ENGINEERING MEMORANDUM

March 27, 2017

TO: City Council

FROM: Mike Payne, City Engineer

SUBJECT: Discussion and possible action on whether to repair the Monterey Dam or
remove the Monterey Dam and restore the Rock River corridor.

Relates to Strategic Plan

Strategic Goal Rock River Corridor

The Monterey Dam is part of the Citys infrastructure along the Rock River which is a prominent
feature in the community. The current condition of the dam requires maintenance or
consideration for removal and river corridor restoration.

Executive Summary
The Monterey Dam was originally constructed in the mid-1800s for purposes of generating
hydroelectric power. The City acquired the Monterey Dam from Wisconsin Power & Light in
1967. The City is required to hire a consultant certified to perform an inspection of the dam a
minimum of every 10 years. The last inspection was performed in 2012 which identified
structural deficiencies requiring repair if the dam remains in place.

Three bids to repair the dam were received in January 2015 with the low bid exceeding
$500,000. At that time, the City Council asked if removing the dam was an option and staff
indicated that would be explored. A citizen advisory committee was established in 2016 to
review options. Consultants provided information on repairs and opportunities for restoration if
the dam were removed. Six public meetings were held leading to a recommendation to remove
the dam and restore the shoreline during the final advisory committee meeting on March 1,
2017. Additionally, the Sustainable Janesville Committee (SJC) met on March 21, 2017 and
voted unanimously to recommend removal of the dam and restore the shoreline.

City Recommendation
The Citys recommended course of action is to remove the Monterey Dam and restore the
impacted shoreline.

Suggested Motion
I move to remove the existing Monterey Dam and restore the impacted Rock River corridor
implementing the features represented in the restoration exhibits prepared by Inter-Fluve.

1
Background
The Monterey Dam was originally built for the purpose of generating hydroelectric power for
local mills. The hydroelectric plant was privately operated until the hydroelectric equipment was
removed prior to the 1960s. In 1967, the Public Service Commission (PSC) and State of
Wisconsin approved a transfer of ownership from Wisconsin Power & Light to the City of
Janesville. The dam does not provide flood control for the Rock River and no longer serves the
original purpose of generating power.

In 2012, Bloom Companies furnished an inspection report of the Monterey Dam to the
Wisconsin Department of Natural Resources (DNR). The report identified structural deficiencies
the DNR required the City of Janesville to address. The deficiencies include:

Undermining of the concrete structure;

Scour holes up to 8 feet deep on the downstream side of the structure;
Concrete spillway deterioration/spalling/missing concrete;
Excessive concrete spillway cracking; and
Exposed reinforcing steel in the structure.

The City began analyzing options for the future of the dam in 2014. Bloom Companies initial
estimate for repair based on the 2012 inspection was $185,000. Based on this, the City
budgeted $250,000 for a total project cost. However, bids opened in January 2015 for the repair
work ranged from more than $500,000 - $800,000, which exceeded both the initial estimates
and budgeted amount.

In the summer of 2015, the City hired Inter-Fluve for services including mapping of the river
bottom, study of the river upstream the dam, and analysis of sediment upstream from the dam.
In November 2016, the City held a Community Engagement Forum (CEF) to inform residents
about the project, as well as answer questions about the process. During the CEF, the City
requested volunteers to serve on a citizen advisory committee to evaluate options for the dam
with the goal of recommending to the City Council whether to repair or remove the dam.

In the following months, the citizen advisory committee was established. All volunteers who
inquired and volunteered were allowed to serve on the committee which consisted of
Councilmembers, business representatives, private citizens, and other stakeholders. The citizen
advisory committee held four meetings to gather information on each of the prospects under
consideration. On March 1, 2017, the citizen advisory committee voted to recommend removal
of the Monterey Dam to the City Council. Specifically, the citizen advisory committee voted to
forward the following to the City Council: to recommend to the City Council to remove the
existing Monterey Dam and restore the impacted river corridor which is currently estimated to
cost approximately $1,100,000. This motion is conditioned on the City implementing the
features represented in the restoration exhibits prepared by Inter-Fluve and that grant funding in
the amount of $400,000 is secured before proceeding. This was the committees final meeting.

Additionally, the Sustainable Janesville Committee (SJC) met on March 21, 2017 and voted
unanimously to recommend removal of the dam and restore the shoreline.

Options
Approve City recommendation to remove the Monterey Dam and restore the impacted
Rock River corridor

2
 Modify the City recommendation
Direct staff to repair the Monterey Dam
Not taking action on the Monterey Dam is not an option since DNR has directed the City
to resolve deficiencies by November 1, 2018

Analysis
A significant level of effort has been performed with the assistance of City staff, MSA
Professional Services, Ayres Associates, Inter-Fluve, and DNR with input from local
stakeholders. Many people have asked questions about what happens if the dam is removed.
The City has facilitated multiple public discussions and held four advisory committee meetings.
A list of support documents have been attached to this memo to answer a number of these
questions as well as summarizing answers to 32 specific questions by the committee. On March
2nd, 2017, the City Manager requested Councilmembers provide questions prior to March 15th,
2017 in order for staff to research and summarize questions with answers. Below you will find
the itemized list containing 26 specific questions by Council members:

1. Can the river walls downtown withstand hydrostatic pressure which will be reduced if
the river levels fall as predicted? Yes. The river walls serve the purpose of retaining walls
to hold back the earth and provide for a vertical river wall through the downtown. The overall
height of the river walls vary but under normal flow conditions, the majority of the river wall is
exposed and not under water. Dropping the water elevation a certain number of inches will
not create any problems.

2. What is the procedure/ policy that exists that would allow a resident to donate money
for a specific project? What assurances would the Council need IF the desire to
accept such an offer would arise? (i.e. should this money be put into some sort of
escrow up front so it would be available, if the donor has a change of plans?) The City
Attorney concluded a person may make a donation to the City at any time. If a donor desires
that their donation can only be used for a specific COJ purpose or project, then the donor, in
a signed document delivered to the Janesville City Clerk-Treasurer at the same time as the
donation, should indicate in writing those specific uses, contingencies, and conditions. The
City Clerk-Treasurer would hold the funds in a separate, segregated, designated
account. The City Council at some point would need to vote in open session to accept the
donation with the contingencies or return the contingent donation. Acceptance would require
four (4) affirmative votes. The City Council, of course, would also need to approve the
project or contract to which the donated funds are linked AND authorize use of the accepted
donation as one of the sources for funding such project. This could all be accomplished in
one motion. The donated funds would need to be received by the City Clerk-Treasurer well
in advance of any City Council decisions.

3. Do we have any guarantees from the consultants on the water levels after removal?
No, but the anticipated water levels are based on extensive river modeling using the HEC-
RAS software which is the industry standard for this purpose.

4. If the dam is removed and the river levels drop significantly more than predicted,
what then? Two independent firms modeled the anticipated river level elevations if the
Monterey Dam were removed and the results of the river modeling independently concluded
very similar results. Staff is comfortable with the results.

3
5. Do the consultants still get paid the full amount or are we holding some funds owed
in case they are wrong? Consultants are paid in full once they provide a professional work
product and have fulfilled their contractual obligation to the City.

6. What is the timeline of the project if the City Council votes to repair the dam?

-early 2017 Council decision to remove or repair the dam

-early 2017 accept Gary Schultz $200,000 donation to repair dam
-mid 2017 repurpose 2015 bid documents
-early 2018 obtain DNR permits and release bids for the project
-early 2018 Council considers award of contract
-mid 2018 complete the necessary repairs

7. What is the timeline of the project if the City Council votes to remove the dam?

-early 2017 Council decision to remove or repair the dam

-mid 2017 establish Work Team 3
-mid to late 2017 design the project elements
-2017/2018 apply for various grant funds
-early to mid 2018 obtain DNR permits and release bids for the project
-mid 2018 City receives grant notification and Council considers award
of contract
-mid 2018 construction to remove dam, start slow draw down of river
impoundment and manage sediment
-fall 2018 regrade and stabilize shoreline, and allow embayment / future
stormwater pond areas to dry out
-spring/summer 2019 complete restoration seeding & planting, plan and construct
stormwater pond
-spring 2020 evaluate native restoration and supplement as necessary

8. What is the timeline of the project if the Council votes to remove the dam with the
condition of obtaining $400,000 in grants as suggested by the citizen advisory
committee? Same as above.

9. If the Council conditions the dam removal on obtaining $400,000 in grants, but does
not obtain the full amount, what options does the Council have? The City intends to
pursue the following grant programs: 1) Municipal Dam grant 2) Urban Non-Point Source
Stormwater grant 3) Municipal Flood Control grant 4) Stewardship grant. If the City does not
receive $400,000 in grant funding staff will return to the Council for further direction.

10. Regardless of what option the Council selects, whether to repair or remove the dam,
if the project bids exceed the estimates, what options does the Council have? The
DNR is requiring the City to address structural deficiencies of the dam so the City must
pursue a project to comply with DNR directives. If the bids exceed the estimates, the Council
will have to fund the entire project.

11. If the dam is repaired to address the current DNR requirements, what is the estimate
of future repairs, the timing and costs? It is impossible to identify what future costs will
be. The two most recent repair projects for the dam occurred in 2006 at a construction cost
of $89,640 and in 2011/2012 at a construction cost of $296,800. The City is responsible for
hiring a consultant certified to perform dam inspections every ten years. The last dam

4
 inspection occurred in 2012 and because the dam is in excess of 150 years old it will
continue to deteriorate and require ongoing rehabilitation. The repairs proposed in 2015 only
impacted approximately 15-20% of the concrete spillway, which leaves the vast majority of
the dam untouched. Once the work area is dewatered, it is possible the project could
encounter expensive change orders due to apparent additional deficiencies since the last
inspection was in 2012.

12. If the dam is removed and the river level is lowered, what is the impact to abutting
property owners? Will new surveys be required? What is the appraisal effect on
properties? The City Attorney and City Assessor have provided an opinion and
summarized in the attached information sheet that was mailed to all abutting property
owners. The one page information sheet provides a detailed response to these questions.

13. If the Council decides to remove the dam, what process will be used to develop the
detailed plans and specifications for bidding the project? The City will hire a consultant
to design this unique project. It is anticipated that a citizen work team will be created to work
with City staff and the consultant to prepare the final elements of the project. Once detailed
plans were prepared, staff would host a Community Engagement Forum if Council desires to
share details with the public and obtain input prior to issuing bid documents.

14. The rendering of river restoration references fish habitat features. What will that
consist of? Fish habitat typically consists of strategically placed boulders, placement of
trees into the water, etc. The actual placement and quantities will be determined during
design with input from the DNR and the community.

15. The rendering of river restoration references paddling sports. What will access
locations to the water consist of? More opportunities for water access to the river as well
as better and safer access to the river was a high priority for the citizen advisory committee.
The river currently has several man made access points in the downtown where vertical
river walls exist. Those are located downstream of the Centerway Dam which is owned and
operated by Eagle Creek Renewable Energy, steps in the riverwall near the Hedberg Public
Library, and a boat ramp near Rockport Road. The restoration rendering includes two
additional kayak / canoe access points located at the public property south of Marling
Lumber and near the public parking lot at the end of Washington Street, approximately 12
fishing access points to the river by installing stepped stone areas, and adding an ADA
compliant fishing platform. In addition a boat launch is proposed with the Town Square
improvements on the west side of the river between Court and Dodge.

16. How will river velocity be impacted if the dam is removed? Current river velocities as
well as river velocities if the dam were removed are approximately 2 mph or less, during
average flow conditions, which is considered a leisurely paddling speed.

17. The rendering of river restoration includes certain amenities around the Lagoon/Bay.
What will that include? The proposed amenities would include photo opportunities using
the Rock as a backdrop while people can walk and access the front of the Rock by foot;
unpaved walking paths would be constructed; trees, shrubs, and native plants/grasses
would be planted; habitat for birds and wildlife; and seats for resting or viewing wildlife and
bird watching. The pond itself would be constructed with a natural shape and would include
a range of water depths for habitat of a range of creatures.

5
18. Are renderings typically used for estimating earthwork quantities? Are the cost
estimates realistic for the anticipated pond construction? No. Renderings are images of
possible opportunities to all people to imagine and visualize what something may look like.
Renderings are typically not to scale and should never be used to calculate earthwork
quantities. Images of vehicles and pedestrians are simply for reference purposes. The
walkway included in the rendering is intended to show the existing 10 ft. wide multi-use path.
Staff and consultants working on this project believe the cost estimate for the Monterey
Lagoon is realistic given there is up to nine (9) feet of sediment in the Monterey Bay area
that can be used to recontour the immediate area. The earthwork quantities for the pond
were conservatively estimated based on a 4 acre pond area at an average excavated depth
of six feet. The cost estimate includes reasonable unit costs from other local earthwork and
pond projects.

19. If the shoreline improvements are completed, what will the public areas consist of
and how will the area be maintained? The rendering includes a combination of new
trees/shrubs/native species, stepped hard surface pedestrian and fishing access to the river,
walking trails, maintained lawn turf areas as well as more native taller grass areas desirable
for birds and wildlife. The public portion of this improved area would be maintained by Parks
staff. Based on the success of other public-private partnerships, it is likely a Friends group
would be established. It is possible some type of public art or sculpture could be
incorporated if there was private funding. The neighborhood may wish to create and
maintain a special flower area or seek assistance from Rotary Gardens to provide a unique
focal point.

20. Did the sampling of sediment identify any contaminants on lands that would become
exposed if the dam were removed? If these lands abut private property, will the
private property owners be responsible for cleaning up the contaminants? Sediment
samples were obtained at approximately a dozen locations. The DNR assisted with
determining appropriate sample locations which included samples upstream of the
Centerway dam, upstream of GM outfalls, at GM outfalls, downstream of GM outfalls, within
the Monterey Bay, near the Monterey Dam, and downstream of the Monterey Dam. The
results of the sediment laboratory analysis were shared with the DNR who was not
concerned about the results except for what was identified at the storm sewer outfalls from
the GM property. As a result, the DNR ultimately identified GM as the primary responsible
party for the contamination near the GM outfall pipes and is working directly with GM to
resolve environmental cleanup at GMs cost. Private property owners are not responsible for
cleaning up contaminants on property they do not own and would not be financially
responsible for any contaminants.

21. If the dam is removed, what improvements are likely when the original millrace is
filled in on the east shoreline of the river? The improvements likely include an ADA
accessible fishing platform, manicured park space with a naturalized shoreline with a
kayak/canoe launch, stepped stone river access, multiple fishing access locations with a
concentration of fish habitat features, and picnic tables.

22. Is GM responsible for cleanup of contaminants in the river? Yes. If the dam were
removed, the Citys contractor would likely need to provide a perimeter containment such as
turbidity barriers or silt fence while working on the Monterey Dam, but the DNR is the
enforcement agency regarding cleanup of contaminants in the Rock River and has identified
GM as the responsible party.

6
23. What are the rights and responsibilities of Delavan Drive property owners? The City
Attorney and City Assessor have provided an opinion and summarized in the attached
information sheet that was mailed to all abutting property owners. The information sheet
provides a detailed response, but property owners will have riparian rights. Property owners
are allowed to maintain the land or allow it to develop naturally.

24. After cleanup of GM contaminants, if there is discovery of subsequent contaminants

during a future inspection, who would be responsible? The DNR has consistently stated
GM would be responsible for all remediation of contamination and not the City, the State, or
an abutting property owner.

25. If the dam is removed and water levels lower, will the land become wetlands? What
riparian rights will property owners have and how will this impact property
valuations? When the water level recedes, seed deposited in the sediment will likely grow.
On the south side of the river, the growth of native vegetation will be monitored and
supplemented as needed to establish vegetation. It is likely much of the vegetation will be
water tolerant, but we would not anticipate the area to become a traditional wetland with
frequent standing water. On the north side of the river, there would be grading of material,
establishment of a cover crop, monitoring of natural native plant growth, and seeding as
necessary to establish desired cover. Regarding riparian rights, the City Attorney and City
Assessor have provided an opinion and summarized in the attached information sheet .

26. If the dam is removed, is there any way to make Lustig Park more river friendly? The
topography of Lustig Park is fairly steep and is located high above the river levels so direct
river access will be a challenge.

Conclusions
The estimated cost to repair the Monterey Dam is approximately $700,000. The estimated cost
to remove the Monterey Dam and complete shoreline restoration is approximately $1.1 million.
The DNR municipal dam grant offers up to $400,000 for dam removal. If funding approximately
$400,000 in grant funding was secured, the project would be essentially cost neutral.

The most recent repairs of the dam occurred in 2006 and 2011/2012 with construction costs of
approximately $90,000 and approximately $300,000, respectively. The original structure is more
than 150 year old and will continue to deteriorate and require ongoing rehabilitation. Staff
believes the fiscally responsible thing to do is remove the dam to eliminate the perpetual need
to monitor and repair the dam while at the same time pursuing shoreline and other
improvements along the Rock River.

Restated City Recommendation

The Citys recommended course of action is to remove the Monterey Dam and restore the
impacted shoreline.

7
Attachments:

-1) Questions and answers discussed during various citizen advisory committee meetings
-2) DNR Directive letter to correct deficiencies by November 1, 2018
-3) Information Sheet prepared by City Attorney and City Assessor
-4) DDA letter of support to remove the dam and restore the river corridor
-5) Forward Janesville letter of support to remove the dam and restore the river corridor
-6) Rock River Coalition letter of support to remove the dam and restore the river corridor
-7) Craig High School student letter of support to remove the dam and restore the river
corridor
-8) Pros / Cons of removing the dam as summarized by the citizen advisory committee

cc: Mark Freitag, City Manager

Maxwell Gagin, Assistant to the City Manager
Paul Woodard, Director of Public Works

8
State of Wisconsin
DEPARTMENT OF NATURAL RESOURCES
Scott Walker, Governor
3911 Fish Hatchery Road
Cathy Stepp, Secretary
Fitchburg WI 53711-5397
Telephone 608-266-2621
Toll Free 1-888-936-7463
TTY Access via relay - 711

March 13, 2017

City of Janesville
Mr. Tim Whittaker, Stormwater Engineer
18 North Jackson Street
Janesville, WI 53545

Subject: Monterey Dam, Updated Dam Safety Timelines, Field File #53.06, Rock River, City of
Janesville, Rock County

Dear Mr. Whittaker:

Thank you for your written request to extend the timeframes from the most recent dam safety inspection of the
Monterey Dam. Based on the Citys current evaluation of whether to reconstruct or remove the dam, we agree
that it is appropriate to extend the timeframes. The timeframes have been extended and are shown below.

DIRECTIVES:
The following deficiencies must be corrected by the dates given:

1. Concrete Repairs November 1, 2018

2. Scour Repairs November 1, 2018

3. Stability Analysis November 1, 2018

Thank you for your continued cooperation. As always, if you have questions please feel free to contact me.

Sincerely,

Robert R. Davis, P.E.

Water Management Engineer
Southern District
Robert.Davis@Wisconsin.gov
608-275-3316

cc: Bill Sturtevant, P.E. - WT/3

Quality Customer Service is Important to Us. Tell Us How We Are Doing.

Water Division Customer Service Survey
https://www.surveymonkey.com/s/WDNRWater
 Pros and Cons of Monterey Dam Removal
as determined by Citizen Advisory Committee
Ecology
Pros Cons
More natural habitat above the dam Short term impacts of sediment release downstream
More natural fishery in impoundment Short term impacts associated with disturbance
around construction
Mosquitos?
More wildlife
Restore riparian wildlife habitat and vegetated
buffers
Reestablish hard substrate for macroinvertebrate
colonization
Restore fish and mussel passage from downstream of
dam to upstream reach and tributary
Restore habitat for freshwater mussels
Fewer carp upstream of dam

Water Quality
Pros Cons
Increase dissolved oxygen, lower turbidity, and Short term increase in turbidity in the downstream
decrease temperature upstream of dam reach due to construction and sediment evacuation
If new riparian area is converted to natural vegetation
it will serve as a vegetated buffer between urban land
uses and water (and dissuade geese)
Opportunity for stormwater treatment wetland/pond
in embayment area?
 Fishing and Recreation
Pros Cons
Expand fishable river habitat up through the restored Fish will no longer stack up downstream of the dam
river section (decrease angler congestion at dam) (but they cant get very far before hitting Centerway)
Increase access to spawning areas for fish
downstream of the dam
New river paddling opportunities
Opportunities for wildlife viewing along trails in new
riparian area
New park space

Economic
Pros Cons
Change in economic activity associated with
changes in river recreation opportunities
Available grant funding for dam removal allows more
investment in restoration for same cost to the City of
repair
Increased fishing opportunities and other
programming
No future maintenance of dam Future maintenance of new facilities

Aesthetic
Pros Cons
Gain flowing river but lose large flat water
Road is further from and less visible from the water Water is further from and less visible from road
Elimination of concrete sloped walls
Reduced geese on trails
Existing trails will have enhanced view