HomeMy WebLinkAbout10.28.24 Water Bd Packet
Meeting Location:
Farmington City Hall
430 Third Street
Farmington, MN 55024
WATER BOARD
Monday, October 28, 2024
5:00 PM
Page
1. CALL TO ORDER
2. APPROVAL OF MINUTES
Approve Minutes
Review, revise as appropriate, and approve the minutes.
Agenda Item: Approve Minutes - Pdf
3 - 6
3. NEW BUSINESS
Comprehensive Water Plan Update
For discussion only, no action requested.
Agenda Item: Comprehensive Water Plan Update - Pdf
7
Well No. 10 Siting
Review the scope and budget and recommend the City Council
authorize an agreement with Barr Engineering for the Well No. 10 Siting
for an estimated cost of $43,000.
Agenda Item: Well No. 10 Siting - Pdf
8 - 42
4. APPROVE BILLS
Approve Bills
Review, discuss, and approve the bills.
Agenda Item: Approve Bills - Pdf
43
5. OPEN FORUM
Project Information and Updates
General discussion of information, no action items.
Agenda Item: Project Information and Updates - Pdf
44
Page 1 of 44
6. ADJOURN
Page 2 of 44
WATER BOARD AGENDA MEMO
To: Water Board, City Administrator
From: John Powell, Public Works Director
Department: Engineering
Subject: Approve Minutes
Meeting: Water Board - Oct 28 2024
INTRODUCTION:
Attached are the minutes from the September 23, 2024, Water Board meeting. Water Board
Members are allowed to vote on approval of minutes even though they were not in attendance at
that particular meeting.
DISCUSSION:
N/A
BUDGET IMPACT:
N/A
ACTION REQUESTED:
Review, revise as appropriate, and approve the minutes.
ATTACHMENTS:
September 23, 2024 Meeting Minutes
Page 3 of 44
MINUTES
REGULAR WATER BOARD MEETING
Monday, September 23, 2024
5:00 PM
City Hall 430 Third Street Farmington, MN
Members Present: Cordes, Weierke, Wohlers
Members Absent:
Staff Present: John Powell, Public Works Director/City Engineer
Others Present:
Call to Order: The meeting was called to order by Chair Weierke at 5:00 p.m.
1. Approval of Minutes - Motion by Weierke to approve the minutes as presented for the July 22,
2024, meeting. Seconded by Cordes, Motion Carried.
2. New Business (there was no New Business)
3. Approve Bills – Minor clarification was provided to the Board on budget charges. Motion by
Wohlers to approve the bills as presented in the amount of $234,426.95. Seconded by Cordes,
Motion Carried.
4. Open Forum – Project & Information Update
a. Akin Knoll: A preliminary and final plat submittal has been received for the subdivision
of property at 19927 Akin Road into three lots. This would lead to three new water
service connections to existing trunk watermain and a new sanitary sewer west of
watermain.
b. Antenna Lease Agreements: T-Mobile has requested renewal amendments for their
leases both at the Daisy Knoll and the 1.5 MG tank. Issues they want to pursue include
lowering of rates, antenna modification rights/costs, annual rate increases, and offering
to purchase long term easements vs. leases.
c. MCES Water Efficiency Grant Program: Since our July meeting, nine property owners
requested and received rebates. This includes two rebates for clothes washers at $200;
four dishwashers at $150; and five irrigation controllers ranging from $56.63 to $112.13
each. The 2024-2026 grant amount is $12,400; we have utilized $3,552.66 to date.
d. Farmington Trunk Serviceability Analysis: Advanced Engineering and Environmental
Services (AE2S) was contracted to study utility service to undeveloped areas in the west
and east areas of the city necessary to support the updated land use determined by the
comprehensive planning process. The final report is expected to be completed by the
end of September; preliminary water-related results indicate the following
improvements will be needed:
West
• 12-inch trunk watermain extension on 220th Street, west of Denmark Avenue.
• 16-inch and 12-inch trunk watermain loop located north of proposed
development northwest of Pilot Knob Road/CR 50.
Page 4 of 44
• 16-inch and 12-inch trunk watermain extension on Flagstaff Avenue, north of
195th Street.
East
• 16-inch trunk watermain extensions in proposed new development areas south
of 220th Street; 220th Street, Biscayne Avenue, 225th Street
• 18-inch trunk watermain north of 220th Street to loop system.
Systemwide Buildout
• Two additional production wells, each with 2,000 gpm capacity.
e. Elevated Water Storage: To support systemwide buildout, an additional 4.0 MG of
water storage is needed. Considerations for further consideration include the location
of water storage sites, phasing of storage construction, and access to existing trunk
watermain in the vicinity of the proposed storage.
f. Well 5 Retaining Wall: The work is complete and the final payment was approved by
City Council on 9/3/24. The final contract amount was $109,559.21; this is about 17.3%
over original contract and is due to the wall square footage being increased.
g. 2024 Street Improvements: Bituminous wearing course paving is complete; punch list
and final quantities are being prepared.
h. 2025 Street Improvements: The City Council has authorized feasibility study and 30%
design to be prepared by Alliant Engineering. Public open houses are being scheduled
to gather input from property owners.
i. Meadowview Preserve Phase II: Infrastructure installation for Phase 1 of this
development located on the north side of 195th Street, across from Meadowview
Elementary School, is substantially complete. The developer is considering moving
forward with Phase II, which includes 75 units, located to the north. Phase II will involve
a road connection to 190th Street West; the need for additional watermain on 190th
Street will be evaluated.
j. Denmark Trail Townhomes: This is development of 40 townhomes by the Dakota
County Community Development Agency (CDA). They are extending the existing 12” DIP
watermain trunk to the south, and through the west portion of the site.
k. Lead and Copper Rule Revisions (LCRR): Community water systems are required to
complete an inventory of service line materials; both on the street side and the dwelling
side of the curb stop. The city’s initial submittal to the Minnesota Department of Health
was made by end of August; and we will continue to collect data. Public Works staff will
need to visit properties to verify materials for those properties that did not return a
survey.
l. Vermillion Commons 4th Addition: This project involves 68 single family homes plus 66
townhomes (134 total); home construction is expected in 2025. Site grading is
underway; the developer plans to begin utility and street work after the development
contract is executed and financial securities are in place.
Page 5 of 44
m. Spruce Street & Dushane Parkway Intersection: Yellow Tree Apartments construction
is underway on the northwest corner; 168 units. Existing city utilities have been
removed from the right of way area to be vacated. The City Council has authorized final
design of a reconfigured intersection and staff is negotiating an easement trade with
Vermillion Valley (Adelmann Farm LLC) to secure the south half of future Spruce Street.
n. Public Works Staffing: Vacant positions within Public Works are being filled:
• Public Works Superintendent-Eric Whitmer started 7/30/24
• Natural Resources Specialist-Ben Humlie started 8/7/24
• Public Works Maintenance Worker Steve Groves started 9/23/24
5. Adjourn – Motion by Weierke to adjourn at 5:38 p.m. Seconded by Wohlers, Motion Carried.
Respectfully submitted,
John Powell
Public Works Director/City Engineer
Page 6 of 44
WATER BOARD AGENDA MEMO
To: Water Board, City Administrator
From: John Powell, Public Works Director
Department: Engineering
Subject: Comprehensive Water Plan Update
Meeting: Water Board - Oct 28 2024
INTRODUCTION:
The Community Development Department is leading an effort to update and amend the city
Comprehensive Land Use Plan. Using the updated land use assumptions generated through this
process, the infrastructure elements also need to be updated. This includes water, storm water,
sanitary and Engineering Advanced retained has The transportation. and sewer, city
Environmental Services (AE2S) to update the water portion of the plan which includes updating the
water system model and evaluating the serviceability of future development areas. vices
DISCUSSION:
Staff from AE2S will be at the meeting to present preliminary results of their modeling and how the
phasing of system improvements could be affected by the timing of future development activity.
BUDGET IMPACT:
In the next two to three years, the city will be making significant investments in our water system;
this includes water storage, water supply (well), trunk watermain upgrades, and an emergency
interconnect with our neighboring community. The basis for these investments is the long-term
comprehensive land use plan which is used to estimate infrastructure demands.
ACTION REQUESTED:
For discussion only, no action requested.
Page 7 of 44
WATER BOARD AGENDA MEMO
To: Water Board, City Administrator
From: John Powell, Public Works Director
Department: Engineering
Subject: Well No. 10 Siting
Meeting: Water Board - Oct 28 2024
INTRODUCTION:
In February of 2021, the Department of Natural Resources (DNR) authorized an amendment of the
city’s DNR Water Appropriation Permit 1959-0725 to authorize the use of Well No. 9. In addition,
the withdrawal of up to 1,000 million gallons of water per year for municipal/public water supply was
authorized. The city’s recent water use, as identified in the annual report to the DNR, was as
follows:
2023 834,984,000 Gallons
2022 810,939,011 Gallons
2021 824,915,341 Gallons
2020 749,989,000 Gallons
The Groundwater Technical Review prepared by the DNR and dated November 12, 2020, Table 1
refers to Well No.10 as “to be installed”. At the time, it was expected that the city would be able to
supply expected growth with no annual volume change to the DNR appropriation permit until about
2027. Based the expected growth identified through the comprehensive planning process; as the
city has initiated the process of decommissioning Well No.1; and due to the lengthy process for
approving a new well; we recommend the process for siting Well No.10 be initiated.
DISCUSSION:
In 2018, Barr Engineering assisted the city in siting Well No. 9, as documented in the attached
memo dated July 30, 2018. On February 21, 2023, the City Council approved the Consultant Pool
for 2023-2027. Barr Engineering is one of the firms in the consultant pool and has prepared the
attached scope and budget based on discussions with City staff regarding this project. This scope
and budget builds upon their past efforts in siting Well No. 9.
As identified in the cost breakdown, major steps in the process include:
Review existing information.
Facilitate a kickoff meeting with city staff.
Conduct preliminary groundwater modeling.
Facilitate an aquifer selection meeting with the DNR.
Preparation of a design basis memorandum identifying the city's requirements and
preferences related to site selection; then meet to review same.
Identify and visit potential well sites which meet the MDH setbacks; identify a well site.
Delineate the preliminary wellhead protection area.
Page 8 of 44
Prepare a DNR Well Construction Assessment Form for DNR use in preparing a Preliminary
Well Construction Assessment (PWCA).
As stated in the proposed works scope, "in the PWCA, the DNR will not approve aquifer selection
or guarantee that Well 10 can be permitted. Actual approval of the aquifer will not occur until after a
test pump of the well itself (sometimes DNR approval is withheld until the well is connected to the
water supply system)".
BUDGET IMPACT:
The detailed work scope and budget are attached. The estimated not to exceed amount for this
work effort is $43,000.
ACTION REQUESTED:
Review the scope and budget and recommend the City Council authorize an agreement with Barr
Engineering for the Well No. 10 Siting for an estimated cost of $43,000.
ATTACHMENTS:
24-22 Barr Well No. 10 Siting Scope and Fee
Final Well 9 Siting_2018-07-30
Page 9 of 44
barr.com
4300 MarketPointe Drive, Suite 200, Minneapolis, MN 55435 | 952.832.2600
October 16, 2024
John Powell, PE
Public Works Director/City Engineer
City of Farmington
430 Third St.
Farmington, MN 55024
Re: Well 10 Siting and Design Services Proposal
Dear Mr. Powell:
Barr Engineering Co. (Barr) is pleased to provide the City of Farmington (City) with a proposal to provide
well siting services for Well 10. This proposal is based on conversations with you during our August 14
call as well as an email dated September 25, 2024. The remainder of this proposal is organized into the
following sections:
• Project understanding
• Scope of work
• Project team
• Schedule
• Estimated fee
Project Understanding
The City plans to add Well 10 to its water supply system to meet existing and future water demands. Well
10 needs to be sited to start the permitting process with the Minnesota Department of Natural Resources
(DNR) and Minnesota Department of Health (MDH). The City has requested a well siting study to identify
a location for the new well. The project will evaluate sites considered during previous work related to the
siting of Well 9 as a starting point as well as other sites owned, or suggested, by the City. Well siting will
consider proximity to the City’s water distribution system, future planned infrastructure (e.g., a centralized
water treatment plant), well setbacks required by the Minnesota Well Code, aquifer sustainability analysis,
and other criteria that may come out of discussions with City staff.
In addition, the aquifer from which Well 10 will pump must also be evaluated. Groundwater withdrawals in
the state are receiving scrutiny relative to their potential to interfere with existing wells and to impact
surface water features such as lakes, streams, and groundwater-dependent wetlands. Recent court
cases have resulted in the DNR placing a greater burden of proof upon those requesting permits for high-
capacity wells to show the proposed wells will not adversely interfere with existing wells or impact surface
water features.
This proposal is based upon Well 10 being located at one of the sites previously considered for Well 9,
with an option to consider two additional sites. It is assumed Well 10 will be drilled into the Jordan
Sandstone (Jordan) aquifer. This work does NOT include any design or bidding services.
Page 10 of 44
John Powell, PE
October 16, 2024
Page 2
G:\BKL\Minnesota Clients\Farmington\Well 10\Farmington Well 10 Siting Proposal letter FINAL to city.docx
Scope of Work
Our proposed scope of work includes three phases: project kickoff, constraints and criteria, and well
siting. These phases are described in greater detail below.
Project Kickoff
Objective: Confirm project scope and desired outcomes.
Task Description: Upon receiving a notice to proceed Barr will request and/or review existing information
that will help inform subsequent tasks. This task will include, but not be limited to:
• Review previous Jordan aquifer well siting work related to Well 9 performed for the City.
• Review the City’s most recent DNR Water Supply Plan and the water supply portion of the City’s
2040 Comprehensive Plan to make sure commitments the City has made have been met, that
Well 10 is identified in the plans, and that the City’s current population reasonably matches
projections.
• Review the DNR’s Groundwater Technical Assessment prepared at the time the DNR reviewed
the City’s most recent Water Supply Plan.
• Review the most current Farmington Water System Comprehensive Plan
Once we have reviewed this information, Barr will schedule a kickoff meeting with City staff to discuss
project goals and desired outcomes. At the meeting, we will review the proposed scope of work, and
make sure all parties are in agreement with projected project outcomes and deliverables. We will also
prepare a client service plan at the meeting to define communication preferences and other project
protocols intended to result in a favorable project outcome.
Meetings: The following meetings are part of this phase of work:
• Kickoff meeting (in person)
Deliverables: The following deliverables are assumed for this task:
• Data/information request
• Invitation to and minutes from the kickoff meeting
• Client service plan
Assumptions:
• City will provide requested data including, but not limited to, the most recent Comprehensive
Plan, Appropriations Permit, and Water Supply Plan, as well as the DNR’s Groundwater
Technical Assessment associated with the DNR’s review of the Water Supply Plan.
• City will host the kickoff meeting
Constraints and Criteria
Objective: Define the well and well site to inform site selection phase
Task Description: This task will include interaction with regulatory agencies to identify their concerns and
requirements specific to this area as they pertain to high-capacity water supply wells. The first step in this
task will be to identify the aquifer from which Well 10 will pump. The obvious, preferred choice is the
Jordan aquifer. However, the DNR may challenge this aquifer selection if they believe Well 10 may
negatively impact nearby surface water bodies or existing wells. To inform this task, Barr will conduct
Page 11 of 44
John Powell, PE
October 16, 2024
Page 3
G:\BKL\Minnesota Clients\Farmington\Well 10\Farmington Well 10 Siting Proposal letter FINAL to city.docx
preliminary groundwater modeling to assess the potential of Well 10 to affect surface water features or
interfere with existing wells.
Following the groundwater modeling, Barr will schedule an aquifer selection meeting with DNR staff for a
preliminary discussion of adding Well 10 to the City’s water supply system and the preferred aquifer for
Well 10. The objective of the meeting will be to identify any major concerns the DNR may have regarding
the aquifer to be targeted for Well 10. Please note that it is unlikely that the DNR would indicate final
approval of the aquifer selection at this meeting.
Following the aquifer selection meeting, Barr will prepare a brief Well 10 design basis memorandum to
further inform well siting. The memorandum will document the City’s requirements (constraints) and
preferences (criteria) that might impact site selection. For the purposes of this proposal, Barr has
assumed that the City will prefer that Well 10 be constructed like other recently competed Farmington
wells, excluding Well 9 which had a unique opportunity to exclude a wellhouse and chemical addition on
site. We assume Well 10 will include the following items as either constraints or criteria related to the
physical features of the well itself:
• 18- or 20-inch diameter inner well casing with additional outer casings as required
• The well will be drilled into the Jordan aquifer and completed with an open hole
• Wellhouse at the surface
• Line shaft vertical turbine pump with the motor at the surface and a downhole check valve
• Chemical addition and electrical equipment located in the wellhouse
• Pump to system pressure at a watermain adjacent to the site
• Bituminous driveway and basic site landscaping to blend into the area
• Connection to the City’s SCADA system
The design basis memorandum will also include a list of additional constraints and criteria to be used in
selecting a site for the well. Following is a partial, preliminary list of additional constraints and criteria:
• Constraints (the well site must meet these items)
o The site must meet MDH land ownership and well setback requirements
o Well site must align with wellhead protection considerations
o The well must not impact protected waters such as calcareous fens or trout streams
o Others, as appropriate
• Criteria (these will be used to compare sites that meet constraints to each other)
o Well site should minimize potential for interference with existing wells
o Well site should minimize potential for adverse impacts to surface waters
o Proximity to previously installed raw water collection main, if relevant
o Proximity to City distribution system
o Proximity to power supply
o Proximity to proposed future centralized water treatment facility
o Constructability considerations (site grade, drill rig accessibility, staging area, etc.)
Barr will then finalize a draft version of the design basis memorandum summarizing these items that will
be used to inform well siting. Once the City approves the memorandum Barr will move to the well siting
phase of the work.
Meetings: The following meetings are part of this phase of work:
Page 12 of 44
John Powell, PE
October 16, 2024
Page 4
G:\BKL\Minnesota Clients\Farmington\Well 10\Farmington Well 10 Siting Proposal letter FINAL to city.docx
• Aquifer selection meeting with DNR (virtual to accommodate DNR staff availability)
• Constraints and criteria review meeting with City staff (virtual)
Deliverables: The following deliverables are assumed for this task:
• Groundwater modeling power point for the DNR meeting along with a brief memo
• Design/Constraints/Criteria basis memorandum
Assumptions:
• City will provide electronic information for the location of existing relevant infrastructure including,
but not limited to, any raw water collection mains, existing distribution system mains, City-owned
land parcels that might be considered for a well site, information on buildings within the city limits
NOT connected to city water, and other relevant data as requested.
• City will provide input on constraints and criteria for Well 10
• The interactions with state agencies will be relatively straight forward and result in use of the
Jordan aquifer. Any detailed modeling or report preparation to defend the use of any aquifer is not
included in this proposal.
Well Siting
Objective: Identify a site for Well 10 acceptable to the City and likely permittable with the DNR and MDH.
Task Description:
Barr will proceed with siting the well following City acceptance of the design basis memorandum. Barr will
review the previous well sites considered but not selected for Well 9 and up to two additional well sites
preferred by the City. The sites will be compared based on the list of constraints and criteria documented
in the design basis memorandum. The site selection process will include a meeting with City staff followed
by visits to potential well sites. Barr will prepare a decision memorandum after the meeting and site visits.
Once the well site is selected, Barr will prepare and submit a Well Construction Assessment form to the
DNR. Following review of the form, the DNR will provide a Preliminary Well Construction Assessment
(PWCA) that will present any potentially significant resource impacts they identify in the vicinity of the
proposed well. Please note that in the PWCA, the DNR will not approve aquifer selection or guarantee
that Well 10 can be permitted. Actual approval of the aquifer will not occur until after a test pump of the
well itself (sometimes DNR approval is withheld until the well is connected to the water supply system).
Barr will also prepare a preliminary wellhead protection area delineation for Well 10. This delineation will
be submitted to the MDH along with the well design (once that it completed at a later date ) per MDH
requirements.
Meetings: The following meetings are part of this phase of work:
• Well siting meeting and site visits (in person)
• Presentation of final results
Deliverables: The following deliverables are assumed for this task:
• Brief well siting decision memorandum that documents aquifer and site selection
• Preliminary wellhead protection area delineation
• DNR Well Construction Assessment form
Page 13 of 44
John Powell, PE
October 16, 2024
Page 5
G:\BKL\Minnesota Clients\Farmington\Well 10\Farmington Well 10 Siting Proposal letter FINAL to city.docx
Assumptions:
• The City will provide Barr with up to two new preferred well sites for comparison to those not
selected for Well 9.
• The City will provide topography and property parcel boundaries for each site appropriate for use
in determining setbacks. We have assumed that this information will be provided in electronic
format such as GIS shapefiles or CADD drawing files.
• The City will provide any wetland or flood level information relevant to the parcels under
consideration that is not readily available through existing data bases like the National Wetland
Inventory or FEMA flood maps.
Project Team
The following key staff will help with this project:
• Partner in Charge: Brian LeMon, PE
• Project Manager: Dan Nessler, PE
• Well Siting: John Greer, PG and Sorel Nelson
Project Schedule
This proposal covers work that will run through December 31, 2025, unless terminated by the City or Barr.
A more detailed schedule can be provided upon request.
Cost
The total cost of the services provided under the General Services Work Order is estimated at $43,000.
Should tasks be requested that will cause the total billed under this Work Order to exceed $43,000 Barr
will notify the City and request a modification to the total cost allowed.
The work performed under this Work Order will be governed by the terms of the current Professional
Consulting Services Agreement in place between Barr and the City. If the terms of this proposal are
acceptable to the City, please date and sign in the space provided below and return a signed PDF copy to
Barr. If you have any comments or questions, please contact me at 612-669-6797.
Sincerely yours,
BARR ENGINEERING COMPANY
By
Brian K. LeMon
Its Vice President
Accepted this day of , 2024
CITY OF FARMINGTON
By
Its
Page 14 of 44
Name (Last, First) LeMon, Brian Greer, John Nesler, Dan Nelson, Sorel Conway, Ryan Anderson, Eddie Huffman, Yvonne
Initials JCG DAN SLN RJC3 EMA YMH
Billing Rate 230.00$ 225.00$ 210.00$ 115.00$ 145.00$ 120.00$ 105.00$
Project Role Vice President
Senior
Hydrogeologist
Senior Civil
Engineer
Environmental
Engineer Hydrogeologist GIS Specialist
Senior
Administrative
Assistant
Job 1 4%
Review existing information 2.0 4.0 8.0 8.0 8.0 30.0 5,120.00$ -$ 204.80$ 5,324.80$
Prep for and attending kickoff meeting 2.0 2.0 4.0 8.0 1,750.00$ -$ 70.00$ 1,820.00$
Subtotal 4.0 6.0 12.0 8.0 8.0 0.0 0.0 38.0 6,870.00$ -$ 274.80$ 7,144.80$ 17%0
Job 2 4%
Aquifer selection GW modeling 2.0 4.0 40.0 46.0 7,090.00$ -$ 283.60$ 7,373.60$
Aquifer selection meeting 2.0 2.0 2.0 6.0 1,330.00$ -$ 53.20$ 1,383.20$
Design/constraints/criteria memo 4.0 4.0 16.0 24.0 8.0 4.0 60.0 9,320.00$ -$ 372.80$ 9,692.80$
Design/constraints/criteria meeting 2.0 2.0 4.0 8.0 1,750.00$ -$ 70.00$ 1,820.00$
Subtotal 8.0 10.0 26.0 24.0 40.0 8.0 4.0 120.0 19,490.00$ -$ 779.60$ 20,269.60$ 47%0
Job 3 4%
Well siting meeting and site vists 3.0 3.0 6.0 12.0 2,010.00$ 200.00$ 88.40$ 2,298.40$
Well siting set back mapping 24.0 6.0 30.0 3,480.00$ -$ 139.20$ 3,619.20$
Well siting memo 2.0 4.0 8.0 12.0 2.0 4.0 4.0 36.0 5,610.00$ -$ 224.40$ 5,834.40$
Preliminary WHP area delineation 4.0 2.0 4.0 10.0 1,900.00$ -$ 76.00$ 1,976.00$
DNR Well Constructoin Assesment form 2.0 3.0 6.0 11.0 1,770.00$ -$ 70.80$ 1,840.80$
Subtotal 5.0 10.0 16.0 48.0 6.0 10.0 4.0 99.0 14,770.00$ 200.00$ 598.80$ 15,568.80$ 36%0
Project Total 17.0 26.0 54.0 80.0 54.0 18.0 8.0 257.0 41,130.00$ 200.00$ 42,983.20$ 0
Assumptions: Stated in letter proposal.
# of
Deliverables
Contingency
%Project Total
% of
Total
Labor
Hours
Labor
Costs Expenses
Project Name:Well 10 Siting Study
Client Name: City of Farmington
Date: 10/1/24
Approved by: Brian LeMon
Pa
g
e
1
5
o
f
4
4
Barr Engineering Co. 4300 MarketPointe Drive, Suite 200, Minneapolis, MN 55435 952.832.2600 www.barr.com
Memorandum
To: Matt Decur, PE, City of Farmington
From: John Greer, PG and Michelle Stockness, PE
Subject: Well Siting, City of Farmington Well 9
Date: July 30, 2018
Project: City of Farmington Well 9, 23191386.00
c: Katy Gehler, Brian LeMon, Ben Meemken
List of Tables
Table 1 Potential Well 9 Locations
Table 2 Results of Potential Well Site Screening Based on Setback Requirements
Table 3 Municipal Well Summary
Table 4 Model-Predicted Drawdowns at Existing City Wells
Table 5 Number of Private Wells with Predicted Drawdown Greater Than 25 Percent
Table 6 Model-Predicted Reductions in Vermillion River Base Flow
Table 7 Ranking of Proposed Well 9 Locations
List of Figures
Figure 1 Proposed Well 9 Locations
Figure 2 Proposed Well 9 Locations in Relation to Utilities
Figure 3 Proposed Locations Carried Forward
Figure 4 Modeled Drawdown Scenarios 1 and 2 – Well 9 at Location 2
Figure 5 Modeled Drawdown Scenarios 1 and 2 – Well 9 at Location 4
Figure 6 Modeled Drawdown Scenarios 1 and 2 – Well 9 at Location 5
Figure 7 Modeled Drawdown Scenarios 1 and 2 – Well 9 at Location 7
Figure 8 Modeled Drawdown Scenarios 1 and 2 – Well 9 at Location 8
Figure 9 Percent Reduction in Static Water Column for CWI Wells – Well 9 at Location 2
Figure 10 Percent Reduction in Static Water Column for CWI Wells – Well 9 at Location 4
Figure 11 Percent Reduction in Static Water Column for CWI Wells – Well 9 at Location 5
Figure 12 Percent Reduction in Static Water Column for CWI Wells – Well 9 at Location 7
Figure 13 Percent Reduction in Static Water Column for CWI Wells – Well 9 at Location 8
Figure 14 Vermillion River Base Flow Reach Evaluated
List of Attachments
Attachment 1 Pumping Rates for Groundwater Modeling Scenarios
Page 16 of 44
To: Matt Decur, PE, City of Farmington
From: John Greer, PG and Michelle Stockness, PE
Subject: Well Siting, City of Farmington Well 9
Date: July 30, 2018
Page: 2
P:\Mpls\23 MN\19\23191386 Farmington- Well 9\WorkFiles\1-Well siting study\memo\Finall Well Siting_2018-07-30.docx
1.0 Introduction
The City of Farmington (City) had provided nine potential location s for Well 9 based on the 2009 Water
Supply and Distribution Plan (Bonestroo, 2009) as part of their May 2018 solicitation for proposals
regarding siting, design, and construction support services for proposed Well 9. The potential well
locations are listed in Table 1 and shown on Figure 1.
Table 1 Potential Well 9 Locations
Potential well location Parcel ID Number
1 18750 Englewood Way 037-145050401010
2 18922 Excalibur Trail 037-145050503060
3 5498 190th Street 037-145050000010
4 19xxx English Avenue 037-141115100020
5 19505 Exceptional Trail 037-141650001010
6 Pilot Knob and Eureka Avenue 037-141680000010
7 Estes Path & 197th Street W. 037-141660000090
8 19995 Everhill Avenue 037-141650301190
9 57xxx 200th Street W 037-141650401010
Barr Engineering Co. (Barr) completed evaluation of the potential locations for proposed Well 9 according
to the procedures outlined in our May 21, 2018 proposal (Barr, 2018a) to the City. The evaluation included
initial screening of potential well locations for setbacks specified in the Minnesota Well Code (Minnesota
Rules chapter 4725), followed by groundwater modeling of potential locations that passed the initial
screening. Results of the evaluation and a ranking of sites for Well 9 are presented in the remainder of this
memorandum.
2.0 Setback Requirements Screening
The first step in the evaluation of potential locations outlined in the May 21 proposal was preliminary
screening of locations based on setback requirements for water supply wells in the Minnesota Well Code
(Minnesota Rules chapter 4725).
In a June 26, 2018 memorandum (Barr, 2018b), Barr provided the City with the preliminary results of the
screening of proposed well locations based on the setback requirements along with preliminary
recommendations for well sites to carry forward for further evaluation with groundwater modeling.
Following review of the June 26 memorandum, the City requested that five sites be carried forward for
groundwater modeling evaluation. The results of the screening based on setback requirements and input
from the City are shown on Figure 2, summarized in Table 2, and discussed briefly below.
Page 17 of 44
To: Matt Decur, PE, City of Farmington
From: John Greer, PG and Michelle Stockness, PE
Subject: Well Siting, City of Farmington Well 9
Date: July 30, 2018
Page: 3
P:\Mpls\23 MN\19\23191386 Farmington- Well 9\WorkFiles\1-Well siting study\memo\Finall Well Siting_2018-07-30.docx
Table 2 Results of Potential Well Site Screening Based on Setback Requirements
Potential Well Location Setback Requirements Assessment
Carried Forward for
Modeling Evaluation?
1 18750 Englewood Way Potentially suitable, needs review of TW-3 location No
2 18922 Excalibur Trail Meets all setback requirements Yes
3 5498 190th Street Does not meet all setback requirements No
4 19xxx English Avenue Meets all setback requirements Yes
5 19505 Exceptional Trail Meets all setback requirements Yes1
6 Pilot Knob and Eureka Not recommended No
7 Estes Path & 197th St. W. Meets all setback requirements Yes
8 19995 Everhill Ave Potentially suitable, would need an MDH variance Yes1
9 57xxx 200th Street W Not recommended No
1 City requested that site be carried forward for modeling evaluation
The nine potential well sites previously identified by the City are listed from north to south in Table 2. The
screening outcome is based on Minnesota Department of Health municipal well setback requirements and
a recommended minimum spacing of ¼-mile (1,320 feet) between municipal water supply wells. The sites
shown in bold in Table 2 were identified to be carried forward for groundwater modeling evaluation. The
sites carried forward for groundwater modeling evaluation are identified on Figure 3. A screening
summary for each potential well site is presented below:
1. PIN 037-145050401010, 18750 Englewood Way:
a. Site potentially meets MDH setback requirements
i. Natural gas pipeline requires 10-foot setback. Site has 82 feet.
ii. Well would need to be accurately sited to meet the required 50-ft separation from
property boundaries.
iii. New well would need to be located 20 feet from observation well TW-3.
b. Site meets the ¼-mile well spacing recommendation for Jordan aquifer wells.
c. Site not recommended for further evaluation as a site for Well 9. City should confirm
location(s) of monitoring wells on the site to determine viability of the site for future
consideration.
2. PIN 037-145050503060, 18922 Excalibur Trail:
a. Site meets all MDH setback requirements
b. Site meets the ¼-mile well spacing recommendation for Jordan aquifer wells.
c. Site recommended for further evaluation as a future well site.
3. PIN 037-145050000010, 5498 190th Street:
a. Site does not meet all MDH setback requirements
i. Natural gas pipeline requires 10-foot setback. Site has 47 feet.
ii. Petroleum pipeline requires 100-ft setback. Site has only 56 feet.
Page 18 of 44
To: Matt Decur, PE, City of Farmington
From: John Greer, PG and Michelle Stockness, PE
Subject: Well Siting, City of Farmington Well 9
Date: July 30, 2018
Page: 4
P:\Mpls\23 MN\19\23191386 Farmington- Well 9\WorkFiles\1-Well siting study\memo\Finall Well Siting_2018-07-30.docx
b. Site meets the ¼-mile well spacing recommendation for Jordan aquifer wells.
c. Site not recommended for further evaluation as a future well site.
4. PIN 037-141115100020, 19XXX English Avenue:
a. Site meets all MDH setback requirements. Note: any future well should be located on the
western part of the parcel.
b. Site meets the ¼-mile well spacing recommendation for Jordan aquifer wells.
c. Site recommended for further evaluation as a future well site.
5. PIN 037-141650001010, 19505 Exceptional Trail:
a. Site meets MDH setback requirements
i. Private septic located 300 feet away. This distance exceeds the 50-foot setback from
septic systems but the presence of the septic system should be noted.
b. Site potentially meets the ¼-mile well spacing recommendation for Jordan aquifer wells?
i. Site is more than ¼-mile from nearest existing municipal supply well
ii. However, it should be noted the potential may exist for interference with the p rivate
well (unique number 100982) that extends to the top of the Prairie du Chien located
approximately 200 feet west of the property line. Potential for interference would
need to be further evaluated.
c. Sanitary sewer proposed as part of adjacent development would not meet setback
requirements and should be moved off the site. City requested that this location be carried
forward for further evaluation as a future well site.
6. PIN 037-141680000010, Pilot Knob Rd. & Eureka Ave:
a. Site meets all MDH setback requirements
i. Petroleum pipeline requires 100-ft setback. Site has 100 feet per GIS evaluation.
ii. 50-foot storm sewer setback would need to be maintained if a well were to be sited
on this parcel.
b. Site does not meet the ¼-mile well spacing recommendation for Jordan aquifer wells.
i. The parcel is less than 900 feet from Farmington Well 5.
c. Site not recommended for further evaluation as a future well site.
7. PIN 037-141660000090, Estes Path & 197th St. W. (Meadow View Park):
a. Site meets all MDH setback requirements.
b. Site meets the ¼-mile well spacing recommendation for Jordan aquifer wells.
c. Site recommended for further evaluation as a future well site.
8. PIN 037-141650301190, 19995 Everhill Avenue:
a. Site potentially meets MDH setback requirements
i. Parcel is too small to be able to meet the required 50-ft separation from property
ownership boundaries.
Page 19 of 44
To: Matt Decur, PE, City of Farmington
From: John Greer, PG and Michelle Stockness, PE
Subject: Well Siting, City of Farmington Well 9
Date: July 30, 2018
Page: 5
P:\Mpls\23 MN\19\23191386 Farmington- Well 9\WorkFiles\1-Well siting study\memo\Finall Well Siting_2018-07-30.docx
ii. However, it likely is possible to obtain a variance from the MDH to include
approximately 7-foot of street right-of-way ROW as a controlled easement since the
City controls the ROW as well as owning the parcel.
b. Site meets the ¼-mile well spacing recommendation for Jordan aquifer wells.
c. City requested that this location be carried forward for further evaluation as a future well site.
9. PIN 037-141650401010, 57XXX 200th St. W.:
a. Parcel is too small to be able to meet the required 50-ft separation from property ownership
boundaries, would need a variance. Other MDH setback requirements met.
b. Site does not meet the ¼-mile well spacing recommendation for Jordan aquifer wells.
i. The parcel is less than ¼-mile from Farmington Well 8.
c. Site not recommended for further evaluation as a future well site.
3.0 Groundwater Modeling Evaluation
A groundwater modeling evaluation of the five potential well sites that passed the initial screening
discussed above was performed. The objectives of the modeling evaluation were to determine if any of
the locations had the potential to negatively impact the aquifer, interfere with existing City or private
wells, or to negatively impact the Vermillion River. Results of the modeling evaluation were reviewed in
light of the sustainability criteria specified in Minnesota statute 103G.287 subd. 5. Which states:
“The commissioner may issue water-use permits for appropriation from groundwater only if the
commissioner determines that:
the groundwater use is sustainable to supply the needs of future generations and
the proposed use will not harm ecosystems,
degrade water quality, or
reduce water levels beyond the reach of public water supply and private domestic wells
constructed according to Minnesota Rules, chapter 4725.”
The groundwater model developed for delineating the City’s wellhead protection areas presented in
the Farmington Part 1 WHPP amendment (Barr, 2016) was used for the modeling evaluation of potential
Well 9 locations.
3.1 Target aquifer
Of the City’s seven primary municipal water supply wells, Wells 1 and 3 are open to both the Prairie du
Chien Group and Jordan Sandstone aquifers and Wells 4, 5, 6, 7, and 8 are open to only the Jordan
Sandstone aquifer. Other aquifers potentially available for Well 9 are the St. Peter Sandstone, the Tunnel
City Group and Wonewoc Sandstone (together they form the Tunnel City-Wonewoc aquifer), and the Mt.
Simon Sandstone. Information on the City’s existing water supply wells is summarized in Table 3:
Page 20 of 44
To: Matt Decur, PE, City of Farmington
From: John Greer, PG and Michelle Stockness, PE
Subject: Well Siting, City of Farmington Well 9
Date: July 30, 2018
Page: 6
P:\Mpls\23 MN\19\23191386 Farmington- Well 9\WorkFiles\1-Well siting study\memo\Finall Well Siting_2018-07-30.docx
Table 3 Municipal Well Summary
Local
Well ID
Unique
Number
Use/
Status1
Casing
Diameter
(in.)
Casing
Depth
(ft.)
Well
Dept
h (ft.)
Year
Constructed Aquifer
Well
Capacity
(gpm)
1 200932 P 16 197 402 1938 Prairie du Chien-Jordan 1,000
3 201154 P 20 x 12 132 424 1959 Prairie du Chien-Jordan 600
4 235586 P 24 x 16 392 477 1973 Jordan 1,000
5 603051 P 30 x 24 417 512 1999 Jordan 1,200
6 626785 P 30 x 24 386 485 2002 Jordan 2,000
7 655902 P 30 x 24 408 501 2002 Jordan 1,400
8 731123 P 30 x 24 368 460 2006 Jordan 2,000
Modeling of the five potential locations for Well 9 that were carried forward focused on the Jordan
Sandstone for the following reasons:
The St. Peter Sandstone aquifer is the shallowest of the bedrock aquifers underlying Farmington
and, therefore, would be somewhat more susceptible to impacts from contaminant spills than the
deeper aquifers. The St. Peter aquifer is typically less productive than the Jordan aquifer. In
addition, the St. Peter aquifer has been removed by erosion under some parts of the City and
sediments deposited along the eroded edge of the St. Peter may serve to further reduce
production from the aquifer.
The Prairie du Chien Group aquifer immediately underlies the St. Peter Sandstone. The Prairie du
Chien is one of the two most heavily used aquifers in the Twin Cities metro area. The Prairie du
Chien is the uppermost bedrock unit beneath proposed location 8. The other four locations
carried forward for additional evaluation all are less than 3,900 feet from the mapped eroded
edge of the St. Peter Sandstone. Capture zones for any of these five proposed locations will
extend into areas where the Prairie du Chien is the uppermost bedrock. Available information for
the Farmington area indicates that in areas where the Prairie du Chien is the uppermost bedrock
the characteristics of the overlying geologic deposits range from gravel to clay. Thus, wells in the
Prairie du Chien may be more susceptible to impact from surface contaminant spills than wells in
the Jordan.
The Jordan Sandstone aquifer immediately underlies the Prairie du Chien Group. The Jordan
aquifer is the other one of the two most utilized and productive aquifers in the Twin Cities metro
area. As noted above, all of the City’s primary water supply wells are open partially or wholly to
the Jordan aquifer. Water pumped from Well 9 in the Jordan aquifer would match the water
quality pumped from Wells 4 through 8, so treatment of the water would be expected to be
within known operating parameters.
In areas where the Tunnel City-Wonewoc aquifer is not the uppermost bedrock (such as in the
Farmington area), high capacity wells such as municipal water supply wells typically produce water
Page 21 of 44
To: Matt Decur, PE, City of Farmington
From: John Greer, PG and Michelle Stockness, PE
Subject: Well Siting, City of Farmington Well 9
Date: July 30, 2018
Page: 7
P:\Mpls\23 MN\19\23191386 Farmington- Well 9\WorkFiles\1-Well siting study\memo\Finall Well Siting_2018-07-30.docx
at significantly lower rates than Jordan aquifer wells. In addition, treatment requirements for water
from the Tunnel City-Wonewoc aquifer can differ from what is required for Jordan aquifer water.
Minnesota statute 103G.271 subd. 4a. restricts use of the Mt. Simon Sandstone aquifer in the
seven county Twin Cities metropolitan area to situations when there is there is no feasible or
practical alternative water source.
3.2 Scenarios
For each of the five potential Well 9 locations, the groundwater modeling evaluation included an average
day scenario (scenario 1) and a drought demand two-week peak scenario (scenario 2). The objective of
these modeling scenarios 1 and 2 was to evaluate the potential for impacts resulting from the addition of
Well 9 to the City’s existing water supply system. Following is a brief description of each scenario:
Scenario 1- Well 9 plus Existing System, Average Day Demand: Intended to identify potential
adverse impacts for average day pumping that may result from the addition of Well 9 to the City’s
water supply system. Well 1 was removed since the City intends to seal Well 1 after the water
tower project is completed next year. Wells 3 through 8 pumping at their average rates for the
period 2012 – 2016. To be conservative, Well 9 pumping was set at 632 gpm. Under this scenario,
modeled average day demand is approximately 2.6 million gallons per day (MGD) and all
additional pumping over current conditions is assumed to occur in Well 9. Based on available
information, it is anticipated that the City will likely not reach this average day demand for at least
approximately 10 years. The conservative pumping rate for Well 9 is likely a higher average rate
than Well 9 would actually operate. The higher average rate provides a very conservative estimate
of potential impacts resulting from adding Well 9 to the system.
Scenario 2 – Well 9 plus Existing System, Peak Demand: Intended to identify potential adverse
impacts that may result from peak demand pumping in Farmington with the addition of Well 9.
Well 1 was removed since the City intends to seal Well 1 after the water tower project is
completed next year. Wells 3 through 9 pumping at peak demand rates determined by applying a
peaking factor of 2.9 to the pumping rates used in scenario 1. Under this scenario, modeled
maximum day demand is approximately 7.6 million gallons per day (MGD). Based on available
information, it is anticipated that the City will likely not reach this maximum day demand for at
least approximately 10 years.
The average day scenario was run in steady state mode. The two-week peak pumping scenario was
run in transient mode. As discussed above, proposed Well 9 was assumed to pump from the Jordan
aquifer. Pumping rates used in the scenarios are shown in Attachment 1. The baseline steady state
scenario to which scenarios 1 and 2 were compared used pumping rates for the existing City wells set
at their averages for the period 2012 through 2016. Model-predicted drawdown in the Jordan aquifer
for each of the scenarios at each of the five proposed Well 9 locations are shown on Figures 4
through 8.
Page 22 of 44
To: Matt Decur, PE, City of Farmington
From: John Greer, PG and Michelle Stockness, PE
Subject: Well Siting, City of Farmington Well 9
Date: July 30, 2018
Page: 8
P:\Mpls\23 MN\19\23191386 Farmington- Well 9\WorkFiles\1-Well siting study\memo\Finall Well Siting_2018-07-30.docx
3.2.1 Potential for Well Interference
Evaluation of potential well interference addresses the following requirements of Minnesota statute
103G.287 subd. 5:
The groundwater use is sustainable to supply the needs of future generations
The groundwater use will not reduce water levels beyond the reach of public water supply and
private domestic wells constructed according to Minnesota Rules, chapter 4725.
The addition of Well 9 pumping in the Jordan aquifer will produce additional drawdown in the City’s
existing water supply wells. Model-predicted drawdown in existing Wells 3 through 8 for each of the
scenarios is summarized in Table 4. The groundwater model assumes the existing wells are 100 percent
efficient.
The results of scenarios 1 and 2 suggest that adding Well 9 to the City’s water supply system at any of the
five modeled locations likely would not cause adverse interference in the City’s existing wells in the near
term (i.e., before there are significant increases in pumping by other public water suppliers in the vicinity
of Farmington). The depths at which the pumps are set in Wells 3 through 8 would need to be assessed in
light of the observed pumping water levels in the wells and the model-predicted drawdown to determine
if pumps would need to be lowered.
Table 4 Model-Predicted Drawdowns at Existing City Wells
Location Scenario Well 3 Well 4 Well 5 Well 6 Well 7 Well 8
18922
Excalibur Trail
1 0.0 2.0 1.5 1.2 1.5 1.0
2 3.4 12.0 12.5 11.7 11.4 9.2
19xxx
English Avenue
1 0.0 1.8 1.8 1.4 1.9 1.1
2 3.5 11.3 13.5 12.2 12.6 9.5
19505
Exceptional Trail
1 0.0 1.3 1.6 1.4 1.4 1.3
2 3.6 10.0 12.7 12.2 11.3 9.9
Estes Path &
197th Street W.
1 0.1 1.2 2.0 2.0 1.7 1.7
2 3.7 9.6 14.0 14.0 12.1 11.2
19995
Everhill Avenue
1 0.1 1.0 1.4 1.4 1.2 1.6
2 3.7 9.1 12.2 12.3 10.8 10.8
The potential for well interference at nearby wells resulting from the addition of Well 9 and pumping from
the City’s wells was evaluated within a 1-mile radius of Farmington. A search of the Minnesota County
Well Index (CWI) within 1 mile of Farmington identified 141 wells (this number does not include Wells 3-8)
that had static water column data. The drawdowns from the results of scenarios 1 and 2 were extracted at
these well locations and percentage reductions in static water column were calculated using the modeled
drawdowns and initial static water column heights computed from the well construction, stratigraphy, and
Page 23 of 44
To: Matt Decur, PE, City of Farmington
From: John Greer, PG and Michelle Stockness, PE
Subject: Well Siting, City of Farmington Well 9
Date: July 30, 2018
Page: 9
P:\Mpls\23 MN\19\23191386 Farmington- Well 9\WorkFiles\1-Well siting study\memo\Finall Well Siting_2018-07-30.docx
static depth to water information on the CWI logs. Figures 9 through 13 show the results of the well
interference evaluation.
The Minnesota Department of Natural Resources (MDNR) has developed guidelines that can be used for
assessing whether pumping from a high capacity well may adversely affect a confined or leaky confined
aquifer like the Jordan aquifer beneath Farmington based on the amount of drawdown relative to the
static water column above the top of the aquifer at the well. These guidelines indicate that, typically,
drawdown of 25 percent or less of the static water column is of no concern.
For the Well 9 siting evaluation, it was assumed that model-predicted drawdown of less than 25 percent
of the static water column above the top of the aquifer in which a private well is open (or above the
screen if the well is a water table aquifer well) would indicate no adverse interference. This assumption
was made because information on pump depths in the private wells was not available. Table 5 shows that
there are no private wells at which the model-predicted drawdown is greater than 25% in either scenario
1 or scenario 2 for any of the potential Well 9 locations.
Table 5 Number of Private Wells with Predicted Drawdown Greater Than 25 Percent
Location Scenario
Number of Wells with
Predicted Drawdown
>25%
18922 Excalibur Trail 1 0
2 0
19xxx English Avenue 1 0
2 0
19505 Exceptional Trail 1 0
2 0
Estes Path & 197th Street W. 1 0
2 0
19995 Everhill Avenue 1 0
2 0
As indicated in Table 5, modeled drawdowns suggest that it is unlikely the addition of Well 9 to the City’s
water supply system would result in adverse well interference in surrounding private wells.
3.2.2 Potential Impact on Vermillion River Base Flow
As indicated on Figure 14, the MDNR has designated the Vermillion River as a trout stream. The MDNR
has determined that groundwater withdrawals cannot be allowed to produce reductions of more than 10
percent of the August median base flow in trout streams (e.g., MDNR, 2016). Therefore, the groundwater
model was used to evaluate potential reductions in base flow. Since flow in the river is not explicitly
Page 24 of 44
To: Matt Decur, PE, City of Farmington
From: John Greer, PG and Michelle Stockness, PE
Subject: Well Siting, City of Farmington Well 9
Date: July 30, 2018
Page: 10
P:\Mpls\23 MN\19\23191386 Farmington- Well 9\WorkFiles\1-Well siting study\memo\Finall Well Siting_2018-07-30.docx
included in the groundwater model, modeled groundwater discharge into the MODFLOW RIV cells
representing the Vermillion River was used as a surrogate for river base flow. The reach of the Vermillion
River for which potential changes in base flow was evaluated is shown on Figure 14. Evaluation of the
potential impact on Vermillion River base flow addresses the following requirement of Minnesota statute
103G.287 subd. 5:
The proposed use will not harm ecosystems.
Table 6 summarizes the model-predicted base flow changes in the reach of the Vermillion River that
passes through Farmington for each proposed Well 9 location and scenario.
Table 6 Model-Predicted Reductions in Vermillion River Base Flow
Location Scenario
Model-Predicted
Baseflow (cfs)
Model-Predicted
Percent Reduction in
Base Flow
18922 Excalibur Trail 1 2.65 0.7
2 2.64 1.1
19xxx English Avenue 1 2.64 1.1
2 2.64 1.1
19505 Exceptional Trail 1 2.64 1.1
2 2.64 1.1
Estes Path & 197th Street W. 1 2.63 1.5
2 2.64 1.1
19995 Everhill Avenue 1 2.63 1.5
2 2.64 1.1
Modeled baseline flow estimate= 2.67 cfs
The results of scenarios 1 and 2 suggest that, the addition of Well 9 to the City’s water supply system
would not result in base flow reductions in the Vermillion River in excess of the MDNR’s identified
maximum allowable reduction.
3.2.3 Water Quality
Adding Well 9 to the City’s water supply system at any of the proposed locations would not be expected
to result in degraded groundwater quality in the area.
4.0 Conclusions and Recommendations
Nine potential well sites were evaluated for future Well 9. The five sites that passed the initial screening
were modeled to determine if any of the locations had the potential to negatively impact the aquifer,
interfere with existing City or private wells, or to negatively impact the Vermillion River. The modeling
Page 25 of 44
To: Matt Decur, PE, City of Farmington
From: John Greer, PG and Michelle Stockness, PE
Subject: Well Siting, City of Farmington Well 9
Date: July 30, 2018
Page: 11
P:\Mpls\23 MN\19\23191386 Farmington- Well 9\WorkFiles\1-Well siting study\memo\Finall Well Siting_2018-07-30.docx
results were used to rank the proposed sites in the following categories: their potential to result in
adverse interference in existing City wells, their potential to produce adverse interference in nearby
private wells, and their potential to result in unacceptable impacts to the reach of the Vermillion River that
passes through Farmington. In each category, the proposed location that produced the smallest impacts
received a score of 1. The highest possible score in a category was 5. If two potential locations produced
the same impacts in a category they were given the same score. The proposed location with the lowest
total score is considered to be the preferred site. The rankings of the proposed locations are shown in
Table 7:
Table 7 Ranking of Proposed Well 9 Locations
Location
Interference
with Existing
City Wells
Interference
with Private
Wells
Potential Adverse
Impact on Vermillion
River Base Flow
Total
Score
18922 Excalibur Trail 3 1 1 5
19xxx English Avenue 4 1 2 7
19505 Exceptional Trail 2 1 2 5
Estes Path & 197th Street W. 5 1 3 9
19995 Everhill Avenue 1 1 3 5
As shown in Table 7, our evaluation indicates that 19995 Everhill Avenue, 19505 Exceptional Trail, and
18922 Excalibur Trail should be considered preferred locations for Well 9. At the project kick off meeting,
City staff expressed an interest in being able to connect Well 9 to an existing raw water main and treating
raw water from Well 9 in an existing wellhouse, if possible. Of the three preferred locations identified by
the evaluation presented above, 19995 Everhill Avenue aligns best with these other considerations
identified by City staff.
5.0 References
Barr Engineering Co. (Barr), 2016. City of Farmington Wellhead Protection Plan Amendment –
Part 1: Delineation of the Wellhead Protection Area (WHPA), Drinking Water Supply Management
Area (DWSMA) and Assessments of Well and DWSMA Vulnerability, prepared for the City of
Farmington, March 2016.
Barr Engineering Co. (Barr), 2018a. Proposal for Well No. 9: Professional Services for Siting, Design, and
Construction Support, submitted to the City of Farmington, May 21, 2018.
Barr Engineering Co. (Barr) 2018b. Draft Initial Well Siting, City of Farmington Well 9, memorandum from
John Greer and Michelle Stockness (Barr) to Matt Decur (City of Farmington), June 26, 2018.
Bonestroo, 2009. Water Supply and Distribution Plan, project no. 000141-06287-0, prepared for the City of
Farminginton, March 2009.
Page 26 of 44
To: Matt Decur, PE, City of Farmington
From: John Greer, PG and Michelle Stockness, PE
Subject: Well Siting, City of Farmington Well 9
Date: July 30, 2018
Page: 12
P:\Mpls\23 MN\19\23191386 Farmington- Well 9\WorkFiles\1-Well siting study\memo\Finall Well Siting_2018-07-30.docx
Minnesota Department of Natural Resources (MDNR), 2016. Report to the Minnesota State Legislature:
Definitions and Thresholds for Negative Impacts to Surface Waters, January 2016.
Certification
I hereby certify that this plan, document, or report was prepared by me or under my direct supervision
and that I am a duly Licensed Professional Geologist under the laws of the state of Minnesota.
John C. Greer
PG #:
Date
July 30, 2018
Page 27 of 44
!A
!A
!A
!A
!A
!>
!>!>
!>
!>
!>
!>
!>
!>
&*
&*
&*
FARMINGTON 6
FARMINGTON 4
FARMINGTON 8
FARMINGTON 5
FARMINGTON 7
037-145050401010
037-145050503060 037-145050000010
037-141115100020
037-141650001010
037-141680000010
037-141660000090
037-141650301190
037-141650401010
Farmington MW-1
Farmington MW-3
Farmington MW-4
PROPOSE D WE LL 9LOCATIONSFarmington Well 9 Siting
FIGURE 1
Barr Footer: ArcGIS 10.6, 2018-07-03 15:30 File: I:\Client\Farmington_MN\Work_Orders\Well9Siting_23191386\Maps\Reports\Well_Siting_Memo\Figure 1 - Proposed Well 9 Locations with Municipal Wells.mxd User: JCG
0 500 1,000 1,500
Feet
!;N&*Farmington Obser vation Well
!A Farmington Municipal Well
Proposed Well 9 Locations
!>Proposed Well 9 Locations
Parcels
(18750 Englewood Way)
(18922 Excalibur Trail)(5498 190th Street)
(19xxx English Avenue)
(19505 Exceptional Trail)
(Pilot Knob and Eureka Avenue)
(Estes Path & 197th Street W)
(19995 Everhill Avenue)
(57xxx 200th Street W)
Page 28 of 44
Ba
r
r
F
o
o
t
e
r
:
A
r
c
G
I
S
1
0
.
6
,
2
0
1
8
-
0
7
-
2
7
1
4
:
2
8
F
i
l
e
:
I
:
\
C
l
i
e
n
t
\
F
a
r
m
i
n
g
t
o
n
_
M
N
\
W
o
r
k
_
O
r
d
e
r
s
\
W
e
l
l
9
S
i
t
i
n
g
_
2
3
1
9
1
3
8
6
\
M
a
p
s
\
M
I
S
C
\
F
i
g
u
r
e
2
-
P
r
o
p
o
s
e
d
W
e
l
l
9
L
o
c
a
t
i
o
n
s
i
n
R
e
l
a
t
i
o
n
t
o
U
t
i
l
i
t
i
e
s
.
m
x
d
U
s
e
r
:
s
a
l
2
PROPOSED WELL 9 LOCATIONSIN RELATION TO UTILITIESFarmington, MN
FIGURE 2
!;N
!>
Excalib
u
r
T
r
190th St W
037-145050503060 !>Natural GasCompressor Station
190th St W
E
n
g
l
i
s
h
A
v
e
Estate Ave
Eng
l
e
w
o
o
d
W
a
y
Pi
l
o
t
K
n
o
b
R
d
456731
037-145050000010
!>
Es
t
a
t
e
A
v
e
Pi
l
o
t
K
n
o
b
R
d
E
n
g
l
i
s
h
A
v
e
456731
037-141115100020
!>
Eur
e
k
a
A
v
e
Mu
n
i
c
i
p
a
l
Dr
Estes
P
a
t
h
Pi
l
o
t
K
n
o
b
R
d
456731
037-141680000010
!>
E
s
t
e
s
P
a
t
h
197th St
037-141660000090 !>
200th
S
t
W
037-141650401010
!>
200th St
W
E
v
e
r
h
i
l
l
A
v
e
037-141650301190
!A
!>
"J
Ex
c
e
p
t
i
o
n
a
l
T
r
Ewing St
195th St W
037-141650001010
100982
0 100 200
Feet
Proposed Well 9 Locations
!>Meets set back requirements
!>
Does not meet set back requirements
"J Septic Systems
!A PCSI Well Locations
Pond Outline
Utilities
Natural Gas Pipeline
Petroleum Pipeline
Raw Watermain
Forcemain
Storm Sewer
Sanitary Sewer
Watermain
100-year Flood Zone
Area within 50 feetof Parcel Boundary
Parcels
!A!>
Englew
o
o
d
W
a
y
Euc
l
i
d
P
a
t
h
Ev
e
r
e
s
t
P
a
t
h
Exc
a
l
i
b
u
r
T
r
Es
s
e
n
c
e
T
r
037-145050401010Farmington TW-3731136
Location 1PIN: 037-14505040101018750 Englewood Way
Location 4PIN: 037-14111510002019xxx English Avenue
Location 9PIN: 037-14165040101057xx 200th Street West
Location 2PIN: 037-14505050306018922 Excalibur Trail
Location 6PIN: 037-141680000010Pilot Knob and Eureka Avenue
Location 8PIN: 037-14165030119019995 Everhill Avenue
Location 3PIN: 037-1450500000105498 190th Street
Location 7PIN: 037-141660000090Estes Path and 197th Street West
Location 5PIN: 037-14165000101019505 Exceptional Trail
Note: Pipeline routes are approximate.
Pa
g
e
2
9
o
f
4
4
!.
!.
!.
!.
!.
!>
!>!>
!>
!>
!>
!>
!>
!>
FAR MING TON 6
FAR MING TON 4
FAR MING TON 8
FAR MING TON 5
FAR MING TON 7
037-145050401010
037-145050000010
037-141650001010
037-141680000010
037-141650301190
037-141650401010
037-145050503060
037-141115100020
037-141660000090
PROPOSE D LOC ATIONSCARRIED FORWARDFarmington Well 9 Siting
FIGURE 3
Barr Footer: ArcGIS 10.6, 2018-07-30 15:11 File: I:\Client\Farmington_MN\Work_Orders\Well9Siting_23191386\Maps\Reports\Well_Siting_Memo\Figure 3 - Proposed Well 9 Locations Carried Forward.mxd User: JCG
0 1,000
Feet
!;N
!.Fa rmington Muni cipal Well
Prop osed Well 9 Locations
!>Meets set back requi rements
!>Does not meet set back requ irements
Parcels Page 30 of 44
!.
!.
!.
!.
!.
!.
!.
!?
FARMINGTON 7
FARMINGTON 3
FARMINGTON 5
FARMINGTON 8
FARMINGTON 4
FARMINGTON 6
FARMINGTON 1
FARMINGTON 9 (proposed)2
V e r m il li o n R i v e r
Source: Esri, DigitalGlobe, GeoEye, Earthstar Geographics, CNES/Airbus DS,USDA, USGS, AEX, Getmapping, Aerogrid, IGN, IGP, swisstopo, and the GISUser Community
Barr Footer: ArcGIS 10.6, 2018-07-30 15:18 File: I:\Client\Farmington_MN\Work_Orders\Well9Siting_23191386\Maps\Reports\Well_Siting_Memo\Figure 4 - Modeled Drawdown Contours 3060 Scens1_2.mxd User
: JCG
MOD ELED DRAWDOWNSCENARIOS 1 AND 2WELL 9 AT LOCATION 2Farmington Well 9 Siting
FIGURE 4
0 4,000
Feet
!;N
!.
!.
!.
!.
!.
!.
!.
!?
FARMINGTON 7
FARMINGTON 3
FARMINGTON 5
FARMINGTON 8
FARMINGTON 4
FARMINGTON 6
FARMINGTON 1
FARMINGTON 9 (proposed)
2
4
6
8
1 0
12
1 4
V e r m il li o n R i v e r
Source: Esri, DigitalGlobe, GeoEye, Earthstar Geographics, CNES/Airbus DS,USDA, USGS, AEX, Getmapping, Aerogrid, IGN, IGP, swisstopo, and the GISUser Community
!?Potential Well 9 Location
!.Existing Farmington Well
Modeled Drawdown (ft)
Vermillion River
Farmington City Limits
Scenario 2: End of Transient 2-Week Near-Term Peak Demand Scenario
Drawdown shown for Jordan Sandstone (model layer 4)
Drawdown referenced to existing conditions scenario (average 2012-2016 pumping at the Farmington wells)
2-foot Contour Interval
Scenario 1: Steady-State Existing System Including Well 9, Minus Well 1
Location 2 is 18922 Excalibur Trail, parcel 037-145050503060
Pa
g
e
3
1
o
f
4
4
!.
!.
!.
!.
!.
!.
!.
!?
FARMINGTON 7
FARMINGTON 3
FARMINGTON 5
FARMINGTON 8
FARMINGTON 4
FARMINGTON 6
FARMINGTON 1
FARMINGTON 9 (proposed)
2
V e r m il li o n R i v e r
Source: Esri, DigitalGlobe, GeoEye, Earthstar Geographics, CNES/Airbus DS,USDA, USGS, AEX, Getmapping, Aerogrid, IGN, IGP, swisstopo, and the GISUser Community
Barr Footer: ArcGIS 10.6, 2018-07-30 15:20 File: I:\Client\Farmington_MN\Work_Orders\Well9Siting_23191386\Maps\Reports\Well_Siting_Memo\Figure 5 - Modeled Drawdown Contours 0020 Scens1_2.mxd User
: JCG
MOD ELED DRAWDOWNSCENARIOS 1 AND 2WELL 9 AT LOCATION 4Farmington Well 9 Siting
FIGURE 5
0 4,000
Feet
!;N
!.
!.
!.
!.
!.
!.
!.
!?
FARMINGTON 7
FARMINGTON 3
FARMINGTON 5
FARMINGTON 8
FARMINGTON 4
FARMINGTON 6
FARMINGTON 1
FARMINGTON 9 (proposed)
2
4
6
8
10
12
14
10
12
V e r m il li o n R i v e r
Source: Esri, DigitalGlobe, GeoEye, Earthstar Geographics, CNES/Airbus DS,USDA, USGS, AEX, Getmapping, Aerogrid, IGN, IGP, swisstopo, and the GISUser Community
Scenario 2: End of Transient 2-Week Near-Term Peak Demand Scenario
Drawdown shown for Jordan Sandstone (model layer 4)
Drawdown referenced to existing conditions scenario (average 2012-2016 pumping at the Farmington wells)
2-foot Contour Interval
!?Potential Well 9 Location
!.Existing Farmington Well
Modeled Drawdown (ft)
Vermillion River
Farmington City Limits
Scenario 1: Steady-State Existing System Including Well 9, Minus Well 1
Location 4 is 19xxx English Avenue, parcel 037-141115100020
Pa
g
e
3
2
o
f
4
4
!.
!.
!.
!.
!.
!.
!.!?FARMINGTON 7
FARMINGTON 3
FARMINGTON 5
FARMINGTON 8
FARMINGTON 4
FARMINGTON 6
FARMINGTON 1
FARMINGTON 9 (proposed)
2
V e r m il li o n R i v e r
Source: Esri, DigitalGlobe, GeoEye, Earthstar Geographics, CNES/Airbus DS,USDA, USGS, AEX, Getmapping, Aerogrid, IGN, IGP, swisstopo, and the GISUser Community
Barr Footer: ArcGIS 10.6, 2018-07-30 15:21 File: I:\Client\Farmington_MN\Work_Orders\Well9Siting_23191386\Maps\Reports\Well_Siting_Memo\Figure 6 - Modeled Drawdown Contours 1010 Scens1_2.mxd User
: JCG
MOD ELED DRAWDOWNSCENARIOS 1 AND 2WELL 9 AT LOCATION 5Farmington Well 9 Siting
FIGURE 6
0 4,000
Feet
!;N
!.
!.
!.
!.
!.
!.
!.!?FARMINGTON 7
FARMINGTON 3
FARMINGTON 5
FARMINGTON 8
FARMINGTON 4
FARMINGTON 6
FARMINGTON 1
FARMINGTON 9 (proposed)
2
4
6
8
10
1
214
V e r m il li o n R i v e r
Source: Esri, DigitalGlobe, GeoEye, Earthstar Geographics, CNES/Airbus DS,USDA, USGS, AEX, Getmapping, Aerogrid, IGN, IGP, swisstopo, and the GISUser Community
!?Potential Well 9 Location
!.Existing Farmington Well
Modeled Drawdown (ft)
Vermillion River
Farmington City Limits
Scenario 2: End of Transient 2-Week Near-Term Peak Demand Scenario
Drawdown shown for Jordan Sandstone (model layer 4)
Drawdown referenced to existing conditions scenario (average 2012-2016 pumping at the Farmington wells)
2-foot Contour Interval
Scenario 1: Steady-State Existing System Including Well 9, Minus Well 1
Location 5 is 19505 Exceptional Trail, parcel 037-141650001010
Pa
g
e
3
3
o
f
4
4
!.
!.
!.
!.
!.
!.
!.
!?
FARMINGTON 7
FARMINGTON 3
FARMINGTON 5
FARMINGTON 8
FARMINGTON 4
FARMINGTON 6
FARMINGTON 1
FARMINGTON 9 (proposed)
2
V e r m il li o n R i v e r
Source: Esri, DigitalGlobe, GeoEye, Earthstar Geographics, CNES/Airbus DS,USDA, USGS, AEX, Getmapping, Aerogrid, IGN, IGP, swisstopo, and the GISUser Community
Barr Footer: ArcGIS 10.6, 2018-07-30 15:22 File: I:\Client\Farmington_MN\Work_Orders\Well9Siting_23191386\Maps\Reports\Well_Siting_Memo\Figure 7 - Modeled Drawdown Contours 0090 Scens1_2.mxd User
: JCG
MOD ELED DRAWDOWNSCENARIOS 1 AND 2WELL 9 AT LOCATION 7Farmington Well 9 Siting
FIGURE 7
0 4,000
Feet
!;N
!.
!.
!.
!.
!.
!.
!.
!?
FARMINGTON 7
FARMINGTON 3
FARMINGTON 5
FARMINGTON 8
FARMINGTON 4
FARMINGTON 6
FARMINGTON 1
FARMINGTON 9 (proposed)
2
4
6
8
10
1 2
14
8
V e r m il li o n R i v e r
Source: Esri, DigitalGlobe, GeoEye, Earthstar Geographics, CNES/Airbus DS,USDA, USGS, AEX, Getmapping, Aerogrid, IGN, IGP, swisstopo, and the GISUser Community
!?Potential Well 9 Location
!.Existing Farmington Well
Modeled Drawdown (ft)
Vermillion River
Farmington City Limits
Scenario 2: End of Transient 2-Week Near-Term Peak Demand Scenario
Drawdown shown for Jordan Sandstone (model layer 4)
Drawdown referenced to existing conditions scenario (average 2012-2016 pumping at the Farmington wells)
2-foot Contour Interval
Scenario 1: Steady-State Existing System Including Well 9, Minus Well 1
Location 7 is Estes Path & 197th Street W, parcel 037-141660000090
Pa
g
e
3
4
o
f
4
4
!.
!.
!.
!.
!.
!.
!.
!?
FARMINGTON 7
FARMINGTON 3
FARMINGTON 5
FARMINGTON 8
FARMINGTON 4
FARMINGTON 6
FARMINGTON 1
FARMINGTON 9 (proposed)
2
V e r m il li o n R i v e r
Source: Esri, DigitalGlobe, GeoEye, Earthstar Geographics, CNES/Airbus DS,USDA, USGS, AEX, Getmapping, Aerogrid, IGN, IGP, swisstopo, and the GISUser Community
Barr Footer: ArcGIS 10.6, 2018-07-30 15:24 File: I:\Client\Farmington_MN\Work_Orders\Well9Siting_23191386\Maps\Reports\Well_Siting_Memo\Figure 8 - Modeled Drawdown Contours 1190 Scens1_2.mxd User
: JCG
MOD ELED DRAWDOWNSCENARIOS 1 AND 2WELL 9 AT LOCATION 8Farmington Well 9 Siting
FIGURE 8
0 4,000
Feet
!;N
!.
!.
!.
!.
!.
!.
!.
!?
FARMINGTON 7
FARMINGTON 3
FARMINGTON 5
FARMINGTON 8
FARMINGTON 4
FARMINGTON 6
FARMINGTON 1
FARMINGTON 9 (proposed)
2
4
6
8
10
1
2 V e r m il li o n R i v e r
Source: Esri, DigitalGlobe, GeoEye, Earthstar Geographics, CNES/Airbus DS,USDA, USGS, AEX, Getmapping, Aerogrid, IGN, IGP, swisstopo, and the GISUser Community
!?Potential Well 9 Location
!.Existing Farmington Well
Modeled Drawdown (ft)
Vermillion River
Farmington City Limits
Scenario 2: End of Transient 2-Week Near-Term Peak Demand Scenario
Drawdown shown for Jordan Sandstone (model layer 4)
Drawdown referenced to existing conditions scenario (average 2012-2016 pumping at the Farmington wells)
2-foot Contour Interval
Scenario 1: Steady-State Existing System Including Well 9, Minus Well 1
Location 8 is 19995 Everhill Avenue, parcel 037-141650301190
Pa
g
e
3
5
o
f
4
4
!.
!.
!.
!.
!.
!.
!.
!?
#0
#0
#0
#0
#0
#0
#0
#0
#0
#0
#0
#0
#0
#0
#0
#0
#0
#0
#0
#0 #0
#0
#0
#0
#0
#0
#0
#0
#0
#0
#0
#0#0
#0
#0
#0
#0#0
#0
#0
#0
#0#0
#0
#0
#0
#0
#0
#0
#0
#0
#0
#0
#0
#0
#0
#0#0
#0#0 #0
#0
#0
#0
#0
#0
#0
#0
#0
#0
#0
#0 #0#0
#0
#0#0
#0
#0 #0
#0
#0
#0
#0
#0
#0
#0
#0
#0#0
#0
#0
#0
#0
#0
#0
#0
#0
#0
#0
#0
#0
#0
#0
#0
#0
#0
#0
#0
#0
#0 #0
#0
#0
#0
#0
#0 #0
#0
#0 #0
#0
#0
#0
#0
#0 #0
#0
#0
#0
#0
#0
#0
#0
#0
#0
#0
#0
#0
#0
#0
#0
#0
#0
#0
#0
#0
#0
FARMINGTON 7
FARMINGTON 3
FARMINGTON 5
FARMINGTON 8
FARMINGTON 4
FARMINGTON 6
FARMINGTON 1
FARMINGTON 9 (proposed)
V e r m il li o n R i v e r
Source: Esri, DigitalGlobe, GeoEye, Earthstar Geographics, CNES/Airbus DS,USDA, USGS, AEX, Getmapping, Aerogrid, IGN, IGP, swisstopo, and the GISUser Community
Barr Footer: ArcGIS 10.6, 2018-07-30 15:25 File: I:\Client\Farmington_MN\Work_Orders\Well9Siting_23191386\Maps\Reports\Well_Siting_Memo\Figure 9 - Modeled Water Column Reduction 3060 Scens1_2.mxd User
: JCG
PERCENT REDUCTION IN STATIC WATER COLUMN FOR CWI WELLSWELL 9 AT LOCATION 2Farmington Well 9 Siting
FIGURE 9
0 4,000
Feet
!;N
!.
!.
!.
!.
!.
!.
!.
!?
#0
#0
#0
#0
#0
#0
#0
#0
#0
#0
#0
#0
#0
#0
#0
#0
#0
#0
#0
#0 #0
#0
#0
#0
#0
#0
#0
#0
#0
#0
#0
#0#0
#0
#0
#0
#0#0
#0
#0
#0
#0#0
#0
#0
#0
#0
#0
#0
#0
#0
#0
#0
#0
#0
#0
#0#0
#0#0 #0
#0
#0
#0
#0
#0
#0
#0
#0
#0
#0
#0 #0#0
#0
#0#0
#0
#0 #0
#0
#0
#0
#0
#0
#0
#0
#0
#0#0
#0
#0
#0
#0
#0
#0
#0
#0
#0
#0
#0
#0
#0
#0
#0
#0
#0
#0
#0
#0
#0 #0
#0
#0
#0
#0
#0 #0
#0
#0 #0
#0
#0
#0
#0
#0 #0
#0
#0
#0
#0
#0
#0
#0
#0
#0
#0
#0
#0
#0
#0
#0
#0
#0
#0
#0
#0
#0
FARMINGTON 7
FARMINGTON 3
FARMINGTON 5
FARMINGTON 8
FARMINGTON 4
FARMINGTON 6
FARMINGTON 1
FARMINGTON 9 (proposed)
V e r m il li o n R i v e r
Source: Esri, DigitalGlobe, GeoEye, Earthstar Geographics, CNES/Airbus DS,USDA, USGS, AEX, Getmapping, Aerogrid, IGN, IGP, swisstopo, and the GISUser Community
!?Potential Well 9 Location
!.Existing Farmington Well
Vermillion River
Farmington City Limits
Scenario 2: End of Transient 2-Week Near-Term Peak Demand ScenarioScenario 1: Steady-State Existing System Including Well 9, Minus Well 1
Location 2 is 18922 Excalibur Trail, parcel 037-145050503060
Percent Reduction in Static Water Column
#0 0 - 25
#0 26 - 50
#0 51 - 75
#0 76 - 100
Pa
g
e
3
6
o
f
4
4
!.
!.
!.
!.
!.
!.
!.
!?
#0
#0
#0
#0
#0
#0
#0
#0
#0
#0
#0
#0
#0
#0
#0
#0
#0
#0
#0
#0 #0
#0
#0
#0
#0
#0
#0
#0
#0
#0
#0
#0#0
#0
#0
#0
#0#0
#0
#0
#0
#0#0
#0
#0
#0
#0
#0
#0
#0
#0
#0
#0
#0
#0
#0
#0#0
#0#0 #0
#0
#0
#0
#0
#0
#0
#0
#0
#0
#0
#0 #0#0
#0
#0#0
#0
#0 #0
#0
#0
#0
#0
#0
#0
#0
#0
#0#0
#0
#0
#0
#0
#0
#0
#0
#0
#0
#0
#0
#0
#0
#0
#0
#0
#0
#0
#0
#0
#0 #0
#0
#0
#0
#0
#0 #0
#0
#0 #0
#0
#0
#0
#0
#0 #0
#0
#0
#0
#0
#0
#0
#0
#0
#0
#0
#0
#0
#0
#0
#0
#0
#0
#0
#0
#0
#0
FARMINGTON 7
FARMINGTON 3
FARMINGTON 5
FARMINGTON 8
FARMINGTON 4
FARMINGTON 6
FARMINGTON 1
FARMINGTON 9 (proposed)
V e r m il li o n R i v e r
Source: Esri, DigitalGlobe, GeoEye, Earthstar Geographics, CNES/Airbus DS,USDA, USGS, AEX, Getmapping, Aerogrid, IGN, IGP, swisstopo, and the GISUser Community
Barr Footer: ArcGIS 10.6, 2018-07-30 15:26 File: I:\Client\Farmington_MN\Work_Orders\Well9Siting_23191386\Maps\Reports\Well_Siting_Memo\Figure 10 - Modeled Drawdown Contours 0020 Scens1_2.mxd User
: JCG
PERCENT REDUCTION IN STATIC WATER COLUMN FOR CWI WELLSWELL 9 AT LOCATION 4Farmington Well 9 Siting
FIGURE 10
0 4,000
Feet
!;N
!.
!.
!.
!.
!.
!.
!.
!?
#0
#0
#0
#0
#0
#0
#0
#0
#0
#0
#0
#0
#0
#0
#0
#0
#0
#0
#0
#0 #0
#0
#0
#0
#0
#0
#0
#0
#0
#0
#0
#0#0
#0
#0
#0
#0#0
#0
#0
#0
#0#0
#0
#0
#0
#0
#0
#0
#0
#0
#0
#0
#0
#0
#0
#0#0
#0#0 #0
#0
#0
#0
#0
#0
#0
#0
#0
#0
#0
#0 #0#0
#0
#0#0
#0
#0 #0
#0
#0
#0
#0
#0
#0
#0
#0
#0#0
#0
#0
#0
#0
#0
#0
#0
#0
#0
#0
#0
#0
#0
#0
#0
#0
#0
#0
#0
#0
#0 #0
#0
#0
#0
#0
#0 #0
#0
#0 #0
#0
#0
#0
#0
#0 #0
#0
#0
#0
#0
#0
#0
#0
#0
#0
#0
#0
#0
#0
#0
#0
#0
#0
#0
#0
#0
#0
FARMINGTON 7
FARMINGTON 3
FARMINGTON 5
FARMINGTON 8
FARMINGTON 4
FARMINGTON 6
FARMINGTON 1
FARMINGTON 9 (proposed)
V e r m il li o n R i v e r
Source: Esri, DigitalGlobe, GeoEye, Earthstar Geographics, CNES/Airbus DS,USDA, USGS, AEX, Getmapping, Aerogrid, IGN, IGP, swisstopo, and the GISUser Community
Scenario 2: End of Transient 2-Week Near-Term Peak Demand Scenario
!?Potential Well 9 Location
!.Existing Farmington Well
Vermillion River
Farmington City Limits
Scenario 1: Steady-State Existing System Including Well 9, Minus Well 1
Location 4 is 19xxx English Avenue, parcel 037-141115100020
Percent Reduction in Static Water Column
#0 0 - 25
#0 26 - 50
#0 51 - 75
#0 76 - 100
Pa
g
e
3
7
o
f
4
4
!.
!.
!.
!.
!.
!.
!.!?#0
#0
#0
#0
#0
#0
#0
#0
#0
#0
#0
#0
#0
#0
#0
#0
#0
#0
#0
#0 #0
#0
#0
#0
#0
#0
#0
#0
#0
#0
#0
#0#0
#0
#0
#0
#0#0
#0
#0
#0
#0#0
#0
#0
#0
#0
#0
#0
#0
#0
#0
#0
#0
#0
#0
#0#0
#0#0 #0
#0
#0
#0
#0
#0
#0
#0
#0
#0
#0
#0 #0#0
#0
#0#0
#0
#0 #0
#0
#0
#0
#0
#0
#0
#0
#0
#0#0
#0
#0
#0
#0
#0
#0
#0
#0
#0
#0
#0
#0
#0
#0
#0
#0
#0
#0
#0
#0
#0 #0
#0
#0
#0
#0
#0 #0
#0
#0 #0
#0
#0
#0
#0
#0 #0
#0
#0
#0
#0
#0
#0
#0
#0
#0
#0
#0
#0
#0
#0
#0
#0
#0
#0
#0
#0
#0
FARMINGTON 7
FARMINGTON 3
FARMINGTON 5
FARMINGTON 8
FARMINGTON 4
FARMINGTON 6
FARMINGTON 1
FARMINGTON 9 (proposed)
V e r m il li o n R i v e r
Source: Esri, DigitalGlobe, GeoEye, Earthstar Geographics, CNES/Airbus DS,USDA, USGS, AEX, Getmapping, Aerogrid, IGN, IGP, swisstopo, and the GISUser Community
Barr Footer: ArcGIS 10.6, 2018-07-30 15:27 File: I:\Client\Farmington_MN\Work_Orders\Well9Siting_23191386\Maps\Reports\Well_Siting_Memo\Figure 11 - Modeled Drawdown Contours 1010 Scens1_2.mxd User
: JCG
PERCENT REDUCTION IN STATIC WATER COLUMN FOR CWI WELLSWELL 9 AT LOCATION 5Farmington Well 9 Siting
FIGURE 11
0 4,000
Feet
!;N
!.
!.
!.
!.
!.
!.
!.!?#0
#0
#0
#0
#0
#0
#0
#0
#0
#0
#0
#0
#0
#0
#0
#0
#0
#0
#0
#0 #0
#0
#0
#0
#0
#0
#0
#0
#0
#0
#0
#0#0
#0
#0
#0
#0#0
#0
#0
#0
#0#0
#0
#0
#0
#0
#0
#0
#0
#0
#0
#0
#0
#0
#0
#0#0
#0#0 #0
#0
#0
#0
#0
#0
#0
#0
#0
#0
#0
#0 #0#0
#0
#0#0
#0
#0 #0
#0
#0
#0
#0
#0
#0
#0
#0
#0#0
#0
#0
#0
#0
#0
#0
#0
#0
#0
#0
#0
#0
#0
#0
#0
#0
#0
#0
#0
#0
#0 #0
#0
#0
#0
#0
#0 #0
#0
#0 #0
#0
#0
#0
#0
#0 #0
#0
#0
#0
#0
#0
#0
#0
#0
#0
#0
#0
#0
#0
#0
#0
#0
#0
#0
#0
#0
#0
FARMINGTON 7
FARMINGTON 3
FARMINGTON 5
FARMINGTON 8
FARMINGTON 4
FARMINGTON 6
FARMINGTON 1
FARMINGTON 9 (proposed)
V e r m il li o n R i v e r
Source: Esri, DigitalGlobe, GeoEye, Earthstar Geographics, CNES/Airbus DS,USDA, USGS, AEX, Getmapping, Aerogrid, IGN, IGP, swisstopo, and the GISUser Community
!?Potential Well 9 Location
!.Existing Farmington Well
Vermillion River
Farmington City Limits
Scenario 2: End of Transient 2-Week Near-Term Peak Demand ScenarioScenario 1: Steady-State Existing System Including Well 9, Minus Well 1
Location 5 is 19505 Exceptional Trail, parcel 037-141650001010
Percent Reduction in Static Water Column
#0 0 - 25
#0 26 - 50
#0 51 - 75
#0 76 - 100
Pa
g
e
3
8
o
f
4
4
!.
!.
!.
!.
!.
!.
!.
!?
#0
#0
#0
#0
#0
#0
#0
#0
#0
#0
#0
#0
#0
#0
#0
#0
#0
#0
#0
#0 #0
#0
#0
#0
#0
#0
#0
#0
#0
#0
#0
#0#0
#0
#0
#0
#0#0
#0
#0
#0
#0#0
#0
#0
#0
#0
#0
#0
#0
#0
#0
#0
#0
#0
#0
#0#0
#0#0 #0
#0
#0
#0
#0
#0
#0
#0
#0
#0
#0
#0 #0#0
#0
#0#0
#0
#0 #0
#0
#0
#0
#0
#0
#0
#0
#0
#0#0
#0
#0
#0
#0
#0
#0
#0
#0
#0
#0
#0
#0
#0
#0
#0
#0
#0
#0
#0
#0
#0 #0
#0
#0
#0
#0
#0 #0
#0
#0 #0
#0
#0
#0
#0
#0 #0
#0
#0
#0
#0
#0
#0
#0
#0
#0
#0
#0
#0
#0
#0
#0
#0
#0
#0
#0
#0
#0
FARMINGTON 7
FARMINGTON 3
FARMINGTON 5
FARMINGTON 8
FARMINGTON 4
FARMINGTON 6
FARMINGTON 1
FARMINGTON 9 (proposed)
V e r m il li o n R i v e r
Source: Esri, DigitalGlobe, GeoEye, Earthstar Geographics, CNES/Airbus DS,USDA, USGS, AEX, Getmapping, Aerogrid, IGN, IGP, swisstopo, and the GISUser Community
Barr Footer: ArcGIS 10.6, 2018-07-30 15:28 File: I:\Client\Farmington_MN\Work_Orders\Well9Siting_23191386\Maps\Reports\Well_Siting_Memo\Figure 12 - Modeled Drawdown Contours 0090 Scens1_2.mxd User
: JCG
PERCENT REDUCTION IN STATIC WATER COLUMN FOR CWI WELLSWELL 9 AT LOCATION 7Farmington Well 9 Siting
FIGURE 12
0 4,000
Feet
!;N
!.
!.
!.
!.
!.
!.
!.
!?
#0
#0
#0
#0
#0
#0
#0
#0
#0
#0
#0
#0
#0
#0
#0
#0
#0
#0
#0
#0 #0
#0
#0
#0
#0
#0
#0
#0
#0
#0
#0
#0#0
#0
#0
#0
#0#0
#0
#0
#0
#0#0
#0
#0
#0
#0
#0
#0
#0
#0
#0
#0
#0
#0
#0
#0#0
#0#0 #0
#0
#0
#0
#0
#0
#0
#0
#0
#0
#0
#0 #0#0
#0
#0#0
#0
#0 #0
#0
#0
#0
#0
#0
#0
#0
#0
#0#0
#0
#0
#0
#0
#0
#0
#0
#0
#0
#0
#0
#0
#0
#0
#0
#0
#0
#0
#0
#0
#0 #0
#0
#0
#0
#0
#0 #0
#0
#0 #0
#0
#0
#0
#0
#0 #0
#0
#0
#0
#0
#0
#0
#0
#0
#0
#0
#0
#0
#0
#0
#0
#0
#0
#0
#0
#0
#0
FARMINGTON 7
FARMINGTON 3
FARMINGTON 5
FARMINGTON 8
FARMINGTON 4
FARMINGTON 6
FARMINGTON 1
FARMINGTON 9 (proposed)
V e r m il li o n R i v e r
Source: Esri, DigitalGlobe, GeoEye, Earthstar Geographics, CNES/Airbus DS,USDA, USGS, AEX, Getmapping, Aerogrid, IGN, IGP, swisstopo, and the GISUser Community
!?Potential Well 9 Location
!.Existing Farmington Well
Vermillion River
Farmington City Limits
Scenario 2: End of Transient 2-Week Near-Term Peak Demand ScenarioScenario 1: Steady-State Existing System Including Well 9, Minus Well 1
Location 7 is Estes Path & 197th Street W, parcel 037-141660000090
Percent Reduction in Static Water Column
#0 0 - 25
#0 26 - 50
#0 51 - 75
#0 76 - 100
Pa
g
e
3
9
o
f
4
4
!.
!.
!.
!.
!.
!.
!.
!?
#0
#0
#0
#0
#0
#0
#0
#0
#0
#0
#0
#0
#0
#0
#0
#0
#0
#0
#0
#0 #0
#0
#0
#0
#0
#0
#0
#0
#0
#0
#0
#0#0
#0
#0
#0
#0#0
#0
#0
#0
#0#0
#0
#0
#0
#0
#0
#0
#0
#0
#0
#0
#0
#0
#0
#0#0
#0#0 #0
#0
#0
#0
#0
#0
#0
#0
#0
#0
#0
#0 #0#0
#0
#0#0
#0
#0 #0
#0
#0
#0
#0
#0
#0
#0
#0
#0#0
#0
#0
#0
#0
#0
#0
#0
#0
#0
#0
#0
#0
#0
#0
#0
#0
#0
#0
#0
#0
#0 #0
#0
#0
#0
#0
#0 #0
#0
#0 #0
#0
#0
#0
#0
#0 #0
#0
#0
#0
#0
#0
#0
#0
#0
#0
#0
#0
#0
#0
#0
#0
#0
#0
#0
#0
#0
#0
FARMINGTON 7
FARMINGTON 3
FARMINGTON 5
FARMINGTON 8
FARMINGTON 4
FARMINGTON 6
FARMINGTON 1
FARMINGTON 9 (proposed)
V e r m il li o n R i v e r
Source: Esri, DigitalGlobe, GeoEye, Earthstar Geographics, CNES/Airbus DS,USDA, USGS, AEX, Getmapping, Aerogrid, IGN, IGP, swisstopo, and the GISUser Community
Barr Footer: ArcGIS 10.6, 2018-07-30 15:29 File: I:\Client\Farmington_MN\Work_Orders\Well9Siting_23191386\Maps\Reports\Well_Siting_Memo\Figure 13 - Modeled Drawdown Contours 1190 Scens1_2.mxd User
: JCG
PERCENT REDUCTION IN STATIC WATER COLUMN FOR CWI WELLSWELL 9 AT LOCATION 8Farmington Well 9 Siting
FIGURE 13
0 4,000
Feet
!;N
!.
!.
!.
!.
!.
!.
!.
!?
#0
#0
#0
#0
#0
#0
#0
#0
#0
#0
#0
#0
#0
#0
#0
#0
#0
#0
#0
#0 #0
#0
#0
#0
#0
#0
#0
#0
#0
#0
#0
#0#0
#0
#0
#0
#0#0
#0
#0
#0
#0#0
#0
#0
#0
#0
#0
#0
#0
#0
#0
#0
#0
#0
#0
#0#0
#0#0 #0
#0
#0
#0
#0
#0
#0
#0
#0
#0
#0
#0 #0#0
#0
#0#0
#0
#0 #0
#0
#0
#0
#0
#0
#0
#0
#0
#0#0
#0
#0
#0
#0
#0
#0
#0
#0
#0
#0
#0
#0
#0
#0
#0
#0
#0
#0
#0
#0
#0 #0
#0
#0
#0
#0
#0 #0
#0
#0 #0
#0
#0
#0
#0
#0 #0
#0
#0
#0
#0
#0
#0
#0
#0
#0
#0
#0
#0
#0
#0
#0
#0
#0
#0
#0
#0
#0
FARMINGTON 7
FARMINGTON 3
FARMINGTON 5
FARMINGTON 8
FARMINGTON 4
FARMINGTON 6
FARMINGTON 1
FARMINGTON 9 (proposed)
V e r m il li o n R i v e r
Source: Esri, DigitalGlobe, GeoEye, Earthstar Geographics, CNES/Airbus DS,USDA, USGS, AEX, Getmapping, Aerogrid, IGN, IGP, swisstopo, and the GISUser Community
!?Potential Well 9 Location
!.Existing Farmington Well
Vermillion River
Farmington City Limits
Scenario 2: End of Transient 2-Week Near-Term Peak Demand ScenarioScenario 1: Steady-State Existing System Including Well 9, Minus Well 1
Location 8 is 19995 Everhill Avenue, parcel 037-141650301190
Percent Reduction in Static Water Column
#0 0 - 25
#0 26 - 50
#0 51 - 75
#0 76 - 100
Pa
g
e
4
0
o
f
4
4
!.
!.
!.
!.
!.
!.
!.
!>
!>
!>
!>
!>
FARMINGTON 7
FARMINGTON 3
FARMINGTON 5
FARMINGTON 8
FARMINGTON 4
FARMINGTON 6
FARMINGTON 1
Location 8(037-141650301190)
Location 7(037-141660000090)
Location 5(037-141650001010)
Location 4(037-141115100020)
Location 2(037-145050503060)
Source: Esri, DigitalGlobe, GeoEye, Earthstar Geographics, CNES/AirbusDS, U SDA, USGS, AEX, Getmapping, Aerogrid, IGN, IGP, swisstopo, and theGIS User Community
VERMILLION RIVER B ASEFLOW REACH EVALUATEDFarmington Well 9 Siting
FIGURE 14
Barr Footer: ArcGIS 10.6, 2018-07-30 15:30 File: I:\Client\Farmington_MN\Work_Orders\Well9Siting_23191386\Maps\Reports\Well_Siting_Memo\Figure 14 - Vermillion River Base Flow Reach.mxd User: JCG
0 2,000 4,000
Feet
!;N!>Potential Well 9 Location
!.Existing Farmington Well
Designated Trout Stream
Protected Tributary to Designated Trout Stream
Vermillion Baseflow Reach for Modeling
Farmington City Limits
V e r m illi o n R i v e r
Page 41 of 44
Attachment 1
Pumping Rates for Groundwater Modeling Scenarios
Farmington Well 9 Siting
Unique
Number Well Name 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016
200932 1 112,119,000 68,160,000 59,749,000 55,340,000 86,794,000
201154 3 75,427,000 91,569,000 66,312,000 62,318,000 43,999,000
235586 4 126,743,000 110,967,000 125,109,000 84,173,081 93,114,000
603051 5 125,838,000 110,894,000 117,582,000 122,911,000 123,035,400
626785 6 146,761,000 138,134,000 127,457,000 143,676,870 141,431,000
655902 7 108,551,000 91,611,000 94,134,000 79,945,000 83,132,000
731123 8 105,845,000 106,322,000 93,263,000 91,419,000 109,217,000
Totals 801,284,000 717,657,000 683,606,000 639,782,951 680,722,400
Source: City water use records
Unique
Number Well Name 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016
200932 1 14.0%9.5%8.7%8.6%12.8%10.7%
201154 3 9.4%12.8%9.7%9.7%6.5%9.6%
235586 4 15.8%15.5%18.3%13.2%13.7%15.3%
603051 5 15.7%15.5%17.2%19.2%18.1%17.1%
626785 6 18.3%19.2%18.6%22.5%20.8%19.9%
655902 7 13.5%12.8%13.8%12.5%12.2%13.0%
731123 8 13.2%14.8%13.6%14.3%16.0%14.4%
Unique
Number Well Name gpm m3/day MGD gpm m3/day MGD gpm m3/day
200932 1 145 792.19 0 0 0 0
201154 3 129 704.02 129 704.02 375 2,041.65
235586 4 205 1119.60 205 1,119.60 596 3,246.83
603051 5 228 1244.29 228 1,244.29 662 3,608.45
626785 6 265 1445.78 265 1,445.78 769 4,192.76
655902 7 174 948.10 174 948.10 504 2,749.49
731123 8 192 1049.04 192 1,049.04 558 3,042.20
--9 0 0.00 632 3,445.27 1,833 9,991.27
Totals 1,340 7,303 2.6 1,826 9,956 7.6 5,296 28,873
1 Pumping rates for Wells 3-9 in Scenario 2 computed from Scenario 1 rates using a peaking factor of 2.9
Total Annual Withdrawal (gal/yr)
Percentage of Annual Withdrawal
Average
Annual % of
Withdrawal
2012-2016 Average Pumping Scenario 1: Steady-State Existing System Scenario 2: Transient 2-Week Near-Term
Page 1 of 1
\\barr.com\projects\Mpls\23 MN\19\23191386 Farmington- Well 9\WorkFiles\1-Well siting study\memo\Attachments\Attachment 1_Pumping_Rates_v2.xlsx
Pa
g
e
4
2
o
f
4
4
WATER BOARD AGENDA MEMO
To: Water Board, City Administrator
From: John Powell, Public Works Director
Department: Engineering
Subject: Approve Bills
Meeting: Water Board - Oct 28 2024
INTRODUCTION:
The bills from September 18, 2024, to October 22, 2024, are presented for approval.
The Water Board receives a detailed list of claims paid that is available to the public upon request.
DISCUSSION:
Staff will highlight the larger expenditures and is available to respond to questions regarding all
disbursements.
BUDGET IMPACT:
The total for this bill report is $90,235.90.
ACTION REQUESTED:
Review, discuss, and approve the bills.
Page 43 of 44
WATER BOARD AGENDA MEMO
To: Water Board, City Administrator
From: John Powell, Public Works Director
Department: Engineering
Subject: Project Information and Updates
Meeting: Water Board - Oct 28 2024
INTRODUCTION:
Staff will provide updates on the following items/projects:
Akin Knoll
MCES Water Efficiency Grant Program
2025 Street Improvements
Meadowview Preserve Phase II
Denmark Trail Townhomes
Lead and Copper Rule Revisions (LCRR)
Vermillion Commons 4th Addition
Spruce Street & Dushane Parkway Intersection
Public Works Staffing Update
DISCUSSION:
General discussion of information, no action items.
ACTION REQUESTED:
General discussion of information, no action items.
Page 44 of 44