE SOILS ENGINEER. THE UTILITY BACKFILL CONSTRUCTION SHALL COMPLY WITH THE REQUIREMENTS OF THE SOILS ENGINEER. CONTRACTOR SHALL BE RESPONSIBLE FOR COORDINATING ALL REQUIRED SOILS TESTS AND SOIL INSPECTIONS WITH THE SOILS ENGINEER.

STMH 100 RE=798.00 IE=792.91 (NW) IE=792.00 (NE)

PROPO INFILT SED SUBSU BASIN RATION SY RFACE BOTT OM = STEM 100 SIZE = HWL = 79 789.0 4.

VOLU 164' X 37' 40 ME = X 20,680 5.5' CF

EXISTING 4" & 16" UNDERGROUND GAS MAIN

3.

CONNECT TO FUTURE WATERMAIN STUB WITH 8" GATE VALVE & EXTEND WATERMAIN SERVICE AS SHOWN

3+00

82 LF - 12" PVC SCH 40 @ 4.88%

A GEOTECHNICAL ENGINEERING REPORT HAS BEEN COMPLETED BY: COMPANY: AMERICAN ENGINEERING TESTING, INC. ADDRESS: 550 CLEVELAND AVENUE NORTH, ST. PAUL, MN 55114 PHONE: 651-659-9001 DATED: 06/20/2018

NO

12" ROOF DRAIN CONNECTION AND PUMP OUTLET FOR GARAGE DRAIN SYSTEM IE=797.00

PA

RK

IN

G

STMH 300 RE=800.44 IE=793.00

CONTRACTOR SHALL OBTAIN A COPY OF THIS SOILS REPORT. 10. CONTRACTOR SHALL SUBMIT SHOP DRAWINGS FOR MANHOLE AND CATCH BASIN STRUCTURES TO SAMBATEK, INC. CONTRACTOR SHALL ALLOW 5 WORKING DAYS FOR SHOP DRAWING REVIEW.

2+00

11. CONTRACTOR AND MATERIAL SUPPLIER SHALL DETERMINE THE MINIMUM DIAMETER REQUIRED FOR EACH STORM SEWER STRUCTURE. 12. THE UNDERGROUND STORMWATER SYSTEM SHOWN ON THE UTILITY PLAN AND THE DETAIL SHEETS IS FOR INFORMATIONAL PURPOSES ONLY AND DEPICTS THE MINIMUM STORAGE REQUIREMENTS AND THE SYSTEM ELEVATIONS. THE CONTRACTOR (WITH THEIR SUPPLIER OR DESIGNER) SHALL SUBMIT DESIGN DRAWINGS TO THE ENGINEER FOR REVIEW AND APPROVAL PRIOR TO CONSTRUCTION. THE DESIGN DRAWINGS SHALL DEPICT THE FINAL LAYOUT AND DETAILS FOR CONSTRUCTION. THE DRAWINGS SHALL BE CERTIFIED BY A LICENSED ENGINEER FOR THE STATE IN WHICH THE PROJECT IS CONSTRUCTED. THE SUBMITTAL SHALL INCLUDE ALL NECESSARY PRODUCT INFORMATION, DESIGN CALCULATIONS AND BEDDING REQUIREMENTS FOR THE PROPOSED STORMWATER SYSTEM. FOLLOWING CONSTRUCTION, THE CERTIFYING ENGINEER SHALL SUBMIT A LETTER TO THE OWNER AND ENGINEER INDICATING THEY OBSERVED THE INSTALLATION AND THE INSTALLATION OF THE STORMWATER SYSTEM WAS IN CONFORMANCE WITH THE CERTIFIED DRAWINGS.

PROPOSED TRENCH DRAIN RE=790.90 IE=789.70 (PUMP BY OTHERS)

13. REFER TO ARCHITECTURAL/MEP FOR SUBSURFACE PARKING DRAINS AND RELATED PUMP DESIGN. 14. EXISTING UTILITY ELEVATIONS ARE FROM A SURVEY COMPLETED BY SUNDE LAND SURVEYING AND ARE BASED ON CITY OF ST. PAUL DATUM. ADD 694.10 FEET TO CONVERT TO MEAN SEA LEVEL DATUM.

ADDITIONAL UTILITY CONSTRUCTION NOTES x

••

1+00

••

•• ••

•• ••

•• •• ••

0+00

••

•• •• •• ••

THE SUBSURFACE UTILITY INFORMATION SHOWN ON THESE PLANS IS A UTILITY QUALITY LEVEL D. THIS QUALITY LEVEL WAS DETERMINED ACCORDING TO THE GUIDELINES OF ASCE/CI 38-02, TITLED "STANDARD GUIDELINES FOR THE COLLECTION AND DEPICTION OF EXISTING SUBSURFACE UTILITY DATA." THE CONTRACTOR AND/OR SUBCONTRACTORS SHALL DETERMINE THE EXACT LOCATION OF ALL EXISTING UTILITIES BEFORE COMMENCING WORK, BY CONTACTING THE NOTIFICATION CENTER (GOPHER STATE ONE FOR MINNESOTA). THE CONTRACTOR AND/OR SUBCONTRACTOR AGREE TO BE FULLY RESPONSIBLE FOR ANY AND ALL DAMAGES, WHICH MIGHT BE OCCASIONED BY HIS OR HER FAILURE TO EXACTLY LOCATE AND PRESERVE ANY AND ALL UTILITIES (UNDERGROUND AND OVERHEAD).

IF THE CONTRACTOR ENCOUNTERS ANY DRAIN TILE WITHIN THE SITE, HE OR SHE SHALL NOTIFY THE ENGINEER WITH THE LOCATION, SIZE, INVERT AND IF THE TILE LINE IS ACTIVE. NO DRAIN TILE SHALL BE BACKFILLED WITHOUT APPROVAL FROM THE PROJECT ENGINEER. IT SHALL BE THE RESPONSIBILITY OF THE CONTRACTOR TO RELOCATE ALL EXISTING UTILITIES WHICH CONFLICT WITH THE PROPOSED IMPROVEMENTS SHOWN ON THE PLANS.

Jul 27, 2018 - 1:55pm - User:jweyenberg L:\PROJECTS\20967\CAD\Civil\Sheets\20967-C6-UTIL.dwg

0

30

SCALE

IN

60 FEET

••

NOT FOR CONSTRUCTION - FOR REFERENCE ONLY

1.2. CONTRACTOR SHALL NOT OPEN, TURN OFF, INTERFERE WITH, OR ATTACH ANY PIPE OR HOSE TO OR TAP WATERMAIN BELONGING TO THE CITY UNLESS DULY AUTHORIZED TO DO SO BY THE CITY. ANY ADVERSE CONSEQUENCES OF ANY SCHEDULED OR UNSCHEDULED DISRUPTIONS OF SERVICE TO THE PUBLIC ARE THE LIABILITY OF CONTRACTOR.

40'

6+ 00

1.1. ALL UTILITIES SHALL BE CONSTRUCTED IN ACCORDANCE WITH CITY REQUIREMENTS.

WEDUM ALBION, LLC. 900 ALBION AVENUE SENIOR COMMUNITY ST. PAUL, MN

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.

EL

IM

IN

AR

Y

Brady D. Busselman

PR

Registration No. 44579

Date: 07/27/2018

If applicable, contact us for a wet signed copy of this plan which is available upon request at Sambatek's, Minnetonka, MN office.

SEWER CONNECTION PERMIT: LICENSE HOUSE DRAIN CONTRACTOR TO OBTAIN (SEWER CONNECTION PERMIT) TO CONSTRUCT NEW SANITARY AND STORM CONNECTION IN STREET FROM MAIN TO THE PROPERTY. CALL ST PAUL PW PERMIT DESK (651-266-6234) FOR INFORMATION ON OBTAINING THIS PERMIT. • • • • • •• • • • •• • • •• • •• • ••• • • • ••• • •• • • • • • •• • •• • •• • • • • ••• • • • • • • • • •• • • •• • • ••• • • • ••• • •• • •• • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • WATER MAINS. A FOUR-SIDED TRENCH BOX IS REQUIRED ON ALL EXCAVATIONS DEEPER THAN 5 FEET WHERE UNDERGROUND WORK OR INSPECTION IS TO BE PERFORMED BY SPRWS. LADDERS ARE REQUIRED AND MUST EXTEND 3 FEET ABOVE THE SURFACE OF THE TRENCH. SIDEWALKS, PAVEMENTS, DUCTS AND APPURTENANT STRUCTURES SHALL NOT BE UNDERMINED UNLESS A SUPPORT SYSTEM OR ANOTHER METHOD OF PROTECTION IS PROVIDED. TRENCHES IN EXCESS OF 20 FEET IN DEPTH MUST BE SIGNED OFF

BY A REGISTERED PROFESSIONAL ENGINEER. EXCAVATED MATERIAL MUST BE KEPT A MINIMUM OF 2 FEET FROM THE EDGE OF THE TRENCH. MAINTAIN 8 FEET OF COVER OVER ALL WATER MAINS AND SERVICES. PIPE MATERIAL FOR 8" DUCTILE IRON PIPE MUST BE CLASS 52, PIPE MATERIAL FOR 6" AND 4" DUCTILE IRON PIPE MUST BE CLASS 53. THE EXTERIOR OF DUCTILE IRON PIPE SHALL BE COATED WITH A LAYER OF ARC- SPRAYED ZINC PER ISO 8179. THE INTERIOR CEMENT MORTAR LINING SHALL BE APPLIED WITHOUT ASPHALT SEAL COAT. PIPE MUST BE WRAPPED IN V-BIO POLYWRAP ENCASEMENT. MAINTAIN 3 FEET VERTICAL SEPARATION BETWEEN WATER AND SEWER PIPES OR A 12 INCH SEPARATION WITH 4 INCH HIGH DENSITY INSULATION PER SPRWS STANDARD PLATE D-10 FOR TYPICAL WATER MAIN OFFSETS. REFER TO SPRWS "STANDARDS FOR THE INSTALLATION OF WATER MAINS" STANDARD PLATE D-11 FOR RESTRAINED PIPE REQUIREMENT. ALL WATER SERVICE VALVE BOXES WITHIN CONSTRUCTION AREA MUST BE EXPOSED AND BROUGHT TO GRADE UPON COMPLETION OF CONSTRUCTION. ALL PIPE WORK INSIDE OF PROPERTY TO BE PERFORMED BY A PLUMBER LICENSED BY THE STATE OF MINNESOTA AND CERTIFIED BY THE CITY OF SAINT PAUL. SPRWS REQUIRES SEPARATE OUTSIDE AND INSIDE PLUMBING PERMITS FOR EACH NEW WATER SERVICE. ALL UNUSED EXISTING WATER SERVICES TO BE CUT OFF BY SPRWS. EXCAVATION AND RESTORATION BY OWNER'S CONTRACTOR. NEW WATER SERVICES WILL NOT BE TURNED ON UNTIL REQUIRED CUTOFFS HAVE BEEN PERFORMED. WATER FACILITY PIPEWORK WITHIN RIGHT OF WAY TO BE INSTALLED BY SPRWS. EXCAVATION AND RESTORATION BY OWNER'S CONTRACTOR. THE CONTRACTOR PROVIDING EXCAVATION IS RESPONSIBLE FOR OBTAINING ALL EXCAVATION AND OBSTRUCTION PERMITS REQUIRED BY ANY GOVERNING AUTHORITY. CONTRACTOR TO MAINTAIN ACCESS TO THE FIRE DEPARTMENT CONNECTION FOR FIRE DEPARTMENT PERSONNEL AT ALL TIMES DURING THE CONSTRUCTION PERIOD. BUILDING STORM DRAINAGE SYSTEMS THAT ARE NEW AND PARTS OF EXISTING SYSTEMS THAT HAVE BEEN ALTERED, EXTENDED, OR REPAIRED SHALL BE TESTED IN ACCOR- DANCE WITH SECTION 712 TO DISCLOSE 20967 LEAKS AND DEFECTS EXCEPT AS PROVIDED IN SECTION 1109.2. ANY SECTION OF THE BUILDING STORM SEWER THAT PASSES THROUGH CONTAMINATED SOILS OR CONTAMINATED WATER MUST BE AIR TESTED JEB IN ACCORDANCE WITH SECTION 712.3.

EXCEPTIONS. PSM TESTING IS NOT REQUIRED FOR: (1) OUTSIDE LEADERS; (2) PERFORATED OR OPEN DRAIN TILE; OR (3) PORTIONS OF THE STORM DRAINAGE SYSTEM AND SEWERS THAT ARE LOCATED MORE THAN TEN FEET FROM BUILDINGS, MORE THAN TEN FEET FROM BURIED WATER LINES, AND MORE THAN 50 FEET FROM WATER WELLS, AND THAT DO NOT PASS THROUGH SOIL OR WATER IDENTIFIED AS BEING CONTAMINATED. BUILDING STORM SEWERS SHALL BE TESTED IN ACCORDANCE WITH SECTION 712 OR THE HYDROSTATIC TEST METHOD FROM THE CITY ENGINEERS ASSOCIATION OF MINNESOTA. THE HYDROSTATIC TEST METHOD, PROVISIONS E2 AND E3, AS SPECIFIED IN STANDARD UTILITIES SPECIFICATIONS FOR WATERMAIN AND SERVICE LINE INSTALLATION AND SANITARY SEWER AND STORM SEWER INSTALLATION, WRITTEN AND PUBLISHED BY THE CITY ENGINEERS ASSOCIATION OF MINNESOTA, 2013 EDITION, IS INCORPORATED BY REFERENCE, IS NOT SUBJECT TO FREQUENT CHANGE, AND IS AVAILABLE IN THE OFFICE OF THE COMMISSIONER OF LABOR AND INDUSTRY.

UTILITY PLAN

C6.01

September 19, 2018 Board Meeting IV. Special Report-Performance Review and Assistance Program (Doneux)

DATE: TO: FROM: RE:

September 13, 2018 CRWD Board of Managers Mark Doneux, Administrator Performance Review and Assistance Program

Background Since 2008, BWSR’s Performance Review and Assistance Program (PRAP) has assessed the performance of the units of government that constitute Minnesota’s local delivery system for conservation of water and related land resources. The program goal is to assist these local government partners to be the best they can be in their management of Minnesota’s land and water resources. In 2018, BWSR conducted a routine level II performance review of the Capitol Region Watershed District local water management function. This performance review focused primarily on the progress the Watershed District is making in implementing the Capitol Region Watershed District Management Plan. This Level II Performance review consisted of three main parts: Tracking progress in implementing the WMO management plan, Performance Certification Checklist, and Survey of Partners.

Issues BWSR staff have completed the review and the final draft is attached for your information.

BWSR staff will review all the information with our findings and recommendations and present the draft PRAP report at a meeting of your watershed district. Dale Krystosek will be at the September 19, 2018 meeting to review the program with Board and Staff.

Requested Action Informational only for the report. Approve response letter to BWSR enc:

Final Draft CRWD PRAP, Level II Report Draft CRWD PRAP Response Letter

Level II Performance Review Capitol Region Watershed District Local Government Unit Review

Draft Report September 5, 2018

Minnesota Board of Water and Soil Resources 520 Lafayette Road North St. Paul, MN 55155 651-296-0768 www.bwsr.state.mn.us

PRAP Level II Report: Capitol Region Watershed District

This page was intentionally left blank.

2

PRAP Level II Report: Capitol Region Watershed District

iii

Table of Contents Report Summary ........................................................................................................................................... iv Introduction .................................................................................................................................................. 1 Background .................................................................................................................................................... 2 Findings .......................................................................................................................................................... 5 Conclusions--Action Items—Commendations ............................................................................................. 11 Recommendations ……………………………………………………………………………………………………………….……………….12 LGU Comments and Response ..................................................................................................................... 13 Appendix A Plan Accomplishments ….....……………………………………………………………………………………….……….14 Appendix B Performance Standards ......……………………………………………………………………………………..…………32 Appendix C Survey Results Summary ....…………………………………………………………………………………….……….…34 Appendix D LGU Comment Letter…….....………………………………………………………………………………….….….………40 Appendix E Program Data ……………….....……………………………………………………………………………………….…….….41

This report has been prepared for the Capitol Region Watershed District by the Minnesota Board of Water and Soil Resources (BWSR) in partial fulfillment of the requirements of Minnesota Statutes, Chapter 103B.102, Subd.3.

Prepared by Dale Krystosek (dale.krystosek@state.mn.us; 218-820-9381).

BWSR is reducing printing and mailing costs by using the Internet to distribute reports and information to wider audiences. This report is available in alternative formats upon request.

iii

iv

PRAP Level II Report: Capitol Region Watershed District

PRAP Level II

Capitol Region Watershed District

Report Summary What is a PRAP Performance Review?

The Board of Water and Soil Resources supports Minnesota’s counties, watershed districts and soil and water conservation districts that deliver water and related land resource management projects and programs. In 2007 the Board set up the Performance Review and Assistance Program (PRAP), to systematically review the performance of these local units of government to ensure their effective operation. Each year BWSR staff conduct routine reviews of several of these local conservation delivery entities. This document reports the results of an entity’s specific PRAP review.

Key Findings and Conclusions The Capitol Region Watershed District (CRWD) has been very effective in conducting water quality monitoring programs and water quality improvement projects. The CRWD has been particularly effective in conducting water management research and increasing awareness of water quality issues.

The CRWD has been very effective in achieving the goals outlined in their water management plan, and has been successful in creating partnerships and joint efforts to do so.

High marks were given to the CRWD by about 90% of their partners in the areas of quality of work, relationships, initiative and follow through with 78% rating the District strong or good in the communication area. This demonstrates a strong working relationship with partners.

The CRWD shows complete compliance with BWSR’s basic and high performance standards.

Resource Outcomes The CRWD Plan does contain some resource outcome goals and objectives.

Commendations The CRWD is commended for meeting 11 out of 11 High Performance Standards Action Item – The CRWD has no action items.

Recommendations: Recommendation 1: Continue and expand the use of Prioritized, Targeted and Measureable as criteria for Goals and Objectives in the next water management plan as appropriate.

Recommendation 2: Structure website information to report progress and trends made in achieving resource outcome goals.

iv

PRAP Level II Report: Capitol Region Watershed District

1

Introduction This is an informational document prepared by the staff of the Board of Water and Soil Resources (BWSR) for the Capitol Region Watershed District (CRWD).

This report presents the results of a routine performance review of the Capitol Region Watershed District’s (CRWD) water management plan implementation and overall organizational effectiveness in delivery of land and water conservation projects and programs.

BWSR has reviewed the CRWD’s reported accomplishments of their management plan action items, determined the organization’s compliance with BWSR’s Level I and II performance standards, and surveyed members of the CRWD and its partner organizations.

This review is neither a financial audit nor investigation and it does not replace or supersede other types of governmental review of local government unit operations.

While the performance review reported herein has been conducted under the authority granted to BWSR

by Minnesota Statutes Chapter 103B.102, this is a staff report and has not been reviewed or approved by the BWSR board members.

What is PRAP? PRAP is an acronym for BWSR’s Performance Review and Assistance Program (PRAP).

Authorized by the 2007 Minnesota legislature, the PRAP purpose is to support local delivery of land conservation and water management by periodically reviewing and assessing the performance of local units of government that deliver those services. These include soil and water conservation districts, watershed districts, watershed management organizations, and the local water management functions of counties.

BWSR has developed four levels of review, from routine to specialized, depending on the program mandates and the needs of the local governmental unit (LGU).

A Level I review annually tabulates all local governmental units’ compliance with basic planning and reporting requirements. In Level II, conducted by BWSR once every ten years for each LGU, the focus is on the degree to which the organization is accomplishing its watershed management plan. A Level II review also includes determination of compliance with BWSR’s Level I and II statewide performance standards, a tabulation of progress on planned goals and objectives, a survey of board or water plan task force members and staff of the factors affecting plan implementation, a survey of LGU partners about their impressions of working with the LGU, and a BWSR staff report to the organization with findings, conclusions and recommendations.

BWSR’s actions in Levels III and IV include elements of Levels I and II and additionally emphasize assistance to address the local governmental unit’s specific needs.

Minnesota Board of Water & Soil Resources • www.bwsr.state.mn.us

PRAP Level II Report: Capitol Region Watershed District

Background - Capitol Region Watershed District The following background information is taken from the Capitol Region Watershed District Watershed Management Plan (adopted in 2010).

Introduction and History of the Area ‘The Capitol Region Watershed District (District) is 40.6 square miles in size and includes portions of Falcon Heights, Lauderdale, St. Paul, Maplewood, and Roseville. Within the municipal boundary of Falcon Heights are the State Fairgrounds and the St. Paul Campus of the University of Minnesota. The District is bounded to the east by the Ramsey‐Washington Metro Watershed District, to the west by Mississippi Watershed Management Organization and to the north by the Rice Creek Watershed District and the Grass Lake Watershed Management Organization. The Mississippi River forms the south and west boundaries of the District.

The District is hydrologically situated at the confluence of the Mississippi and Minnesota Rivers, in a fully urbanized setting. The reach of the Mississippi River bordering the District has cultural and historically significance for groups. The River provides for power generation, regional recreational opportunities, major fly‐way for migratory birds, and barge traffic.

The Mississippi River Valley has been a focal point for settlement since the time of the earliest inhabitants of the area, the Hopewell culture, built burial mounds on the bluffs overlooking the river. In addition to the Hopewell culture, the Dakota Indians lived in the area and used similar mounds to bury their dead from about 1600 to 1837. The Dakota also revered Carver’s Cave, which they referred to ask ‘Wakân Teepee’, or dwelling of the Great Spirit.

European settlement of the area began in the mid‐ 1800s and development became very rapid in the late 1800s. To accommodate the growth and development, natural areas were paved over and built upon, streams were filled or buried in pipes, and wetlands were drained and filled. These actions resulted in significant changes to the natural landscape and hydrology of the District.

Many of the remaining natural areas in the District have significantly degraded over time. These areas

2

consist primarily of non‐native, invasive species and lack ecological diversity. This degradation has reduced the effectiveness of the remaining natural areas to protect and buffer the District’s water resources. Due to the District’s highly urbanized nature and impervious land cover, the water resources are greatly impacted by stormwater runoff. The District is faced with the challenge of managing its water resources while balancing the land use needs of a growing and diverse population.

The Capitol Region Watershed District (District) is a special purpose local unit of government created to manage and protect part of the Mississippi River Basin, along with the lakes, wetlands, and creeks that comprise the watershed and drain to the river. The District was established by the Minnesota Board of Water and Soil Resources (BWSR) in 1998.

The District is governed by five Board Members, while the Districts programs, activities and initiatives are carried out by staff members, consultants and citizen volunteers. The mission of the District is to ‘To protect, manage and improve the water resources of the Capitol Region Watershed District.’

The first watershed management plan for the District was adopted in 2000. Since then, the District has worked towards accomplishing the goals and objectives set forth in the 2000 plan. The District has developed programs, projects and capital improvement projects to manage and restore its resources.

With the experiences of the last 10 years, the input of stakeholders, and a vision for the future, the District set out to establish new goals for its next 10 years of operation. This 2010 Watershed Management Plan meets the requirements specified in Minnesota Statutes Chapter 103B and 103D and will be valid through 2020.’

Land & Water Resource Inventory ‘The District encompasses 40.6 square miles of fully urbanized and developed land within portions of Falcon Heights, Lauderdale, St. Paul, Maplewood, and Roseville. The Mississippi River forms the western and southern borders of the District. Within the boundaries of the District there are a number of valuable water resources including Como Lake, Lake McCarrons, Loeb Lake and Crosby Lake, as well as several significant

Minnesota Board of Water & Soil Resources • www.bwsr.state.mn.us

PRAP Level II Report: Capitol Region Watershed District

wetlands. A summary of the land and water resource inventory section is included within the body of the Plan and the traditional inventory is included as Appendix A.’ Issues & Goals The process for developing this watershed management plan began with the identification of issues and documenting the concerns of stakeholders, residents, District staff, board members, and other interested parties in a thorough public involvement process. The public involvement process brought to light two guiding principles of the plan; the value in cooperating with District partners and the critical role that residents play in effective watershed management.

The District places great value on working with partners in order to explore new ideas, increase efficiency, and prevent duplication of effort and save money when promoting best management practices across the watershed. This District also recognizes the importance of involving residents in watershed protection. In order for the District to achieve its mission of protecting, managing and improving water resources, it is essential that residents adopt preferred water quality protection behaviors in their own home landscape, and support large scale watershed management projects.

Issue statements were crafted to encompass all comments received during the public involvement process and identify what needs are to be addressed within the timeframe of the watershed management plan. The issue statements were then used to formulate Goals for the District in order to guide activities for the next 10 years. The issues and goals crafted fall under the following seven Issue Topics.’

Education and Outreach ‘The purpose of education and outreach is to inform residents of the issues related to water quality and stormwater management, the role of the District, and to encourage change in people’s behaviors related to water. Through education and outreach, the District can disseminate information about the state of the local resources while delivering the message that residents are key part of the solution. With the Bringing Water Back campaign, the District’s goal is to

3 reconnect people who live, work and recreate in the District with the water resources and to create a sense of ownership. The District is unique in that it has the most diverse population of residents within the state of Minnesota. Such diversity requires watershed education to be delivered in a way that meets the needs of each of the varying populations.’

Urban Stormwater Management ‘The watershed is fully developed, resulting in a landscape dominated by impervious surfaces. Urban stormwater management is necessary to reverse the impact of increased stormwater runoff and pollutant loading to District water bodies caused by impervious surfaces. The District’s urban stormwater management will be primarily focused on the protection of the water quality of the District’s water resources. Additional effort will be focused on investigating new stormwater management techniques, promoting green infrastructure and addressing storm sewer infrastructure capacity and corresponding flooding problems.’

Monitoring and Data Assessment ‘The data collected through the District’s monitoring program provide valuable information on the state of water resources and the effectiveness of stormwater management BMPs. In addition the data provide guidance for making decisions on stormwater management projects and is used in education and outreach programs to convey messages to the public about stormwater. The District’s monitoring efforts will continue to be focused on the subwatersheds draining to the Mississippi River and specific water resources and BMPs throughout the District while exploring additional monitoring opportunities with wetlands, groundwater, soils, and additional BMPs. The District will also focus on ensuring that collected data and assessments are in a format that is understandable and available to the public.’

Future Trends ‘Changes in watershed management and emerging issues such as climate change impact the District’s management decisions. The District recognizes the importance of staying up to date on new and innovative stormwater management approaches given the highly developed nature of the watershed and the limits of traditional practices. In addition, the

3

PRAP Level II Report: Capitol Region Watershed District

District will need to have a role in addressing changes in watershed management due to climate change.’

Funding and Organization ‘The District funds programs, projects and Capitol improvements through levied taxes, grants, bonds and other outside sources of funding. Partnering with the county, municipalities, and other governmental entities to implement watershed management projects results in cost savings for the District and in turn, the residents. The District plans to continue to encourage and coordinate such partnerships and facilitate joint projects as well as continuing to offer grant programs for projects benefiting the water resources.’

Regulations and Enforcement ‘The District currently implements rules that address water quality and quantity, erosion control, wetland protection, Trout Brook Storm Sewer Interceptor and floodplain management. The District will focus on keeping these rules clear and up to date with revisions as needed, improving compliance and inspections, and coordinating District rules with other local and state and federal regulatory requirements.’

Ecosystem Health ‘In addition to protecting and improving water quality, the District is dedicated to promoting healthy and viable ecosystems throughout the watershed. The District is highly developed and most natural areas no longer exist. The Bringing Water Back campaign focuses on restoring historic wetlands, streams and other natural areas as well as completing ecological restoration of degraded natural areas.’

4 government is discussed and the requirements for local water management plans are established. The District defines two alternatives for local plan development; one for cities that wish to adopt the Districts Rules and another approach for those Cities that do not intend to adopt the Rules. The District will fund its implementation program using four primary sources of revenue: 1. Property tax levy 2. Grant funds 3. Local partner cost‐sharing funding 4. Bonds and Loans The District’s financing approach for operations (administration, programs, and projects) will be to fund the costs primarily through the annual levy, however, typically 5% is raised through grants, fees, interest income, and local cost‐share funding. The financing approach for capital improvement projects is planned to be 25% through the annual levy and 75% through grants, loans, and bond proceeds. Small capital improvement projects (less than $250,000) will be financed through the annual levy. Larger projects will have the costs spread to the long‐term benefitting parties through financing via bonds and loans. The District will seek local partner cost‐share funding for capital improvement projects of all sizes to off‐set the District’s contributions.’

Implementation Plan ‘The District developed a series of goals to address various aspects of these fundamental issues. The goals formed the basis for developing an implementation plan. The District’s 10 year implementation plan consists of programs, projects and Capitol improvements geared towards meeting the goals identified in the planning process.’

Administration ‘The administration section of the Plan contains useful information on the operation of the District as well as a discussion on the interaction of the District and its partners. The financial implication of the Plan on local

4

5

PRAP Level II Report: Capitol Region Watershed District

Findings

This section describes what the Minnesota Board of Water and Soil Resources (BWSR) learned about the performance of the Capitol Region Watershed District (CRWD) during the Performance Review and Assistance Program (PRAP) process.

Findings Part 1: Planning The District has identified 20 implementation actions for these goals for which the CRWD is considered the lead agency. This report assesses those 20 implementation actions.

According to the progress report, CRWD has completed all 20 items.

the survey respondents is unknown to both BWSR and the watershed district.

Part 3 summarizes the results from the survey of managers and staff regarding the accomplishments of the organization over the past several years.

A total of 33 board members and staff were invited to take the survey and 16 (48%) responded. The full responses are reported in Appendix C, and summarized here.

When asked to list the district’s successes, board members and staff mentioned the following: •

‘Capital Improvement Projects including Green Line Green Infrastructure Project, Trout Brook Storm Sewer Interceptor Repairs, CHS Field and Upper Villa Rainwater Harvesting Projects.

Also CRWD’s Monitoring Program and implementation of Rules.’

•

‘CRWD Watershed Steward Awards Program and Stewardship Grant Program ‘Adopt a Storm Drain’ Program Trout Brook Storm Sewer Realignment Project Green Line Green Infrastructure Project Central High School Partnership for Clean Water Hamline-Midway Boulevard Curb Cut Rain Gardens Sustainable Stormwater Management on the Ford Site Upper Villa Stormwater Reuse Project SnellingMidway Redevelopment Project (United Soccer Stadium).’

•

‘Improving the effectiveness and efficiency of the Monitoring, Research and Maintenance Program; CHS field; Adopt-a-Drain implementation and expansion; Master Water Stewards Implementation; Trout Brook Nature Sanctuary.’

•

‘Trout Brook Interceptor repair, Como Lake water quality study, Trout Brook Nature Sanctuary, Adopt-a-Drain, new District office location.’

•

‘Targeted Watershed Central High School Trout Brook Nature Sanctuary, CHS Field Stewardship, Grants Permitting Stormwater and in-lake monitoring and diagnosis.’

•

‘CHS Field, Trout Brook Nature Sanctuary, New CRWD Office at 595 Aldine.’

Findings Part 2: Performance Standards During a Level II performance review, BWSR uses 27 performance standards to assess four areas of operation: administration, planning, execution, and communication/coordination. The standards that apply to the CRWD are divided into two categories; basic (16) and high performance (11).

The 16 basic standards describe practices that are either legally required or fundamental to watershed district operations. The 11 high performance standards describe practices that reflect a high level of performance. While all watershed districts should be meeting the basic standards, only the more ambitious ones will meet many high performance standards.

The Level II review for the CRWD evaluation includes a report of compliance with 16 of the 16 basic and 11 of the 11 high performance standards for Metro Minnesota watershed districts.

The results for the District are listed in Appendix B. Findings Part 3: LGU Self-Assessment The information in parts 3 and 4 is based on responses to surveys developed by BWSR to obtain the opinions of both CRWD board members and staff and the CRWD’s partner organizations about District performance. At BWSR’s request, District staff identified current board managers and staff and representatives from those partner organizations with which they have an on-going working relationship.

BWSR distributed an online survey to the individuals identified, and analyzed the results. The identity of

5

6

PRAP Level II Report: Capitol Region Watershed District

•

•

‘General requirement and acceptance of installing stormwater features throughout the District.’

‘Programs: Monitoring Water Resource Improvement Projects Stewardship, Partner and Well Sealing Grants Education Outreach Projects: Trout Brook Nature Sanctuary Central High School Clean Water project at CHS Field Hamline-Midway Blvd Rain Gardens Swede Hollow Park Stream Improvements.’

One survey respondent stated, ‘Our most successful projects are those where we are collaborating with partners to manage and use stormwater in new ways.

Examples are Trout Brook Nature Sanctuary where we day lighted a portion of our storm sewer to create a meandering stream corridor within a new parkland, CHS Field where rain water is reused for irrigation and toilets, our Upper Villa Park project where stormwater is reused for irrigation of a ball field and Como Park Senior High School where we worked with the school district and municipal public works to treat water from public right-of-way on private land. Our most successful programs related to our information gathering and our relationships with the public. We have invested in many tools that standardize, streamline and increase our water quality monitoring data and data gathering processes including equipping monitoring sites with remote access, solar power and developing new data management software. We have also invested in programs where we provide information and resources for residents to be empowered to make meaningful impact on water quality. Examples are the Adopt a Drain program implemented in partnership with the Cities of Saint Paul and Roseville and Hamline University, community curbside leaf cleanups around Como Lake and our Master Water Stewards program in partnership with Freshwater Society that trains residents to be local water experts.’

Survey participants stated that reasons for success included: •

‘Collaboration and good relationships with municipal, institutional and community partners; creative, organized and thoughtful leadership of our Board, CAC and internal leadership staff and the ability to pursue new types of projects and programs that help

improve watershed management practices state-wide.’

•

‘CRWD Staff Partnerships, adequate funding and grants.’

•

‘Strong leadership, clear goals, work plan, and fidelity to the budget.’

•

‘A staff that works hard and is passionate about our work, a supportive board, a large enough budget to be involved in innovative projects.’

•

‘Hard work by staff members and consultants, public engagement, CAC input.’

•

‘Talented staff, supportive board, willing partners.’

•

‘Lots of advance planning and coordination.’

•

‘The staff, board and community and external partnerships.’

Also mentioned as reasons for success was ‘being able and willing to spend the money to do the work. Either as the organization paying for the work or through partnerships to increase the funds available to complete a project.’

When asked which of the organization's programs or projects have shown little progress or been on hold, survey participants provided the following responses: •

‘Illicit Discharge Detection Elimination (IDDE) plan and taking next step of implementation.’

•

‘None.’

•

‘Research.’

•

‘Unknown’

One survey participant stated ‘We have seen significant growth in all areas of our work that come to mind.’

When asked why the organization has had difficulty with these projects and programs identified above, the following responses were provided: •

‘Our greatest challenges have been time and capacity to implement new projects or programs while also making the time to evaluate and adapt the work we currently do.’

•

‘Has consistently been placed on back burner.’

6

7

PRAP Level II Report: Capitol Region Watershed District

‘We found many people were researching the same things or needing the same information.

We are participating in a large research partnership to pool resources and develop research projects to address current needs.’

•

‘Increase the budget for education and outreach so they are not limited in a monetary capacity to perform their work. Expand to a new office (this is in the works and will greatly help staff!!).’

Managers and staff identified that the District had good working relationships with: City of St. Paul, Roseville, and Falcon Heights, all of our municipal partners, some of the larger institutions in our boundaries and our community partners, Great River Greening, Ramsey-Washington Metro Watershed District, Lauderdale, neighboring watersheds, state agencies, district planning councils, nonprofits, St. Paul: Parks & Rec./Regional Water & Sewer/Planning Commission, Ramsey County, Metropolitan Council, University of Minnesota, Saint Paul Public Schools and Roseville Public Schools.

•

‘It comes down to available resources (money) for staff and program/project implementation.

We should continue to leverage state funding and partner funding when available and ensure we have adequate funding internally to expand our programs.’

•

‘Additional staff would allow for more in-depth and efficient program administration, although it's already pretty good.’

•

‘Continue to be visible within the area and continue to develop innovative projects and programs.’

•

‘Increase use of WMP as a reference and guide during project selection and budgeting.

Continue to seek grant opportunities, increase staff.’

•

When survey participants were also asked who they would like to collaborate more with, the responses identified: MNDOT (noted twice), MPCA, private sector developers, land use managers and designers we don't routinely work with, Saint Paul Public Works Department, commercial and retail businesses, City of Saint Paul, Mississippi Watershed Management Organization, City of Roseville and Met Council.

One survey participant also commented, ‘There are several district planning councils that are less active that could help us with outreach. There are likely other nonprofit organizations that we could partner with. We are constantly exploring those opportunities.’

When asked what the organization could do to be more effective in accomplishing plan goals and objectives, one person stated – ‘Increase education and outreach efforts especially in underserved communities. Increase presence in community events Increase brand recognition. Quantify triple bottom line benefits of green infrastructure and communicate to city leaders, business leaders, developers, and broader community Identify new, alternative funding sources and mechanisms Strengthen enforcement of postconstruction. BMP maintenance requirements.

Broaden BMP inspection and maintenance efforts to include offering paid services to partners. Apply CRWD rules to redevelopment projects less than 1 acre Identify and work with new partners.’

Other survey respondents mentioned:

7

8

PRAP Level II Report: Capitol Region Watershed District

Findings Part 4: Partners’ Assessment A total of 65 partners from a variety of organizations were invited to take an online survey regarding the work of, and their relationship with, the CRWD. Twenty one of the 65 partners invited to take the survey responded (32%). Individual survey respondents are anonymous so there is no count or identification of which organizations participated.

In general, the CRWD received very high marks from the partners who responded. Most partners indicated they had contact with the CRWD a few times to monthly.

Of the 21 partners who responded to the survey, most indicated that the amount of work they do with the District to be about right (83.3%) and 16.7% said the amount of work with the District was not enough and that there is potential for greater organization collaboration.

Partners rated the CRWD in five performance areas; communication, quality of work, relations with customers, initiative and timelines/follow though.

The table below provides partner ratings. For communication, 28% of the partners rated the CRWD strong while 50% provided a good rating and 22% acceptable. For quality of work and timelines and follow through, 100% of partners rated the CRWD strong or good, while most of the partners had strong or good ratings for relations with customers and initiative.

Partner Ratings Performance Area

Two survey respondents provided comments on their working relationship with the CRWD: •

‘We interact when projects are being planned, as permit or policy questions arrive, or to discuss funding and maintenance needs.

CRWD is always available and quick to respond.’

•

‘They provide a nice balance of proactively future planning as well as individual projectbased immediate needs.’

Partners also describe their working relationship with the CRWD in a very positive light, with 28% rating it ‘powerful’ and 72% describing it as ‘strong’.

There were comments regarding how the watershed district could be more effective including, •

‘Our partnership and communication continues to improve each year. We have made great strides in communication future projects and reaching out for partnerships sooner rather than later.’

•

‘Their vision allows them to think about short term projects in the long-term impacts they create. I think this is why they constantly have a great understanding about needs in their work and within a community in which they work. Also, they are very great at finding the resources needed to get a job done! Great Job!’

•

‘Communication is the most important element in our field. CRWD is skilled in communication.

I think it is best to communicate all potential projects, issues that may impact others, and any bit of knowledge to partners as this makes us all the best we can be.’

•

‘Continue to work on flexibility in regulation to help achieve their goals AND those of partner organizations.’

•

‘I think they are doing a great job through watershed monitoring and planning, grant offerings and project implementation, and community outreach and engagement. Keep up the great work!’

(Response Percent) Strong

Good

Accept able

Poor

Don’t Know

Communication

28%

50%

22%

0%

0%

Quality of Work

72%

28%

0%

0%

0%

Relations with Customers

56%

33%

11%

0%

0%

Initiative

83%

11%

6%

0%

0%

Timelines/ Follow through

72%

28%

0%

0%

0%

8

9

PRAP Level II Report: Capitol Region Watershed District

Targeted Watershed Demonstration Program

In 2013, the Minnesota Legislature passed Laws of Minnesota 2013, Chapter 137, Article 2, Section 7(a), requiring the Minnesota Board of Water and Soil Resources (BWSR), using Clean Water Fund appropriations, to award competitive grants to local government units that will result in a significant reduction in water pollution in a selected subwatershed. The program focuses on watersheds where the amount of change necessary to improve water quality is known, the actions needed to achieve results are identified, and a majority of those actions can be implemented within a four-year time period.

Capitol Region Watershed District (CRWD) received a Targeted Watershed grant of $1,760,000 in 2016 to improve water quality in two of the State’s most visited urban lakes, Como Lake in Saint Paul and Lake McCarrons in Roseville. Como Lake is located in Como Regional Park in Saint Paul. The lake is 100% accessible to the public and a highly valued and iconic natural resource. Como Lake is currently listed as impaired for aquatic recreation largely due to high phosphorus inputs and internal loading. Lake McCarrons is CRWD’s highest quality recreational waterbody and is a popular destination for swimming, boating and fishing.

The lake is currently meeting water quality standards; however, monitoring has shown an increase in phosphorus concentrations.

Two approaches are being applied to reduce watershed pollution to these lakes; large-scale BMP installation and Clean Streets Initiatives. Large-scale structural best management practice (BMP) require working with local municipalities and other partners to design and install cost-effective stormwater treatment projects. Clean Streets Initiatives involve more public outreach and result in construction of curb-cut rain gardens and expansion of the Adopt-a-Drain and Curbside Cleanup programs. It is estimated that between large-scale BMPs and clean street initiatives the Urban Lake Renewal project will reduce the watershed phosphorus loads to Como Lake and Lake McCarrons by 100 pounds and 37 pounds per year, respectively. Without Targeted Watershed Grant funding for outreach, design and construction, these reductions would have been difficult to achieve or would have taken many more years.

Below is an update on project progress: Large-scale BMPs ‘In the fall of 2017 construction was completed on CRWD’s first large-scale BMP as part of the Targeted Watershed Grant. The project is a large underground infiltration system at Como Park Sr. High School and was a partnership between CRWD, Saint Paul Public Schools, and the City of Saint Paul. The system will treat about 17 pounds of phosphorus per year that would have otherwise gone to Como Lake. Feasibility studies for Parkview Center School and Como Park regional BMPs were completed. Three BMPs in Como Park are advancing to final engineering and the preferred BMP for Parkview is also being designed.

Construction on all projects is being considered for late-2019.’

Clean Street Initiatives ‘Adopt-A-Drain promotion was expanded in Saint Paul (Como) and added to Roseville with emphasis on the Lake McCarrons neighborhood in fall of 2017. Spring promotion of the program began in April. To date, 44 homes in the Lake McCarrons watershed are participating, and there are currently over 900 participants of Adopt a Drain in Saint Paul, 100 of which are in the Como Lake watershed. Another round of Adopt a Drain promotion will occur this fall.

CRWD worked with Jana Caywood from the Como Active Citizen Network (CACN) to develop a model for curb clean-ups based on the work that has been done around Como Lake. The model is intended for communities to utilize ideas that work well for them while also recognizing that each community is unique, so a one-size-fits-all approach might not be successful.

Next steps are to present the model to residents of Como Lake and Lake McCarrons as part of a workshop planned for later in 2018.

Finally, in the McCarrons subwatershed, 64 properties were identified with favorable site conditions for curbcut rain gardens. A community meeting was held in February to explain the project to 21 interested property owners. The effort resulted in 16 planned rain gardens that are currently under construction. CRWD and the Saint Paul District 10 Planning Council’s Environment Committee hosted an event on June 23rd where CRWD staff worked with volunteers from the community to analyze boulevards throughout the

9

PRAP Level II Report: Capitol Region Watershed District

10

Como subwatershed for their rain garden suitability.

Site screening will continue until promotion begins later this fall. Up to 30 rain gardens are being considered for construction in 2019.’ Funding from the Targeted Watershed Program has allowed CRWD to initiate and expedite projects that may not have happened for many years. The total cost of projects associated with the grant is currently estimated to be around $3 million, and the grant award has allowed CRWD to leverage local investment in these efforts. It has also strengthened partnerships with the cities of Saint Paul and Roseville, the school districts in each city, and the local communities. This relatively short but concentrated effort will result in water quality benefits for years to come.

10

11

PRAP Level II Report: Capitol Region Watershed District

Conclusions

The Capitol Region Watershed District (CRWD) has been very effective in conducting water quality monitoring programs and implementing water quality improvement projects. The CRWD has been particularly effective in conducting water management research and increasing constituent awareness of water quality issues.

The organization has been very effective in achieving the goals outlined in the CRWD 2010 Watershed Management Plan, and has been successful in creating partnerships and joint efforts to do so.

High marks were given to the CRWD by about 90% of their partners that responded to the assessment survey in the areas of quality of work, relationships, initiative and follow through with 78% of the survey respondents rating the CRWD as strong or good in the communication area. This demonstrates a strong working relationship with partners.

 Has organization strategic plan which identifies short-term activities and budgets based on state and local watershed priorities.  Water quality trends are tracked for priority water bodies.  Watershed hydrologic trends are monitored and reported.  Track progress for information and education objectives in the watershed management plan.  Coordinates with County Board, City and/or Township officials.  Maintains or develops partnerships.

Coordinates and/or collaborates on projects and/or tasks with neighboring watershed districts, counties, soil and water conservation districts and non-governmental organizations.

The performance standards assessment shows that the CRWD is in compliance with all basic requirements and all of the high performance standards.

Action Items Action Items are based on those Part 2 basic practice performance standards for which an entity may be found out of compliance with. The CRWD was found to be in compliance and therefore has no action items.

Commendations The CRWD is commended for meeting all of the high performance standards (identified below) which represent activity and effort above and beyond the basic requirements (see Appendix B).  Has administrator on staff  Provides board training. Has orientation and continuing education plan and record for each Board member  Provides staff training. Has orientation and continuing education plan and record for each staff member.  Operational guidelines exist and are current.  Biennial Budget Request was submitted within last 24 months.

11

PRAP Level II Report: Capitol Region Watershed District

Recommendations This section contains recommendations offered by the Minnesota Board of Water and Soil Resources (BWSR) to the Capitol Region Watershed District (CRWD) Board of managers and staff to enhance the organization’s service to the residents of the District and its delivery of effective water and related land resource management. BWSR financial assistance may be available to support the CRWD’s implementation of some of these recommendations.

Recommendation 1: Continue and expand the use of Prioritized, Targeted and Measureable as criteria for goals and objectives in the next water management plan as appropriate.

The Prioritized, Targeted and Measureable criteria for water resource management planning goals is the new standard for One Watershed-One Plan efforts currently underway. In the next District water management plan, the managers and staff should continue to embrace this concept and structure their goals and objectives to explicitly acknowledge these criteria.

Recommendation 2: Structure website information to improve reporting of trend information and progress and trends made in achieving established measurable goals.

Following completion of the next water management plan, additional efforts should be made to improve the sharing of trend information and progress toward meeting the established measurable resource goals in easy to understand and easy to access formats on the website.

Minnesota Board of Water & Soil Resources • www.bwsr.state.mn.us

12

PRAP Level II Report: Capitol Region Watershed District

13

LGU Comments and BWSR Responses The Capitol Region Watershed District was invited to provide a written response to a draft version of this report. The response has been summarized and responded to in this section. The full response from the CRWD can be found in Appendix D of this report.

13

14

Appendix A. Plan Accomplishments Capitol Region Watershed District Type of Management Plan: 2010 Watershed Management Plan: The 2015 Mid-Term Review Date of Last Plan Revision: 12/14/2015

Date of This Assessment: 6/2018

#1. Issue: Many District residents, businesses and institutions do not feel a personal connection with water and natural resources and therefore do not have a sense of responsibility or ownership which negatively impacts their ability to change behaviors and increase stewardship.

Goal: Increase awareness of water, appreciation for local resources, the District.

Planned Actions or Activities • • • • • • • •

Education/Outreach Events Updated District Education Plan Hamline Midway boulevard raingarden planting event Stewardship and Partner Grant Program Sponsored Education Outreach Intern Illicit discharge and winter maintenance trainings Clean water interpretive signage at the new Lowertown baseball park, CHS Field Hosting a Minnesota Green Corps Member

• • • • • • • •

Workshop about maintaining turf in a way that causes minimal impact to water quality Supported Children’s Water Fest Membership in Watershed Partners (WSP) Chloride education workshops Knowledge Attitudes and Practices Study Participation in Blue Thumb Workshop on landscaping for clean water Sponsored Blooming Saint Paul Award program.

Accomplishments to Date CRWD increases awareness of and appreciation for local water resources through programs for residents such as Adopt a Drain, Master Water Stewards, Blue Thumb and the District’s Stewardship and Partner Grants. Each of these opportunities expands residents’ knowledge of issues facing local lakes and the Mississippi River and offers resources to support efforts to help capture and clean polluted runoff. CRWD offers illicit discharge prevention, turfgrass and winter maintenance workshops for city staff, and recertified all of Saint Paul’s Public Works staff in 2018.

District staff regularly participate in community events and school programs or field days to engage residents in learning about water resource protection efforts. Interpretive signage is added to projects, so the public becomes more familiar with CRWD programs and projects. Numerous partnerships with non-profit and community organizations, schools, arts and environmental groups enrich this work and allow us to continue reaching new audiences throughout the District. All planned actions and activities have been completed.

Minnesota Board of Water & Soil Resources • www.bwsr.state.mn.us

PRAP Level II Report: Capitol Region Watershed District

Progress Rating: =not started/dropped  =on-going progress  =completed/target met  =completed/target met

#2. Issue: The District’s diverse community has a wide range of cultural, social and political relationships with water, community interests, priorities, and opinions of the District’s water resources.

Goal: Increase communication and encourage involvement.

Planned Actions or Activities • • • •

•

Water Quality Event designed for Latino Youth East Side Youth Environment Education Internship Membership in Watershed Partners (WSP) Knowledge Attitudes and Practices Study Supported a water themed dance event at the first Open Streets celebration in Saint Paul Community organizing project focused on supporting water quality projects of faith communities Supported Children’s Water Fest

• • • • •

Stipends for environmental education internships for East Side youth Interpretive signage Educational signage and construction of rain gardens at Beacon Bluff Education Outreach Events Stewardship and Partner Grant Program

Accomplishments to Date CRWD has increased its communications significantly in recent years. The District produces e-newsletters, press releases, annual reports and Facebook posts, and updates our website regularly. A complete overhaul of all website content is underway, and the new website will be launched September 2018. CRWD staff participate on the Watershed Partners Steering Committee (WSP). In 2016, a new WSP website was developed along with regular blog posts and high-quality photos to inspire residents to act to protect water in their communities. As part of the Stewardship Grant program, information was developed to share with residents who request site visits that promotes a deeper understanding of program goals and project options. CRWD’s Watershed Artist in Residence remains an important part of projects including the District’s new office and watershed learning center in Saint Paul. Art enhances and tells the stories of our work in new ways that resonate with new audiences. All planned actions and activities have been completed.

15

PRAP Level II Report: Capitol Region Watershed District

Progress Rating:  =not started/dropped  =on-going progress  =completed/target met  =completed/target met

#3. Issue: Regular maintenance is critical to the success of stormwater BMPs and is not consistently performed to achieve desired performance Goal: Improve short and long‐term maintenance of BMPs, coordinate with other jurisdictions.

Planned Actions or Activities • • • • •

BMP Monitoring and Maintenance Trout Brook Storm Sewer Interceptor inspections and repairs Illicit discharge and winter maintenance trainings Chloride education workshops Sponsored Winter Maintenance training

• • • • •

University of MN BMP Maintenance Workshop Presenters.

Rain Garden Maintenance Brochure Support of a street sweeping study Stewardship and Partner Grant Program District BMP Database

Accomplishments to Date CRWD continues to improve the short and long-term maintenance of Stormwater Best Management Practices (BMPs) by maintaining a BMP database, hosting hands-on workshops, providing grants, conducting inspections, and investing in maintaining District-owned projects. A survey was conducted in 2018 of all Stewardship Grant recipients that installed rain gardens to better understand and address common maintenance challenges.

A gardening guide was created and sent to all grantees to address commonly asked questions and provide seasonal maintenance tips. CRWD also hosts rain garden maintenance workshops for residents where staff demonstrate best practices for cleaning inlets, weeding, mulching, and planting.

Inspections are followed with a postcard outlining recommendations for their rain gardens. In recent years, local youth-based organizations have received funding to help maintain BMPs along the Green Line. Partnerships like these enhance the practices and help build awareness about the importance of capturing and cleaning runoff as well as our streets. All planned actions and activities have been completed. All planned actions and activities have been completed.

Progress Rating: =not started/dropped  =on-going progress  =completed/target met  =completed/target met

16

PRAP Level II Report: Capitol Region Watershed District

#4. Issue: The pollutant load of stormwater has impacted the quality of water in the District’s lakes, wetlands and the Mississippi River.

Goal: Goals: Reduce chemical, physical and biological pollution to District lakes, wetlands and the Mississippi River.

Planned Actions or Activities • • • • • • • • • • •

Curtiss Pond Improvement Project Curtiss Pond Improvement Project Lake McCarrons Lakeshore Restoration Trout Brook Nature Sanctuary Villa Park Wetland Restoration Project Center St/Rice St Subwatershed Analysis Crosby Lake Management Plan Green Infrastructure on the Green Line Inspiring Communities Program TBI Farrington Feasibility Study Eustis Street Stormwater Feasibility Study Stop the Rain Drain (SRD) gutter downspout redirection program

• • • • • • • • • •

Supported Children’s Water Fest Led a stormwater BMP tour along the Green Line Sponsored Education Outreach Intern Blooming Saint Paul Award program - education displays targeted at adults Neighborhood water festival Presented to attendees of the MN Green Roof Symposium Led a tour of Trout Brook Nature Sanctuary Clean water interpretive signage at the new Lowertown baseball park, CHS Field Education displays at community events Sponsored Winter Maintenance training

Accomplishments to Date This is the fundamental issue facing the District. The District has worked extensively towards addressing this issue, but it is an on‐going effort. Many of the specific goals (related to a particular resource) have been met (McCarrons and Loeb Lake water quality) while others are being actively worked on (Como Lake water quality. In addition to reorganizing the goals for this issue, staff recommended re‐visiting some of the specific objectives within this issue area specifically; Achieving the TP loading requirement of the Lake Pepin TMDL (a TP reduction target was not established) Developing a target reduction for the amount of trash entering District lakes (the District works towards reducing trash loading, the benefit of developing a target is unclear) The primary focus of the District has been the conventional watershed pollutants, TP, sediment, nitrogen. Additional effort could be placed on additional contaminants such as pesticides, chlorides, etc. All planned actions and activities have been completed.

Progress Rating:  =not started/dropped  =on-going progress  =completed/target met  =completed/target met

17

PRAP Level II Report: Capitol Region Watershed District

#5. Issue: The quantity of runoff from a highly urbanized area increases the risk of flooding and puts added strain on the infrastructure within the District.

Goal: Minimize flooding, evaluate impact of climate change, preserve and re‐establish floodplain, and to manage volume in the Trout Brook system.

Planned Actions or Activities • • • • •

Curtiss Pond Improvement Project Gottfried's Pit Improvements Trout Brook Nature Sanctuary Villa Park Subwatershed Plan and BMP Design Villa Park Wetland Restoration Project Center St/Rice St Subwatershed Analysis

• • • •

Co‐sponsored storm drain stenciling and trash cleanup Supported Children’s Water Fest Chloride education workshops Workshop about maintaining turf in a way that causes minimal impact to water quality.

Workshop on landscaping for clean water

Accomplishments to Date The issue has been primarily addressed through the 2010 H&H Study as well as subwatershed‐ specific studies, numerous Capitol improvement projects, the District Rules and through the management of the Trout Brook system. Little effort has been placed in identifying opportunities to re‐establish floodplain areas as this has been determined to be a low priority activity for the District. All planned actions and activities have been completed.

Progress Rating:  =not started/dropped  =on-going progress  =completed/target met  =completed/target met

#6. Issue: Within an urbanized area, runoff from impervious surfaces is directed to storm sewers and discharged to surface waters rather than infiltrating into the ground resulting in reduced groundwater recharge and impacts to receiving waters Goal: Promote groundwater recharge through infiltration, protect groundwater.

18

PRAP Level II Report: Capitol Region Watershed District

Planned Actions or Activities • • • • • • • •

Curtiss Pond Improvement Project Green Infrastructure on the Green Line East Kittsondale Subwatershed Analysis Chloride education workshops Como 7 Subwatershed Inspiring Communities Program Como High School Stormwater Project Upper Villa Stormwater Reuse and Infiltration Project

• • • • • • • •

Illicit discharge and winter maintenance trainings Hosting a Minnesota GreenCorps Member Participation in Blue Thumb Water quality education field trips storm drain stenciling and trash cleanup Supported Children’s Water Fest Maintaining turf in a way that causes minimal impact to water.

Workshop on landscaping for clean water

Accomplishments to Date The District has completed significant work to encourage infiltration through Rules and various Grant programs. The District has identified areas where infiltrating stormwater is not recommended but has NOT developed a watershed‐wide evaluation of areas that are most conducive to infiltration. This type of evaluation has been done on a site specific and subwatershed basis. The Districts approach for protecting/managing groundwater at the time the plan was written was to collaborate with Ramsey County on their County Groundwater Plan which, ultimately, was not developed. While the District’s goals relative to stormwater and water quality are well defined, the role the District should play in groundwater management is not explicitly defined. This is a common situation for many watershed districts and as such there have been discussions at the State level about making recommendations for how watershed districts address groundwater issues. All planned actions and activities have been completed.

Progress Rating:  =not started/dropped  =on-going progress  =completed/target met  =completed/target met

#7. Issue: Monitoring and research data are needed to understand the watershed, identify problems, and determine appropriate watershed management approaches within the District 19

PRAP Level II Report: Capitol Region Watershed District

Goal: Monitor watershed resources and BMPs, continually refine the program and use collected data to evaluate performance of District work Planned Actions or Activities • • • • • • • • • • • •

Monitoring Program Review District BMP Database BMP Maintenance and Monitoring Stormwater Quality Monitoring Gross Solids Study East Kittsondale Subwatershed Analysis Sponsored Education Outreach Intern Held a summer macroinvertebrate study 2013 International Low Impact Development Symposium Presentations WEFTEC 2013 Staff Presentations WEFTEC 2014 Staff Presentations Lake and Wetland Monitoring

Accomplishments to Date Monitoring is one of the core programs of the District and a great deal of data is being collected on the Districts resources as well as on the performance of District installed practices. All planned actions and activities have been completed.

Progress Rating:  =not started/dropped  =on-going progress  =completed/target met  =completed/target met

#8. Issue: Monitoring and research data are difficult for the public to access and understand.

Goal: Make monitoring data available and easy to understand for a broad audience, serve as a clearinghouse, and establish partnerships.

Planned Actions or Activities • • • •

Internal Mapping System District BMP Database BMP Maintenance and Monitoring Stormwater Quality Monitoring Monitoring Database

20

PRAP Level II Report: Capitol Region Watershed District

Accomplishments to Date The District has expended some effort in making monitoring and research data more accessible to the public, but additional work remains to be done in this area. In 2014, the District began implementation of a new monitoring database to manage more effectively and efficiently, analyze, and report data. In 2018, the District launched its web page for Data Reporting and Analysis Tool. The framework is in place to deliver this type of information to the public more effectively, so staff is confident that this goal will be achieved in the next couple of years. All planned actions and activities have been completed.

Progress Rating: =not started/dropped  =on-going progress  =completed/target met  =completed/target met

#9. Issue: Future watershed management strategies need to be responsive to emerging issues resulting from climate change and technological advances.

Goal: Develop better understanding of climate change impacts, conduct research on stormwater management technologies, and promote use of emerging technologies and innovative management techniques.

Planned Actions or Activities • • • • • • • • • • •

Green Infrastructure on the Green Line Real‐Time Automated BMP Controls Stormwater Reuse Projects-CHS Field, Upper Villa, Great River School Impervious Surfaces Data Set Workshop on landscaping for clean water Presented to attendees of the Minnesota Green Roof Symposium Clean water interpretive signage at the new Lowertown baseball park, CHS Field Hosted the Clean Water Summit conference from 2011-2016 2013 International Low Impact Development Symposium Presentations WEFTEC Staff Presentations GIS Program Development

21

PRAP Level II Report: Capitol Region Watershed District

Accomplishments to Date The District has become a leader in conducting research on stormwater management technologies (Arlington Pascal) and has been active in promoting emerging technologies through its rules and involvement with the Green Line. More attention will be paid on the impact climate change on watershed health and management. The District needs to determine where the balance lies between an incentive‐based vs regulatory approach to ‘promoting’ innovative watershed management techniques. The District has received several awards and had several presentations selected to be presented at national conferences which demonstrate innovative work and leadership in the watershed/water quality field. All planned actions and activities have been completed.

Progress Rating:  =not started/dropped  =on-going progress  =completed/target met  =completed/target met

#10. Issue: Many District partners and residents are willing to help the District accomplish its mission if assistance is made available.

Goal: Encourage partners and residents to implement projects.

Planned Actions or Activities • • • • • • • •

Stop the Rain Drain (SRD) gutter downspout redirection program Clean water interpretive signage at the new Lowertown baseball park, CHS Field Stewardship Grants for: Raingarden, Green Roof, Pervious Paver, Erosion Control, Rain Barrel, Storm Drain Stenciling, Watershed Artist in Residence, and Como Lake Support of Friends of the Mississippi River’s river stewardship and habitat restoration programs Education displays at community events Center St/Rice St Subwatershed Analysis Como 7 Subwatershed ‐ Curtis Field Curtiss Pond Improvement Project Green Infrastructure on the Green Line Inspiring Communities Program

• • • • • • • • • • •

Supported Children’s Water Fest Chloride education workshops Workshop about maintaining turf in a way that causes minimal impact to water quality.

Workshop on landscaping for clean water Tour of: green roof projects, Trout Brook Nature Sanctuary, & of stormwater BMPs along the Green Line Coordinated publicity for the Blue Thumb native plant sale Education displays targeted at adults Sponsored Winter Maintenance training Lake McCarrons Lakeshore Restoration Trout Brook Nature Sanctuary Well Sealing

22

PRAP Level II Report: Capitol Region Watershed District

Accomplishments to Date CRWD encourages partners and residents to implement projects by participating in community events and school programs, hosting workshops, providing grants, and implementing projects such as the Adopt a Drain and Master Water Stewards programs. CRWD created interactive displays to share at community events that discuss topics such as common pollutants found in stormwater runoff and connections between land use and water quality. Hands-on engagement programs have included macroinvertebrate studies, fishing in the parks, Green Line and CHS Field project tours, and support of local events such as Children’s Water Fest. District grant programs such as the Stewardship, Well-Sealing and Rain Barrel grants are designed to help residents take action to protect water at home. The District also supports partners including our member cities by hosting winter and turfgrass maintenance workshops for water quality.

Collectively, these actions help improve the health of our lakes and the Mississippi River. All planned actions and activities have been completed.

Progress Rating:  =not started/dropped  =on-going progress  =completed/target met  =completed/target met

#11. Issue: The District is uniquely positioned to be able to identify and support collaborations between various partners/stakeholders with compatible projects and programs Goal: Coordinate efforts with partners to ensure cost effective use of funds for water resource management.

Planned Actions or Activities • • • • • • • • • • • • •

Center St/Rice St Subwatershed Analysis District 6 Natural Resource Inventory East Kittsondale Subwatershed Analysis Stewardship and Partner Grant Program Como 7 Subwatershed Curtis Field Crosby Lake Management Plan Curtiss Pond Improvement Project Gottfried's Pit Improvements Green Infrastructure on the Green Line Inspiring Communities Program Lake McCarrons Lakeshore Restoration Trout Brook Nature Sanctuary Feasibility Studies: Wetland Reestablishment, Victoria Park TBI, Farrington & Eustis Street Stormwater

• • • • • • • • • • • • •

Watershed Artist in Residence Stewardship Grant Community Clean up Como Lake Stewardship Grant Knowledge Attitudes and Practices Study Water Quality Event designed for Latino Youth East Side youth environment education internship Support for Friends of Mississippi River volunteers Stop the Rain Drain (SRD) gutter downspout redirection program Rain barrel construction workshop grants Storm drain stenciling Stewardship Grant Native Plant Education Expo and Market Community organizing project focused on supporting water quality projects of faith communities Support of a street sweeping study Water quality education event for Latino youth

23

PRAP Level II Report: Capitol Region Watershed District • • •

Lake Study Event Illicit discharge and winter maintenance trainings Hosting a Minnesota GreenCorps Member

•

Stipends for environmental education internships for East Side youth Upper Villa Como High School

• •

Accomplishments to Date Coordinating efforts with partners is an overarching principle of the District and is the approach used in all aspects of watershed management: District rules, CIPs and programs. Because CRWD is not a major land owner, all Capitol Improvement Projects require partner participation for implementation. All planned actions and activities have been completed.

Progress Rating: =not started/dropped  =on-going progress  =completed/target met  =completed/target met

#12. Issue: Multiple funding mechanisms and outside funding sources are available for the District to pursue to offset financial needs.

Goal: Increase the funds available to meet the goals and objectives of the District.

Planned Actions or Activities • • • •

Trout Brook Nature Sanctuary Trout Brook Storm Sewer Interceptor Villa Park Subwatershed Plan and BMP Design Villa Park Wetland Restoration Project East Kittsondale Subwatershed Analysis

• • • • •

Upper Villa stormwater reuse infiltration system Como High School Green Infrastructure on the Green Line Inspiring Communities Program Lake McCarrons Lakeshore Restoration William Street Pond

Accomplishments to Date The District has been very successful pursuing and obtaining grant money from sources that are typically available for watershed management activities. Examples of funding sources are: Clean Water Fund, Metropolitan Council Stormwater grant, TWP, MPCA clean water partnership, BWSR Targeted watershed project grants, Federal 319 grants, project funding from partners for CIP. All planned actions and activities have been completed.

24

PRAP Level II Report: Capitol Region Watershed District

Progress Rating: =not started/dropped  =on-going progress  =completed/target met  =completed/target met

#13. Issue: The District must prioritize programs and projects to ensure that goals are met in the most efficient, and cost-effective manner.

Goal: Utilize long‐term planning and pursue cost effective solutions Planned Actions or Activities • • • • •

Subwatershed Analysis GIS Program Development Impervious Surfaces Data Set Internal Mapping System District BMP Database Data Acquisition

Accomplishments to Date The District conducts a periodic review of its programs, sets priorities and evaluates cost/benefits. The annual work plan and budgeting process is also used to evaluate priorities and ensure that goals are being met in a cost-effective manner. All planned actions and activities have been completed.

Progress Rating:  =not started/dropped  =on-going progress  =completed/target met  =completed/target met

#14. Issue: An effective watershed organization needs to plan for change, growth, and development.

Goal: Strengthen the District’s capacity to accomplish its mission, strive for excellence, with competent, knowledgeable, committed, and innovative Board members, advisory committees, and staff, provide research‐based, informed, mission‐driven decision making, be an open, approachable, facilitator of partnerships to enhance the District’s capacity to protect, maintain and improve water resources 25

PRAP Level II Report: Capitol Region Watershed District

Planned Actions or Activities • • • • • • •

Data Acquisition Internal Mapping System District BMP Database Safety Program Updates/Audits Stormwater Quality Monitoring GIS Program Development Impervious Surfaces Data Set BMP Maintenance and Monitoring CSE Equipment

Accomplishments to Date The District continued development of an online user driven Data and Reporting Tool. Completion is expected in 2018. The District helped initiate the Minnesota Stormwater Research Council in partnership with other watershed districts, cities, agencies, and the University of Minnesota. The District updated its Trout Brook Interceptor Hydraulics & Hydrology model to reflect changed climate conditions by incorporating Atlas 14 data and analysis. The District continues to improve and update its cloud-based BMP database and mapping tool. This system allows access to over 1,500 Best Management Practices via a secure web link to staff, consultants, and partners. The dataset also includes the latest impervious cover data from Ramsey County. CRWD conducts and offers metro wide annual safety and right-to-know training for watershed district staff. CRWD annually updates its Quality Assurance Program Plan to ensure the quality and integrity of the monitoring data collected by the District. Staff annually prepare and review with their supervisor a professional development plan that coincides with their annual review. All planned actions and activities have been completed.

Progress Rating:  =not started/dropped  =on-going progress  =completed/target met  =completed/target met

#15. Issue: The District needs to maintain clear and effective Rules utilizing the most current research and science available.

Goal: Review and update the rules regularly Planned Actions or Activities • •

Permitting Program Review Stormwater Pollution Prevention Program

26

PRAP Level II Report: Capitol Region Watershed District • •

Watershed Rule Adoption Annual joint rules TAC

Accomplishments to Date The District has annual TAC meetings to review the rules and has had 2 rule revisions in the last 5 yrs. The most recent revisions were in 2015 and included updated filtration and volume reduction standards. CRWD is currently undertaking a rule amendment review with RWMWD in 2018. All planned actions and activities have been completed.

Progress Rating: =not started/dropped  =on-going progress  =completed/target met  =completed/target met

#16. Issue: Coordination with District partners on regulatory issues is needed for more efficient and effective stormwater regulation across all jurisdictions.

Goal: Work with partners to improve rules and ordinances, collaborate to ensure proper BMP construction and erosion & sediment control techniques are implemented, work with neighboring WMOs and state agencies on consistency, comply with applicable local, state, federal regulations.

Planned Actions or Activities • • • • • • •

Illicit discharge and winter maintenance trainings Permitting Program Review Stormwater Pollution Prevention Program Watershed Rule Adoption Chloride education workshops Sponsored Winter Maintenance training Interpretive signage

27

PRAP Level II Report: Capitol Region Watershed District

Accomplishments to Date The Districts rules and permitting program has evolved significantly from the time the Plan was written. Most of the goals for the issue were addressed in the rule development process and now are largely accomplished. In the context of overall plan, the goals under this issue may appear to be overly emphasized based on how the District relationships have evolved since the writing of the plan. Some outstanding issues exist such as maintaining consistency with neighboring entities and achieving volume reduction on sites less than 1 acre. However, CRWD partnered with the City of Saint Paul to create an educational info graphic regarding ordinance and stormwater regulation, streamlining and coordination on small sites within the City of Saint Paul. The most recent revisions were in 2015 and included updated filtration and volume reduction standards. All planned actions and activities have been completed.

Progress Rating:  =not started/dropped  =on-going progress  =completed/target met  =completed/target met

#17. Issue: The ecological integrity of many District lakes, wetlands, and the Mississippi River has degraded to a point where the resources are not providing their original level of function or value.

Goal: Improve ecological integrity of District lakes, wetlands and Mississippi River.

Planned Actions or Activities • • • • • •

Trout Brook Nature Sanctuary Lake McCarrons Lakeshore Restoration Wetland Reestablishment Feasibility Study — Victoria Park District 6 Natural Resource Inventory Lake Study Event Sponsored Education Outreach Intern Held a summer macroinvertebrate study Sponsor a natural resource intern

• • • • • •

Willow Reserve Restoration Project Sarita Wetland Restoration Project Como Shoreline Restoration Projects Highland Ravine Stabilization Project Roseville Victoria Wetland Easement Acquisition Support of Friends of the Mississippi River’s river stewardship and habitat restoration programs St. Paul Parks and Recreation: Swede‐Hollow Stream Analysis Restoration Feasibility Study Design

28

PRAP Level II Report: Capitol Region Watershed District

Accomplishments to Date CRWD has conducted several projects to help improve natural areas in the District to enhance their functions of improving water quality, providing aquatic and terrestrial habitat offering flood control and/or mitigating impacts of climate change. All planned actions and activities have been completed.

Progress Rating:  =not started/dropped  =on-going progress  =completed/target met  =completed/target met

#18. Issue: The loss of natural areas has decreased the ability of the watershed to capture, filter and infiltrate rainwater prior to discharging to District lakes, wetlands, and the Mississippi River.

Goal: Support increasing open space, mitigate loss of pervious areas by incorporating green infrastructure.

Planned Actions or Activities • • • • • • •

Trout Brook Nature Sanctuary Green Line BMPs Lake McCarrons Lakeshore Restoration Wetland Reestablishment Feasibility Study — Victoria Park District 6 Natural Resource Inventory Sponsored Education Outreach Intern Sponsor a natural resource intern Support of Friends of the Mississippi River’s river stewardship and habitat restoration programs St. Paul Parks and Recreation: Swede‐Hollow Stream Analysis Restoration Feasibility Study Design

• • • • • • • •

Willow Reserve Restoration Project Como Lake Restoration Urban School Retrofit Projects Stewardship Grant Program Upper Villa Stormwater Reuse Project CHS Field Stormwater Improvement Project Central High School Green Infrastructure Project Special Grants Program

Accomplishments to Date The District has addressed this issue through its rules, management of the Trout Brook system and through collaborations with partners, for example the installation of green infrastructure on the Green Line and installation of rainwater reuse system at CHS Field. CRWD offers technical and financial assistance to homeowners, businesses, schools, District cities and other partners to implement green infrastructure practices to improve the water quality of District Lakes and the Mississippi River. All planned actions and activities have been completed.

29

PRAP Level II Report: Capitol Region Watershed District

Progress Rating: =not started/dropped  =on-going progress  =completed/target met  =completed/target met #19. Issue: Reduced connectivity of natural habitat areas in the District limit movement between the District’s resources Goal: Coordinate with partners to improve accessibility and movement between natural areas.

Planned Actions or Activities • • • • • • • • •

Trout Brook Nature Sanctuary Wetland Reestablishment Feasibility Study — Victoria Park District 6 Natural Resource Inventory St. Paul Parks and Recreation: Swede‐Hollow Stream Analysis Restoration Feasibility Study Design Lake McCarrons Lakeshore Restoration Sponsored Education Outreach Intern Conducted fishing lessons Sponsor a natural resource intern Support of Friends of the Mississippi River’s river stewardship and habitat restoration programs

Accomplishments to Date The Districts goals and objectives for this issue were deliberately written to be ‘collaborative’ in nature. The District has been supportive of the type of activities that would increase connections to the Districts nature areas. All planned actions and activities have been completed.

Progress Rating: =not started/dropped  =on-going progress  =completed/target met  =completed/target met

#20. Issue: The land within the District developed during a time when resource protection was not a priority. As a result, there are a number of opportunities to restore historic resources.

Goal: Identify opportunities to restore historic stream and wetland resources and increase the awareness of current and historic water resources.

30

PRAP Level II Report: Capitol Region Watershed District

Planned Actions or Activities • • • •

Trout Brook Nature Sanctuary Wetland Reestablishment Feasibility Study-Victoria Park District 6 Natural Resource Inventory St. Paul Parks and Recreation: Swede‐Hollow Stream Analysis Restoration Feasibility Study Design

Accomplishments to Date The District has restored a historic portion of Trout Brook but has not restored any historic wetlands, although the upcoming Willow Reserve restoration project will accomplish this goal in part. The District has increased awareness of existing water resources, but little effort has been placed in raising the awareness of historic resources. This District is currently beginning a proactive planning effort to reestablish a headwaters portion of Hidden Falls Creek on the redeveloping Ford Site. All planned actions and activities have been completed.

Progress Rating: =not started/dropped  =on-going progress  =completed/target met  =completed/target met

31

32

Appendix B. Performance Standards METRO WATERSHED DISTRICT and WMO PERFORMANCE STANDARDS

Administration

Performanc e Area

LGU Name:

Performance Standard

 High Performance standard  Basic practice or statutory requirement (see instructions for explanation of standards)

             

Planning



Execution

Capitol Region Watershed District

Activity report: annual, on-time Financial report & audit completed on time Drainage authority buffer strip report submitted on time eLink Grant Report(s): submitted on time Rules: date of last revision or review Personnel policy: exists and reviewed/updated within last 5 yrs Data practices policy: exists & reviewed/updated within last 5 yrs Manager appointments: current and reported Consultant RFP: within 2 yrs for professional services WD/WMO has resolution assuming WCA responsibilities and appropriate delegation resolutions as warranted(N/A if not LGU) WD/WMO has knowledgable & trained staff that manages WCA program or has secured a qualified delegate. (N/A if not WCA LGU) Administrator on staff Board training: orient.& cont. ed. Plan, record for each board member Staff training: orient. & cont. ed. plan and record for each staff person Operational guidelines for fiscal procedures and conflicts of interest exist and current

      

Rating Yes, No, or Value YES NO

I I I I II II II II II

X X N/A X 15-Apr X X X X

II

N/A

II

N/A

II

X

II

X

II

X

II

X

Public drainage records: meet modernization guidelines Watershed management plan: up-to-date City/twp. local water plans not yet approved Capital Improvement Program: reviewed every 2 yrs Biennial Budget Request submitted on time Strategic plan identifies short-term priorities Engineer Reports: submitted for DNR & BWSR review WCA decisions and determinations are made in conformance  with all WCA requirements. (if delegated WCA LGU) WCA TEP reviews & recommendations appropriately  coordinated. (if delegated WCA LGU)  Total expenditures per year (past 10 yrs)

II I II II II II II

N/A X 0% X X X X

II

N/A

II

N/A

II

see below

 Water quality trends tracked for key water bodies  Watershed hydrologic trends monitored / reported

II

X

II

X

II

X

II

X

Website: contains informationas required by MR 8410.0150 Subp.

Communication & Coordination

Level of Review I Annual Compliance II BWSR Staff Review & Assessment (1/5 yrs)

 3a, i.e. as board meeting, contact information, water plan, etc.

Functioning advisory committee(s): recommendations on projects,

 reports, 2-way communication with Board  Communication piece: sent within last 12 months

II Communication Target Audience: Residents II  Track progress for I & E objectives in Plan II  Coordination with County Board, SWCD Board, City/Twp officials Partnerships: cooperative projects/tasks with neighboring II  organizations, such as counties, soil and water districts, watershed districts and non-governmental organizations

Minnesota Board of Water & Soil Resources • www.bwsr.state.mn.us

X X X X

PRAP Level II Report: Capitol Region Watershed District

33

34

Appendix C. Summary of Survey Results Survey Overview: Two surveys developed by the Board of Water and Soil Resources (BWSR) staff for the purpose of identifying information about the local government unit’s performance from both Board members and staff and from the local government unit’s partner organizations. The Capitol Region Watershed District (CRWD) identified, at BWSR’s request, their current Board members and staff and the partner organizations with whom they have an on-going working relationship. BWSR staff invited those people to take the on-line surveys and the responses were received and analyzed by BWSR staff. Board members and staff answered a different set of survey questions than those distributed to partner organizations. The identity of the survey respondents is unknown to both BWSR and the CRWD. In this case, 33 board members and staff, and 65 partner organization representatives, were invited to take the survey. Sixteen responses (48%) were received from CRWD Board members or staff. Twenty-one responses (32%) were received from partner organizations. Both sets of responses are summarized below. Some responses were edited for clarity or brevity.

Board Member and Staff Questions and Responses How often does your organization use your current management plan to guide decisions about what you do?

Always Usually Seldom Never

(response percent) 69.2% 30.8% 0.0 0.0

Additional Comments: •

In making decisions about projects and programs, we reference the guiding principles of our watershed management plan to make sure our initiatives and investments correspond to priorities identified in our management plan.

•

In addition to what is in our management plan, we practice adaptive management in order to react to new information or new opportunities.

•

I'm always impressed how CRWD's work always relates back to the larger plan. This speaks to a good plan, and excellent focus.

List your organization’s most successful programs and projects during the past 3-5 years. (10 responses) Como Park Senior High School Stormwater Project CRWD Permitting Program Upper Villa Stormwater Reuse and Infiltration Project CRWD Monitoring Program CRWD Grant Program CRWD education and outreach program.

Our most successful projects are those where we are collaborating with partners to manage and use stormwater in new ways. Examples are Trout Brook Nature Sanctuary where we day lighted a portion of our storm sewer to create a meandering stream corridor within a new parkland, CHS Field where rain water is reused for irrigation and toilets, our Upper Villa Park project where stormwater is reused for irrigation of a ball field and Como Park Senior High School where we worked with the school district and municipal public works to treat water from public right-of-way on private land. Our most successful programs related to our information gathering and our relationships with the public. We have invested in many tools that standardize, streamline and increase our water quality monitoring data and data gathering processes including equipping monitoring sites with remote access, solar power and developing new data management software. We have also invested in programs where we provide information and resources for residents to be empowered to make meaningful impact on water quality. Examples are the Adopt a Drain program implemented in partnership with the Cities

Minnesota Board of Water & Soil Resources • www.bwsr.state.mn.us

PRAP Level II Report: Capitol Region Watershed District of Saint Paul and Roseville and Hamline University, community curbside leaf cleanups around Como Lake and our Master Water Stewards program in partnership with Freshwater Society that trains residents to be local water experts.

Capitol Improvement Projects including Green Line Green Infrastructure Project, Trout Brook Storm Sewer Interceptor Repairs, CHS Field and Upper Villa Rainwater Harvesting Projects Monitoring Program CRWD Rules.

CRWD Watershed Steward Awards Program and Stewardship Grant Program ‘Adopt a Storm Drain’ Program Trout Brook Storm Sewer Realignment Project Green Line Green Infrastructure Project Central High School Partnership for Clean Water Hamline-Midway Boulevard Curb Cut Rain Gardens Sustainable Stormwater Management on the Ford Site Upper Villa Stormwater Reuse Project Snelling-Midway Redevelopment Project (United Soccer Stadium).

Improving the effectiveness and efficiency of the Monitoring, Research and Maintenance Program; CHS field; Adopt-aDrain implementation and expansion; Master Water Stewards Implementation; Trout Brook Nature Sanctuary.

Trout Brook Interceptor repair, Como Lake water quality study, Trout Brook Nature Sanctuary, Adopt-a-Drain, new District office location.

Targeted Watershed Central High School Trout Brook Nature Sanctuary CHS Field Stewardship Grants Permitting Stormwater and in-lake monitoring and diagnosis.

CHS Field, Trout Brook Nature Sanctuary, New CRWD Office at 595 Aldine.

General requirement and acceptance of installing stormwater features throughout the District.

Programs: Monitoring Water Resource Improvement Projects Stewardship, Partner and Well Sealing Grants Education Outreach Projects: Trout Brook Nature Sanctuary Central High School Clean Water project at CHS Field Hamline-Midway Blvd Rain Gardens Swede Hollow Park Stream Improvements.

What helped make these projects and programs successful? (10 responses) Como - first time City of St. Paul allowed ROW runoff to be diverted into a private parcel CRWD permitting program results in implementation of significant stormwater treatment practices on projects over 1-acre Upper Villa- Partnerships with Roseville and grants from BWSR and MPCA reduce TP load to McCarrons and by over 38 lbs./year - confirmed through monitoring program Grants provide education and WQ benefit through private and public partners.

Collaboration and good relationships with municipal, institutional and community partners; creative, organized and thoughtful leadership of our Board, CAC and internal leadership staff and the ability to pursue new types of projects and programs that help improve watershed management practices state-wide.

CRWD Staff Partnerships Adequate funding and grants.

Strong leadership Clear goals, work plan, and fidelity to the budget.

A staff that works hard and is passionate about our work, a supportive board, a large enough budget to be involved in innovative projects.

Hard work by staff members and consultants, public engagement, CAC input.

Talented staff, supportive board, willing partners.

Lots of advance planning and coordination.

Being able and willing to spend the money to do the work. Either as the organization paying for the work or through partnerships to increase the funds available to complete a project.

The staff, board and community and external partnerships.

During the past 3-5 years, which of your organization’s programs or projects have shown little progress or been on hold? (6 responses) IDDE plan and taking next step of implementation.

We have seen significant growth in all areas of or work that come to mind.

35

PRAP Level II Report: Capitol Region Watershed District None.

Research.

Unknown.

Unknown.

List the reasons why the organization has had difficulty with these projects and programs. (3 responses) Has consistently been placed on back burner.

Our greatest challenges have been time and capacity to implement new projects or programs while also making the time to evaluate and adapt the work we currently do.

We found many people were researching the same things or needing the same information. We are participating in a large research partnership to pool resources and develop research projects to address current needs.

Regarding the various organizations and agencies with which you could cooperate on projects or programs‌ List the ones with which you work well already (10 responses) St. Paul, Roseville.

All of our municipal partners, some of the larger institutions in our boundaries and our community partners.

Saint Paul Parks and Recreation Department, SP Planning and Economic Development, Ramsey County, All Roseville departments, Lauderdale, Falcon Heights, Metropolitan Council, University of Minnesota, other WDs/WMOs, Saint Paul Public Schools, Roseville Public Schools.

UMN. Great River Greening, Ramsey-Washington Metro Watershed District, City of St. Paul, St. Paul District councils.

Saint Paul, Roseville, Falcon Heights, Lauderdale, neighboring watersheds, state agencies, district planning councils, nonprofits.

St. Paul: Parks & Rec./Regional Water & Sewer/Planning Commission.

St. Paul Public Works, St. Paul Parks, Roseville PW, Ramsey County.

City of St. Paul, Roseville, and Falcon Heights.

City of Saint Paul.

List the ones with which better collaboration would benefit your organization. (8 responses) Mn/DOT MPCA Private sector developers, land use managers and designers we don't routinely work with.

Saint Paul Public Works Department, commercial and retail businesses, developers.

City of Saint Paul Mississippi Watershed Management Organization, City of Roseville There are several district planning councils that are less active that could help us with outreach. There are likely other nonprofit organizations that we could partner with. We are constantly exploring those opportunities.

MnDOT Met Council, possibly but I am not sure that is accurate.

36

PRAP Level II Report: Capitol Region Watershed District

If you don’t know much about your organization’s working relationships with partners, enter ‘I don’t know’ I don't know.

What steps could your organization take to increase your effectiveness in accomplishing your plan goals and objectives? (6 responses) Increase use of WMP as a reference and guide during project selection and budgeting. Continue to seek grant opportunities, increase staff.

Increase education and outreach efforts especially in underserved communities Increase presence in community events Increase brand recognition Quantify triple bottom line benefits of green infrastructure and communicate to city leaders, business leaders, developers, and broader community Identify new, alternative funding sources and mechanisms Strengthen enforcement of post-construction BMP maintenance requirements Broaden BMP inspection and maintenance efforts to include offering paid services to partners Apply CRWD rules to redevelopment projects less than 1 acre Identify and work with new partners.

Increase the budget for education and outreach so they are not limited in a monetary capacity to perform their work.

Expand to a new office (this is in the works and will greatly help staff!!).

It comes down to available resources (money) for staff and program/project implementation. We should continue to leverage state funding and partner funding when available and ensure we have adequate funding internally to expand our programs.

Additional staff would allow for more in-depth and efficient program administration, although it's already pretty good.

Continue to be visible within the area and continue to develop innovative projects and programs.

How long have you been with the organization?

Less than 5 years 5 to 10 years More than 15 years

(response percent) 54.5% 45.5% 0.0%

Partner Organization Questions and Responses Question: How often have you interacted with this organization during the past two to three years? Select the response closest to your experience. (response percent) 0.0% Not at all 11.1% A few times 55.6% Several times a year 22.2% Monthly 5.6% Almost every week 5.6% Daily

Additional Comments: None.

Is the amount of work you do in partnership with this organization…

Not enough, there is potential for us to do more together About right Too much, they depend on us for work they should be doing for themselves Too much, we depend on them for work we should be doing ourselves or with others

(response percent) 16.7% 83.3% 0.0% 0.0%

37

PRAP Level II Report: Capitol Region Watershed District

Additional Comments: • We interact when projects are being planned, as permit or policy questions arrive, or to discuss funding and maintenance needs. CRWD is always available and quick to respond.

• They provide a nice balance of proactively future planning as well as individual project-based immediate needs.

Based on your experience working with them, please rate the organization in the following areas: Rating (response percent) Performance Characteristic

Strong

Good

Acceptable

Poor

Communication (they keep us informed; we know their activities; they seek our input) Quality of work (they have good projects and programs; good service delivery) Relationships with Customers (they work well with landowners and clients) Initiative (they are willing to take on new projects, try new ideas)

28%

50%

22%

0%

I don’t know 0%

72%

28%

0%

0%

0%

56%

33%

11%

0%

0%

83%

11%

6%

0%

0%

Timelines/Follow-through (they are reliable and meet deadlines)

72%

28%

0%

0%

0%

How is your working relationship with this organization? (response percent) Powerful, we are more effective working together Strong, we work well together most of the time Good, but it could be better Acceptable, but a struggle at times Poor, there are almost always difficulties Non-existent, we don’t work with this organization

28% 72% 0% 0% 0% 0%

Comments from Partners about their working relationship with the Capitol Region WD. •

CRWD have very knowledgeable and committed staff. It is great to find opportunities to work with them.

•

The working relationship has grown and improved significantly in the last 5 years. It continues to solidify and produce strong results.

•

Staff at CRWD are available and provide great communication and knowledgeable technical support at all project stages.

•

Responsive, hard-working, focused, and talented group of individuals at Capitol Region Watershed District.

They are doing great work!

•

I feel we each have strengths that can support the other when working together to produce the best product possible.

•

The Watershed has done an incredible job of transforming Saint Paul's working relationship with CRWD, from a tenuous one, into a strong partnership over the last decade. CRWD has been a true leader in fostering and building this partnership.

•

A confident, capable district with long-tenured lead and senior staff.

38

PRAP Level II Report: Capitol Region Watershed District

Do you have additional thought about how the ‘subject’ organization could be more effective? (7 responses) Our partnership and communication continues to improve each year. We have made great strides in communication future projects and reaching out for partnerships sooner rather than later.

Their vision allows them to think about short term projects in the long-term impacts they create. I think this is why they constantly have a great understanding about needs in their work and within a community in which they work. Also, they are very great at finding the resources needed to get a job done! Great Job! Communication is the most important element in our field. CRWD is skilled in communication. I think it is best to communicate all potential projects, issues that may impact others, and any bit of knowledge to partners as this makes us all the best we can be.

Continue to work on flexibility in regulation to help achieve their goals AND those of partner organizations.

No. Not at this time.

I think they are doing a great job through watershed monitoring and planning, grant offerings and project implementation, and community outreach and engagement. Keep up the great work!

How long have you been with your current organization?

Less than 5 years 5 to 15 years More than 15 years

(response percent) 22% 50% 28%

39

40

Appendix D. LGU Comment Letter

Minnesota Board of Water & Soil Resources • www.bwsr.state.mn.us

41

Appendix E. Program Data Time required to complete this review Capitol Region Watershed District Staff: ?? hours BWSR Staff: ?? hours

Schedule of Level II Review BWSR PRAP Performance Review Key Dates • • • • •

May 23, 2018: Initial meeting with staff June 6, 2018: Initial meeting with board June 11, 2018: Survey of Board/Committee, staff and partners September 19, 2018: Presentation of Draft Report to Board/Committee and staff October, 2018: Date Transmittal of Final Report to LGU

NOTE: BWSR uses review time as a surrogate for tracking total program costs. Time required for PRAP performance reviews is aggregated and included in BWSR’s annual PRAP report to the Minnesota Legislature.

Minnesota Board of Water & Soil Resources • www.bwsr.state.mn.us

Water DRT is to provide a dynamic data reporting tool that offers: data visualization and user interaction; expanded statistical capabilities; customizable reporting and data download/export; access to the most up-to-date monitoring data; and dynamic statistics and data summarization capabilities that assists in meeting annual reporting requirements.

The Level II PRAP process is very effective and useful in assisting LGU’s on how to improve their operation effectiveness. This tool is most effective for CRWD since it was right before the development of our Watershed Management Plan (WMP). I would suggest that if BWSR shift these reviews to occur two years prior to WMP updates.

Sincerely Mark Doneux, Administrator cc:

CRWD Board of Managers Melissa King, BWSR Board Conservationist

W:\08 Orgs-Cities-Agencies\BWSR\PRAP Level II 2018\Krystocek - Performance Review and Assistance Program Response Letter 9-13-18.docx

September 19, 2018 Mr. Dale Krystosek Minnesota Board of Water and Soil Resources 520 Lafayette Road N St. Paul, MN 55155 RE: 2018 Level II Performance Review, LGU Comment Letter Dear Mr. Krystosek: The Board of Managers and staff of the Capitol Region Watershed District (CRWD), accepts the BWSR Level II Performance Review as summarized in your report. This process was informative, and we appreciate BWSR's comments and feedback, which ultimately will improve the functions of the CRWD. Regarding the specific recommendations noted within the report, we would like to offer the following comments: BWSR Recommendation 1: Continue and expand the use of Prioritized, Targeted and Measurable as criteria for goals and objectives in the next water management plan as appropriate.

CRWD Response: This is a timely comment since the 2020 CRWD Watershed Management Plan process is just getting started this fall. In this new plan the District will continue to embrace this concept and structure our goals and objectives to explicitly acknowledge these criteria.

BWSR Recommendation 2: Structure website information to improve reporting of trend information and progress and trends made in achieving established measurable goals.

CRWD Response: CRWD has already initiated efforts to improve the sharing of trend information and progress toward meeting the established measurable resource goals in our plan. We will be launching our new Data Reporting Tool or “DRT� website this fall that will provide in easy to understand and easy to access formats on the web. online, user-driven, interactive, map-based Water Data Reporting Tool (DRT) that displays CRWD monitoring data by interfacing with our monitoring database. The primary goal of

Water DRT is to provide a dynamic data reporting tool that offers: data visualization and user interaction; expanded statistical capabilities; customizable reporting and data download/export; access to the most up-to-date monitoring data; and dynamic statistics and data summarization capabilities that assists in meeting annual reporting requirements.

The Level II PRAP process is very effective and useful in assisting LGU’s on how to improve their operation effectiveness. This tool is most effective for CRWD since it was right before the development of our Watershed Management Plan (WMP). I would suggest that if BWSR shift these reviews to occur two years prior to WMP updates.

Sincerely Mark Doneux, Administrator cc:

CRWD Board of Managers Melissa King, BWSR Board Conservationist

W:\08 Orgs-Cities-Agencies\BWSR\PRAP Level II 2018\Krystocek - Performance Review and Assistance Program Response Letter 9-13-18.docx

September 19, 2018 Board Meeting

V. Action Item A) Approve Minutes of September 5, 2018 Board Workshop (Doneux) Special Board Workshop of the Capitol Region Watershed District (CRWD) Board of Managers, for September 5, 2018 5:00 p.m. at the office of CRWD, 1410 Energy Park Drive, Suite 4, St. Paul, Minnesota 55108.

Board Workshop Minutes I.

Call to Order at 5:00 p.m. (President Joe Collins) A) Attendance Board Members Joe Collins Shirley Reider Mary Texer Rick Sanders Seitu Jones

Staff Present Mark Doneux, CRWD Bob Fossum, CRWD Guests Present Kate Gillette, Avison Young James Mogen, RCAO Jason McMillan, JE Dunn

A) Introductions President Joe Collins called the workshop to order at 5:00 p.m.

B) Workshop Goals and Objectives President Collins reviewed the goals and objectives of the 1736 Thomas Building workshop.

II.

Review of 2019 Work Plan and Budget

The Board met and discussed the possible future sale or lease options for the 1736 Thomas Building. Kate Gillette provided some the pros and cons of both the selling and leasing options. Jason McMillan reviewed order of magnitude costs for each of the options as well. James Mogen commented on the legal issues involving selling or leasing the building. The Board agreed that it would best to bring this topic up again after the District has moved into the new building to better understand building needs and capacity. Administrator Doneux said he will put this back on future workshop agenda in early 2019.

President Joe Collins closed the Board workshop at 6:00 p.m.

Respectfully submitted, Mark Doneux, Administrator 1

W:\04 Board of Managers\Minutes\2018\August 9, 2018 DRAFT Worshop.docx

2

September 5, 2018 Board Meeting V. Action Item B) Approve Minutes of August 15, 2018 DRAFT Regular Board Meeting (Sylvander)

Regular Meeting of the Capitol Region Watershed District (CRWD) Board of Managers, for Wednesday, August 15, 2018, 6:00 p.m. at the office of CRWD, 1410 Energy Park Drive, Suite 4, St. Paul, Minnesota.

REGULAR MEETING MINUTES I.

A)

Call to Order of Regular Meeting (President Joe Collins)

Managers Joe Collins Seitu Jones Shirley Reider Rick Sanders Mary Texer

B)

Staff Present Mark Doneux, CRWD Anna Eleria, CRWD Elizabeth Hosch, CRWD Michelle Sylvander, CRWD Nate Zwonitzer, CRWD James Mogen, Ramsey County Attorney

Public Attendees

Review, Amendments and Approval of the Agenda.

President Collins asked for any additions or changes to the agenda. No changes were made.

Motion 18-168: Approve the Agenda of September 5, 2018 Reider/Sanders Unanimously Approved II.

Public Comment – For Items not on the Agenda

No Comments.

III.

Permit Applications and Program Updates A)

Permit #17-005 Ford Parkway erosion repair - Closure (Hosch)

Ms. Hosch reviewed permit #17-005 Ford Parkway erosion repair permit. The permit was issued for stabilization of eroding slopes and galleys beneath and adjacent to the Ford Parkway Bridge in St. Paul. The permit was issued for erosion and sediment control only, so no stormwater infrastructure was built. The site is stable, and Ramsey County continues to monitor some areas that do not have permanent cover but are also protected from runoff and rainfall. Stabilization efforts will be made in a maintenance capacity should the need arise. No surety was collected for this public project.

Our Mission is to protect, manage and improve the water resources of Capitol Region Watershed District

Motion 18-169: Approve Certificate of Completion for permit #17-005, Ford Parkway erosion repair.

Reider/Jones Unanimously Approved IV.

Special Reports - No Special Reports

V.

Action Items A)

AR:

Approve Minutes of the August 15, 2018 Regular Meeting (Sylvander).

Motion 18-170: Approve Minutes of the August 15, 2018 Regular Meeting.

Reider/Jones Unanimously approved B)

AR:

Approve 2019 Preliminary Budget (Doneux)

Administrator Doneux reviewed that the Board of Managers have reviewed the preliminary 2019 Budget and Tax Levy during meetings and workshops this summer. The Citizen’s Advisory Committee reviewed and recommended approval at their August 8th meeting. A duly noticed Public Hearing was held on August 15th to collect public comments. Administrator Doneux recommended that the Board adopt the preliminary budget and levy as presented. Changes were made to the fund balance. A letter of support came from the City of St. Paul, no recommended changes just requesting that funding be made available for projects such as Willow Reserve and Snelling Midway. President Collins requested that it be recognized that funding for Stewardship Grants, Special Projects and Grants support numerous projects.

Motion 18-171: Approve and adopt the Preliminary 2019 Budget and Levy Certification.

Reider/Jones Unanimously approved C)

AR: Approve Special Grants Program Updates (Zwonitzer)

Mr. Zwonitzer reviewed the goal of Special Projects and Grants Program to partner with government units and other entities to cooperatively implement highly visible and/or innovative capital improvement projects for water resource protection and improvement.

Improvements to the Special Grant Program have been developed for 2019. Staff recommend splitting the program into separate grants for planning and construction under the Special Grant Program umbrella and have added more detail to the evaluation criteria. This will make it easier to compare projects during evaluation and will reduce the amount of construction funds committed by CRWD to projects in the beginning stages of planning. The goal of Special Grants and types of projects likely to be funded are largely the same.

Water Quality Planning Grants • Provide financial assistance to prepare feasibility studies and advance designs of innovative water quality improvement projects • Application cycle: year-round (ongoing) • Review process: Evaluation by staff, approval by Board for projects exceeding $20,000 • 2019 Grant Award Budget (390-19660): $75,000 Our Mission is to protect, manage and improve the water resources of Capitol Region Watershed District

Water Quality Capital Improvement Project Grants (Water Quality CIP Grants) • Provide financial assistance for final engineering and construction of innovative water quality improvement projects. Minimum of completed feasibility study required.

• Application cycle: 1-2 times/year depending on available funding and quality of applications • Review process: Committee review (staff, Board, CAC) and recommendation to Board for approval.

• 2019 Grant Award Budget (440-19910): $350,000 Motion 18-172: Approve updates to Special Grant Program and Authorize distribution of the 2019 Special Grant Program for Applications.

Reider/Texer Unanimously approved VI.

Unfinished Business A) Building Update (Doneux)

Administrator Doneux shared that the curb and gutter is in. The cistern will be going in after the Anniversary and River of Iron event on September 21st. A lot of planning has been going into the Anniversary/River of Iron event. Ms. Eleria shared details about the River of Iron pour.

B) Lauderdale Stormwater (Eleria) Ms. Eleria shared that the project is moving along. Ms. Eleria has applied for Clean Water Fund Grant.

C) Strategic Plan Update (Fossum) Mr. Fossum shared that Ms. Barb Deming will be having focus groups interviews. Ms. Deming would like to set up meeting with the board managers. Managers discussed dates of availability. Mr. Fossum will confirm with Ms. Deming regarding availability to meet on September 19th or October 3rd and change the starting time of board meeting.

D) Como Lake Management Plan Update (Belden) No Update.

VII. A)

General Information

Board of Managers Updates

Manager Texer shared that Mississippi Watershed will be hosting an event tomorrow September 6th. President Collins and Manager Sanders are both planning to attend. Administrator Doneux shared that a similar event will be held again on Thurs Sept 20th 2:00pm to 4:00pm incase anyone would like to attend.

B)

Administrator’s Report (Doneux)

1) Administrator Approved or Executed Agreements a) Consultant Services Agreement with This is Folly for 2018 artwork to embellish the sidewalk at the new Capitol Region Watershed District Building for an amount not to exceed $5,000.

Our Mission is to protect, manage and improve the water resources of Capitol Region Watershed District

b) Consultant Services Agreement with Houston Engineering for 2018 Como Park Stormwater Reclassification for an amount not to exceed $9,362. c) Consultant Services Amendment with Ford Plant Area C for an amount not to exceed $34,500. d) Change Order with Wetland Habitat Restoration for Willow Reserve Ecological Restoration for an amount not to exceed $660.00. e) Consultant Services amendment with Barr Engineering for Trout Brook Nature Sanctuary Engineering Support Services for an amount not to exceed $43,000. g) Consultant Services Amendment with Belletrist Communications for website copywriting for an amount not to exceed $1,250. h) Consultant Services Amendment with SRF Consulting for Parkview Center School Stormwater BMP Feasibility. i) Agreement Outdoor Lab for BMP repairs at Harambee Elementary School for an amount not to exceed $4,214. j) Consultant Services Amendment with Silverman for New Headquarters Project for an amount not to exceed $10,750. k) Stewardship grant Agreement with Susan Bougie for BMP project for an amount not to exceed $1,820. l) Stewardship Grant Agreement with Leah Gannon for BMP project for an amount not to exceed $1,028.

2) Board Approved Agreements a) Consultant Services Agreement with Tamsie Ringler for Mississippi River Watershed Iron Casting Project for an amount not to exceed $28,440. b) Cost Share Grant Agreement for construction of BMP’s for Minnesota Nursery and Landscape for an amount not to exceed $62,000.

3) General Updates a) Office Closed Monday, September 3rd for Labor Day Holiday b) 20th Anniversary Event and River of Iron Pour, Friday, September 21st c) Rules TAC Meeting, Wednesday, September 19th, 9:00 – 11:00 AM VIII. A) B) C)

Next Meetings

Wednesday, September 12, 2018 CAC Meeting 7:00 pm Manager Reider will be attending Wednesday, September 19, 2018 Regular Meeting 6:00 pm Tuesday, October 16, 2018 Metro MAWD IX.

Adjournment

Motion 18-173: Adjournment of the September 5, 2018 Regular Board Meeting at 6:35 p.m.

Reider/Jones Unanimously Approved Respectfully submitted, Michelle Sylvander

Our Mission is to protect, manage and improve the water resources of Capitol Region Watershed District

September 19, 2018 Board Meeting V. Action Items – C) Accounts Payable & Budget Update (Sylvander)

DATE: August 9, 2018 TO: CRWD Board of Managers FROM: Michelle Sylvander, Office Manager RE: August 2018 Accounts Payable/Receivable and Administrative/Program Budget Report _________________________________________________________________________________

Enclosed are the Accounts Payable/Receivable and the Administrative/Program Budget Reports for the Month of August 2018.

Summary of Budget Report: (August Only Expenses) Administrative Budget (100’s) Program Budget (200’s) Project Budget (300’s) Capital Improvement Budget (400’s) Debt Service (500’s)

$ $ $ $ $

83,782.34 174,827.74 101,922.47 1,531,318.90 0

TOTAL

$

1,891,851.45

Summary of Accounts Payable/Receivable Report through August 31, 2018: (Past, present and future months) (August 2018 Only)

Accounts Payable Accounts Receivable

$ $

1,908,964.05 6,100.00

Our Mission is to protect, manage and improve the water resources of Capitol Region Watershed District.

2018 Operations and CIP Monthly YTD Expenditures to Budget $14,000,000 $12,000,000 $10,000,000 $8,000,000 $6,000,000 $4,000,000 $2,000,000 $Jan

Feb

March

April

May

Jun

July

August

Sept

Oct

2018 Operations Budget

Operations Cumulative Expenditures

2018 CIP Budget

CIP Cumulative Expenditures

Nov

Dec

August Accounts Payable A check was issued to Ta-coumb T. Aiken for the glass art work for the new CRWD office building on August 15th. This check was signed at the August 15th Board of Managers meeting and reflected in the August Accounts Payable/Receivable and Budget Report.

Request Action Approve August 2018 Accounts Payable/Receivable and Budget Report, direct Treasurer and Board President to endorse and disperse checks for these payments. enc:

August 2018 Accounts Payable August 2018 Budget Report

W:\02 Budget and Finance\Board Memos\Board Memos 2018\BD Memo AP Budget Report 9.12.18 .docx

2

Capitol Region Watershed District

Check Register For the Period From Sep 1, 2018 - Sep 30, 2018

Date 08/15/18 09/19/18 09/19/18 09/19/18 09/19/18 09/19/18 09/19/18 09/19/18 09/19/18 09/19/18 09/19/18 09/19/18 09/19/18 09/19/18 09/19/18 09/19/18 09/19/18 09/19/18 09/19/18 09/19/18 09/19/18 09/19/18 09/19/18 09/19/18 09/19/18 09/19/18 09/19/18 09/19/18 09/19/18 09/19/18 09/19/18 09/19/18 09/19/18 09/19/18 09/19/18 09/19/18 09/19/18 09/19/18 09/19/18 09/19/18 09/19/18 09/19/18 09/19/18 09/19/18

Payee Ta-coumba Aiken AD Green Roof Applied Ecological Services, Inc. Arrowplane Barr Engineering Benefit Extras, Inc. BlueAnt Designs Braun Intertec C Lanphear Design City of St. Paul - St. Maint.

City of St. Paul P & R Comcast - Business Comcast Business - VM Cable Comcast Business - VM Cable Common Bond Communities Compas Computer Revolution Dulcet Fountain & Aeration, Inc. Emmons & Olivier Resources Energy Park Plaza Fleet One, LLC Forrest J. Kelley Fourth Dimension Sign Frogtown Green Gopher State One Hamline Hardware Hank HealthPartners Hejny Rental, Inc. Hosch Appraisal & Consulting, Inc. Houston Engineering, Inc. Iris Park Commons Joseph Collins Landbridge Ecological League of MN Cities Ins. Trust Limno Tech Management & Analysis & Development Mark Heiher MetLife Metropolitan Council Midway Ford MSR Nelson Cheese & Deli Outdoor Lab Outdoor Lab

Amount $7,500.00 3,900.00 675.55 93.60 13,496.77 76.75 57,550.00 1,534.50 722.50 2,650.50 78,100.00 321.24 249.19 128.33 12,715.00 3,860.00 2,160.50 735.25 10,467.25 8,881.74 294.16 640.00 4,084.00 5,536.00 59.40 45.28 20,680.93 660.32 35,038.06 23,188.59 10,000.00 934.00 6,611.47 1,878.00 16,750.00 350.00 750.00 312.87 20,748.25 49.90 80,605.79 84.14 1,935.00 600.00

Check # 19237 19238 19239 19240 19241 19242 19243 19244 19245 19246 19247 19248 19249 19250 19251 19252 19253 19254 19255 19256 19257 19258 19259 19260 19261 19262 19263 19264 19265 19266 19267 19268 19269 19270 19271 19272 19273 19274 19275 19276 19277 19278 19279 19280

Page 1 of 2

Description Glass Art August Consulting Professional Services Tech Consulting August Engineering Expense Employee Benefits Grant Reimbursement Soil Testing Design Work Storm Sewer/Street Maintenance Grant Reimbursement Bundled Services Voice Mail Voice Mail & Cable Raingarden Installation Partner Grant Reimbursement Managed Services Service Call Pressure Alarms Office Pocket Park Rent Fuel for Vehicles Office Cleaning Concrete Stamps Partner Grant Funding Tickets Shrub Rakes Employee Benefits Canopy Rental Easement Appraisal Consulting Final Design Surety Return Manager Per Diem/Expense Willow Reserve Restoration Membership Dues Project Engineer Barbara Deming-Strategic Planning Well Sealing Cost Share Employee Benefits Lab Analysis Focus/Tire Repairs Office Design/Professional Services Board Workshop Harambee Elementary School Arlington Pascal Maintenance

Capitol Region Watershed District

Check Register For the Period From Sep 1, 2018 - Sep 30, 2018

Date 09/19/18 09/19/18 09/19/18 09/19/18 09/19/18 09/19/18 09/19/18 09/19/18 09/19/18 09/19/18 09/19/18 09/19/18 09/19/18 09/19/18 09/19/18 09/19/18 09/19/18 09/19/18 09/19/18 09/19/18 09/19/18 09/19/18 09/19/18 09/19/18 09/19/18 09/19/18 09/19/18 09/19/18

Payee Outdoor Lab Outdoor Lab Pioneer Press Public Art Saint Paul Ramsey County - Attorney Redpath & Company Ltd Royal Textile Manufacturing Sarah Berger Seitu Jones Sentry Systems, Inc. Shirley Reider Silverman St. Paul Publishing Co. St. Paul Regional Water Services Staples Business Advantage Sunde Land Surveying TCB Marketing, Inc. Tracy King Walters Wenck Associates, Inc. Xcel Energy Xcel Energy Xcel Energy Xcel Energy Xcel Energy Zenman Productions US Bank Colonial Life

SUB-TOTAL: AUGUST A/P

Amount 1,200.00 2,304.00 433.40 1,320.00 2,635.00 3,486.00 105.00 2,781.00 1,165.92 112.85 1,419.32 500.00 250.00 219.00 118.66 16,833.98 295.00 327.00 73.25 20,034.89 0.77 102.45 149.07 495.00 10.46 17,000.00 1,314.12 671.30

Check # 19281 19282 19283 19284 19285 19286 19287 19288 19289 19290 19291 19292 19293 19294 19295 19296 19297 19298 19299 19300 19301 19302 19303 19304 19305 19306 19307 19308

Description Green Line Maintenance Harambee Elementary School-Plants Legal Notice/Budget Snelling Midway Rainwater Art August Attorney Services August Accounting CRWD Apparel Stewardship Grant Manager Per Diem/Expense Security System Manager Per Diem/Expense Arch-Comm.

St. Paul Voice Water/Sewer Office Supplies Preparation of Easement/Sketches Hmong Times Stewardship Grant Trash/Recycling August Engineering Expense Maryland-Elecrical Services Electrical Services Gas/Electrical Electrical Services Electrical Services Website Development Monthly Credit Card Expense Employee Benefits

$513,012.27

WIRE TRANSFERS: 09/19/18 J. E. Dunn Construction Company 09/19/18 J. E. Dunn Construction Company SUB-TOTAL: WIRE TRANSFERS: AUGUST PAYROLL/BENEFITS: AUGUST TOTAL:

$648,679.00 579,774.00

Certificate of Payment - #7 - Thru 8/31/18 Certificate of Payment - #8 - Thru 8/31/18

$1,228,453.00 $167,498.78 $1,908,964.05

APPROVED FOR PAYMENT:

9/19/2018

AUGUST, 2018 RECEIPTS Ford TCAP Surety Ford Railyard Excavation Permit Permit Fee

$3,600.00 500.00 2,000.00

AUGUST RECEIPTS:

$6,100.00

Page 2 of 2

Surety Permit Fee Permit Fee

Capitol Region Watershed District August 31, 2018 Comparison

August Check Register Totals August A/P

August Financial Statements

Difference

$513,012.27

August J.E. Dunn Construction August Payroll/Benefits AUGUST SUB-TOTAL: Checks issued posted to non-expense accounts/pre-paid expense Thomasin Ringler (issued 8/15/18) August credit card charges paid with check #19235 issued 8/15/18 Surety Returns

$1,228,453.00 $167,498.78 $1,908,964.05

$1,891,851.45

($17,112.60)

($21,665.10) $14,220.00 $332.50

($10,000.00)

AUGUST TOTAL:

$1,891,851.45

Colonial Life HealthPartners MetLife

$671.30 20,680.93 312.87 $21,665.10

Iris Park Commons

10,000.00 $10,000.00

Surety Returns:

Page 1 of 1

$1,891,851.45

$0.00

CAPITOL REGION WATERSHE DISTRICT JOB COST RECAP FOR THE PERIOD AUGUST 1, 2018 ‐ AUGUST 31, 2018

TOTAL GENERAL ADMINISTRATION: 200 ‐ Administration 201 ‐ Groundwater 207 ‐ Rulemaking/Rule Revisions 208 ‐ Permitting 210 ‐ Stewardship Grants 211 ‐ Monitoring & Data Collection 220 ‐ Education & Outreach 225 ‐ Technical Resources & Information Sharing 228 ‐ Future Trends: Research and Positioning 230 ‐ Geographic Informatin Systems (GIS) 240 ‐ Safety Program TOTAL PROGRAMS: 300 ‐ Administration 301 ‐ Shoreline & Streambank Maintenance 305 ‐ Como Lake Subwatershed 310 ‐ Lake McCarron's Subwatershed 313 ‐ Loeb Lake Subwatershed 315 ‐ Trout Brook Subwatershed 317 ‐ Crosby Lake Subwatershed 325 ‐ Wetland, Stream & Ecosystem Restoration 330 ‐ Mississippi River Subwatershed 370 ‐ Watershed Management Plan TOTAL PROJECTS: TOTAL OPERATING FUND: 405 ‐ Como Lake BMP's 410 ‐ Lake McCarron's BMP's 413 ‐ Loeb Lake BMP's 415 ‐ Trout Brook BMP's 417 ‐ Crosby Lake BMP's 430 ‐ Mississippi River Subwatersheds BMP's 440 ‐ Special Projects & Grants 450 ‐ Future Trends: Implementation TOTAL CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT: 15104 ‐ Debt & Loan Service 15 TOTAL DEBT SERVICES:

2018 ANNUAL BUDGET ‐ 506,220.00 214,310.00 74,560.00 ‐ ‐ (396,257.00) $398,833.00 261,530.00 7,400.00 15,000.00 322,840.00 560,110.00 591,210.00 497,130.00 41,840.00 133,510.00 26,700.00 33,320.00 $2,490,590.00 134,727.00 8,000.00 260,330.00 51,650.00 ‐ 222,300.00 26,290.00 ‐ 113,760.00 65,000.00 $882,057.00 $3,771,480.00 444,140.00 119,970.00 85,590.00 288,150.00 ‐ 619,540.00 824,580.00 8,762,000.00 $11,143,970.00 550,000.00 $550,000.00

CURRENT MONTH EXPENDITURES ‐ 80,179.21 2,026.22 1,233.59 343.32 ‐ ‐ 83,782.34 ‐ 766.90 700.99 36,013.89 36,101.16 49,480.81 38,651.68 683.72 11,006.27 965.45 456.87 $174,827.74 ‐ ‐ 30,373.08 1,511.43 ‐ 58,127.62 2,732.50 ‐ 7,377.32 1,800.52 $101,922.47 $360,532.55 24,346.78 1,512.39 7,620.38 ‐ ‐ 7,746.64 145,691.10 1,344,401.61 $1,531,318.90 ‐ ‐

TOTAL ALL FUNDS:

$15,465,450.00

$1,891,851.45

$7,202,814.04

$8,262,635.96

46.57%

Fund Balance FUND BALANCES @ 12/31/17 Operations 2,071,267.17 Capital Improvement 1,130,734.69 Debt Service 94,698.10 Building/Bond Proceeds ‐ TOTAL FUND BALANCE: $3,296,699.96

2018 Fund Transfers ‐ ‐ ‐ ‐ $0.00

Year‐to‐Date Revenue 1,877,242.72 1,361,020.89 284,828.42 9,955,072.82 $13,478,164.85

Year‐to‐Date Expenditures $2,041,933.28 1,222,126.52 530,167.24 3,408,587.00 $7,202,814.04

Fund Balance @ 08/31/18 1,906,576.61 1,269,629.06 (150,640.72) 6,546,485.82 $9,572,050.77

17970 ‐ General Administration 17 18970 ‐ General Administration 18 18795 ‐ Aldine Operating Expense 18976 ‐ Thomas Operating Expense 17980 ‐ Diversity Plan 17985 ‐ CRWD History Study 00000 ‐ Administration Allocation

JOB COST #/NAME

YEAR‐TO‐DATE BALANCE OF BUDGET EXPENDITURES REMAINING 10,965.46 (10,965.46) 583,852.94 (77,632.94) 9,727.10 204,582.90 6,940.03 67,619.97 2,412.72 (2,412.72) 7,304.46 (7,304.46) ‐ (396,257.00) $621,202.71 ($222,369.71) ‐ 261,530.00 3,713.40 3,686.60 11,988.98 3,011.02 228,776.10 94,063.90 150,972.36 409,137.64 309,665.44 281,544.56 243,278.01 253,851.99 11,453.58 30,386.42 36,248.42 97,261.58 10,298.92 16,401.08 12,275.86 21,044.14 $1,018,671.07 $1,471,918.93 ‐ 134,727.00 ‐ 8,000.00 137,157.26 123,172.74 22,705.81 28,944.19 ‐ ‐ 150,710.34 71,589.66 25,604.91 685.09 ‐ ‐ 63,467.36 50,292.64 2,413.82 62,586.18 $402,059.50 $479,997.50 $2,041,933.28 $1,729,546.72 24,820.81 419,319.19 109,702.75 10,267.25 13,984.85 71,605.15 ‐ 288,150.00 24,564.55 (24,564.55) 30,782.79 588,757.21 244,317.32 580,262.68 4,182,540.45 4,579,459.55 $4,630,713.52 $6,513,256.48 530,167.24 19,832.76 $530,167.24 $19,832.76

% OF BUDGET EXPENDED ‐‐‐ 115.34% 4.54% 9.31% ‐‐‐ ‐‐‐ 0.00% 155.76% 0.00% 50.18% ‐‐‐ 70.86% 26.95% 52.38% 48.94% 27.37% 27.15% 38.57% 36.84% 40.90% 0.00% 0.00% 52.69% 43.96% ‐‐‐ 67.80% 97.39% ‐‐‐ 55.79% ‐‐‐ 45.58% 54.14% 5.59% 91.44% 16.34% 0.00% ‐‐‐ 4.97% 29.63% 47.73% 41.55% 96.39% 96.39%

Page 1 of 8

CAPITOL REGION WATERSHE DISTRICT JOB COST DETAIL FOR THE PERIOD AUGUST 1, 2018 ‐ AUGUST 31, 2018

2018 ANNUAL BUDGET ‐ 506,220.00 214,310.00 74,560.00 ‐ ‐ (396,257.00) TOTAL GENERAL ADMINISTRATION: $398,833.00 20000 ‐ Administration Allocation 261,530.00 17000 ‐ District Permit Program ‐ 18000 ‐ District Permit Program 165,050.00 18101 ‐ Permit Tracking & Database Management 10,740.00 18102 ‐ Construction Inspection 119,050.00 17103 ‐ Permit Closure & Post Construction Inspection/Maintenance ‐ 18103 ‐ Permit Closure & Post Construction Inspection/Maintenance 28,000.00 ‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐ ‐ Permits ‐ 18120 ‐ Evaluate Rules/TAC Meetings 15,000.00 18130 ‐ Groundwater Protectin ‐ Well Sealing 7,400.00 16143 ‐ Stewardship Grants ‐ 17143 ‐ Stewardship Grants ‐ 18143 ‐ Stewardship Grants 318,190.00 17144 ‐ Partner Grants ‐ 18144 ‐ Partner Grants 96,790.00 17145 ‐ Inspiring Communities Program 18,850.00 18145 ‐ Inspiring Communities Program ‐ 18146 ‐ Rain Garden Projects 25,330.00 16147 ‐ TWP Blvd. Rain Gardens 92,190.00 18148 ‐ MN Greencorps Member 8,760.00 17200 ‐ Baseline Monitoring & Data Collection ‐ 18200 ‐ Baseline Monitoring & Data Collection 289,190.00 17205 ‐ Lake Monitoring & Data Collection ‐ 18205 ‐ Lake Monitoring & Data Collection 113,550.00 17210 ‐ Villa Park Monitoring & Data Collection ‐ 18210 ‐ Villa Park Monitoring & Data Collection 30,570.00 17215 ‐ Wetland Bio‐Monitoring ‐ 18215 ‐ Wetland Bio‐Monitoring 14,420.00 18220 ‐ Long‐Term Monitoring Database Development 13,510.00 17221 ‐ Data Analysis & Reporting Tool 18,320.00 18225 ‐ Remote Data Access & Set‐Up 13,380.00 17230 ‐ BMP Monitoring ‐ 46,520.00 18230 ‐ BMP Monitoring

17970 ‐ General Administration 18970 ‐ General Administration 18975 ‐ Aldine Operating Expense 18976 ‐ Thomas Operating Expense 17980 ‐ Diversity Plan 17985 ‐ CRWD History Study 10000 ‐ Administration Allocation

JOB COST #/NAME

CURRENT MONTH EXPENDITURES ‐ 80,179.21 2,026.22 1,233.59 343.32 ‐ ‐ $83,782.34 ‐ ‐ 8,929.26 89.66 103.88 ‐ 1,961.43 24,929.66 700.99 766.90 ‐ ‐ 22,633.25 ‐ 10,335.22 ‐ ‐ ‐ 2,570.70 561.99 ‐ 35,043.85 ‐ 736.95 ‐ 2,589.96 ‐ 1,223.85 ‐ 181.68 ‐ 3,900.00 3,644.48

YEAR‐TO‐DATE BALANCE OF EXPENDITURES BUDGET REMAINING 10,965.46 (10,965.46) 583,852.94 (77,632.94) 9,727.10 204,582.90 6,940.03 67,619.97 2,412.72 (2,412.72) 7,304.46 (7,304.46) ‐ (396,257.00) $621,202.71 ($222,369.71) ‐ 261,530.00 5,790.93 (5,790.93) 71,839.88 93,210.12 717.12 10,022.88 871.36 118,178.64 244.42 (244.42) 5,067.00 22,933.00 144,245.39 (144,245.39) 11,988.98 3,011.02 3,713.40 3,686.60 234.95 (234.95) 3,470.33 (3,470.33) 104,813.03 213,376.97 489.76 (489.76) 14,369.68 82,420.32 ‐ 18,850.00 486.00 (486.00) 804.87 24,525.13 23,550.95 68,639.05 2,752.79 6,007.21 15,495.43 (15,495.43) 170,435.18 118,754.82 501.95 (501.95) 30,652.67 82,897.33 1,583.60 (1,583.60) 5,975.21 24,594.79 4,530.00 (4,530.00) 3,502.38 10,917.62 8,418.85 5,091.15 32,385.16 (14,065.16) 749.72 12,630.28 5,812.83 (5,812.83) 9,739.91 36,780.09

% OF BUDGET EXPENDED ‐‐‐ 115.34% 4.54% 9.31% ‐‐‐ ‐‐‐ 0.00% 155.76% 0.00% ‐‐‐ 43.53% 6.68% 0.73% ‐‐‐ 18.10% ‐‐‐ 79.93% 50.18% ‐‐‐ ‐‐‐ 32.94% ‐‐‐ 14.85% 0.00% ‐‐‐ 3.18% 25.55% 31.42% ‐‐‐ 58.94% ‐‐‐ 26.99% ‐‐‐ 19.55% ‐‐‐ 24.29% 62.32% 176.77% 5.60% ‐‐‐ 20.94%

Page 2 of 8

CAPITOL REGION WATERSHE DISTRICT JOB COST DETAIL FOR THE PERIOD AUGUST 1, 2018 ‐ AUGUST 31, 2018

JOB COST #/NAME 15231 ‐ AHUG Exfiltration Monitoring 16232 ‐ Midway Office WH Monitoring 17232 ‐ Midway Office WH Monitoring 17250 ‐ General Ed & Outreach 18250 ‐ General Ed & Outreach 18251 ‐ General Communications 18252 ‐ Education & Outreach ‐ Aldine 17255 ‐ Leaf & Litter Clean Ups 18255 ‐ Leaf & Litter Clean Ups 17260 ‐ Municipal Outreach 18260 ‐ Municipal Training 18262 ‐ Youth Outreach 18263 ‐ Communication Training 18265 ‐ Sponsorships & Partnerships 16268 ‐ Adopt A Drain 17268 ‐ Adopt A Drain 18268 ‐ Adopt A Drain 17270 ‐ Website & Social Media 18270 ‐ Website & Social Media 18271 ‐ Master Water Stewards 17274 ‐ TWP Communications 17275 ‐ Events 18275 ‐ Events 16277 ‐ TWP ‐ Adopt a Drain 16278 ‐ TWP Leaf & Litter Clean Ups 17279 ‐ Social Media 18279 ‐ Social Media 17285 ‐ Awards & Recognition Programs 18284 ‐ 595 Education & Outreach 18285 ‐ Awards & Recognition Programs 17300 ‐ Local & Agency Plan Review & Tech Committee 18300 ‐ Plan Review & Tech Committee 17303 ‐ BMP Database Maintenance/Updates 18303 ‐ BMP Database Maintenance/Updates 17330 ‐ District Research Program 18330 ‐ District Research Program 17333 ‐ Public Art Program 18333 ‐ Public Art Program 18334 ‐ Public Art Program ‐ Aldine 18336 ‐ Climate Change 18370 ‐ GIS Program Development 18390 ‐ Safety Training 16395 ‐ Safety Updates 17395 ‐ Safety Program Update/Audits 18395 ‐ Safety Program Update/Audits 18396 ‐ CSE Equipment

2018 ANNUAL BUDGET 20,460.00 31,290.00 ‐ ‐ 79,350.00 76,960.00 60,000.00 ‐ 17,400.00 ‐ 20,090.00 10,690.00 10,990.00 27,560.00 ‐ ‐ 17,390.00 ‐ 77,770.00 28,120.00 7,480.00 ‐ 22,780.00 6,900.00 10,400.00 ‐ 7,270.00 ‐ ‐ 15,980.00 20,940.00 ‐ ‐ 20,900.00 ‐ 38,720.00 ‐ 19,790.00 60,000.00 15,000.00 26,700.00 10,540.00 12,460.00 ‐ ‐ 10,320.00 TOTAL PROGRAMS: $2,490,590.00

CURRENT MONTH EXPENDITURES 908.53 ‐ 1,251.51 ‐ 7,438.17 3,514.37 ‐ ‐ 109.47 ‐ ‐ 126.33 ‐ 624.83 ‐ ‐ 31.83 18,077.46 ‐ 1,695.13 61.49 40.99 1,798.33 ‐ 61.36 40.99 225.47 ‐ 4,784.96 20.50 ‐ 442.79 ‐ 240.93 ‐ 431.68 ‐ 206.21 10,368.38 ‐ 965.45 ‐ ‐ 47.79 ‐ 409.08 $174,827.74

YEAR‐TO‐DATE BALANCE OF EXPENDITURES BUDGET REMAINING 6,864.01 13,595.99 ‐ 31,290.00 13,018.54 (13,018.54) 4,490.80 (4,490.80) 40,962.32 38,387.68 32,962.55 43,997.45 ‐ 60,000.00 (2,213.50) 2,213.50 1,474.14 15,925.86 6,337.50 (6,337.50) 2,625.22 17,464.78 4,820.60 5,869.40 142.85 10,847.15 16,810.63 10,749.37 31.44 (31.44) 2,210.51 (2,210.51) 13,055.66 4,334.34 69,581.72 (69,581.72) ‐ 77,770.00 23,771.47 4,348.53 731.34 6,748.66 40.99 (40.99) 10,233.05 12,546.95 3,401.63 3,498.37 2,573.79 7,826.21 40.99 (40.99) 912.88 6,357.12 3,210.85 (3,210.85) 4,784.96 (4,784.96) 283.62 15,696.38 50.47 20,889.53 4,025.32 (4,025.32) 430.23 (430.23) 6,947.56 13,952.44 102.46 (102.46) 3,495.75 35,224.25 7,409.83 (7,409.83) 8,048.14 11,741.86 15,933.66 44,066.34 1,258.58 13,741.42 10,298.92 16,401.08 7,606.74 2,933.26 ‐ 12,460.00 1,955.83 (1,955.83) 860.46 (860.46) 1,852.83 8,467.17 1,018,671.07 $1,471,918.93

% OF BUDGET EXPENDED 33.55% 0.00% ‐‐‐ ‐‐‐ 51.62% 42.83% 0.00% 0.00% 8.47% ‐‐‐ 13.07% 45.09% 1.30% 61.00% ‐‐‐ ‐‐‐ 75.08% ‐‐‐ 0.00% 84.54% 9.78% ‐‐‐ 44.92% 49.30% 24.75% #DIV/0!

12.56% ‐‐‐ ‐‐‐ 1.77% 0.24% ‐‐‐ ‐‐‐ 33.24% ‐‐‐ 9.03% ‐‐‐ 40.67% 26.56% 8.39% 38.57% 72.17% 0.00% ‐‐‐ ‐‐‐ 17.95% 40.90%

Page 3 of 8

CAPITOL REGION WATERSHE DISTRICT JOB COST DETAIL FOR THE PERIOD AUGUST 1, 2018 ‐ AUGUST 31, 2018

JOB COST #/NAME 30000 ‐ Administration Allocation 18100 ‐ Watershed Management Plan ‐ 2020 18001 ‐ Strategic Plan 18405 ‐ St. Paul Natural Resources Intern Program 16420 ‐ Como Reg Park Stormwater Plan 17421 ‐ Como BMP Maintenance & Inspection 18421 ‐ Como BMP Maintenance & Inspection 18425 ‐ Curtis Pond Opti RTC O & M 16426 ‐ Como Lake, In‐Lake Management Assessment 18427 ‐ Como Lake Management Plan 16430 ‐ TWP Como Lake Project Development 16432 ‐ TWP Como Lake Project Dev. 17435 ‐ North & East Subwatershed Study 18470 ‐ AIS Management 15471 ‐ Aquatic Invasive Mgt Plan 15 17475 ‐ Lake McCarron's Internal Loading Assessment 18475 ‐ Lake McCarron's Internal Loading Assessment 18476 ‐ Upper Villa Maintenance 16477 ‐ TWP ‐ Lake McCarron's Project Development 17550 ‐ Inspection & Annual Maintenance 18550 ‐ Inspection & Annual Maintenance 14552 ‐ TBI Easement Verification & Documentation 17554 ‐ TBI Hydraulic/Hydrolic Model Calibration & Update 18570 ‐ NPDES MS4 Stormwater Program 18575 ‐ Illicit Discharge Detection & Elimination Program 17621 ‐ Snelling Midway Redevelopment 17622 ‐ Ford Site Planning 18622 ‐ Ford Site Planning 18623 ‐ Ford Site Area C 18624 ‐ CCLRT BMP Maintenance 14625 ‐ Eustis St. Stormwater Improvement 18531 ‐ Highland Ravine BMP Maintenance 17631 ‐ Highland Ravine Maintenance 16660 ‐ TWP Grant Admin 16

16705 ‐ TWP Como BMP McMurray 16715 ‐ TWP Como Sr. High 16720 ‐ Willow Reserve Restoration Project 16752 ‐ TWP ‐ McCarrons BMP ‐ Parkview 12801 ‐ Highland Ravine Stabilization 16815 ‐ TBI Repairs ‐ St. 0+00 ‐ 28+49 13xxx ‐ Trout Brook Nature Sanctuary 13852 ‐ Tirllium Site Water Resource

2018 ANNUAL BUDGET 134,727.00 50,000.00 15,000.00 8,000.00 21,010.00 ‐ 25,310.00 9,550.00 ‐ 135,540.00 68,920.00 ‐ ‐ 14,300.00 ‐ ‐ 29,200.00 8,150.00 ‐ ‐ 112,650.00 76,050.00 10,610.00 6,450.00 16,540.00 10,850.00 ‐ 69,200.00 ‐ 33,710.00 ‐ 26,290.00 ‐ ‐ TOTAL PROJECTS: $882,057.00 TOTAL OPERATING FUND: $3,771,480.00 444,140.00 ‐ 85,590.00 119,970.00 ‐ ‐ 288,150.00 ‐

CURRENT MONTH EXPENDITURES ‐ 1,204.22 596.30 ‐ ‐ ‐ 600.00 ‐ 98.96 29,190.28 483.84 ‐ ‐ ‐ ‐ ‐ ‐ 1,429.98 81.45 ‐ 3,624.65 53,883.05 95.58 49.25 475.09 ‐ ‐ (4,700.34) 10,775.43 1,302.23 ‐ ‐ 2,732.50 ‐ $101,922.47 $360,532.55 24,287.38 ‐ 7,620.38 1,364.64 ‐ 59.40 ‐ 147.75

YEAR‐TO‐DATE BALANCE OF EXPENDITURES BUDGET REMAINING ‐ 134,727.00 1,719.38 48,280.62 694.44 14,305.56 ‐ 8,000.00 ‐ 21,010.00 50.47 (50.47) 9,746.19 15,563.81 2,500.00 7,050.00 5,065.58 (5,065.58) 61,060.89 74,479.11 58,581.71 10,338.29 ‐ ‐ 152.42 (152.42) ‐ 14,300.00 5,308.32 (5,308.32) 9,689.69 (9,689.69) ‐ 29,200.00 6,502.84 1,647.16 1,204.96 (1,204.96) 2,062.37 (2,062.37) 35,470.44 77,179.56 94,669.51 (18,619.51) 10,076.68 533.32 1,326.43 5,123.57 7,104.91 9,435.09 2,293.10 8,556.90 2,510.16 (2,510.16) 19,476.52 49,723.48 30,062.75 (30,062.75) 9,035.19 24,674.81 89.64 (89.64) 5,946.35 20,343.65 19,658.56 (19,658.56) ‐ ‐ 402,059.50 $479,997.50 $2,041,933.28 $1,729,546.72 24,387.10 419,752.90 39.16 (39.16) 13,984.85 71,605.15 19,877.20 100,092.80 24,564.55 (24,564.55) 394.55 (394.55) ‐ 288,150.00 49,857.65 (49,857.65)

% OF BUDGET EXPENDED 0.00% 3.44% 4.63% 0.00% 0.00% ‐‐‐ 38.51% 26.18% ‐‐‐ 45.05% 85.00% ‐‐‐ ‐‐‐ 0.00% ‐‐‐ ‐‐‐ 0.00% 79.79% ‐‐‐ ‐‐‐ 31.49% 124.48% 94.97% 20.56% 42.96% 21.13% ‐‐‐ 28.15% ‐‐‐ 26.80% ‐‐‐ ‐‐‐ ‐‐‐ ‐‐‐ 45.58% 54.14% 5.49% ‐‐‐ 16.34% 16.57% ‐‐‐ ‐‐‐ 0.00% ‐‐‐

Page 4 of 8

CAPITOL REGION WATERSHE DISTRICT JOB COST DETAIL FOR THE PERIOD AUGUST 1, 2018 ‐ AUGUST 31, 2018

JOB COST #/NAME 15855 ‐ Roseville Victoria Wetland Grant 16853 ‐ Victoria Park Water Features 16881 ‐ Green Line Redevelopment BMP's 16886 ‐ Lauderdale Subwatershed Stormwater Improvement Project 16910 ‐ Special Grants 17910 ‐ Special Grants 18910 ‐ Special Grants 16912 ‐ Selby Milton Victoria 15917 ‐ Harambee Elementary 15 16917 ‐ Swede Hollow Construction 15919 ‐ Swed Hollow Final Design 16920 ‐ TWP Grant Administration 14922 ‐ Model Cities ‐ Brownstone 17925 ‐ Highland Park Sr. High 17927 ‐ Union On Grand Condos 17928 ‐ Jimmy Lee Play Area 17929 ‐ Wilder Square Condo 16950 ‐ New Office Facility 17950 ‐ New Office Facility TOTAL CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT: 17001 ‐ Debt & Loan Service TOTAL DEBT SERVICES:

2018 ANNUAL BUDGET ‐ ‐ 559,490.00 60,050.00 ‐ ‐ 821,700.00 2,880.00 ‐ ‐ ‐ ‐ ‐ ‐ ‐ ‐ ‐ ‐ 8,762,000.00 $11,143,970.00 550,000.00 $550,000.00

TOTAL ALL FUNDS:

$15,465,450.00

CURRENT MONTH YEAR‐TO‐DATE BALANCE OF EXPENDITURES EXPENDITURES BUDGET REMAINING ‐ 38,600.00 (38,600.00) ‐ 1,367.90 (1,367.90) 3,804.34 13,645.91 545,844.09 3,942.30 17,136.88 42,913.12 ‐ 97.93 (97.93) ‐ 2,427.84 (2,427.84) 9,702.62 31,223.86 790,476.14 ‐ 99.49 2,780.51 ‐ 56,199.04 (56,199.04) 40.72 382.35 (382.35) 78,140.72 78,140.72 (78,140.72) ‐ 664.00 (664.00) ‐ 97.90 (97.90) ‐ 75.48 (75.48) 57,647.55 57,647.55 (57,647.55) ‐ 16,761.85 (16,761.85) 159.49 499.31 (499.31) 1,344,401.61 4,182,540.45 (4,182,540.45) ‐ ‐ 8,762,000.00 $1,531,318.90 $4,630,713.52 $6,513,256.48 ‐ 530,167.24 19,832.76 ‐ $530,167.24 $19,832.76 $1,891,851.45

$7,202,814.04

$8,262,635.96

% OF BUDGET EXPENDED ‐‐‐ ‐‐‐ 2.44% 28.54% ‐‐‐ ‐‐‐ 3.80% 3.45% ‐‐‐ ‐‐‐ ‐‐‐ ‐‐‐ ‐‐‐ ‐‐‐ ‐‐‐ ‐‐‐ ‐‐‐ 0.00% 41.55% 96.39% 96.39% 46.57%

Page 5 of 8

CAPITOL REGION WATERSHED DISTRICT PERMITS FOR THE PERIOD AUGUST 1, 2018 ‐ AUGUST 31, 2018 PERMIT NUMBER 8017 8032 9009 10002 10003 10009 10010 10014 10027 10029 11017 12017 12023 13002 13004 13009 13015 13023 13025 14003 14005 14008 14009 14018 14020 14022 14026 14029 14034 14041 15002 15007 15013 15024 15025 15029 15030 15032 15037 15039 15040

PERMIT NAME

PERMITTING BUDGET

Highland Park HS St. Joseph's Hospital Victoria Street TH36 & Rice Interchange CCLRT Como Park HS Maryland & Rice Front‐Victoria RSVP Lafayette Bridge I94 & 280 Hmongtown Market Cayuga Ford Site Demo Hamline Ave. Bridge Episcopal Homes St. Thomas Field Maryland Arkwright Dew Drop Inn Vandalia Redevelopment State Trunk Highway 5 Resurface Hazelden Redevelopment LT Ballpark Stormwater Permit Waters of Highland Frogtown Farms Primrose School Victoria Park Stormwater Pleasant Ridge St. Agnes School East 7th Senior Apartments Higher Ground 2700 University Ramsey County Building Demo Jamestown Homes Saints Tailgating Parking Lot Stewart Street Midway Office Warehouse Farrington Estates Victoria Park East Trail MNDOT Ped Bridges Sunrise Banks Office Building Luther Seminary

‐ ‐ ‐ ‐ ‐ ‐ ‐ ‐ ‐ ‐ ‐ ‐ ‐ ‐ ‐ ‐ ‐ ‐ ‐ ‐ ‐ ‐ ‐ ‐ ‐ ‐ ‐ ‐ ‐ ‐ ‐ ‐ ‐ ‐ ‐ ‐ ‐ ‐ ‐ ‐ ‐

CURRENT MONTH EXPENDITURES

YEAR‐TO‐DATE EXPENDITURES

44.71 ‐ 33.49 121.20 403.39 ‐ ‐ 71.53 107.30 ‐ ‐ 211.81 1,060.27 35.76 50.23 ‐ ‐ ‐ ‐ 16.75 125.00 71.53 ‐ ‐ ‐ ‐ 151.83 18.10 167.40 ‐ 125.00 150.70 159.65 ‐ 139.76 ‐ 242.56 ‐ 53.65 54.32 753.38

44.71 447.00 33.49 307.41 403.39 17.99 35.99 71.53 107.30 534.00 18.10 1,728.44 5,404.42 35.76 50.23 36.21 35.99 36.21 17.99 60.08 771.90 71.53 54.32 63.37 63.20 63.02 1,982.36 18.10 536.72 51.00 1,315.49 641.35 1,365.48 2,411.03 492.79 176.29 693.20 53.97 53.65 126.28 3,446.92

BALANCE OF PERMIT BUDGET REMAINING

% OF PERMIT BUDGET EXPENDED

‐ ‐ ‐ ‐ ‐ ‐ ‐ ‐ ‐ ‐ ‐ ‐ ‐ ‐ ‐ ‐ ‐ ‐ ‐ ‐ ‐ ‐ ‐ ‐ ‐ ‐ ‐ ‐ ‐ ‐ ‐ ‐ ‐ ‐ ‐ ‐ ‐ ‐ ‐ ‐ ‐

‐ ‐ ‐ ‐ ‐ ‐ ‐ ‐ ‐ ‐ ‐ ‐ ‐ ‐ ‐ ‐ ‐ ‐ ‐ ‐ ‐ ‐ ‐ ‐ ‐ ‐ ‐ ‐ ‐ ‐ ‐ ‐ ‐ ‐ ‐ ‐ ‐ ‐ ‐ ‐ ‐

Page 6 of 8

CAPITOL REGION WATERSHED DISTRICT PERMITS FOR THE PERIOD AUGUST 1, 2018 ‐ AUGUST 31, 2018 PERMIT NUMBER 16004 16005 16007 16008 16009 16010 16011 16016 16017 16018 16019 16020 16021 16023 16024 16025 16026 16027 16028 16029 16032 16033 17001 17002 17003 17004 17005 17008 17009 17010 17012 17013 17014 17015 17016 17017 17018 17019 17020 17021 17022

PERMIT NAME Xcel Pipeline 2016 Como‐Chatsworth Phase II Community School of Excellence Keg & Case Market Jackson Street Wheelock Parkway McMurray Field Willow Reserve Habitat of Humanity Rivoli Redevelopment 601 Prior Demo Roselawn Cemetary Dorothy Day Place 2300 Territorial Apartments Linwood Lower School Hmong Academy Expansion Snelling Midway St. Anthony Park Elementary River East School Adams School Boaters Outlet SPJCC Addition AET Campus Expansion Horace Mann Elementary Highland Park Elementary Como Park Sr. High School St. Thomas Stadium & Field Ford Parkway Bridge Erosion SPA Expansion Jackson Street Reconstruction Swede Hollow Nova Academy School Great River Schools Residence Inn Grand Avenue Wheelock Dale Victoria Smith Avenue Bridge Dickerman Park Exchange Street Apartments MN United Stadium Hauling Transfer Road Storage Macalaster Theater Building Regions Birth Center

PERMITTING BUDGET ‐ ‐ ‐ ‐ ‐ ‐ ‐ ‐ ‐ ‐ ‐ ‐ ‐ ‐ ‐ ‐ ‐ ‐ ‐ ‐ ‐ ‐ ‐ ‐ ‐ ‐ ‐ ‐ ‐ ‐ ‐ ‐ ‐ ‐ ‐ ‐ ‐ ‐ ‐ ‐ ‐

CURRENT MONTH EXPENDITURES

YEAR‐TO‐DATE EXPENDITURES

71.53 ‐ 156.96 927.37 ‐ 89.41 ‐ 39.02 548.18 ‐ 88.81 451.62 878.15 473.22 184.36 2,564.45 174.57 176.97 93.27 106.56 895.87 1,097.91 200.20 187.88 124.34 ‐ 33.49 516.38 472.62 ‐ ‐ 94.63 473.22 33.49 255.87 25.70 472.03 ‐ 742.88 187.41 84.38

71.53 18.10 988.82 3,714.45 36.21 107.40 71.09 3,663.72 4,341.45 279.94 518.88 3,741.31 4,410.77 3,656.87 746.18 15,573.09 2,631.17 890.61 578.86 718.87 4,631.04 1,383.25 676.20 953.58 658.02 18.10 123.67 3,594.89 2,697.10 171.83 36.20 633.17 3,930.43 159.68 1,107.43 79.01 3,584.02 327.42 2,300.21 665.26 2,189.50

BALANCE OF PERMIT BUDGET REMAINING

% OF PERMIT BUDGET EXPENDED

‐ ‐ ‐ ‐ ‐ ‐ ‐ ‐ ‐ ‐ ‐ ‐ ‐ ‐ ‐ ‐ ‐ ‐ ‐ ‐ ‐ ‐ ‐ ‐ ‐ ‐ ‐ ‐ ‐ ‐ ‐ ‐ ‐ ‐ ‐ ‐ ‐ ‐ ‐ ‐ ‐

‐ ‐ ‐ ‐ ‐ ‐ ‐ ‐ ‐ ‐ ‐ ‐ ‐ ‐ ‐ ‐ ‐ ‐ ‐ ‐ ‐ ‐ ‐ ‐ ‐ ‐ ‐ ‐ ‐ ‐ ‐ ‐ ‐ ‐ ‐ ‐ ‐ ‐ ‐ ‐ ‐

Page 7 of 8

CAPITOL REGION WATERSHED DISTRICT PERMITS FOR THE PERIOD AUGUST 1, 2018 ‐ AUGUST 31, 2018 PERMIT NUMBER 17023 17024 17025 18001 18002 18003 18004 18005 18006 18007 18008 18009 18010 18011 18012 18013 18014 18015 18016 18017 18018 18019

18000

PERMIT NAME

PERMITTING BUDGET

CURRENT MONTH EXPENDITURES

YEAR‐TO‐DATE EXPENDITURES

BALANCE OF PERMIT BUDGET REMAINING

% OF PERMIT BUDGET EXPENDED

Weyerhaeuser Apts.

St. Catherine Library Lot Rice Park Revitalization Sylvan Park Improvements Menards Trnasload Terminal Marydale Park Improvements Como Paving 2018 Higher Ground Academy Wheelock 2018 Woodlawn Jefferson Vomela Beacon Bluff Seal Island at Como Zoo CRWD 595 Aldine Hendrickson Apartments Scheffer Community Center Beacon Bluff Opus Morning Star Met Council Villa Park Sanitary O'Gara's Mixed Use Cathedral Hill Payne Building Development Ford TCAP Railyard Excavation

‐ ‐ ‐ ‐ ‐ ‐ ‐ ‐ ‐ ‐ ‐ ‐ ‐ ‐ ‐ ‐ ‐ ‐ ‐ ‐ ‐ ‐

398.72 1,194.44 483.13 97.69 666.56 88.81 226.85 ‐ 62.17 111.03 48.85 124.34 ‐ ‐ 1,083.92 53.28 ‐ 348.65 1,223.08 656.63 564.00 205.44

1,265.63 1,906.44 3,568.26 2,139.25 5,722.54 1,319.53 1,765.65 1,343.92 634.15 1,162.17 1,887.30 1,758.46 1,570.51 1,024.95 3,967.89 2,216.84 3,558.01 2,209.05 3,241.23 656.63 564.00 205.44

‐ ‐ ‐ ‐ ‐ ‐ ‐ ‐ ‐ ‐ ‐ ‐ ‐ ‐ ‐ ‐ ‐ ‐ ‐ ‐ ‐ ‐

‐ ‐ ‐ ‐ ‐ ‐ ‐ ‐ ‐ ‐ ‐ ‐ ‐ ‐ ‐ ‐ ‐ ‐ ‐ ‐ ‐ ‐

Sub‐Total: Permits

‐

24,929.66

144,245.39

‐

‐

8,929.26 33,858.92

77,630.81 221,876.20

General Permitting TOTAL PERMITS:

‐ $165,050.00

‐ ‐ ($56,826.20) 134.43%

Page 8 of 8

CRWD Fall Events Walk for Water Upper Landing Park (180 Shepard Rd, St. Paul, MN 55012) Saturday, September 15 CAC members Bob Simonet and Mary Lily will be staffing a CRWD table. $25 to register Event details here: http://www.andersonraces.com/new-events/2018/9/15/twin-cities-walk-for-water

CRWD 20th Anniversary and River of Iron – Artist pour of the Mississippi River casting for our new office location with music, food and art activity.

Friday September 21, 5 – 9pm 595 Aldine Ave, Saint Paul 55104 – Event will take place in the building on Thomas Event details and RSVP here: https://capitolregion-20th-anniversary.eventbrite.com

Frogtown Farm Harvest Fest Staff and volunteers will be leading rain garden activities including seed bomb making and using the Enviroscape to demonstrate watersheds and non-point source pollution 946 Minnehaha Ave West Saturday, September 22, 11am – 2pm Event info here: http://www.frogtownfarm.org/harvest-fest-2018

InProgress – Voices of the North End Thursday, September 27 6-8pm St Bernard’s Catholic Church 187 Geranium Ave W, Saint Paul RSVP here: https://www.eventbrite.com/e/voices-of-the-north-end-community-gathering-tickets-49580173634 Nibi Walk with MN Humanities Center, We are Water MN and River of Life Program A Dakota Ceremonial Walk from Phalen Lake to the Mississippi River October 6, 9am – 12pm Required NIbi Walk Preparation workshop to cover Dakota History of the place, share ecological history & learn Nibi walk protocols October 27, 9am - 3pm Nibi Walk from Phalen Lake to the Mississippi River Meet at the Humanities center for both dates 987 Ivy Ave E Saint Paul, MN 55106 October Como Connect Community Resource Fair Bethel Lutheran Church 670 W Wheelock Parkway St Paul, 55117 Saturday October 13, 10am – 2pm Let Lindsay know if you’d like to help staff a CRWD table. lindsay@capitolregionwd.org

W:\07 Programs\Edu-Outreach\Events\2018 Events\9-19-18 Board CRWD Events.docx