02-08-2016 Council Packet - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Search

These RMUs have been identified as a higher priority for the City of Lino because they have the potential for developing sooner than other portions of the City and have been more closely evaluated through the Alternative Urban Areawide Review (AUAR) process or the development of other Master Plans. Like Section 5.1 City -Wide Actions, this section includes RMU specific implementation activities previously identified by the City or other entity (e.g. RCWD, VLAWMO, Anoka County, etc.) in past planning efforts. However, this section does add a schematic to help visualize the multi -functional greenway corridor using a general cross-section that the City can use to demonstrate its vision and goals to developers early in the land development process. The information provided in this section will form the basis for the development of a more in-depth Subwatershed Plans for each RMU which will clearly lay the framework for how the City would like to see future development tie into the multi -functional greenway corridor. The use of RMU corridor plans is to maximize the value and benefit with efficient use of the corridors for multiple public functions: flood control, conveyance infrastructure, water quality and volume treatment, public trail systems, and habitat corridor enhancement. Figure 29 below illustrates the variable cross section configurations that implement the multifunctional greenway corridor. Each of the RMU's would have unique configurations due to the variable landscape settings of the major drainageways. 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 are also a consideration (Figure 14). The natural landscape is different throughout 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 make 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, Ditch 55, and Ditch 47) and Marshan RMU (Ditch 10-22-32) corridors Wider corridors - Reshanau (Ditch 25) corridor 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 corridors 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 feature 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. City of Lino Lakes SWMP 1 December 20151 80