HomeMy WebLinkAbout2021-10-28 Council Work Session Agenda Packet
Council Work Session Agenda
October 28, 2021 - 5:30 pm
1. Call to Order / Roll Call
2. Water Supply Planning*
3. Unscheduled Items
4. Adjournment
*Includes Materials - Materials relating to these agenda items can be found in the Council Chambers Agenda
Packet book located by the entrance. The complete Council Agenda Packet is available electronically on the City website
at www.corcoranmn.gov.
HYBRID MEETING OPTION AVAILABLE
The public is invited to attend the regular Council
meetings at City Hall.
Meeting Via Telephone/Other Electronic Means
Call-in Instructions:
+1 312 626 6799 US
Enter Meeting ID: 867 9126 8323
Press *9 to speak during the Public Comment
Sections in the meeting.
Video Link and Instructions:
https://us02web.zoom.us/j/86791268323
visit http://www.zoom.us and enter
Meeting ID: 867 9126 8323
Participants can utilize the Raise Hand function
to be recognized to speak during the Public
Comment sections in the meeting. Participant
video feeds will be muted. In-person comments
will be received first, with the hybrid electronic
means option following.
For more information on options to provide
public comment visit:
www.corcoranmn.gov
Memo
To: Kevin Mattson, Public Works Director From: Kent Torve, PE, City Engineer
File: 227704426 Date: October 21, 2021
Reference: Corcoran Water Supply, Treatment, & Storage Project
Work Session Discussion
COUNCIL ACTION REQUESTED
Staff would like to meet with the City Council at the work session ahead of the regular City Council
Meeting to talk through several design components for the Northeast Water Project including water
storage alternative and building architecture.
DISCUSSION TOPICS
The Stantec Water Project Design Team will be at the City Council Work Session to present and discuss
with the city council key design topics for the Northeast Water Supply Project.
The first topic to discuss will be the preferred water storage system and a discussion on elevated storage
vs ground storage. Attached is a memo prepared by Stantec with additional information on the potential
alternatives which will be presented on and discussed with the Council.
Secondly, we would like to have a preliminary discussion on the building architecture for the water
treatment facility which is planned to be located along County Road 116 just north of Hunters Ridge. A
powerpoint slide deck is attached to this memo and the project architect and staff will be at the meeting
to present on architectural considerations for the facility.
If there is not enough time during the work session to fully discuss all of the topics, we can return to a
future work session or City Council Meeting to follow up.
Water Storage Options
Evaluation
Northeast Water System
October 20, 2021
Prepared for:
City of Corcoran
WATER STORAGE OPTIONS EVALUATION – NORTHEAST WATER SYSTEM
Table of Contents
INTRODUCTION ............................................................................................................ 1
STORAGE OPTIONS SUMMARY ................................................................................. 1
WATER TOWER ............................................................................................................ 1
GROUND STORAGE TANK ........................................................................................... 2
ALTERNATIVES EVALUATION .................................................................................... 3
AESTHETIC & SITE CONSIDERATIONS ...................................................................... 3
SYSTEM CONSIDERATIONS ........................................................................................ 4
OPERABILITY & SERVICEABILITY ............................................................................... 5
COST SUMMARY & FINAL CONSIDERATIONS .......................................................... 5
LIST OF TABLES
Table 1: Water Tower Capital Cost Summary ............................................................................ 5
Table 2: Ground Storage Tank Capital Cost Summary ............................................................... 6
Table 3: 30-Year O&M Expense Summary ................................................................................ 6
LIST OF FIGURES
Figure 1: Composite Tower Example
Figure 2: Pedestal Tower Example
Figure 3: Ground Storage Tank Examples
APPENDICES
Appendix A – Shadow Study Figures
Appendix B – Water Storage Comparison Figures
WATER STORAGE OPTIONS EVALUATION – NORTHEAST WATER SYSTEM
1
INTRODUCTION
Stantec has begun work on the preliminary design of the Northeast Water System which includes the
preliminary design of a municipal well, trunk conveyance, water treatment plant, and water tower. A park
site has been identified in the 5th and 6th Bellwether Additions in northeast Corcoran as the location for the
water tower. However, as discussed at the September council meeting, the City has requested additional
information in evaluating storage options which include a water tower, above-ground ground storage tank
(GST), and buried storage tank based on concerns related to the aesthetics and location of the
infrastructure relative to neighboring homes.
The purpose of this document is to summarize the three water storage options, evaluate them in the
context of the proposed water treatment plant and distribution system for northeast Corcoran, and provide
an updated cost comparison that includes capital, operation, and maintenance expenses for each option.
This document will be presented to the City for discussion during the October 28th Council Work Session.
After the Work Session, we would ask that the council review the information provided and, if comfortable,
provide guidance on the on their preferred storage option to be carried through preliminary design.
Portions of this document reference the NE Water Supply Feasibility Study Update submitted in July
2019, the 2020 Northeast Water System Feasibility Study finalized in February 2021, and Feasibility
Report Supplements provided in June 2021.
STORAGE OPTIONS SUMMARY
WATER TOWER
The NE Water Supply Feasibility Study Update (July 2019) identified 650,000 gallons as the minimum
water storage volume required for fire flow. This volume corresponds to a standard water tower size of
750,000 gallons. Available water tower configurations include composite, single pedestal, and multi-
column.
Composite or single pedestal tower configurations have been discussed as options for an elevated
storage system in the preliminary design for northeast Corcoran.
· Composite water towers consist of a concrete pedestal with a steel bowl (see Figure 1). This
configuration typically, has a higher cost of construction but provides the benefit of reduced cost
of maintenance on the concrete support as well as providing an area for storage at the bottom of
the tower. A dripping ring around the bowl prevents unsightly mold and generally requires less
interim maintenance.
WATER STORAGE OPTIONS EVALUATION – NORTHEAST WATER SYSTEM
2
· Single pedestal water towers consist of a steel pedestal and steel bowl (see Figure 2). This
configuration has a smaller footprint at the base of the tower. In terms of maintenance, this
configuration can be prone to condensation and mold growth on bottom half of the tower and the
cost for reconditioning is typically more than that of composites.
GROUND STORAGE TANK
Ground storage tanks (GST) can be above ground, partially buried, or completely buried and are typically
constructed of pre-stressed or poured-in-place concrete. GSTs are lower profile, making them less
vulnerable to extreme weather events such as tornados. Various architectural finishes can be applied to
the exterior of GSTs to achieve a desired aesthetic but can come at significant cost depending on the
materials chosen and complexity. GSTs also require the construction of a booster station which consists
of low and high demand pumps, a pressure tank, and a backup generator to provide pressure to the
distribution system.
GSTs are typically constructed with domed roofs that are supported by the walls of the tank. It’s also
possible for the tanks to be partially or fully buried and have a flat roof that is supported by columns on
the interior of the tank. Flat roofs can accommodate other uses above the tank and support the booster
station infrastructure if site footprint is limited. Partially or fully buried tanks and flat roofs increase the
overall construction cost due to additional excavation, requiring poured-in-place concrete, and additional
costs associated with constructing internal columns to support the added roof loading. Figure 3 includes
examples of above ground, partially buried, and buried GSTs.
Figure 1: Composite Tower Example Figure 2: Pedestal Tower Example
WATER STORAGE OPTIONS EVALUATION – NORTHEAST WATER SYSTEM
3
Figure 3: Ground Storage Tank Examples
3.0 ALTERNATIVES EVALUATION
When considering which water storage option is best applied for the northeast Corcoran system, the
following criteria have been identified as key decision drivers – aesthetics relative to surrounding
community, functionality relative to other components in the system, and operability and serviceability.
3.1 AESTHETIC & SITE CONSIDERATIONS
The proposed water storage location will be in a City park located in the Bellwether 5th and 6th Additions
and be surrounded primarily by single-family homes. The City wants to ensure that the water storage
infrastructure will be aesthetically acceptable to the residents in the neighboring developments.
The proposed water tower option would be approximately 180-feet tall and 66-feet in diameter to
accommodate the system pressure and total storage volume requirements. A shadow study for this
option was completed in September 2021 to evaluate the shadowing impacts of a water tower on
neighboring homes. Four figures were developed based on the time of year to project the shadow that
would impact homes at various times of day and are included in Appendix A.
Water towers are the most common water storage option for communities in Minnesota due to the lack of
vertical relief and operational advantages. As previously discussed, common tower configurations are
composite and pedestal towers which can be painted in a variety of ways to display the City’s name, logo,
and instill a sense of community pride. Water towers typically have to be repainted every 20 years, which
provides the opportunity for the City to update its logo and community branding.
Water towers can also accommodate telecommunications antennas, which can be a revenue source for
the City, but may also be less aesthetically pleasing. Composite water towers could have maintenance
storage space in the base of the tower which could be utilized by the City for park maintenance or other
public works equipment.
WATER STORAGE OPTIONS EVALUATION – NORTHEAST WATER SYSTEM
4
A 750,000 gallon GST option would be approximately 40-feet tall and 66-feet in diameter if constructed at
grade with a domed roof or 30-feet tall if constructed at grade with a flat roof. The GST would also require
the construction of a booster station, which could be designed to look like a typical park building and
would be constructed next to the GST or above it. Typical dimensions for a booster station would be
approximately 30’x40’. A flat roofed tank could be designed for additional roof loading to accommodate
additional park facilities and the booster station building, but at significantly greater cost compared to
above ground options.
The exterior of the tank can be painted to display a City logo or finished with a specialized architectural
treatment such as stone, brick, or columns. However, the cost of architectural treatments can escalate
quickly and, given the tank’s location in the City park, it may be a target for graffiti and vandalism. A
fence around the GST would be recommended but would increase the footprint required and would have
to be designed to fit into the context of the rest of the park.
A buried or partially buried tank would have to take into consideration the groundwater depth and
buoyancy. At this time there is no ground water elevation data for the proposed site to determine if a
buried or partially buried GST would be feasible or if it would require a drain and pumping system to
maintain dry conditions under the tank. The depth of a buried tank would be limited by the suction lift of
the pumps and would result in a larger diameter tank and footprint with dimensions of approximately 100-
feet in diameter and 15-feet in depth.
Site figures have been prepared for both options that display the dimensions of the infrastructure relative
to the preliminary park layout and are included in Appendix B.
3.2 SYSTEM CONSIDERATIONS
The main difference between water tower and GST options is how each interacts hydraulically with the
overall water system. Water towers are at the highest elevation in the overall system which allows for
them to passively provide water pressure to the entire distribution system without pumping. GSTs require
water to first be pumped from the water treatment plant to the storage tank, and then again to the
distribution system. In the event of a power outage, a GST requires backup generation to maintain
pressure and deliver water. In contrast, during a power outage, a water tower can provide hours or days
of supply to the system without backup power. Having available storage volume and system pressure
from a water tower reduces stress on the operators in emergency situations.
Given that the northeast system will be a first for the City, maintaining a high level of system resiliency in
emergency situations is recommended. The elevation of the proposed water tower would be designed so
that it is similar to the hydraulic grade ine of Maple Grove. This would allow for a system interconnect in
which case either the Corcoran water tower or the Maple Grove water tower could provide temporary
supply to both systems in an emergency. Corcoran currently has this type of connection with Medina
along Hackamore Road. This type of built-in redundancy would be more complicated with a GST using
service pumps to supply Maple Grove, but for Corcoran during pump downtime the Maple Grove source
would supply northeast Corcoran users.
WATER STORAGE OPTIONS EVALUATION – NORTHEAST WATER SYSTEM
5
3.3 OPERABILITY & SERVICEABILITY
The booster station for a GST includes one or two low-demand (daily use) pumps and two high-demand
pumps (fire flow) in addition to a hydro-pneumatic tank and compressed air system that is used at very
low demand. The two systems are similar for system pressure for the tower the wells pump to the
treatment plant and then water is pumped from the treatment plant to the holding tank or tower. The GST
has well pumps to the treatment plant, but additional pumps for fire flow. The daily use pumps are more
complicated since demand is variable during the day and night. In contrast, a water tower’s pumps are
somewhat simpler in that water from the treatment plant can be pumped at a steady rate to fill the tower.
The GST will require its own generator which will be in addition to the generator at the WTP.
The two options vary in terms of the maintenance time and cost for pumps and equipment. Typically a 10-
year pump maintenance program can be followed for well pumps, etc. and more frequent maintenance
may be needed for the GST. The relative challenges of operating a GST and booster pump system
compared to a water tower should be considered for a City that will be operating and maintaining its own
system for the first time.
4.0 COST SUMMARY & FINAL CONSIDERATIONS
Capital cost components for water towers include the foundation requirements, piping and
appurtenances, composite pedestal and bowl, painting, and utility connections. Annual operating costs
are associated with inspections, cleaning, equipment maintenance and replacement, and aesthetic
rehabilitation. Table 1 presents budgetary capital costs for a 750,000 gallon, 180-foot tall composite tower
with a shallow foundation system. If deep foundations are required, additional costs may approach
$300,000.
Table 1: Water Tower Capital Cost Summary
Component Cost
Water Tower (Composite Pedestal, Bowl)$3,250,000
Piping & Appurtenances $100,000
Site Improvements, Landscaping $75,000
Paint w/ Logo $350,000
Utility Connections (Gas, Electric)$20,000
TOTAL $3,795,000
The major capital cost components for a GST include the tank, tank piping and connection to the
watermains, foundation requirements, earthwork, architectural treatments, the booster station with backup
power generation, and connections to gas and electrical utilities. Annual operating costs are associated
WATER STORAGE OPTIONS EVALUATION – NORTHEAST WATER SYSTEM
6
with inspections, tank cleaning, equipment maintenance and replacement, additional operations staffing
requirements, and aesthetic rehabilitation. Table 2 presents budgetary capital costs for a 750,000 gallon,
above ground storage tank with a shallow foundation system. If deep foundations are required, additional
costs may approach $300,000.
Fully buried or partially buried tanks increase the capital costs significantly beyond the base option
presented in Table 2 due to different structural needs, methods of construction, and additional excavation
costs. If an at-grade GST is not desirable, the City should consider a partially or fully buried tank to be the
most expensive of the three options with respect to both capital and O&M costs.
Table 2: Ground Storage Tank Capital Cost Summary
Component Cost
Tank (above ground, tank only)$1,035,000
Piping & Appurtenances $100,000
Site Improvements, Landscaping $100,000
Basic Architectural Treatment or Paint w/ Logo $300,000
Booster Station & Backup Power $1,200,000
Utility Connections (Gas, Electric)$75,000
TOTAL $2,810,000
Table 3 summarizes the 30-year operating and maintenance expenses associated with the two options
based on the expected annual recurrence of each expense. The main O&M cost differences are
associated with pump and equipment replacement for the additional assets and additional operator hours
to maintain the booster station facility on a daily basis and to complete annual maintenance activities.
This comparison does not quantify electrical usage or revenue from hosting a cellular antenna, but both
would favor the water tower option.
Table 3: 30-Year O&M Expense Summary
Tower GST
Expense Category Recurrence Cost Recurrence Cost
Inspection, Cleaning 1 $ 7,500 1 $ 7,500
Pump, Equipment Replacement 5 $ 20,000 5 $ 50,000
Painting 20 $ 300,000 20 $ 200,000
Operator Hours --1 $ 31,200
30-year TOTAL $ 795,000 $ 1,761,000
Ground storage tanks and water towers are both in use throughout the metro area and have individual
benefits and disadvantages. As discussed, there are specific considerations for the City to evaluate
relative to the location of the infrastructure, effects on the overall water system, emergency response, and
the City’s relative experience in operating their own system. The costs presented in this evaluation
represent the most cost-effective, base options for water tower and GST options.
WATER STORAGE OPTIONS EVALUATION – NORTHEAST WATER SYSTEM
7
Appendix A SHADOW STUDY FIGURES
Anoka
County
Hennepin
County
Wright
County
102n d P l a ce
JackPineLane103rd Avenue
1
0
2
n
d
Avenue
StiegRoad
Iro
nwoodLane
9:00 AM
11:00 AM
1:00 PM
3:00 PM
Disclaimer: This document has been prepared based on information provided by others as cited in the Notes section. Stantec has not verified the accuracy and/or completeness of this information and shall not be responsible for any errors
or omissions which may be incorporated herein as a result. Stantec assumes no responsibility for data supplied in electronic format, and the recipient accepts full responsibility for verifying the accuracy and completeness of the data.
Client/Project
Figure No.
Project Location
Title
"($$¯V:\2277\active\227704380\03_data\gis_cad\gis\pro\shadow_study\shadow_study.aprx Revised: 2021-09-09 By: jshuckLegend
Water Tower
Projected Shadow (180' Tall, 66' Wide Tower)
Proposed Layout
County Parcels
Page 1 of 1
Notes
1. Coordinate System: NAD 1983 HARN Adj MN
Hennepin Feet
2. Data Sources: Hennepin County, Sathre Bergquist
3. Background: Hennepin County 2020 Aerial
Photograph
(At original document size of 8.5x11)
1:3,600
0 150 300
Feet
Prepared by JCS on 2021-09-09
TR by XXX on 2020-XX-XX
IR by XXX on 2020-XX-XX
T119N, R23W, S01
Corcoran, Hennepin Co., MN
227704380City of Corcoran
Water Tower Shadow Study
Projected Shadow - January
1
Anoka
County
Hennepin
County
Wright
County
102ndPlace
JackPineLane103rd Avenue
1
0
2
n
d
Avenue
StiegRoad
Iro
nwoodLane
9:00 AM
11:00 AM
1:00 PM
3:00 PM
5:00 PM
Disclaimer: This document has been prepared based on information provided by others as cited in the Notes section. Stantec has not verified the accuracy and/or completeness of this information and shall not be responsible for any errors
or omissions which may be incorporated herein as a result. Stantec assumes no responsibility for data supplied in electronic format, and the recipient accepts full responsibility for verifying the accuracy and completeness of the data.
Client/Project
Figure No.
Project Location
Title
"($$¯V:\2277\active\227704380\03_data\gis_cad\gis\pro\shadow_study\shadow_study.aprx Revised: 2021-09-09 By: jshuckLegend
Water Tower (180' Tall, 66' Wide)
Projected Shadow
Proposed Layout
County Parcels
Page 1 of 1
Notes
1. Coordinate System: NAD 1983 HARN Adj MN
Hennepin Feet
2. Data Sources: Hennepin County, Sathre Bergquist
3. Background: Hennepin County 2020 Aerial
Photograph
(At original document size of 8.5x11)
1:3,600
0 150 300
Feet
Prepared by JCS on 2021-09-09
TR by XXX on 2020-XX-XX
IR by XXX on 2020-XX-XX
T119N, R23W, S01
Corcoran, Hennepin Co., MN
227704380City of Corcoran
Water Tower Shadow Study
Projected Shadow - April
2
Anoka
County
Hennepin
County
Wright
County
102ndPlace
JackPineLane103rd Avenue
1
0
2
n
d
Avenue
StiegRoad
Iro
nwoodLane
9:00 AM
11:00 AM 1:00 PM
3:00 PM
5:00 PM
Disclaimer: This document has been prepared based on information provided by others as cited in the Notes section. Stantec has not verified the accuracy and/or completeness of this information and shall not be responsible for any errors
or omissions which may be incorporated herein as a result. Stantec assumes no responsibility for data supplied in electronic format, and the recipient accepts full responsibility for verifying the accuracy and completeness of the data.
Client/Project
Figure No.
Project Location
Title
"($$¯V:\2277\active\227704380\03_data\gis_cad\gis\pro\shadow_study\shadow_study.aprx Revised: 2021-09-09 By: jshuckLegend
Water Tower (180' Tall, 66' Wide)
Projected Shadow
Proposed Layout
County Parcels
Page 1 of 1
Notes
1. Coordinate System: NAD 1983 HARN Adj MN
Hennepin Feet
2. Data Sources: Hennepin County, Sathre Bergquist
3. Background: Hennepin County 2020 Aerial
Photograph
(At original document size of 8.5x11)
1:3,600
0 150 300
Feet
Prepared by JCS on 2021-09-09
TR by XXX on 2020-XX-XX
IR by XXX on 2020-XX-XX
T119N, R23W, S01
Corcoran, Hennepin Co., MN
227704380City of Corcoran
Water Tower Shadow Study
Projected Shadow - July
3
Anoka
County
Hennepin
County
Wright
County
102ndPlace
JackPineLane103rd Avenue
102n
d
A
venue
StiegRoad
Iro
nwoodLane
9:00 AM
11:00 AM
1:00 PM 3:00 PM
5:00 PM
Disclaimer: This document has been prepared based on information provided by others as cited in the Notes section. Stantec has not verified the accuracy and/or completeness of this information and shall not be responsible for any errors
or omissions which may be incorporated herein as a result. Stantec assumes no responsibility for data supplied in electronic format, and the recipient accepts full responsibility for verifying the accuracy and completeness of the data.
Client/Project
Figure No.
Project Location
Title
"($$¯V:\2277\active\227704380\03_data\gis_cad\gis\pro\shadow_study\shadow_study.aprx Revised: 2021-09-09 By: jshuckLegend
Water Tower (180' Tall, 66' Wide)
Projected Shadow
Proposed Layout
County Parcels
Page 1 of 1
Notes
1. Coordinate System: NAD 1983 HARN Adj MN
Hennepin Feet
2. Data Sources: Hennepin County, Sathre Bergquist
3. Background: Hennepin County 2020 Aerial
Photograph
(At original document size of 8.5x11)
1:3,600
0 150 300
Feet
Prepared by JCS on 2021-09-09
TR by XXX on 2020-XX-XX
IR by XXX on 2020-XX-XX
T119N, R23W, S01
Corcoran, Hennepin Co., MN
227704380City of Corcoran
Water Tower Shadow Study
Projected Shadow - October
4
WATER STORAGE OPTIONS EVALUATION – NORTHEAST WATER SYSTEM
8
Appendix B WATER STORAGE COMPARISON FIGURES
Chaska Water
Treatment Facility
16 MGD capacity
•Six gravity-type filter cells
•Three backwash
retention tanks
•750,000-gallon clearwell
•15,000 GPM high-lift
pumping capacity
Chaska Water Treatment Facility
Face brick veneer with manufactured stone accent band
Prefinished metal wall panels
Prefinished metal coping at flat roofs
Prefinished metal standing seam roof panels at pitched roofs
Aluminum framed windows
Chaska Water Treatment Facility
Face brick veneer with manufactured stone accent bands
Prefinished metal wall panels
Prefinished metal coping at flat roofs
Prefinished metal standing seam roof panels at pitched roofs
Aluminum framed windows
Chaska Water Treatment Facility
Face brick veneer with manufactured stone accent bands
Prefinished metal wall panels
Prefinished metal coping at flat roofs
Prefinished metal standing seam roof panels at pitched roofs
Aluminum framed windows
Hastings Water
Treatment Facility
3 MGD Capacity
•Engineered anionic
exchange removal
facility treats high
nitrate well water to
less than 5 PPM of
nitrate
Hastings Water Treatment Facility
EIFS (Exterior Insulation and Finish System) at roof overhangs and walls
Manufactured stone wall veneer
Precast concrete window sills and column accents
Aluminum framed windows at grade
Translucent wall panels below high roof
Prefinished metal coping at flat roofs
Hastings Water Treatment Facility
EIFS (Exterior Insulation and Finish System) at roof overhangs and walls above brick
Manufactured stone wall veneer columns
Face brick veneer with arched tops
Precast concrete window sills and column accents
Translucent wall panels below high roof
Prefinished metal coping at flat roofs
Hastings Water Treatment Facility
EIFS (Exterior Insulation and Finish System) at roof overhangs and walls above face brick
Manufactured stone wall veneer
Face brick veneer with arched tops
Precast concrete window sills and column accents
Translucent wall panels below high roof
Prefinished metal coping at flat roofs
Apple Valley Water
Treatment Facility
Expansion
Increased capacity from
16.25 MGD to 24.4 MGD
•Added 4 new filter
cells and pipe gallery
•Added new backwash
tank
Apple Valley Water Treatment Facility Expansion
Face brick veneer – three color blends
Manufactured stone corner accent
Horizontal corrugated prefinished metal wall panels behind name
Multi-colored prefinished aluminum wall panels
Aluminum framed windows
Prefinished metal coping at flat roofs
Apple Valley Water Treatment Facility Expansion
Face brick veneer – three color blends
Manufactured stone corner accent
Multi-colored prefinished aluminum wall panels
Aluminum framed windows
Prefinished metal coping at flat roofs
Chaska Ground Water Storage Booster Station
Chaska Ground Water Storage Booster Station
Chaska Ground Water Storage Booster Station
Stacy Water
Treatment Facility
0.6 MGD Capacity
•Gravity filtration to
remove radium,
manganese, and
iron
Stacy Water Treatment Facility
Stacy Water Treatment Facility
Stacy Water Treatment Facility
Maple Plain Water
Treatment Facility
1.0 MGD Capacity
•Gravity filtration to
remove radium,
manganese, and
iron
Considerations
Exterior Wall Materials:
All of the water treatment facility examples shown
above utilize a structural masonry or precast concrete
panel backup system with a wall cavity for insulation
and the visible materials are a veneer.
•Face brick – 100-year lifecycle with mortar pointing
required at 50 years
•Precast Concrete Wall Panels – 100-year life cycle
with caulking replacement every 10-20 years
•Manufactured Stone – 100-year lifecycle with
mortar pointing required at 50 years
•Prefinished metal panels – 35-year warranty against
peeling, checking or cracking
•EIFS – 50 years (no warranty against birds pecking
holes through the synthetic plaster and removing
the insulation to build nests)
•Windows – 50 years for frames; 10 years for glass
panes
•Translucent wall panels – 50 years for frames; 30
years for translucent panels
Roof Options:
•Flat roof – 20- or 25-year warranties available
•Pitched roof with prefinished standing seam metal
panels – 50-year lifecycle
•Pitched roof with asphalt shingles – 40+ year
warranties available.
Victoria Water
Treatment Facility &
Firehouse
XX MGD Capacity
•Gravity filtration
to remove iron
and manganese
Victoria Water Treatment Facility & Firehouse
Victoria Pumphouse
No. 3
Cottage Grove Fire
Station
Cottage Grove Fire Station