The URL can be used to link to this page

A-2. West Water Treatment Plant and Well 15kA CITY OF MEMORANDUM vluuIlJUWLILJII TO: Todd Gerhardt, City Manager 7700 Market Boulevard Fax: 952.227.1170 end of Manchester Road at the intersection of Lake Harrison Road and Galpin PO Box 147 FROM: Paul Oehme, Dir. of Public Works /City Engineer Chanhassen, MN 55317 Fax: 952.227.1110 Water treatment for the west well field was planned to be phased in as needed. Fax: 952.227.1404 DATE: Q July 28, 2014 Administration Planning & Natural Resources Originally this plant was programmed in the CIP for 2012 however with the down Phone: 952.227.1100 SUBJ: West Water Treatment Plant Options and Proposed Well #15 Fax: 952.227.1110 City Project No. 14 -04 Building Inspections untreated water and the way it directly influences portions of the cities treated low 7901 Park Place Phone: 952.227.1180 Phone: 952.227.1300 Chanhassen's western border and runs from Highway 5 north up Minnewashta Fax: 952.227.1190 BACKGROUND WEST WATER TREATMENT PLANT Engineering The East Water Treatment Plant was constructed in 2005/2006 and treats about 80% Phone: 952.227.1160 the community's water. Fax: 952.227.1170 end of Manchester Road at the intersection of Lake Harrison Road and Galpin Recreation Center The 2003, water treatment plant study recommended treating the east well field wells Finance Phone: 952.227.1140 first since these were the wells that have the highest iron and manganese content. Fax: 952.227.1110 Water treatment for the west well field was planned to be phased in as needed. Park & Recreation The City purchased a piece of property at the time the Lake Harrison Development Phone: 952.227.1120 was approved for a treatment plant and for a small park. The location is at the south Fax: 952.227.1110 end of Manchester Road at the intersection of Lake Harrison Road and Galpin Recreation Center Boulevard. 2310 Coulter Boulevard Phone: 952.227.1400 DISCUSSION Fax: 952.227.1404 Currently, the West Water Treatment Plant is programmed for construction in 2023. Planning & Natural Resources Originally this plant was programmed in the CIP for 2012 however with the down Phone: 952.227.1130 turn in the economy in 2008, the plant was delayed. Fax: 952.227.1110 Chanhassen has some unique water quality issues, caused by the High Zone's Public works untreated water and the way it directly influences portions of the cities treated low 7901 Park Place zone areas. The area, referred to as the " Minnewashta Loop ", comprises Phone: 952.227.1300 Chanhassen's western border and runs from Highway 5 north up Minnewashta Fax: 952.227.1310 Parkway to Highway 7 then east to Highway 41 (see map). This area is a large Senior Center hydraulic loop linked to the low zone's treated water on the southern end and the high Phone: 952.227.1125 zones untreated water on the northern side at Highway 7 and Highway 41. During Fax: 952.227.1110 periods of normal to low use this area is served with treated water, however in periods of high use the demand is heavily supplemented from the high zone. This condition Web Site causes troublesome rusty water complaints throughout the Minnewashta Loop area. www.d.chanhassen.mn.us The only remedy for these complaints is to perform localized hydrant flushing to remove the discoloration. Unfortunately, this activity only introduces more untreated water into the area, replicating the problem for a later date. Chanhassen is a Community for Lite - Providing for Today and Planning for Tomorrow Todd Gerhardt West Water Treatment Plant Options & Proposed Well No. 15 July 28, 2014 Page 2 High Zone influence on the low zone also has a dramatic effect on chlorine residuals. Chlorine is added to the water to guard against disease causing pathogens and untreated water has a high chlorine demand because it is rich with iron and manganese. These elements chemically oxidize together with chlorine in distribution piping, bringing them out of solution and creating discolored material. This condition makes for an uneven chlorine residual throughout the City; higher in the east and lower to the west. Wells 3 & 9 located on Galpin Boulevard north of Highway 5 are low zone wells directly connected to the distribution system and are not treated by the east water treatment plant. These supportive wells offer water production in periods of high city demand however they also bear negative water quality issues upon the low zone. The areas most affected with discolored water from these wells are along W. 78th Street and include Arboretum Village Townhomes, Vasserman Trail area, and Walnut Grove HOA. Treated areas of the city not under any direct or indirect influence from the high zone experience very little or no discolored water throughout the year. The West Plant is currently planned for a total capacity of 6,000 gpm. The plant would have the same gravity cast -in -place treatment process as the East Water Treatment Plant. The plant would be designed for the ultimate treatment capacity needs of the city and bring all the western wells and future wells to the plant for treatment. The plant would be designed so treated water could be able to be pumped in the low and high zones. Plate settler for reclaim water would also be part of the design. Funding for the construction of the plant is currently planned for 47% with connection fees and 53% with user charges. For the East Water Treatment Plan, 50% of the plant is being paid for with connection charges and the other half with user charges. The estimated project cost for the West Water Treatment Plant in 2023 is $25.6 million. Phased In Treatment Options Phase in treatment with several smaller plants has pros and cons to one large plant. Advantages to phased in treatment are: ✓ The City would be able to treat the high zone wells at this time and not treat the low zone peaking wells. Essentially the City would be able to treat 100% of the average day community needs. ✓ Phased in treatment can provide the City with a reduced cost to treat average day demand vs. one large plant. ✓ Phased in treatment is a more flexible plan, The City can add treatment when needed. The disadvantages with several smaller treatment plants are as follows: ✓ The total cost for ultimate treatment will be higher than constructing one plant. g: \mg \public \_2014 projects \14-04 well #15 \072814 bkgd ws wtp and well disc .doc Todd Gerhardt West Water Treatment Plant Options & Proposed Well No. 15 July 28, 2014 Page 3 ✓ Utility costs will be more. ✓ Maintenance costs will be more. ✓ Life cycle costs will be more. ✓ More labor to run the plants. ✓ Potentially more treatment constructed then what is needed. If phasing in treatment is the preferred option, staff envisions phasing in treatment to the west well field starting at the west plant site on Lake Harrison Road. Currently, raw water lines for Wells 7 and 8 are extended to the sight. The site may also be able to accommodate one or two future wells (one Jordan and one Tunnel City aquifer well). The plant is proposed to be designed for 4,000 gpm and be able to pump both in the low and high pressure zones. Plate settlers for reclaimed water would be included. The estimated project cost for the plant this $13 million. The next phase for treatment would be to construct a 2,000 gpm treatment plant on the Well 3 property to treat both Well 3 and 9 water. Well 9 raw water is already chlorinated at the Well 3 pump house so no additional raw water main would be needed. The plant would most likely be a steel pressure filter package plant. The plant would only treat low zone water. Plate settlers for reclaimed water would be included. The estimated project cost for this plant is $7 million. The final phase for treatment would be for future well needs. This plant would be designed for 2,000 gpm and could be constructed at any future well site that has enough space. The plant would most likely be a steel pressure filter package plant. Plate settlers for reclaimed water would be included. The estimated project cost for this plant was $7 million in 2013 dollars. If any treatment option is advanced, a detailed feasibility study should be completed to gain a better understanding on the type of construction, projected chemical feed rates and to gain a more in -depth look at costs prior to design. If Council feels advancing a water treatment option prior to 2023, the following is a proposed schedule: Water Rates Study Review Fall, 2014 Feasibility Report Spring, 2015 Design Fall, 2015 Construction 2016/2017 PROPOSED WELL #15 IMPROVEMENTS The City has 14 existing wells, 10 of which are currently available for use. During the early 2000's, the City was experiencing rapid growth, along with the rest of the Twin Cities metropolitan area. In order to keep up with increasing water demand, the City had planned to install new wells. In 2007, near the peak of the growth, the region experienced a drought. During this time, Wells 5 and 6, which are finished in a sand and gravel aquifer near the water treatment plant, dried up and a gAwg \public \_2014 pwjects\14 -04 well #15 \072814 bkgd ws wry and well disc Am Todd Gerhardt West Water Treatment Plant Options & Proposed Well No. 15 July 28, 2014 Page 4 third, also located in the same sand and gravel aquifer, saw declining water levels. In response to this loss of capacity, the City added Wells 12 and 13 which were brought on line in 2008. Since that time, Well 11, which is also located in the sand and gravel aquifer, has dried up causing the City to install Well 14. Wells 12, 13, and 14 all use the Jordan aquifer. During this time, the City has continued to see growth, even while development in other parts of the metropolitan area has been flat. Now, with development picking up even more, the City has the same number of wells it had back in 2007 when it was already planning to add supply to meet increasing water demands. Current Water Supply The wells on the west side of town pump directly to the water distribution system while the wells on the east side of town are connected to the East Water Treatment Plant. The existing wells, their nominal capacity, and where they deliver water is listed below. Well tt I Nominal Capacity (gpm) Distribution Area 1 0 NA 2 I 850 East Treatment Plant 3 I 800 Direct to System 4 I 950 Direct to System 5 I 0 NA 6 0 NA 7 I 1,100 Direct to System 8 I 1000 Direct to System 9 750 Direct to System 10 I 900 East Treatment Plant 11 I 0 NA 12 I 950 East Treatment Plant 13 I 950 East Treatment Plant 14 1,000 East Treatment Plant Total 9,250 N/A The City's total nominal well pumping capacity is 9,250 gallons per minute (gpm). For planning purposes, the total nominal capacity is not used since it is possible that a well may be out of service due to mechanical failure, a lighting strike, or for maintenance. To account for this in planning, the firm well pumping capacity is used. The firm pumping capacity is the water volume that can be supplied to the system reliably during maintenance activities or in an emergency situation where the g: \eng \public \_2014 projects \14-04 well #15 \072814 bkgd ws wtp =dwell disc .doe Todd Gerhardt West Water Treatment Plant Options & Proposed Well No. 15 July 28, 2014 Page 5 largest capacity well pump is out of service. As the City's water distribution system is split, two wells need to be removed to determine the total firm well pumping capacity, one from the East Water Treatment Plant area and one from the west area where wells pump directly to the distribution system. By removing Wells 7 and 14, the City's current firm well pumping capacity is determined to be 7,150 gpm. Another point to consider is that water supply in the metropolitan area has shifted over time from surface water to groundwater as the suburbs grew. Minneapolis and St. Paul utilize the Mississippi River but most all suburbs use groundwater. As the area has grown, and more cities have drilled wells and the levels in some regional aquifers have declined. As levels decline, well capacities are negatively affected. Chanhassen is in an area where the decline has been noticeable. In wet years, the decline is not significant, and in some cases rebound is even evident, but when drought hits, pumping spikes and aquifer levels decline on a regional basis affecting the total amount of water a supplier can pump. Because of this, it is important to keep ahead of increasing demand to make sure an adequate supply of water is available. The table below shows historic water levels in Chanhassen that have declined over the years. g: \eng \public \_2014 projects \14 -04 well #15 \072814 bkgd ws wtp and well disc .doc Depth to Static Water Static Water July 2011 Level at Level Elevation Depth to Well Construction at Date of Static Water Static Water Name (ft) Construction Level (ft) Level Change Well I 108 6/1/1969 157 -49 Well 127 7/7/1973 I 168 -41 Well 84 8/1/1981 I 112 I -28 Wells 125 8/13/1990 Well I 126 7/18/1991 Well I 135 6/28/1996 I 158 I -23 Well I 181 1/25/1999 I 196 I -15 Well 152 8/30/2004 158 -6 Well 10 I 147 4/18/2006 I 170 I -23 Well 11 I 137 3/24/2006 I 148 I -11 Well 12 I 95 4/21/2008 I I -- Well 13 119 4/23/2008 127 -8 Well 14 142 5/20/2010 150 -9 g: \eng \public \_2014 projects \14 -04 well #15 \072814 bkgd ws wtp and well disc .doc Todd Gerhardt West Water Treatment Plant Options & Proposed Well No. 15 July 28, 2014 Page 6 Water Demand For water system planning, a City should have a firm water supply capacity equal to or greater than the maximum day water demand. Maximum day water demand was determined using information from the City of Chanhassen 2030 Comprehensive Plan, dated November 10, 2008 (Comp Plan), with Chapter 9 specifically discussing the City's water system. Table 9 -5 of the Comp Plan lists the City's current maximum day water demand at 7,200 gpm. The population in 2007 that created this demand was 23,520 residents. Current commercial demands were also collected. Based on the current 2014 population of 24,155 residents, the maximum day water demand is predicted to be 7,505 gpm. Using this number, fixture demand can be estimated based on projected population growth. Predicted maximum day water demand for 2007 -2014 is shown below. $Xfl E M 4boo 3 0 4000 $I 944 Firm Water Supply and Maximum Day Water Demand 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 Year The projections are based entirely on population growth. It is possible that a "wet industry" may want to locate in town which would shift the need higher. There are also pushes for more and more conservation which could potentially reduce future demands. While these impacts to future demand are possible it is not reasonable or advisable to predict them and alter water supply projections. The City is ultimately responsible for supplying water for fire protection and any push to limit the future supply could negatively impact the City's ability to provide flow for maximum day demand. g1eng \public \_2014 projects \14 -04 well #15 \072814 bkgd ws wtp and well disc .doc Todd Gerhardt West Water Treatment Plant Options & Proposed Well No. 15 July 28, 2014 Page 7 Water Supply and Demand Conclusions The City's current firm water supply is 7,150 gpm and the current maximum day water demand is estimated to be 7,505 gpm. This suggests that the City's existing water supply is slightly undersized to meet current demands of the projected maximum day should wells be out of service for some reason. As the City continues to grow, this difference will increase. Because of this it is recommended that the City proceed with plans to add additional capacity by installing Chanhassen Well 15 to safely meet existing and growing water demands within the City. Barr Engineering has reviewed a site proposed by the City for Well 15. The proposed Well 15 site is in Pheasant Hill Park just north of Lake Lucy Road. The well is proposed to use the Prairie du Chien and Jordan (PDCJ) aquifers. The location in the northern part of town is "upstream" from a groundwater perspective meaning there is additional water column available at this location as compared to other sites in the City. There are no known contamination sources near the proposed well that pose a realistic threat based on information available from the Minnesota Pollution Control Agency. While there are a few sites that show up and are identified as "Tanks and Leaks" and "Hazardous Wastes ", they are not considered groundwater contamination; rather they identify a location where a tank exists or where hazardous wastes are generated. These are surface uses and there is a substantial layer of clay between the surface and the aquifer that Well 15 will be constructed into so even if these sites were associated with a release, it is highly unlikely that any contamination would make it down to the source water aquifer. The site should be considered not vulnerable under wellhead protection guidelines. The regional groundwater model was also run with the proposed Well 15 included. Results of the model indicated there is adequate water at the well site and drawdown levels are acceptable. The data reviewed is what is readily available on a regional basis and site specific geologic data should still be gathered as part of the well project. It is recommended that the plans and specification include a test boring at the site to verify local geology prior to proceeding with drilling of the full diameter well. This is a normal part of the plans and specifications used to construct the last three wells in Chanhassen. The site is still considered to be viable. Water Supply Alternatives Currently, the City relies 100% on wells that use the Prairie du Chien and Jordan (PDCJ) aquifers to meet water demand. Previously, the City also had three wells in a shallower sand and gravel aquifer. The wells in the sand and gravel aquifer can no longer supply water to the City due to declines in the water level in the aquifer. The PDCJ aquifers are the most heavily used aquifers in the Twin Cities metropolitan area. The Minnesota Department of Natural Resources (MDNR) maintains an observation well network to collect data on water levels in the major aquifers in the Twin Cities area. Data obtained from this observation well network indicates that the water level in the PDCJ aquifers in the vicinity of Chanhassen has declined approximately 15 to 20 feet over the last 20 years. The City has seen reductions in static water levels in the municipal water supply wells that are consistent with MDNR observations. Furthermore, groundwater modeling simulations of projected future water demand (which includes projected new water supply wells) performed in 2010 by the g: \mg\pubhc \_2014 projects \14 -04 well #15\072814 bkgd ws wtp and well disc .doc Todd Gerhardt West Water Treatment Plant Options & Proposed Well No. 15 July 28, 2014 Page 8 Metropolitan Council indicate that water levels in the PDCJ aquifers in the vicinity of Chanhassen are projected to decline from current levels by up to approximately 20 to 30 feet by 2030. Future declines in water levels in the aquifers used by the City will adversely affect the City's ability to meet future water demand. Recently, the MDNR began developing a new approach to evaluating groundwater appropriations in the north and east portions of the Twin Cities metropolitan area. MDNR has indicated that strategies developed to regulate groundwater appropriations in the north and east metro area likely will also be applied in other parts of the metro area. The effect of this new approach on future groundwater appropriations is not known at this time but could, potentially, include restrictions on new appropriations or requests for appropriations increases. Restrictions on new groundwater appropriations or requests for appropriation increases could adversely affect the City's ability to meet future water demands. Mitigation of potential future declines in the water available to the City from the PDCJ aquifers or restricted appropriations increases would require that the City make use of an alternate water source. Potential alternative water supply sources for the City include but are not limited to: • Tunnel City — Wonewoc aquifer • Aquifer storage and recovery • Wholesale purchase of water from another water supplier • Surface water The Mt. Simon - Hinckley aquifer lies below the Tunnel City — Wonewoc aquifer. New withdrawals from the Mt. Simon- Hinckley aquifer are currently restricted by State law. The MDNR views the Mt. Simon - Hinckley as the aquifer of last resort in the Twin Cities area. Therefore, this evaluation does not include the Mt. Simon- Hinckley aquifer. Tunnel City — Wonewoe Aquifer The Tunnel City— Wonewoc (TCW) aquifer lies below the PDCJ aquifers and is separated from the Jordan Sandstone by an aquitard. This aquifer is not used as heavily as the PDCJ aquifers in the Twin Cities area. Wells completed in the TCW aquifer typically can sustain production of up to approximately 400 gallons per minute in areas where the units that comprise this aquifer are not the uppermost bedrock units (such as under the vast majority of Chanhassen). This production rate is less than 50% of the rate typically obtained from wells in the PDCJ aquifers. In addition, the hydraulic properties of the TCW aquifer require that water supply wells be spaced significantly farther apart than wells in the PDCJ aquifers to avoid well interference effects that would result in reduced well capacity. Groundwater modeling simulations of projected future water demand (which includes projected new water supply wells) performed in 2010 by the Metropolitan Council indicate that water levels in the TCW aquifer in the vicinity of Chanhassen are projected to decline from current levels by up to approximately 10 to 20 feet by 2030. gAeng \public \_2014 projects \14 -04 well k15 \072814 bkgd ws wtp and well disc .doc Todd Gerhardt West Water Treatment Plant Options & Proposed Well No. 15 July 28, 2014 Page 9 Water quality in the TCW aquifer is typically fair although low levels of radium may be present in the water in some areas. (Chanhassen Well 4 is open to the PDCJ aquifers and the uppermost 23 feet of the TCW aquifer. Radium has been detected in water from Well 4. The source of the radium may be the TCW aquifer but it is not certain at this time if that is the case.) TCW aquifers are high in iron and manganese compared to the PDCJ aquifer. If the City were to install new wells in the TCW aquifer, an evaluation of the effects of mixing TCW aquifer water with water from the PDCJ aquifers would need to be done to determine what treatment, if any, would be necessary to prevent precipitation of solids in the water distribution system or other unwanted outcomes. At the present time, it is likely that the MDNR would approve an appropriation request to use water from the TCW aquifer. Based on currently available information, while the TCW aquifer is a viable source to augment the City's water supply, it is not likely that the TCW aquifer could fully replace the City's production from the PDCJ aquifers. Aquifer Storage and Recovery Aquifer storage and recovery (ASR) refers to the recharge and temporary storage of water in an aquifer with the intent to recover some or all of the water from the aquifer in the future. The water used to recharge the aquifer typically is seasonally available but it could be water that is available at any time throughout the year. The water to be stored in the aquifer could come from either surface water or another aquifer. ASR can be used to cost effectively store much larger quantities of water than can be stored in surface storage facilities such as tanks or towers. Injection wells are used to place water into confined aquifers while infiltration basins or injection wells could be used to place water into the water table aquifer. To install an injection well in Minnesota, a permit would be required from the U.S. EPA and a variance would be needed from the Minnesota Department of Health (MDH). Considerations when evaluating the feasibility of an ASR system include: • Identification of the aquifer in which the water will be stored. For example, the buried sand and gravel aquifer in which Chanhassen Wells 5, 6, and 11 are completed should be evaluated as a potential target storage aquifer if the City further considers an ASR system. • Determination of the source for the water to be stored in the aquifer. The source for the water to be stored could be surface water (e.g., seasonally available water such as from high stream flows during spring snow melt or groundwater from another aquifer). It should be noted that there typically will be some type of treatment requirement associated with each water source before it could be injected into the target storage aquifer. • The kind of treatment that will be needed before putting the recharge water into storage in the aquifer must be evaluated. The necessary treatment will depend upon what is in the water to be stored, the characteristics of the storage aquifer, and applicable regulatory requirements. Surface water to be stored in the target aquifer would typically require a greater level of treatment than water from another aquifer. • Hydraulic properties of the storage aquifer must be well understood to support proper system design and operational planning. g9eng\public \_2014 projects \14 -04 well #15 \072814 bkgd ws wtp and well disc .doe Todd Gerhardt West Water Treatment Plant Options & Proposed Well No. 15 July 28, 2014 Page 10 Surface Water The Minnesota River runs along the south side of the City and is a potential source of water. The Minnesota River's average monthly flow is approximately 4,000 cfs and the historic monthly low flow is approximately 180 cfs. Consideration and evaluation of the water quality would need to be completed to determine any effects of mixing surface water with water from the City's existing PDCJ wells to prevent precipitation of solids in the water distribution system or other unwanted outcomes in addition to ensuring the water meets drinking water standards. The Minnesota River flows through areas of intensive agriculture. As a result, the river water contains high concentrations of nitrate, phosphorous, and other agriculture chemicals. Therefore, water from the Minnesota River would require significant treatment to meet drinking water standards. It is recommended that additional evaluation steps be completed before any decision is made relative to an alternative water source for the City. The current well improvement schedule is as follows: Open House September, 2014 Bid Opening October, 2014 Award Construction Contract November, 2014 Substantial Completion July, 2015 Attachments: 1. Renderings of West Water Treatment Plant option 2. Well #15 CIP Page gAeng \public \_2014 projects \14 -04 well #15 \072814 bkgd ws wtp and well disc .doc CT B �.\ RIARWOOD �\ hr„ oRa 1 T _ _ t 994 I AA 1 � � � I ��o`�' I ✓' �` �A III I � 1 �°$� �V°��` � I � I j � I I L WaC � C CUL -DE -SAC I I� / /\ r W L LLI V A FILTER', v I +� S/ Q CELLS \ \ I \ WEST p WATE TR E -yamI s v v Q . v s PARKING BURIED BACKWASH I TANK �♦ I � / I / �/� all qp pi n ^L 974 � - I I I \ Ao Si Elevation I view from mmmk Front Elevation Iview from southeast Back Elevation I view from northwest Si Elevation I view from southwest West Water Treatment Pla n t for the City of Chanhassen §)) , %A .J 1 NA | I� 0 Lj z #2 °{LLI ()7) F- / \o! z z ;® �& \/. LLJ z ; ) � &] Water Pressure Zones and Wells High Low ® Treated /Untreated Zone July 23, 2014 ;;,Well 3 i 0 _ We11 -10- Well 12 We11 2 . ° `We1113 0 Proposed Well 15 O M Future Water Treatment Plant N Existing Watermain Feet Future Watermain 200 0 Future 3 Phase Power 100 Year Flood Elevation M Parcel Boundary (2009) 11 Freshwater Emergent Wetland 200 Figure 3 PROPOSED WELL 15 City of Chanhassen Chanhassen, MN Metro Area Aquifers Feet above mean sea level 1,200 Lake 17050 Minnetonka yy4.5• }• }• L L•L 4{ y 900 { !• !•{ !4 }r4f }}}f }!•} L{`•!K•lKlKH{y }lV Lr }r }•L{ {1.i5 4.4 K.4.4:4:4:4 4 }4}L }-• } }}4 }4i4}4i4 }4 J.4 }Lii }} •••i i } }L: {4 5 L 4 {L {L {L {Li1iy MINNEAPOLIS L•L•L•5•Y r " \,•,5}�•yti ti•L�y Y!t�lr1� rJ 1J 1- L{ L. L. L. 1{{{ Y{.1+• {1�1�1 {{^L { {:{{ {: {%Y { { {{n FLn'{�- 1+i{1�1 {{%{ -ti-{s. {, 1.5.1.1�:{r {:{{Y1: •r.r•r• {• r•r•r•r- {•r•i• }.r- r.r• {•{• {• r•r•r• {•r•r•r.{•r•r• {• r.r -r• r r•r -. 750 X }• }i} { }{5{ i}{ x{} :3r}rL•}i}: } } } } }rk• } { }iiitt}L{} L•}:}, }r} {7{} } }•L }r•1r'r �2 ?: St. Peter Y'}{�j- } 1_1.4 YM1r,r�tii}15 {1•yl•L L•L•L YYL •}• L L' •L•Y lry tiny Y rY r•r.r- l.r.r.! -r. .i} {} r• r}{r}f '4 !1,{'1r•YYIRRR• L{• { L{1Y 1•V 5•L{YL. r r•r•r.l.r.r rrYr }r•}r }r.r.r. ^r.�,r'l. rL:i: �LS4. YYL•L 1_•L. L 600 {J�• 450 7- County + Cross - Section location 300 150- Minneapoll St Paul 0 -150 -300 Miles 0 10 20 30 Glacial Drift _ Aquifer l r. J.r !•J J r Mississippi River St Croix ST. PAUL River L•4•L L ' r•rr•r r r •L }L }4 }M1$L•L•L• 1 {5•Y5 ✓••1 {L {1�Yyb V1 •5 }blL•!, •{i1i{ } %5J Y•1 }L }'�1• Li {f}Y. 1 {L• • L •r•f Y•!•f•f•f• L 1.1.5• •rYYYM•r 1 Y 534 it r {ir .J � .k S . +. it C O ty .. N • - S I N Red Clastic 40 50 60 70 _ Confining Layer 5 NLGNa�Y No ° S.t�TE / ! 'xy AD ae e F ! — — -- - -- LAKE DELVE EAST - - - -- — - -- — —_ —__ _ °— —�eNo nfra Sheet Title CIVIL SITE PLAN Vndtk 6.66 Truck 5.69 rYa K°M4R�N wa "� � wren 1 � Ms9l14Ra 3NN �N4 Hn0 WM Orlpx4 4it Sleerirg Angle O Client �OEVELOYMENTSOMMMY CENTER .. COMPANIES, LLC xx mu,aexw., suT11x C3.01 cxnxwaux, mnsvn - Project No. CEN19486 Project DAKOTA RETAIL — DEVEI�OPr.. rtnuam� ..wa��w�ee.e.nou.w.mm...,e. w, o Location w a� CHANHASSEN, MIN �vsxus woxnr.s �«•� ��- ^^ »..a,�,. +�r.." Certification .ew. tN �KET NOTES `01�wN'. Summary Revi RevBl on History wsxam,x,.xsn $ 20.5 183 13.01 Ford ` —ZSO feet Sheet Title CIVIL SITE PLAN Vndtk 6.66 Truck 5.69 Lock to Lock Time 6.0 Sleerirg Angle : 324 t Sheet No. Revision C3.01 - Project No. CEN19486 Capital Improvement Program City of Chanhassen, MN Project # W -048 Project Name Well #15 Improvements Account #1 700 - 70254751 Account #2 Description This well is proposed to meet th aquifer levels. Account #3 Account #4 water needs of the growing com meet the growing water needs of the City planned for in the 2008 water 2014 thru 2018 Department Water System Improvements Contact Paul Oehme Type Improvement Useful Life Category Utilities Priority n/a Total Project Cost: $1,400,000 project is needed dependent on growth, summer water usage and Expenditures 2014 2015 2016 2017 2018 Total Construction 1,400,000 1400 000 Total Funding Sources 2014 1,400,000 2015 2016 1,400,000 2017 2018 Total Water Utility Fund 1,400,000 1,400,000 Total 1,400,000 1,400,000 P122