05-06-13 Council Packet - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Search

City of Lino Lakes SWMP | February 8, 2013 Draft | 73 The need to address water quality within the city is partially illustrated in the map showing the various impaired lakes (Figure 12) which has regulatory implications that are still being developed. And wetland impacts a re also a consideration (Figure 14). The natural landscape is different th roughout the city. To visualize how the corridors would take shape, Figure 2 shows the city divided into the RMUs. The drainage networks, often agricultural ditch systems, that ma ke up the backbone of the needed city stormwater infrastructure are shown in Figure 18. Now comparing Figure 18 waterway locations with the naturally low -lying, flood -prone wetland areas of Figure 15, it begins to take shape that each corridor will have a unique characteristic. To illustrate this, one can look at the three priority RMUs.  Narrower corridors - Clearwater Creek RMU (Clearwater Creek, D itch 55, and Ditch 47) and Marshan RMU (Ditch 10 -22 -32) corridors  Wider corridors - Reshanau (Ditch 25) co rridor Both could have portions with occasional sections that are medium width. The wider corridors are due to large low -lying areas and wetlands along the drainageway. The cross sections below provide a generic illustration of how those various corrido rs can be organized when development comes to maximize their public potential to serve the multiple functions and benefits within one area. As shown below, “Setting Type A” illustrates a narrow corridor that does not include significant existing natural f eature but still accomplishes the multifunctional goals. “Setting Type C” is a much wider section that incorporates existing natural features with the recreational and stormwater conveyance components easily included . In these ways, additional benefits are provided to the community and with small additional costs and can be incorporated into the city process so they produce a direct outcome of the development process.