Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout03/27/2013 Env Bd Packet• CITY OF LINO LAKES ENVIRONMENTAL BOARD MEETING Wednesday, March 27, 2013 6:30 p.m. Council Chambers AGENDA 1. Call to Order 2. Approval of Agenda 3. Swearing in of New Board Member: Nancie Klebba 4. Approve Meeting Dates for 2013 5. Approval of Minutes: February 27, 2013 • 6. Open Mike 7. Action Items A. Surface Water Management Plan Review 8. Discussion Items A. Earth Day 9. Adjourn • City of Lino Lakes 2013 APPLICATION DEADLINE & MEETING SCHEDULE City Council Meeting (2nd & 4th Monday) — January 28 February 11 February 25 March 11 March 25 oo — April 22 May 13 May 28 (Tues.) O V <t N c.) July 8 N N T August 12 N September 9 rn N 4. u October 14 October 28 November 12 (Tues.) November 25 December 9 December 23 January 13, 2014 January 27, 2014 February 10, 2014 February 24, 2014 City Council Work Session (Im Monday & before 2 Council Mtg) January 7 January 28 February 4 February 25 U March 25 — r p April 22 May 6 May 28 (Tues.) June 3 June 24 — T July 22 v� bq N v; t b0 Q September 3 (Tues.) September 23 r v, .O October 28 November 4 November 25 1 December 2 December 23 January 6, 2014 January 27, 2014 February 3, 2014 February 24, 2014 Planning & Zoning Board (2'"t Wednesday) Dec. 12, 2012 T T February 13 March 13 — CL May 8 N _, - July10 August 14 cJ October 9 November 13 December 11 January 8, 2014 Park Board (1' Monday) December 3, 2012 January 7 February 4 7 — May 6 June 3 n August 5 September 3 (Tues.) October 7 November 4 December 2 January 6, 2014 EDAC (Economic Dev. Advisory Conlin.) 1" Thursda December 6, 2012 January 3 February 7 March 7 May 2 v July — No Mtg. August 1 September 5 October 3 r o z December 5 January 2, 2014 Environmental Board (Last Wednesday) November 28, 2012 December 12, 2012 January 30 February 27 March 27 N May 29 N sc July 31 August 28 September 25 October 30 November 20 (amended) December 18 (amended) Application Deadline (Monday 4 weeks before P & Z) November 13, 2012 (Tues.) December 10, 2012 January 14 February 11 i C ti T ti August 12 September 9 October 14 November 12 (Tues.) December 9 • • ENVIRONMENTAL BOARD MEETING February 27, 2013 DATE TIME STARTED TIME ENDED MEMBERS PRESENT MEMBERS ABSENT STAFF PRESENT 1. 2. CITY OF LINO LAKES : February 27, 2013 . 6:35 P.M. . 8:22 P.M. : Mary Jo O'Dea, Barbara Bor, Paula Andrzejewski, Martha DeHaven, Steve Heiskary and Nancy Morin : Nancie Klebba : Environmental Coordinator Marty Asleson CALL TO ORDER Ms. O'Dea called the meeting to order at 6:35 p.m. VOTE CHAIR AND VICE -CHAIR FOR 2013 Ms. Andrzejewski nominated Ms. O'Dea as Chair and Ms. Bor as Vice Chair. The nomination was seconded by Ms. DeHaven. The nomination was unanimously approved. 3. APPROVE MEETING DATES FOR 2013 There were no meeting dates in packet so it was tabled till next month. 4. APPROVAL OF MINUTES December 12, 2012 Minutes have been approved with a few small changes. Ms. Andrzejewski made a motion to approve the December 12, 2012 minutes. Ms.Bor seconded motion to approve the minutes. Motion carried unanimously 5. APPROVAL OF AGENDA REMOVE: Approve meeting dates for 2013 till next month ADD: Item F, VLAWMO working with local schools Ms.Bor made a motion to approve the agenda. Mr.Heiskary seconded the motion to approve the agenda. Motion carried unanimously DRAFT MINUTES l ENVIRONMENTAL BOARD MEETING February 27, 2013 6. OPEN MIKE Open mike closed at 6:40 p.m. 7. ACTION ITEMS No action items. 8. DISCUSSION ITEM A. Earth Day Mr. Asleson stated that Earth Day will be on April 30 at Wargo Nature Center. There will be Build Your Own Rain Barrel and information on Emerald Ash Borer, Recycling and Surface Water Treatment. There will be other vendors there with environmental information B. Heron Rookery Update Wayne LeBlanc presented the board with a hand out on the work that was on February 23. He feels that because of the flashing there is an increase in the number of heron's nests. Ms. Bor suggested that a thank you should be sent to the Blaine JC for their donation. And Ms. O'Dea recommends that Mr. Asleson present the Heron Rookery information to the City Council. C. Grants: 1. Forest Bonding Grant 2012 -2014 Mr. Asleson was able to get an extension on the grant. 2. Solid Waste and Solid Waste/Recycling Update Mr. Asleson presented the board with monthly totals and stated that there was an increase on the months that the advertising post cards went out to residents. Mr. Asleson also stated that the annual city wide recycling day is Saturday, May 4 this year. Ms. O'Dea asked what the difference was between the monthly recycling and the yearly recycling day. Mr. Asleson stated that the DRAFT MINUTES 2 • • • • ENVIRONMENTAL BOARD MEETING February 27, 2013 yearly one will have new this year a paper shredder locked container for residents, mattress drop off for a charge of $15.00 as well as the usual vendors as in the past. Mr. Asleson said that residents are notified in the city newsletter and a newspaper ad. Ms. Andrzejewski recommended that a postcard would also be a good way to notify residents. Mr. Asleson stated that there is a need to get people more involved and thinking of recycling and Ms. Bor suggested in doing a Utube video on the subject. Ms. Andrzejewski suggested that the elementary schools could make a video and hold a competition. D. Emerald Ash Borer Update Mr. Asleson stated that a complete inventory of all the trees has been accomplished. There is a plan and Public Works will help with taking down some of the trees and treating other trees within the city. There are three safe chemicals that you can use to treat the trees. Only one of these you have to be a licensed applicator. Ms. O'Dea suggested that Mr. Asleson may want to look into doing a cooperative with some of the nearby cities in helping keep the cost down in treating the trees. E. Project Updates A. Wollan's Park Wetland Banking Mr. Asleson stated that the City is still waiting to get clear title from the State and County. B. Preserves Mr. Asleson stated that they are still working with engineers with the wetland areas. Biggest issue is getting the flow to Clearwater Creek. Ms. Bor was hoping that it would not be piecemeal together. C. Community Gardens Ms. O'Dea questioned if the Park & Recreation Department is now in charge of the gardens. Mr. Asleson remarked that he will still be in working with the gardens but the Park & Recreation Department have the manpower to help maintain the gardens and have taken over the registration process. DRAFT MINUTES 3 ENVIRONMENTAL BOARD MEETING February 27, 2013 Ms. O'Dea asked about the Community Garden sign. Mr. Asleson said he is working on that and knows it is one of the 2013 goals. D. VLAWMO article in the Quad Ms. O'Dea brought an article about the Chippewa Middle school and Vadnais Lake Area Watershed district working together in doing rain gardens. And at the end of the article was a listing of upcoming workshops. She stated that she thinks that maybe Rice Creek Watershed and the Middle School could work together on a project. Mr. Asleson said he would contact someone at the Middle school and Kyle at Rice Creek Watershed to see if they can't do a project together. 7. ADJOURN It was noted that the next meeting of the Environmental Board will be on Monday, March 27, 2013 at 6:30 p.m. There being no further business, Mr. Heiskary moved to adjourn at 8:22 p.m. Ms. DeHaven seconded the motion. Motion carried unanimously. Transcribed by: Mary Fogarty Office Tech 1 DRAFT MINUTES 4 • • • • • AGENDA ITEM 7A STAFF ORIGINATOR: Marty Asleson MEETING DATE: March 27, 2013 TOPIC: Surface Water Management Plan Review BACKGROUND In 1982, the Minnesota Legislature approved the Metropolitan Surface Water Management Act, requiring local water management authorities to prepare and implement surface water management plans. In 1992, the Board of Water and Soil Resources (BWSR) developed Minnesota Rule Chapter 8410 (Attachment 1) to determine the plan content. This rule also requires that plans are in conformance with Watershed District, Management Organization and Metropolitan Council Plans. The Rice Creek Watershed District (RCWD) completed an update to their watershed management plans in June of 2010. As such the City is required to complete an update to its plan within two years. The new plan for your consideration was developed to be in conformance with the rules of 8410, the rules of the Rice Creek Watershed District, the Vadnais Lake Area Water Management Organization, Metropolitan Council requirements and applicable State and Federal Laws. The City has worked with Emmons & Oliver Resources, Inc. to develop the attached Surface Water Management Plan. Your comments and recommendations will be incorporated and /or forwarded on to the City Council. RECOMMENDATION Staff recommends approval of the attached Surface Water Management Plan with your Environmental Board Comments and recommendations to be forwarded to the City Council for consideration. ATTACHMENTS 1. Minnesota Administrative Rules, Chapter 8410, Water Management 2. Lino Lakes Surface Water Management Final Draft Plan 2013 8410 Minnesota Rule Page 1 of 1 • Minnesota Administrative Rules • • CHAPTER 841o, LOCAL WATER MANAGEMENT Board of Water and Soil Resources Part Title METROPOLITAN AREA LOCAL WATER MANAGEMENT 8410.0010 SCOPE. 8410.0020 DEFINITIONS. 8410.0030 CONTENT OF JOINT POWERS AGREEMENTS. 8410.0040 REMOVAL OF ORGANIZATION REPRESENTATIVES. CONTENT OF WATERSHED MANAGEMENT ORGANIZATION PLANS 8410.0050 EXECUTIVE SUMMARY. 8410.0060 LAND AND WATER RESOURCE INVENTORY. 8410.0070 IMPACT ON OTHER UNITS OF GOVERNMENT. 8410.0080 ESTABLISHMENT OF GOALS AND POLICIES. 8410.0090 ASSESSMENT OF PROBLEMS. 8410.0100 IMPLEMENTATION PROGRAM. 8410.0110 IMPACT ON LOCAL GOVERNMENT. 8410.0120 IMPLEMENTATION PRIORITIES. 8410.0130 IMPLEMENTATION COMPONENTS. 8410.0140 PLAN CONTENTS; AMENDMENTS. 8410.0150 ANNUAL REPORTING REQUIREMENTS. CONTENT OF LOCAL PLANS 8410.0160 GENERAL STRUCTURE. 8410.0170 STRUCTURE. 8410.0180 DETERMINATIONS OF FAILURE TO IMPLEMENT. https: / /www.revisor.mn.gov /rules / ?id =8410 3/21/2013 • City of Lino Lakes Surface Water Management Plan Marshan Lake iva.. Mae r ..�ura.san.pnrr City of C 1 low go ow ik Creek in bf. akes of Park Reserve e LakeRMU Rice Lake Reshanau Lake •■•• �t�L 4 I I.1 3 herman RMUr. 54 "i..�,- s,. Clearwater Creek. R Reshanau -fir •.-r--1---t — �ir_.i.,S ( 1 ) 1 • LN L'KES Cedar Lake 1 kinson Amelia Lake February 8, 2013 DRAFT Prepared by Emmons & Olivier Resources, Inc. Contents • 1.0 Executive Summary 1 • 2.0 Introduction & Purpose 3 2.1. Purpose 3 2.2. Past Planning & Studies 3 2.3. Plan Objectives & Summary 6 3.0 Land & Water Resource Assessment 7 3.1. History 7 3.2. Resource Management Framework 9 3.3. Climate & Precipitation 11 3.4. Topography 12 3.5. Geology 12 3.6. Soils 15 3.7. Groundwater Resources 18 3.8. Surface Water Resources 23 3.9. Stormwater Management System 38 3.10. Land Use 41 3.11. Unique Natural Features 46 3.12. Pollutant Sources 49 3.13. Water Resource Related Agreements 57 4.0 Identified Issues, Goals and Policies 57 4.1. Water Rate & Quantity 57 4.2. Water Quality 58 4.3. Wetland Management 60 4.4. Floodplain Management 60 4.5. Public Ditch System 61 4.6. Groundwater Management 61 4.7. Natural Resources 62 4.8. Erosion & Sediment Control 63 4.9. Regulations, Permitting and Reporting 64 4.10. Monitoring, Maintenance & Inspection Issues 64 4.11. Public Participation, Information & Education 65 4.12. Financing 66 City of Lino Lakes SWMP 1 February 8, 2013 Draft 1 i 5.0 Implementation Activities 67 5.1. City -Wide Actions 67 5.2. Priority RMU Specific Actions 72 5.3. Other RMU Actions 78 5.4. Implementation Costs 81 6.0 Administration 83 6.1. Regulatory Coordination 83 6.2. City Administration of Surface Water Management Plan 84 6.3. Amendments to Surface Water Management Plan 85 7.0 Financial Considerations 86 8.0 Glossary & Acronyms 87 8.1. Glossary 87 8.2. Acronyms 89 Appendix A Summary of Relevent Modeling Appendix B Breakdown of Implementation Plan Activities Appendix C Fully- Funded Scenario Implementation Costs City of Lino Lakes SWMP I February 8, 2013 Draft 1 ii • List of Tables Table 1. Monthly Averages, 1981 -2010 11 Table 2. Design Storm Events 12 Table 3. Soil hydrologic groups 15 Table 4 Impaired Waters in Lino Lakes 24 Table 5. Summary of Flooding Concerns by Resource Management Unit 36 Table 6. Documented Rare Features in Lino Lakes 47 Table 7. Number of Potential Environmental Hazard Sites in City of Lino Lakes 52 Table 8. City -Wide Actions 69 Table 9. RMU Specific Actions: Reshanau RMU 75 Table 10. RMU Specific Actions: Marshan RMU 76 Table 11. RMU Specific Actions: Clearwater Creek RMU 77 Table 12. RMU Specific Actions: George Watch RMU 78 Table 13. RMU Specific Actions: Rondeau RMU 78 Table 14. RMU Specific Actions: Peltier RMU 79 Table 15. RMU Specific Actions: Hardwood Creek RMU 79 Table 16. RMU Specific Actions: Upper Rice Creek RMU 79 Table 17. RMU Specific Actions: Rice Lake RMU 80 Table 18. RMU Specific Actions: Centerville RMU 80 Table 19. RMU Specific Actions: Sherman RMU 80 Table 20. RMU Specific Actions: Amelia RMU 80 Table 21. RMU Specific Actions: Baldwin RMU 81 Table 22. RMU Specific Actions: Middle Rice Creek RMU 81 Table 23. RMU Specific Actions: Wilkinson RMU 81 • Table 24. Estimated Costs of City -Wide Actions in 2012 dollars 82 Table 25. Estimated Costs of RMU- Specific Actions in 2012 dollars 82 City of Lino Lakes SWMP February 8, 2013 Draft iii List of Figures • Figure 1. City of Lino Lakes Location Map [from SAMP] 8 Figure 2. Resource Management Units [from Comprehensive Plan] 10 Figure 3. Surficial Geology 13 Figure 4. Bedrock Geology 14 Figure 5. Hydrologic Soil Group 16 Figure 6. Infiltration Potential within the Rice Creek Watershed District [from RCWD, 2003 Infiltration Implementation Study] 17 Figure 7. Groundwater contours [from RCWD 2009 Groundwater Planning & Management Program]19 Figure 8. Groundwater recharge and discharge areas [from RCWD 2009 Groundwater Planning & Mgt. Program] 20 Figure 9. Groundwater dependent resources [from RCWD 2009 Groundwater Planning & Mgt. Program] 21 Figure 10. Areas not recommended for infiltration [from RCWD 2009 Groundwater Planning & Mgt. Program] 22 Figure 11. Impaired Lakes within the City of Lino Lakes 27 Figure 12. St. Paul Water Utility Area [from 2005 Lino Lakes Surface Water Management Plan] 29 Figure 13. Nutrient Loading to Wetlands [from SAMP] 32 Figure 14. Wetland Restoration Potential based on MnRAM Evaluation [from SAMP] 33 Figure 15. FEMA Floodplain 35 Figure 16. Points of Flooding Concern identified in Lino Lakes RMP (2008) [from Lino Lakes RMP] 37 Figure 17. Ditch Systems in the City of Lino Lakes [from SAMP] 40 Figure 18. Existing Land Use [from Comprehensive Plan] 42 Figure 19. Full Build Out Future Land Use [from Comprehensive Plan] 44 Figure 20. 2030 Future Land Use [from Comprehensive Plan] 45 Figure 21. Presettlement Vegetation [from Comprehensive Plan] 48 Figure 22. Potential Environmental Hazards 53 Figure 23. Subwatershed phosphorus loading from major drainage areas as calculated in PLOAD. [Reproduced from LL RMP] 55 Figure 24. Subwatershed phosphorus loading from major drainage areas as calculated in P8. [from Lino Lakes Chain of Lakes Draft TMDL] 56 Figure 25. Conceptual Lino Lakes Resource Management Unit (RMU) Corridor Configurations 74 Surface Water Summary Map (enclosed) City of Lino Lakes SWMP I February 8, 2013 Draft I iv • • 1.0 Executive Summary The City of Lino Lakes (City) has retained its rural charm while developing a quality residential and commercial base. It is a bedroom community, with over 81 percent of its residents traveling at least 15 minutes to work each day. The City's landscape and environment is largely a function of its 15 lakes, widespread wetlands, two tributaries and Rice Creek. Eight lakes are located in or abutting the Chain of Lakes Regional Park and bisect the community. Approximately 40 percent of the City's total land area is comprised of lakes and natural wetlands. Lino Lakes' wetlands are widespread and these areas often help mitigate excess stormwater runoff peak flows while also creating challenges and opportunities for development. The City's lakes generally fall into three shoreland management categories: Natural Environment, Recreational, and General Development as classified by the MN DNR. The Natural Environment Lakes are primarily located in the Chain of Lakes areas and include Peltier, George Watch, Marshan, Rice, Ward, Sherman, Cedar, Amelia, Rondeau, and Wilkinson. Recreational lakes include Otter, Centerville, Rehanau, Baldwin. Bald Eagle Lake is a General Development Lake. Recreational uses include swimming, boating, fishing and water skiing. Centerville, Bald Eagle, Peltier and Reshanau are considered game fishing lakes. Centerville and Bald Eagle Lakes are managed fisheries and are stocked annually with Walleye and Muskellunge. Currently, there are a number of water quality issues that the City of Lino Lakes will need to address in partnership with the watershed management organizations, state agencies, the County and surrounding communities. Within the municipal boundary of the City of Lino Lakes, seven lakes within the Chain of Lakes (Baldwin, Centerville, George Watch, Marshan, Peltier, Reshanau, and Rice), Bald Eagle Lake, and two creek reaches (Clearwater and Hardwood) are currently listed on the Minnesota Pollution Control Agency's 2010 Draft 303d list of impaired waters. The eight lakes are listed for nutrient/eutrophication biological indicators affecting aquatic recreation uses, Clearwater and Hardwood Creeks are listed for fish and/or aquatic macroinvertebrate bioassessments affecting aquatic life, and Hardwood Creek is also listed for dissolved oxygen affecting aquatic life. There are also three lakes that have fish consumption impairments due to high mercury concentrations in fish: Peltier Lake, Otter Lake, and Bald Eagle Lake. A number of TMDL Reports and Implementation Plans have been drafted or are in various stages of the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency's (EPA's) and the Minnesota Pollution Control Agency's (MPCA's) approval process. At some point, the City of Lino Lakes will receive wasteload allocations (WLA) for one or more of the TMDLs listed above. When the WLAs are approved by the EPA, the City will need to demonstrate progress towards meeting the WLAs. The City of Lino Lakes has taken an active role in natural resources management by conducting or participating in planning efforts that will allow for development in the context of preserving the environmental assets that make the City unique in the Twin Cities Metropolitan Area. These previous planning efforts lay the foundation for the issues, goals, policies and implementation activities identified in this local surface water management plan. Issues, goals and policies have been identified under the following categories in Chapter 4: 4.1 Water Rate & Quantity 4.2 Water Quality 4.3 Wetland Management 4.4 Floodplain Management • 4.5 Public Ditch System City of Lino Lakes SWMP 1 February 8, 2013 Draft 1 1 4.6 Groundwater Management 4.7 Natural Resources 4.8 Erosion and Sediment Control 4.9 Regulations, Permitting and Reporting 4.10 Monitoring, Maintenance and Inspection 4.11 Public Participation, Information and Education 4.12 Financing Consistent with the City's Comprehensive Plan, some of the activities are organized on a geographic basis, using Resource Management Units (RMUs) following watershed boundaries as the best scale for planning and implementation. The Surface Water Management Plan implementation is organized into three categories: City -Wide Actions; Priority RMU Specific Actions and Other RMU Actions. City -Wide Actions include activities that apply on a broader scale while RMU Specific Actions include activities that had previously been identified for the three highest priority RMUs, based on development potential: • Reshanau RMU • Marshan RMU • Clearwater Creek RMU Similarly, Other RMU Actions include activities that have previously been identified for the remaining RMUs. The Implementation and Capital Improvement Plan presented in this Plan includes estimated costs, scheduling, and project partners for each Issue Category. The City of Lino Lakes will determine which specific implementation activities to implement as part of the annual budgeting process. The Plan supports Anoka County in fulfillment of its responsibilities for ground water protection. Similarly, the City will support the RCWD and VLAWMO roles in wetland protection under the Minnesota Wetland Conservation Act, and in its administration of a construction permit program. Within this context, the Plan develops objectives and action items that will support these entities goals and policies. Finally, the Plan recognizes the need for flexibility and, therefore, establishes criteria for amendments. In addition, it calls for the development of annual work plans and five -year updates to address changing conditions, such as annexation or regulatory changes. City of Lino Lakes SWMP I February 8, 2013 Draft 1 2 • • 2.0 Introduction & Purpose The City of Lino Lakes is abundant with water and natural resources. The lakes, wetlands and associated uplands are arranged geographically throughout the City creating the potential to develop corridors that protect rare species, support fish and wildlife, and provide recreational opportunities. This Stormwater Plan provides policies and actions to support and improve the City's water and natural resources. 2.1. Purpose The purpose of this Plan is to guide the actions of the City of Lino Lakes with respect to the management and support of the City's water and natural resources. The Plan accomplishes this by bringing together background information and action items from a number of previously conducted studies and planning efforts. In addition, this Plan is intended to fulfill the requirements for Local Water Management Plans under MN Statute 103B and MN Rule 8410. Not only does this Plan meet regulatory requirements, it also reflects the resource -based vision of its residents and civic leaders. Since its last preparation of a Local Surface Water Management Plan, the City has been very proactive working with local partners to inventory existing resources, model future land use development scenarios, develop plans to improve water quality in its lakes, protect high quality resources and wetlands, and develop a multi - functional greenway corridor system. All of this work supports the need for activities that implement the Natural Resource Systems Plan and Resource Management Unit projects identified in the City's Comprehensive Plan and Resource Management Plan respectively. 2.2. Past Planning & Studies Past planning efforts and studies provide information used to support this Plan. These previous efforts are reflected in the land and water resources inventory and as the goals, policies, and actions. The following is a summary of each of these studies. Lino Lakes 2005 Surface Water Management Plan The 2005 Surface Water Management Plan presented a vision of high quality natural and water resources for the City. The plan's overall goal was to improve the quality of surface waters by delivering good quality storm water runoff to lakes and wetlands at acceptable rates and volumes, while reducing pollutant and sediment loadings and stream bed/stream bank erosion and water quality degradation. The plan focused on the implementation of the City's NPDES program to accomplish this goal. Lino Lakes 2010 Comprehensive Plan The Lino Lakes 2030 Comprehensive Plan is the City's plan for the future. It contains analyses of existing conditions, policy goals, long -range plans for utility and roadway infrastructure, and guides the development of land to the year 2030. In addition to an extensive community survey and citizen visioning process, the Lino Lakes Comprehensive Plan is unique due to the level of coordination and involvement with the Rice Creek Watershed District throughout the process. The City prepared its Comprehensive Plan in concert with the Rice Creek Watershed District's (RCWD) Resource Management Plan to balance growth and natural resource protection objectives. This coordinated effort resulted in new land development policies and implementation tools for low impact development, water resource management, growth management, and community design. The Comprehensive Plan establishes City of Lino Lakes SWMP Februar y 0, 2013 Draft 3 the policy foundations for ordinances regulating zoning, subdivision, and other official controls related to the use of land. Hardwood Creek TMDL and Implementation Plan In 2002, Hardwood Creek was listed on Minnesota's 303(d) List of Impaired Waters, for biological impairment resulting from a low fish index of biological integrity (IBI) score. In 2004, Hardwood Creek was again listed on Minnesota's 303(d) List of Impaired waters for biological impairment, this time due to low Dissolved Oxygen (DO). Due to the fact that both Total Maximum Daily Loads (TMDLs) are intrinsically linked, this TMDL study encompasses both impairments. The TMDL study entailed analysis of existing data, intensive synoptic water quality and biological surveys of the creek, completion of the stressor identification process, watershed modeling, and the development of implementation strategies to meet the goals of the TMDLs. Approximately 4% of the 16,000 acres drainage area lies within Lino Lakes Peltier Lake and Centerville Lake TMDL The Peltier Lake and Centerville Lake TMDL address nutrient impairments in Peltier Lake and Centerville Lake. The November 2011 draft TMDL report states that nutrient load reductions of about 37% are needed for Centerville Lake and reductions of 79% to 85% are needed for Peltier Lake. Lino Lakes Chain of Lakes TMDL The Lino Lakes Chain of Lakes TMDL addresses nutrient impairments in George Watch Lake, Marshan Lake, Reshanau Lake, Rice Lake and Baldwin Lake. The November 2011 draft TMDL report states that nutrient load reductions ranging from 65% to 85% are needed to meet state standards. The report further states that to achieve state water quality standards in this chain of lakes, Peltier Lake must also meet its water quality goals. Bald Eagle Lake TMDL The Bald Eagle Lake TMDL addresses nutrient impairments of Bald Eagle Lake. The TMDL report indicates that nutrient load reductions of 38% to 91% are required for the lake to meet state standards. The public comment period for the Bald Eagle Lake TMDL ended on March 30, 2011; it has not yet been approved by the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA). Vadnais Lake Area WMO TMDL The Vadnais Lake Area WMO Total Maximum Daily Load (TMDL) and Protection Study addresses nutrient impairments of Wilkinson Lake among four other lakes within VLAWMO as well as the bacterial impairment of a creek in VLAWMO. A draft TMDL report posted October 2012 to the VLAWMO website provides a draft wasteload allocation for the City of Lino Lakes with respect to Wilkinson Lake. Rice Creek Watershed District WMP The Rice Creek Watershed District Watershed Management Plan was last updated in 2010. The plan provides the guidance and implementation for the RCWD to manage the water and natural resources of the district into the foreseeable future extending through 2020. The Watershed Management Plan incorporates and builds on the previous district plans as well as numerous studies, inventories and assessments that have been completed in recent history. The plan is organized around eight management categories including: 1) Education, Data and Information; 2) Lakes; 3) Wetlands; 4) Drainage Systems and Waterways; 5) Excess Runoff; 6) District Facilities; 7) Open Space; and 8) Groundwater. The City of Lino Lakes SWMP 1 February 8, 2013 Draft! 4 management categories provide the guide for plan implementation and district expenditures. The • identified goals and polices established by the plan are implemented in part by the established Rules. The RCWD adopted Rule RMP -3, which governs approximately 95% of Lino Lakes, in 2009. This Rule is specifically focused on improving wetland functions and water quality through the District's permitting process. • • Vadnais Lake Area Watershed Management Organization WMP The Vadnais Lakes Area Water Management Organization (VLAWMO) Watershed Management Plan describes how the VLAWMO will address water management over the next 10 years. VLAWMO was organized by a Joint Powers Agreement in 1983 in response to the Minnesota Metropolitan Surface Water Act of 1982 (Minnesota Statutes {M.S.} Section 473.875 to 473.883). The first VLAWMO Watershed Management Plan was prepared, approved, and adopted in 1987. The second generation plan was prepared and adopted in 1995. That plan expired in 2006. This current Plan represents a third generation plan and will be effective from 2007 to 2016. In addition to complying with the aforementioned laws, this Plan meets the requirement of Minnesota Rules 8410, 8420, and 8750. The Plan includes management standards and procedures for addressing surface water, wetland, and groundwater issues. RCWD Resource Management Plan and Rule RMP -3 The Lino Lakes Resource Management Plan (RMP) came about through a partnership between the Rice Creek Watershed District (RCWD) and the City of Lino Lakes. The RMP examines natural resources on a watershed basis to create a planning and regulatory framework that will protect and enhance those resources in the context of development pressures within the watershed. The RMP was developed in close coordination with state and federal permitting authorities and has been prepared to be consistent with both state and federal wetland regulations. The plan incorporates continuing maintenance of capacity within the public drainage systems in accordance with Minnesota Statutes Chapter 103E by reducing runoff volumes conveyed through the system. It constitutes a Comprehensive Wetland Management Plan under Minnesota Statutes § 103G.2243 and was approved by the Minnesota Board of Water and Soil Resources in 2008. The RMP is intended that components of the plan be incorporated into Clean Water Act (CWA) Section 404 permit evaluations. The RMP also provided guidance to the City of Lino Lakes for ecologically -based land use decisions during their Comprehensive Plan and storm water management plan update process. The purpose of Rule RMP -3 is to implement the Lino Lakes Resource Management Plan (RMP) adopted by the Rice Creek Watershed District in 2008. This Rule regulates activity both in wetland and on upland within the RMP area. It comprehensively addresses wetland and other water resource protection concerns and therefore replaces permit review under individual District Rules C (Stormwater Management) and F (Wetland Alteration). JD4 Resource Management Plan and RMP -2 The Judicial Ditch 4 (JD4) RMP provides a watershed -based approach to wetland management that is consistent with RCWD goals. The approach uniquely addresses management in the context of wetland functions and the effects of anticipated future land use. The RMP was developed in close coordination with state and federal permitting authorities, and has been prepared to be consistent with both state and federal wetland regulations. It is intended that components of the plan be incorporated into CWA Section 404 permit evaluations. The approach is unique as a means to develop a comprehensive wetland management plan according to the State of Minnesota Wetland Conservation Act, because it not only provides existing wetland functions and values, but forecasts future functions in light of anticipated land use, and watershed -based approaches for no net loss of wetland function. City of Lino Lakes SWMP February 8, 2013 Draft 15 The RMP serves as a companion to adoption of the JD4 RMP Rule. The Rule RMP -2 provides standards intended to avoid land use effects that degrade wetland and aquatic resource quality. It also establishes the conditions for the RCWD to implement wetland permitting, wetland banking and volume banking programs in the JD4 RMP area. The stormwater volume banking program is a critical tool in meeting downstream TMDL goals and reducing flooding for this volume- constrained drainage system. Lino Lakes Special Area Management Plan and Programmatic General Permit The City of Lino Lakes and the RCWD have prepared a Special Area Management Plan (SAMP) for the subwatersheds within the City. The Army Corps of Engineers St. Paul District (Corps) intends to use the SAMP in its Clean Water Act (CWA). The purpose of the SAMP is to provide a watershed -based and conservation -based framework for aquatic resource management, particularly as development and redevelopment occur within the City. The SAMP addresses future water quality, quantity, flow rates and wetland function and condition in light of forecasted development and potential changes to surface and groundwater characteristics. As a result of the SAMP the CWA Section 404 regulated wetland alterations and impacts within the City of Lino Lakes will be covered by a Programmatic General Permit that streamlines the federal, state and local permitting process. City of Lino Lakes Storm Water Pollution Prevention Program (SWPPP) The City of Lino Lakes, as a municipal separate storm sewer system is required to implement and enforce a SWPPP as a part of compliance with National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System (NPDES) Phase II program. The SWPPP is designed to reduce the discharge of pollutants from the City to the "maximum extent practicable" to protect water quality. The SWPPP must include Best Management Practices (BMP) that address six minimum control measures. Wellhead Protection Plan The City of Lino Lakes along with the Minnesota Department of Health and Anoka County developed a Wellhead Protection Plan that delineates drinking water supply management areas and wellhead protection areas. The Wellhead Protection Plan was approved by the Minnesota Department of Health in 2005. 2.3. Plan Objectives & Summary The Plan defines goals and actions to guide the management of the City's lakes, wetlands, streams and natural resources. The Plan is intended to fulfill the requirements for a Local Surface Water Management Plan under MN Statute 103B and MN Rule 8410 and to address the Rice Creek Watershed District and Vadnais Lake Area Watershed Management Organization requirements for Local Plans. The Plan summarizes available information about the City's water and natural resources, defines goals and policies, and outlines an implementation plan. Based on the City's commitment to collaborative planning this Plan articulates the future of water resource management in Lino Lakes. The City is fortunate to have invested in the science needed to determine sound resource management actions. In addition, the City established a civic engagement process to gain public support and developed strong civic leadership to implement the necessary regulatory mechanisms to ensure water resources are protected now and into the future. City of Lino Lakes SWMP 1 February 8. 2013 Draft! 6 • • • 3.0 Land & Water Resource Assessment 3.1. History Dakota Indians lived in what would later be called Centerville Township in the 1600s and 1700s. At that time, the area was covered with dense woodlands and many square miles of marshes, lakes and waterways. The natural habitat provided the Dakota with an abundant food supply, including wild rice and a wide variety of game and fish. They traveled the waterways by canoe, reaching the St. Croix River to the east and the Mississippi River to the west. The Dakotas abandoned their settlement in the late 1700s, but returned annually to harvest wild rice. The abundance of wildlife attracted many trappers and hunters in the early 1800s. The western part of the Township was known as the "German" settlement and was first settled in 1850, by F.W. Travis and was followed five years later by Henry Wenzel. The eastern part of the Township was known as the "French" settlement and its first settlers in 1852 were: Francis Lamott, F.X. LaVallee, Peter Cardinal, Charles Peltier, Joseph Houle, A. Gervais, Oliver Dupre, Joseph Forcier, Paul and Oliver Peltier, Stephen Ward and L. Burkard. The downtown area of what came to be the City of Centerville was originally established as a "French" settlement in the middle part of the 1800s. In 1854, Charles Peltier built a sawmill on Clearwater Creek near the village. In the same year, settlers Peltier, LaValle and LaMotte laid out and platted the Town. They chose the name Centerville because of its central location from St. Paul, Stillwater, and Anoka. The City was officially established on August 11, 1857, when Minnesota was still a territory. In the 1950s, neighboring villages started annexing land away from Centerville Township. By 1955, to protect the boundaries and allow for the financing of public improvements, a committee of the Centerville Town Board began proceedings for incorporation from all of Centerville Township, except the Cities of Centerville and Circle Pines. They took the historic name Lino and because of the ten lakes within the area added Lakes and came up with the name Lino Lakes. On May 11, 1955, the new Village of Lino Lakes was incorporated. At incorporation, the new Village was comprised of 21,000 acres of land and 1,800 citizens. In 1972, the State Legislature passed a law changing all Minnesota villages to cities, hence the current status of the City of Lino Lakes. Today, the City has a population of over 20,216 people and is rapidly developing. The current City location is shown in Figure 1. City of Lino Lakes SWMP February 8, 2013 Draft 7 City of Lino Lakes Rice Creek Watershed ANOKA COUNTY Minneapolis St. Paul RAMSFY COUNTY WASHING`"` "' COUNT 01/30/2009 0 10 Miles Eon Emmons & Olivier Resources, Inc. 651 Hale Ave North Oakdale, MN 55128 Tele. 651 770.8448 www eorinc. con, Figure 1. City of Lino Lakes Location Map [from SAMP] City of Lino Lakes SWMP 1 February 8, 2013 Draft 1 8 • 3.2. Resource Management Framework The City of Lino Lakes laid out a framework in the Comprehensive Plan for the management of the resources within the City. The framework provides a unified systems approach to natural resource management that brings together the following major components: • The City's Surface Water Management Plan • The Rice Creek Watershed District/Lino Lakes Resource Management Plan (RMP) • The City's Parks, Natural Open Space /Greenways, and Trail System Plan The framework is organized around a number of subwatershed -based resource management units (RMUs). The RMP divided the city into 15 distinct RMUs. These units provide specific resource management strategies that address the unique conditions of each area (F ure2Ftgure -2). The intent of implementing the RMU recommendations is to achieve the aquatic resource management goals of the RMP and achieve a watershed -based approach to flood control and protecting high quality wetlands. City of Lino Lakes SWMP 1 February 8, 2013 Draft 19 L 53 Main S. Rondeau RMU ? D Et N Rondeau Lake Marshan RMU Oak Ln Peltier Lake -r r L Lilac St (Upper Rice Creek RMU Hardwood 8,,,Crreek R Peltier RMU George Watch Lake Peltier F:e- ,:,:,,;` Lake City of Centerville Ma rshan Lake ce Creek n of Lakes go al Park Reserve Rice Lake RMU Rice Lake 1 Reshanau Lake 1 Creek RMU I_ Sherman RMU • Resha Amelia RMU64th F. Cedar ,'Middle I i Rce Creek. — L Amelia Lake RMU Resource Management Units (RMUs) City of Lino Lakes 2030 Comprehensive Plan Wilkinson RMU Otter Lake Municipal Boundary Resource Management Unit Boundary 4000 0 4,000 Right- of-Way prepaetlby Barestroo Feet Open Water K /amyewmk/Gisseneomosa&omor -o orsFatescompIaM7MU mxa CI1 [[N� of EKES August 6, 2008 Figure 2. Resource Management Units [from Comprehensive Plan] City of Lino Lakes SWMP 1 February 8, 2013 Draft' 10 • • • • • • 3.3. Climate & Precipitation The climate of Lino Lakes is similar to the climate for the overall Seven County Metropolitan Area which exhibits the typical characteristics of continental climates. Areas with continental climates have winters with at least one month below 32° F and at least three months of temperatures above 50° F. Regions with continental climates are characterized by winter temperatures cold enough to support snow cover from late fall to early spring, and relatively moderate precipitation that occurs mostly in the summer months. Climate data was collected by the National Weather Service Cooperative at the Minneapolis -St. Paul International Airport (Station 215435) and supplemented with data from the St. Paul station (station 217377) to fill gaps in the snowfall record. The data summary of precipitation, snowfall, and temperature presented in Table 1 covers the 30 years between 1981 and 2010. The average annual temperature is 46.2 degrees F. Average annual precipitation is 30.6 inches, including approximately 51.6 inches of snowfall (Table 1). Daily climate data and other climate summaries are available on the Minnesota Climatology Working Group website at climate.umn.edu. Table 1. Monthly Averages, 1981 -2010 Mean Monthly Precipitation, 1981 -2010 Jan Feb Mar Ma Jun Jul Se. Oct Nov Dec ANN Precipitation [in] 0.90 0.76 1.89 2.66 3.36 4.25 4.04 4.29 3.07 2.43 1.76 1.15 30.6 Mean Monthly Snowfall, 1981 -2010 Jan Feb Mar Ma Jun Jul Se. Oct Nov Dec ANN Snowfall in 10.87 8.15 10.04 2.12 0.01 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.01 0.55 8.77 11.10 51.6 Mean Temperature, 1981 -2010 Jan Feb Mar A Ma Jun Jul MIN Oct Nov Dec ANN Max °F 23.4 29.6 41.5 57.1 69.8 78.7 82.8 80.2 71.1 58.2 39.5 26.5 54.9 Min °F 7.5 12.7 24.2 37.2 48.9 58.7 64.0 61.7 52.2 39.7 26.2 12.7 37.2 Mean °F 15.6 20.8 32.7 47.4 59.1 68.7 73.7 71.1 62.0 48.8 33.7 20.1 46.2 Table 2 illustrates the probability of a rainfall event occurring in any given year within the City of Lino Lakes. The recurrence interval is a measure of the probability of occurrence of the storm event. For example, a rainfall event of 5.9 inches has a 1% probability of occurring in any given year which is expressed as once in every 100 years, the 3.6 inch rainfall event has a 20% probability of occurring in any given year which is expressed as once in every 5 years. These U.S. Precipitation Frequency Estimates for the Midwest are currently being updated by the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA) and the National Weather Service (NWS). Once this study is complete, it is anticipated that the precipitation for the recurrence intervals illustrated in Table 2 will be modified. This project is expected to be completed in 2013. Updated information on rainfall patterns and rainfall intensity may require modification of City ordinances and policies to ensure that development and redevelopment account for the changes in rainfall patterns and the resulting water management needs. Policies and ordinances may also need modifications to ensure that affected natural resources are properly protected. City of Lino Lakes SWMP 1 February 8, 2013 Draft 111 Table 2. Design Storm Events Recurrence Interval (years) 24 Hour Rainfall Amount (inches) 1 2.4 2 2.8 5 3.6 10 4.2 25 4.8 50 5.3 100 5.9 Source: U.S. Weather Bureau TP-40 (Hershfield, 1961) 3.4. Topography The City's hydrologic system includes streams, lakes and wetlands. The City is characterized by gently rolling topography interspersed with lakes, streams, floodplains, various judicial and county ditches, and wetlands that are primarily a result of glaciation. This is due to its location in the North Central Hardwood Forest Eco- region that can be sub - divided into three geomorphic settings: the McGrath Till Plain, the Twin Cities Formation and the Anoka Sand Plain. This system is typical of a glaciated area with outwash plains and terminal moraines. The thinly spread glacial drift is characterized by circular level - topped hills with smooth side slopes averaging between 2 -3% grades. Ground surface elevations range from 850 to 950 feet above mean sea level (MSL). Lacking a uniform drainage pattern, many small streams end in lakes or depressions. Low -lying areas contain closed basins with numerous lakes and peat bogs. Water table levels normally occur within three to ten feet of the surface. All ground water levels vary seasonally. 3.5. Geology Surficial Geology The surficial geology of Lino Lakes is composed of 2 distinct areas. The City is divided almost evenly between portions of the Anoka Sandplain and an area of loamy till typical of the Eastern Saint Croix Moraine. Organic deposits are present throughout both areas (Figure 3). The northwestern portion of the City is considered to be part of the Anoka Sandplain geomorphic area. The Anoka Sandplain is an outwash plain formed during the retreat of the Grantsburg Lobe. The material making up the plain is principally fine sand. Depressions are common in the plain and were formed when isolated blocks of ice later melted. They are now filled with peat deposits or are marshes and lakes. The landscape within the Anoka Sandplain is generally considered to be a gently undulating plain. Water tables are near the surface in depressions and from 2 to 10 or more feet deep in rises. The southeastern portion of the City is composed of New Ulm loamy till. This area was formed by the Grantsburg sublobe of the Des Moines lobe and is characterized by gently rolling terrain (Figure 3). Bedrock Geology Three bedrock layers exist beneath the study area; Mt. Simon - Jordan, Prairie Du Chien and St. Peter - Platteville. The Mt. Simon -Jordan was formed during the Upper Cambrian and parallels the same extent as the Anoka Sandplain. The Prairie Du Chien and St. Peter - Platteville areas are from the Ordovician period and parallel the glacial till in the southeast portion of the City (Figure 4). City of Lino Lakes SWMP 1 February 8, 2013 Draft' 12 • • 23 35 Resou mentof Natural Resou cent of Transooretion .,cal Survey Legend Alluvium Lake Sand Des Moines, Tdl iDes Moinesi Organic Deposists Modern Lakes Figure 3. Surficial Geology _ _ l Lino Lakes County Lino Lakes Storm Water Management Plan Surficial Geology 0 Miles 1 City of Lino Lakes SWMP February 8, 2013 Draft l 13 E Z Legend ST.LAWRENCE- FRANCONIA Fm ji _ i Lino Lakes JORDAN SANDSTONE County PRAIRIE DU CHIEN GROUP Stream ST PETER SANDSTONE Lake Figure 4. Bedrock Geology Lino Lakes Storm Water Management Plan Bedrock Geology City of Lino Lakes SWMP 1 February 8, 2013 Draft 114 • • • • • • 3.6. Soils The City of Lino Lakes is located within the Anoka Sandplain ecological subsection of central Minnesota. The Anoka Sandplain is a 1,875 square mile glacial outwash plain that includes portions of 13 Minnesota counties, and is centered on most of Anoka, Isanti, and Sherburne counties. The Anoka Sandplain was created and shaped by the last major glacial episode in Minnesota — the Wisconsin glaciation — between 35,000 and 10,000 years ago. The City of Lino Lakes is located within the historic lake bottom of Glacial Lake Fridley which formed from glacial ice -melt water circa 12,000 years ago. The release of glacial melt water from Glacial Lake Fridley created deep, broad, irregular troughs within the glacial lake bottom. These troughs formed the Rice Creek Chain of Lakes and associated wetland complexes of present day, as well as numerous other lake chains to the northwest and southeast of Lino Lakes. The glacial history of Lino Lakes resulted in complex patterns of surficial geology, hydrology, and soil associations that remain as important influences on development, agricultural patterns, and natural resources conservation opportunities within the City. The upland soils of Lino Lakes are typically sandy, moderately to well drained, and nutrient poor. Wetland soils are typically shallow to deep organic peat deposits over sand or saturated sands, which occur within complex networks of braided depressions throughout the City's landscape. The southeastern most edge of the City includes a small portion of a glacial till. The upland and wetland soils of this landscape inclusion are comprised of fine- textured silt loams, loams, and clays that are poorly drained. Topography throughout the City is generally flat to slightly undulating, and the regional groundwater table is typically shallow below the soil surface. Soil types commonly found in Lino Lakes have been grouped into categories (as illustrated in Figure 5) based on the Hydrologic Soil Group (HSG), or runoff potential from precipitation. This classification describes the hydrologic features of the soils and is derived from vegetation, soils composition, and slope. Combined hydrologic soil groups (e.g. A/D, B/D, and C/D) represent soils that can be classified by two labels depending on their drained status. The first letter indicates the soil's properties in a drained setting and the second letter indicates that same soil's properties in an undrained area. Table 3Table 3 summarizes the four hydrologic soil groups: Table 3. Soil hydrologic groups Hydrologic Soil Group (HSG) Description A Soils having high infiltration rates when thoroughly wet (low runoff potential). Deep, well drained to excessively drained sand or gravelly sand. B Soils having a moderate infiltration rate when thoroughly wet. Moderately deep or deep, moderately well drained or well drained with moderately to moderately coarse texture. C Soils having a slow infiltration rate when thoroughly wet. Soils have a layer that impedes the downward movement of water or soils of moderately fme texture or fme texture. D Soils having very slow rates of infiltration when thoroughly wet (high runoff potential). Soils consists of clays with high shrink -swell potential, soils have a permanent high water table, soils that have a claypan or clay layer at or near the surface and soils that are shallow over nearly impervious materials. Urban Land Areas of development that are covered by asphalt, concrete, and buildings. ata from Natural Resource Conservation Service, 1977. City of Lino Lakes SWMP 1 February 8, 2013 Draft! 15 a 4 Loch Ness Loch Ness Sou x Emnrons 8 Olry 'Resource-11 c M i n n e s o t a Da menrot Natural Re v Minnesota DemurreotoiTaalleotatioo 2 USDA, NRCS ER iu a k e f ecology Charev P1ge,.r fNeasartt Legend I Lino Lakes Soil Survey County Lake A/D Stream 6 Figure 5. Hydrologic Soil Group EID 0 Unidentified Bald Eagle 61 t 1 / Lino Lakes Storm Water Management Plan 0 Soils Miles 1 City of Lino Lakes SWMP 1 February 8, 2013 Draft 1 16 • • • • • In 2003, the Rice Creek Watershed District (RCWD) completed a study that identified the infiltration potential within the watershed. Figure 6 provides a general categorization into five levels of infiltration potential, ranging from high to low. These levels were assigned by assessing soils, make -up of the sub- surface geology, estimated content of fine material in the soil profile, and depths to seasonally high water table. The City of Lino Lakes is identified as having high infiltration potential in the western portion of the City with medium to low infiltration potential in the eastern portion of the City. RICE CREEK WATERSHED DISTRICT INFILTRATION IMPLEMENTATION STUDY INFILTRATION POTENTIAL MAP SECTION LINES MAJOR HIGHWAYS OTHER ROADS MUNICIPAL BOUNDARIES SURFACE WATER MAJOR STREAMS INFILTRATION POTENTIAL ® HIGH MEDIUM HIGH MEDIUM MEDIUM Low Low WETLAND COMPLEX/ ORGANIC SOILS ❑ LOCATION OF TEST SITES ANOKA MOO Nu OSPIN COUMiCf eueelnvE Approximate City of Lino Lakes Boundary CLEAR LAKE MEADOWS. / FOREST LAKE • 1 TARGET STORE, LINO LAKES`` SADDLE CLUB ADDITION, LINO LAKES SPIRIT HILLS, LINO LAKES L BETNEL COLLEGE, ARDEN HILLS KAT Ill. ',OK NY ONNINO NOM MC AY • LAMM SCALE •ITZ 2 MILES W( EILMONs & OLIVIER RESOURCES Figure 6. Infiltration Potential within the Rice Creek Watershed District [from RCWD, 2003 Infiltration Implementation Study] City of Lino Lakes SWMP 1February 8, 2013 Draft 117 3.7. Groundwater Resources The City is located over very substantial ground water reserves. The major aquifers include: glacial sand and gravel, the Prairie -du- Chien/Jordan aquifer, and the Mt. Simon - Hinckley aquifer. The Prairie -du- Chien/Jordan aquifer supplies much of the ground water pumped in the Twin City metropolitan area, while the Mt. Simon - Hinckley aquifer provides a smaller portion. Bedrock ground water in the northern portion of the Watershed District generally flows toward the west; in the southern portion, the ground water flows to the southwest. Ground water recharge areas are not well known in the Rice Creek Watershed District (RCWD). Glacial sand and gravel aquifers are generally recharged locally. The Mt. Simon - Hinckley aquifer is recharged outside the watershed. It has generally been documented that the Prairie -du -Chien aquifer does recharge within the watershed. Additional information on groundwater resources is available for Anoka County in their Water Resources Management Report (2009). In addition, the Department of Natural Resources' Minnesota Geologic Survey prepared a Regional Hydrogeologic Assessment for the Anoka Sandplain (1993), an area which includes Lino Lakes, and is working on an Anoka County Geologic Atlas. In 2009 the RCWD completed a Groundwater Planning & Management Program; the report identifies information such as groundwater contours, recharge and discharge areas, groundwater dependent natural resources, and areas where infiltration is not recommended. The report indicates that groundwater flows from the southeast and northwest toward the lakes in the center of the City (Figure 7) and similarly that the Chain of Lakes are groundwater discharge points with surrounding areas of recharge (Figure 8). The identified groundwater dependent natural resources include areas around Rondeau and Peltier Lakes (Figure 9). In addition, a few locations within Lino Lakes are identified as areas where infiltration is not recommended unless precautions are taken to protect the City's drinking water supply. These areas are located around public well fields. The City's Wellhead Protection Plan includes Wellhead Protection Areas, Drinking Water Supply Management Areas, a Vulnerability Assessment, Potential Contaminant Source Management Strategy, an Evaluation Program and an Alternative Water Supply /Contingency Plan. The Drinking Water Supply Management Area includes guidelines related to stormwater infiltration. The Minnesota Pollution Control Agency (MPCA) has an active ground water monitoring system in and near the City. The purpose of the MPCA monitoring program is to characterize the physical, chemical, bacteriological, and organic properties of each water source. Data is available to the public through the MPCA's Environmental Data Access system. The Metropolitan Council Water Supply Plan (2010) indicates that with expected population growth, the aquifers in the Twin Cities metropolitan area will show lower aquifer water levels, but will still have the water supply and recharge capability needed to meet expected water uses. The model completed for the study indicates that aquifer water levels may decrease by about 100 feet in outer ring suburbs, especially in the south metro. The Anoka County Water Resources Management Report (2009) summarizes a 2007 Metropolitan Council report and indicates that surface water features in Anoka County are more likely to be impacted by groundwater drawdown than in other areas. City of Lino Lakes SWMP 1 February 8, 2013 Draft 1 18 • • • ANOKA Approximate City of Lino Lakes Boundary Ls,Antsoi- i Circle Pines Spring Lake Park/ L.:, • - Fridley `1- \ f — . Brtgbton Colt.. Heights ; .7* COIWUSIJS Geste,. sttsH,, Lona Lakes L-1 : r I , / CH ISAGO —940 1 _ • Forest Lake ScbrIttia 960 950 6e 1 le 144cep Hugo r 900 Alden Hills Shoreview ( 940 St Anthony 4'. 900 900 HENNEPIN I, ,9 :930 % r r Roseville ..L_ tiLle I, —keicoa 06910. es6, 0 92c RAMSEY Wilke Bear WM. L &to 920 J 980 c.70 900 980 jrh gellwn661 White Spat • Birchwood V116re III 930 L iS69.1 — Pine Springs 6,91' Mantoinedi I "1 J 960 Grant '970 WASHINGTON Legend Political Boundary • County Boundary Water Table Elevation (10' Interval) Sources Rice Creek Watershed DWI', Emmons & Resources Inc Minnesota Department of Transportahor Minnesota Department Of Natural Resources 0 1.25 25 5 Miles ER Figure 7. Groundwater contours [from RCWD 2009 Groundwater Planning & Management Program] City of Lino Lakes SWMP 1 February 8, 2013 Draft 1 19 ANOKA CHISAGO Approximat City of Lino Boundary mike • .M ,-p, i Lake Park /eJ 1 / I\Mdunds Mom 0 MaMomedi Grant ir ASHINGTON HENNE n La de■ Legend c.! Political Boundary j1 County Boundary Groundwatershed Discharge Area En Recharge Area Iol Sources Rice Creek Watershed Aanici Emmons 8 Olivier Resources. Inc Minnesota Department V rranspoaatin Figure 8. Groundwater recharge and discharge areas [from RCWD 2009 Groundwater Planning & Mgt. Program] City of Lino Lakes SWMP 1 February 8, 2013 Draft 1 20 • • • • • • ANOKA Spring lake Park / ••■! I / Columbia liege. /,,,, • L`emu Approximate City of Lino Lakes Boundary I _ I- -_lam 1 1 r, 1 -I i_ _1_ 1, '1 CHISAGO Hardwood Creek sdnau .1 Fr nee Wow tone HENNEPIN ,1 ti nHeights RAMSEY Birchwood wypN ual:e 11.1 Project ID GW 1 GW 2 GW 3 GW 4 GW 5 GW 6 GW 7 Pine Springs WASHINGTON Description Ramsey Mounds Kettle Bogs Highview Middle School Wetland Complex Poplar Lake Open Space Turtle Lake Flowage White Bear Tamarack Swamp Forest Lake Headwaters Complex_ St Croix Moraine Kettle Bogs Legend :0 Political Boundary c 1I County Boundary O Small Groundwater Dependent Aggregates Large Gourndwater Dependent Aggregates Groundwater and Surface Water Dependent Resource Groundwater Dependent Resource Sou Rice Creek Watershed District (NR/ 2005! Emmons & ONVier Resources Inc Aennesote Department of Transportation, Minnesota Deparrmant of Natural Resources Washington County 0 1.25 2 5 5 Miles ir(�� I I I 12/1772008 Figure 9. Groundwater dependent resources [from RCWD 2009 Groundwater Planning & Mgt. Program] City of Lino Lakes SWMP February 8, 2013 Draft 21 ANOKA L CHISAGO 66____I I r, 1 6. rP14 Approximate i -,. ° I T , ai City of Lino Lakes :1 Columbus ir Boundary `� i _r' r_I r' i., r' 1 a1 PI Spring Lake Pareri ti I�Mounds View ! I Brine 1 Forest lake x} kl F Wya kes Aran HUM \1 L 1 r Columbia eg0t f I. I im eeet nelson P ►4 HENNEPIN rt Roseville RAMSEY 111 whir Bea. • 1 Bellwood `I I Ir PI f White Birchwood w Pine Springs WASHINGTON Legend Political Boundary 1t County Boundary ail Infiltration Not Recommended Sou Ace creek watershed DisInc, Emmons a ORVkr! Tran Resources, Inc Minnesota Department of Transportation Minnesota Gedngrcal Survey Mnnesote Department of Hearth Disclaimer: The polygons shown on this map are Interwee for use at a wetershed.scale Site specific inrormaeon (e.g. well data, proposed land use, emergency spill contaminant protocol availability, etc.) should be reviewer, and considered in these areas when making a fine' deteminadon as to whether Infiltration is ultimately appropriate fora given site 0 1.25 2 5 I 1 I 5 Miles H v Figure 10. Areas not recommended for infiltration [from RCWD 2009 Groundwater Planning & Mgt. Program] City of Lino Lakes SWMP 1 February 8, 2013 Draft 1 22 • • • 3.8. Surface Water Resources Open water features are a significant land cover type in the City, totaling over 3,000 acres, or roughly 14% of the surface area. The largest portion of this cover type (96 %) is represented by the large, natural ice block lakes forming the Chain of Lakes and other outlier lakes, along with smaller natural ponds. A number of streams and creeks also flow through the City. Within the municipal boundary of the City of Lino Lakes, seven lakes within the Chain of Lakes (Baldwin, Centerville, George Watch, Marshan, Peltier, Reshanau, and Rice), Bald Eagle Lake, and two creek reaches (Clearwater and Hardwood) are currently listed on the Minnesota Pollution Control Agency's 2010 Draft 303d list of impaired waters (Table 4, Figure 11). The eight lakes are listed for nutrient/eutrophication biological indicators affecting aquatic recreation uses, Clearwater and Hardwood Creeks are listed for fish and/or aquatic macroinvertebrate bioassessments affecting aquatic life, and Hardwood Creek is also listed for dissolved oxygen affecting aquatic life. There are also three lakes that have fish consumption impairments due to high mercury concentrations in fish: Peltier Lake, Otter Lake, and Bald Eagle Lake. In 2009, the MPCA completed a plan to address this mercury impairment. With substantial stakeholder input, the MPCA prepared a plan to reduce mercury releases in Minnesota. This plan, the Implementation Plan for Minnesota's Statewide Mercury Total Maximum Daily Load, describes actions Minnesota will take to meet water - quality standards for mercury. Draft TMDL reports have been written for the eight impaired lakes with nutrient impairments. The public comment period for the Bald Eagle Lake TMDL ended on March 30, 2011; it has not yet been approved by the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA). The public comment period for the TMDL reports for the other seven lakes is from January 30, 2012 through February 29, 2012. The implementation plans for these impairments will be completed after the EPA approves the TMDLs. The TMDL for the Clearwater Creek impairment has not yet been started. It will be part of a future Watershed Restoration and Protection Plan, to be completed by the MPCA in conjunction with local partners. The TMDL for the two impairments on Hardwood Creek is complete and was approved by the EPA on July 10, 2009 (Hardwood Creek Impaired Biota (Fish) and Dissolved Oxygen TMDL can be found on MPCA's website). The implementation plan for these two impairments is also complete and was approved by the MPCA in 2009. There is a TMDL study under way for bacteria (E. coli and fecal coliform) impairments along portions of the Upper Mississippi River and its tributaries, including Rice Creek. Lino Lakes will be part of that TMDL study. There is also a TMDL underway for Wilkinson Lake as part of the Vadnais Lakes Area WMO TMDL and Protection Study. The City of Lino Lakes will receive wasteload allocations (WLA) for one or more of the TMDLs listed above. When the WLAs are approved by the EPA, the City will need to demonstrate progress towards meeting the WLAs. The MPCA is in the process of reissuing the General Permit for Small MS4s, which will identify the process for demonstrating progress towards meeting a WLA. City of Lino Lakes SWMP 1 February 8, 2013 Draft 123 Table 4. Impaired Waters in Lino Lakes Impaired Water Lake or River ID 62- 0002 -00 Affected use Aquatic Recreation Pollutant or Stressor List Date 2002 Bald Eagle Lake* Nutrient/Eutrophication Biological Indicators Bald Eagle Lake* 62- 0002 -00 Aquatic Consumption Mercury in Fish Tissue 1998 Baldwin Lake 02-0013-00 Aquatic Recreation Nutrient/Eutrophication Biological Indicators 2010 Centerville Lake 02- 0006 -00 Aquatic Recreation Nutrient/Eutrophication Biological Indicators 2002 George Watch Lake 02- 0005 -00 Aquatic Recreation Nutrient/Eutrophication Biological Indicators 2002 Marshan Lake 02-0007-00 Aquatic Recreation Nutrient/Eutrophication Biological Indicators 2002 Otter Lake 02- 0003 -00 Aquatic Consumption Mercury in Fish Tissue 2010 Peltier Lake 02 0004 -00 Aquatic Recreation Nutrient/Eutrophication Biological Indicators 2002 Peltier Lake 02- 0004 -00 Aquatic Consumption Mercury in Fish Tissue 1998 Reshanau Lake 02- 0009 -00 Aquatic Recreation NutrientlEutrophication Biological Indicators 2006 Rice Lake 02- 0008 00 Aquatic Recreation Nutrient/Eutrophication Biological Indicators 2010 Wilkinson Lake 62- 0043 -00 Aquatic Recreation Nutrient/Eutrophication Biological Indicators 2010 Clearwater Creek (Bald Eagle Lake to Peltier Lake) 07010206- 519 Aquatic Life Fish and Aquatic Macro- invertebrate Bioassessments 2002 2006 Hardwood Creek (Hwy 61 to Peltier Lake) 07010206- 596 Aquatic Life Fish Bioassessment 2002 Hardwood Creek (Hwy 61 to Peltier Lake) 07010206- 596 Aquatic Life Dissolved Oxygen 2004 Note: Impairments from the MPCA 2010 Draft 303d List of Impaired Waters. *Only a small sliver of Bald Eagle Lake is within the City of Lino Lakes Lakes The City contains all or part of 15 lakes (Figure 11). Of the City's lakes, nine of them (Baldwin, Centerville, George Watch, Marshan, Peltier, Reshanau, Rice, Sherman, and Ward) are located within or abutting the Chain of Lakes Regional Park. The City lakes generally fall into three shoreland management categories: Natural Environment, Recreational and General Development. The Natural Environment lakes are primarily located in the Chain of Lakes area and include Peltier, George Watch, Marshan, Rice, Ward, Sherman, Cedar, Amelia, Rondeau and Wilkinson. Recreational lakes include Otter, Centerville, Reshanau, and Baldwin. Bald Eagle Lake is a General Development Lake. They are used for a variety of recreational uses such as swimming, boating, fishing and water skiing. Centerville, Bald Eagle, Peltier and Reshanau Lakes are considered game fishing lakes. A metric used to evaluate lake water quality is the level of eutrophication, the enrichment of lakes due to excess nutrients such as phosphorus. Although phosphorus is the dominant factor, as both phosphorus and nitrogen concentrations increase in lake water, algae blooms increase. In the extreme, blue -green or scum - forming algae can render a lake unusable for recreation. The degree of eutrophication is characterized by gradations of oligotrophic and eutrophic levels. Oligotrophic lakes have very low nutrient levels, high City of Lino Lakes SWMP 1 February 8, 2013 Draft 1 24 oxygen concentrations, little algae growth, and clear water. Eutrophic lakes have high nutrient levels, low oxygen concentrations, high algae growth, and murky water. Sources of phosphorus to lakes include the atmosphere, stormwater runoff, and internal cycling. The atmosphere contains phosphorus in dust and other particles transported into it by wind and re- deposited by rain and snow events. Stormwater runoff also carries phosphorus. Generally, as land use intensifies and the percentage of hard (impervious) surfaces increase, the amount of phosphorus in runoff also increases. Internal cycling is an important factor in most lakes. This is the process where phosphorus that had settled to the lake bottom seeps back into the water during the summer, the time when nuisance algae are problematic. A summary of available data from the 2010 Rice Creek Watershed District Watershed Management Plan for each lake is provided below. Where noted, additional data was presented from the Department of Natural Resources' LakeFinder and the Minnesota Pollution Control Agency's Environmental Data Access system. Rondeau Lake Rondeau Lake has a surface area of 275 acres, a watershed area of 3,448 acres, and a maximum depth of 7 feet. Rondeau is classified as a shallow lake and is managed to support aquatic life and enhance passive recreational uses. Rondeau is not listed as an impaired water body. Peltier Lake Peltier Lake has a surface area of 483 acres, a watershed area of 65,989 acres, and a maximum depth of 16 feet. Peltier is classified as a deep lake and is managed to support aquatic life and enhance passive recreational uses. Peltier was listed as impaired for nutrient /eutrophication biological indicators in 2002. Centerville Lake Centerville Lake has a surface area of 495 acres, a watershed area of 799 acres, and a maximum depth of 19 feet. Centerville is a deep lake and is managed to support aquatic life and recreational uses such as boating and swimming. Centerville was listed as impaired for nutrient /eutrophication biological indicators in 2002. George Watch Lake George Watch Lake has a surface area of 528 acres, a watershed area of 69,639 acres, and a maximum depth of 5 feet. George Watch is a shallow lake and is managed to support aquatic life and enhance passive recreational uses. George Watch was listed as impaired for nutrient /eutrophication biological indicators in 2002. Marshan Lake Marshan Lake has a surface area of 312 acres and a maximum depth of 5 feet. Marshan is a shallow lake and is managed to support aquatic life and enhance passive recreational uses. Marshan was listed as impaired for nutrient /eutrophication biological indicators in 2002. Reshanau Lake Reshanau Lake has a surface area of 342 acres, a watershed area of 4,264 acres, and a maximum depth of 10 feet. Reshanau is a shallow lake and is managed to support aquatic life and enhance passive recreational uses. Reshanau was listed as impaired for nutrient/eutrophication biological indicators in 2006. City of Lino Lakes SWMP 1 February 8, 2013 Draft 1 25 Rice Lake Rice Lake has a surface area of 598 acres, a watershed area of 79,673 acres, and a maximum depth of 4.8 feet. Rice is a shallow lake and is managed to support aquatic life and enhance passive recreational uses. Rice was recently listed as impaired for nutrient/eutrophication biological indicators in 2010. Baldwin Lake Baldwin Lake has a surface area of 220 acres, a watershed area of 81,485 acres, and a maximum depth of 4.5 feet. Baldwin is a shallow lake and is managed to support aquatic life and enhance passive recreational uses. Baldwin was listed as impaired for nutrient /eutrophication biological indicators in 2010. Otter Lake Otter Lake has a surface area of 332 acres, a watershed area of 1,179 acres, and a maximum depth of 21 feet. Otter is a deep lake and is managed to support aquatic life and recreational uses such as boating and swimming. Otter is not listed as an impaired water body Amelia Lake Amelia Lake is located in the boundaries of the Vadnais Lake Area Watershed Management Organization and outflows to the south. Amelia has a surface area of 217 acres and a maximum depth of 2 feet. Amelia is not listed as an impaired water body. Cedar Lake Cedar Lake is a small lake located east of Reshanau Lake. Lake surface area, watershed area, and maximum depth are unknown. Cedar is not listed as an impaired water body. Wards Lake Wards Lake has a surface area of 211 acres and a watershed area of 3,722 acres. Maximum depth is unknown. Wards is not listed as an impaired water body. Sherman Lake Sherman Lake has a surface area of 33 acres and maximum depth of 5 feet (DNR Lake Finder). The watershed area is unknown. Sherman is not listed as an impaired water body. Bald Eagle Lake Bald Eagle Lake has a surface area of 1,046 acres, a watershed area of 19,688 acres, and a maximum depth of 39 feet. Only a small portion of Bald Eagle Lake is located within the City of Lino Lakes municipal boundary. Bald Eagle is a deep lake and is managed to support aquatic life and recreational uses such as boating and swimming Bald Eagle was listed as impaired for nutrient/eutrophication biological indicators in 2002. Wilkinson Lake Lake Wilkinson is a 250 acre water body with a maximum depth of 1 foot. The lake is located at the south end of the city and was listed as impaired for nutrient /eutrophication biological indicators in 2010. At its ordinary high water level, it extends into the City of Lino Lakes. City of Lino Lakes SWMP 1 February 8, 2013 Draft 1 26 • • o Lakes10001 S RanUc�3ii 1 .;: Sou Emmons d Dl1YMr Resour•= Minnesota Depallment or Nate '` nrwa M/mesta Depa-trtent otTligifiaoaraon FedeelEmerpe cy Management Agency Charley Plleasc :+ an; Rarnsey ER e c o l o g y community Legend [—:1 Lino Lakes TMDL Lake County TMDL Lake Drainage Areas Lake Baldwin Stream Centerville George Watch Marshan Peltier Reshanau Rice Lake Rondeau Figure 11. Impaired Lakes within the City of Lino Lakes • Lino Lakes Storm Water Management Plan Impaired Lakes 0 Miles City of Lino Lakes SWMP 1 February 8, 2013 Draft 127 Surface Water and Groundwater Appropriations St. Paul Water Utility The St. Paul Water Department plays a significant role in the management of the water resources of the City. Peltier, Centerville, Bald Eagle, and Otter Lakes are all capable of being directly affected by withdrawals for the purpose of supplying water to the St. Paul system. The first water supply system to serve the City of St. Paul was constructed by a private company in 1868- 70. The company operated under a State of Minnesota Charter dated 1857, and was known as the St. Paul Water Company. In 1884, a 72 -inch brick conduit was constructed to deliver water from Vadnais Lake. Shortly thereafter, connection was made to Sucker Lake and Pleasant Lake, which are a short distance north of Vadnais Lake. In 1889, the source of supply was extended to Baldwin Lake. In 1894, extensions were made to Otter Lake. Arrangements were made to receive the overflow from Bald Eagle Lake. In 1914 -1915, a dam was constructed at the north end of Bald Eagle to impound additional water. Some water is available from the overflow from Bald Eagle Lake during high water periods. Bald Eagle Lake has a surface area of approximately 1,040 acres. When water in Bald Eagle Lake is higher than the culvert inverts at the north end of the lake, water overflows into Clearwater Creek, which drains into the Rice Creek Chain of Lakes. During normal periods of high water levels, water is taken from Otter Lake and by gravity flow is conveyed through a concrete conduit to the Centerville conduit and thence to Deep Lake. A pumping station was constructed in 1896, at Centerville Lake, to pump water from this source into the Chain of Lakes System. Over the years a number of deep wells were drilled to meet emergency conditions, but have since been abandoned. In 1902, a 150 -foot wide dam was built across Rice Creek at the outlet of Peltier Lake. A conduit connects Peltier Lake to Centerville Lake. Water from the Mississippi River was first taken to augment the supply in 1925, by means of an intake and pumping station on the river in Fridley. Approximately 75% of the water source is from the Mississippi River and is pumped into the Vadnais Chain of Lakes. Wells drawing from the Prairie du Chien -Jordan are used to augment flows to the water treatment plant when needed. The Rice Creek Chain of Lakes and Otter and Bald Eagle Lakes are used as a reserve supply. The St. Paul Water Utility Water Inflow System is depicted on Figure 12. City of Lino Lakes The City of Lino Lakes has five municipal wells in the city to provide a public water supply. The City's wellhead protection and drinking water supply management area plans outline protections for the wells and the water supply area. Other Appropriations There are 10 other active water appropriations permitted by the DNR within the City of Lino Lakes. These include crop irrigation, sod farms, athletic fields, nursery, and institutional uses of groundwater and surface water. City of Lino Lakes SWMP1 February 8, 2013 Draft' 28 • 0 1 ! xxr .w wt,cs LTIER L. RV LE MTERVILLE PLIMPIAM STATION DEEP L. MISSISSIPPI RNER PCANPMM STATION CHAR L LEGEND PUMPING STATION a1nzEn= OPEN CANAL marts TAEATAEAT P AA/T TKDA ENGINEERS • ARCHITECTS • PLANNERS CITY OF LINO LAKES SURFACE WATER MANAGEMENT PLAN FIGURE NO. 2 -1 ST. PAUL WATER UTILITY AREA Figure 12. St. Paul Water Utility Area [from 2005 Lino Lakes Surface Water Management Plan] City of Lino Lakes SWMP1 February 8, 2013 Draft' 29 Creeks The City's river and stream resources are characterized by three major stream systems: Rice Creek, and two of its tributaries, Hardwood Creek and Clearwater Creek. A network of ditches and stormsewer drain to these streams; the ditch and stormsewer system is discussed in Section 3.7. Rice Creek, Hardwood Creek and Clearwater Creek join at Peltier Lake with a combined drainage area of 70 square miles (44,800 acres). Hardwood Creek, with a total drainage area of 28 square miles, originates in Washington County's Rice Lake at a normal lake elevation of 920 feet and flows to Peltier Lake at an approximate elevation of 884 feet. Clearwater Creek originates in White Bear Lake and flows into Bald Eagle Lake, which has a normal elevation of about 884 feet. From there, it proceeds to Centerville Lake and then to Peltier Lake. Two creek reaches are listed in the 2010 Minnesota Pollution Control Agency Draft 303d list of impaired waters. The reach of Clearwater Creek between Bald Eagle Lake and Peltier Lake was listed in 2002 for fish bioassessments, and in 2006 for aquatic macroinvertebrate assessments. A TMDL for these assessments will be conducted during 2013 -2016 to determine the stressors for these impairments. The reach of Hardwood Creek between Hwy 61 and Peltier Lake was listed in 2002 for fish bioassessments. Based on a TMDL started in 2003, this listing was updated as a dissolved oxygen stressor on aquatic life in 2004. Wetlands Wetlands are habitats where water saturation is the primary controlling factor of the environment and associated plant and animal life. Wetlands occur between upland and aquatic environments where the water table is at or near the surface of the land, or where the land is covered by shallow water that may be up to six feet deep. The single feature that most wetlands share is soil or substrate that is at least periodically saturated with or covered by water. This saturation creates physiological conditions requiring special adaptations by plants and animals for life in an oxygen- deprived (anaerobic) environment. Lino Lakes' wetlands are widespread and these areas often help mitigate excess storm water runoff peak flows. Wetlands provide numerous direct benefits depending on the type of wetland and the season. Examples of such benefits are: Floodwater storage and retention. Snowmelt or storm water may be temporarily stored in wetlands. This, in turn, slows the rate of water outflow from the wetland compared to inflow to the wetland by extending lower outflow flow rates over a longer period of time. Nutrient assimilation. Wetland plants absorb nutrients during their growth and development that results in cleaner water leaving the wetland than came into it. Sediment entrapment. Sediments have time to settle out when the flow of water is slowed down, as previously described. Ground water recharge. Some wetlands collect and retain surface waters in ground water recharge areas. Low flow augmentation. A benefit of flow attenuation is that the steadier water outflow rates can reduce the impacts of short-term precipitation deficiencies in downstream rivers and streams. Shoreland anchoring and erosion control. Wetland vegetation can reduce shoreline and bank erosion by anchoring the soil from the forces of wave action. Fish and wildlife habitat. Many species of fish and wildlife spend part or all of their life cycle in wetland habitats used for breeding, feeding, cover protection, or brood rearing. City of Lino Lakes SWMP 1 February 8, 2013 Draft 130 • • • • • Aesthetics and recreation. This includes scenic value in urban and suburban environments. Wetlands also provide a place for people to observe nature. Hunters, birders, and fisherman frequent wetlands. Education. Wetlands provide an outdoor classroom for learning. A number of comprehensive wetland studies have been conducted to guide the management of wetlands and their benefits within Lino Lakes. The two key studies are the Lino Lakes Special Area Management Plan (SAMP, 2010) and the Lino Lakes Resource Management Plan (RMP, 2008). These two studies provide the foundation for the management of wetlands, surface water, floodplains, and greenway resources within the City of Lino Lakes. The SAMP and RMP establish Resource Management Units and standards to support the wetland resources of the City under future development in a manner that integrates with floodplain management, stormwater management, and greenway management. A few key points from the plans are highlighted below: The City's wetlands may be impacted by nutrient loading, however, standards for assessing nutrient impairment of wetlands have not yet been fully established by federal or state agencies. Nutrient load modeling developed for the TMDL projects generated qualitative ranking of subcatchment nutrient loading (high, medium, or low). The results of the vegetation quality ranking and nutrient ranking are shown in Figure 13. There is no relationship between vegetation quality and catchment phosphorus loading. The phosphorus loading may be indirectly related to the vegetative quality. The loading information is useful for setting priorities on protecting wetland condition in Lino Lakes. It is important to know which areas are under the greatest stress from nutrient loading, because even without a direct relationship between vegetative integrity and phosphorus, the wetland stressors may be indirectly related to phosphorus loading. Any wetland restoration plan, regardless of location, examines the contributing catchments for their specific loading (both nitrogen and phosphorus), the loading sources, and the vegetation quality. The City contains numerous fully and partially drained wetlands that provide the greatest opportunity for wetland restoration activities. Wetland restoration projects function to retain and treat stormwater and at the same time enhance natural resources, all of which were determined to be of highest priority for the citizens of Lino Lakes according to a wetland values survey. As specified by the Minnesota Routine Assessment Methodology (MNRAM), the factors evaluated when considering a wetland for restoration include the number of nearby wetlands, hydrologic restoration potential without flooding structures, number of landowners involved, size, potential for a naturalized buffer, and restoration design complexity. Wetlands ranked high and medium are considered high priority for restoration (Figure 14, also see Appendix A, RMP, Figure 9 — Partially Drained or Impaired Wetlands). Local wetland values such as Lino Lakes' interest in Tamarack Swamp restoration was also used in the evaluation. City of Lino Lakes SWMP I February 8, 2013 Draft 1 31 6106107 0 3,000 Feet I 1 t I Legend in Lino Lakes y Lakes 10P8 Model Area Major Roads duality of Vegetation Subwatershed Nutrient Loading Value if'4, High (331) We High Medium (332) Medium INII Low (333) Low Scwsrs C fOR, RCWD, 1.1mesota Department d Transportatim "o R3 . Figure 13. Nutrient Loading to Wetlands [from SAMP] City of Lino Lakes SWMP 1 February 8, 2013 Draft 1 32 • • • 6106,07 0 3,000 Feet I 1 1 I Legend C (Lino Lakes Lakes Major Roads Restoration Potential High Medium Low 566.: 5012, RCWO, PWrerota DeprDrcnt d hansprteLbn ER ter: Figure 14. Wetland Restoration Potential based on MnRAM Evaluation [from SAMP] City of Lino Lakes SWMP 1 February 8; 2013 Draft 1 33 Floodplain Figure 15 shows the areas identified within the 100 -year flood zone according to the National Flood Insurance Program maps dated May 17, 1982. The City has a Floodplain Ordinance in accordance with Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA) and Department of Natural Resources (DNR) requirements to minimize potential losses due to periodic flooding along these areas. FEMA is currently updating the Flood Insurance Rate Maps for the Lino Lakes area. Hydrologic and hydraulic modeling has been conducted throughout the City for many previous efforts (Appendix A). The most recent and detailed modeling is occurring in 2012 by RCWD. This updated hydrologic and hydraulic model was provided to FEMA to assist in floodplain studies. A previous XP- SWMM (Storm Water Management Model) model update was completed in 2007 in support of the Lino Lakes Resource Management Plan (RMP). This model is capable of completing multi -year continuous simulation for the years 1999 -2003 or event simulation depending on the needs of the user. Most ponds, water bodies, and wetlands within Lino Lakes have been explicitly modeled as a live storage volume with an outlet allowing a high resolution of results and analysis. The hydrologic inputs to the model were based on 2 -foot contours, satellite -based estimation of impervious surface area and Green -Ampt infiltration methodology. The majority of the channels and ponds were surveyed with some use of as- built drawings on newer developments. Upstream inputs from major tributaries were input directly into the XP -SWMM model using the regional HydroCAD model for event based simulations and a water balance approach for continuous simulation for the years 1999 -2003. The model can be used for the simulation of any synthetic rainfall/runoff event up to the 100 -year 24 -hour event. Larger events are possible but have not been tested. The RMP identifies specific areas of flooding concern under a full buildout scenario and implementation of RMP 2.8 -inch infiltration standards. The study identified areas where the road would be overtopped, where less than 1 foot of freeboard is expected, and where a pond overflows under a 100 -year event (Figure 16). In addition, the RMP identifies flooding concerns by Resource Management Unit (Table 5). City of Lino Lakes SWMP 1 February 8, 2013 Draft 1 34 • • EOM ecologi, c o m m units Legend 1:7:I _ I Lino Lakes [/' .) 100yr Floodptain County ZrA 500yr Floodplain Stream Lake Figure 15. FEMA Floodplain • Lino Lakes Storm Water Management Plan FEMA Floodplain O Miles o City of Lino Lakes SWMP 1 February 8, 2013 Draft 1 35 Table 5. Summary of Flooding Concerns by Resource Management Unit \ §.. CO Load- ing EP k k @ 2 k k 8 ou no 1 2 ves 1 k . .. 2/ X. 0. @ 2 - k ou - 2 @ S no S ou 4. Land Use ■ ƒ » \ _ urban urban to § J : urban tii ad / § / § / § / k \ V } % Q # } a a \ \ urban (Centerville): niral \ urban (Centerville): viral urban (Centerville) and rural urban and rural urban and rural 1 / 1 2 e f \\ a. @: § § \ & .\ § 1\ E. g 2 Q § Partially Drained Wetlands ves ou ves — Ditch 47 and Ditch 55 0 ves Ditch 72 _ 54 0 k ou 0 no 2 2 @ R Flood- ing ou 8 w G y \ v 2 no 2 { % Endpoint of Concern 3 ves k 2 k k sa. R § ves @ 2 k = w Conveyance Endpoint { Peltier Lake Cleinwater Creek /Peltier Lake 0 et \ } a Centerville wetlands and lake George Watch groundwater - supported wetlands and lake Marshan wetlands and lake Reshanau wetlands or lake Groundwater - supported wetlands and Rice wetlands and lake Baldwin wetlands Shernuan Lake and high priority wetlands Amelia Lake and high priority wetlands High priority wetlands Constructed Conveyance k / None. Natural Channel Ditch and pipe None or private ditch Pipe and pond: ditch and pipe. private ditch k 7 41 a Pipe and pond: private ditch K " 8 C) \ 41 21 ƒ$ a. Pipe 41 a 41 a None pipe Upper Rice Creek Hardwood Creek Clearwater Creek ' Ditch 55 Rondeau $ \P 4.. \ George Watch Marshan Ditch 10 -22 -32 ■ © f k A7 c 2 . 2 k Middle Rice Creek • • Legend Resource Management Unit Sensitive Water Level Points Catchments Road Overtops Municipal Boundary $ Less Than 1' Freeboard on Road Pond Overtops Under 100 -Year Flood Event • • • 0 0.25 0.5 1 Miles l i i i l i i i EOR, RCWO, Cia lakes, h6V ONR romuNs Rt'OI HtE Figure 16. Points of Flooding Concern identified in Lino Lakes RMP (2008) [from Lino Lakes RMP] City of Lino Lakes SWMP 1 February 8. 2013 Draft 1 37 3.9. Stormwater Management System Hydrologic boundaries do not stop at the municipal borders and orderly coordination between related municipalities is addressed in the Lino Lakes Resource Management Plan (RMP). Hydrologic boundary based, Resource Management Units (RMU) identified in the RMP are the basis for neighbor community coordination of shared water resources. The hydrologic modeling encompasses true watershed catchments even where the boundaries are outside the municipal boundaries. The modeling covers small portions of land area within North Oaks, Hugo, and Blaine, as well as all of Centerville. Ditches The State of Minnesota has established a set of rules to provide an opportunity for individual landowners to obtain drainage and to minimize the effects to downstream landowners. There are a variety of County Ditches (Nos. 8, 10, 22, 25, 32, 47, and 55) and one Judicial Ditch (No. 3) that run through the City. Both County and Judical Ditches are managed the same way. The naming is different because the systems were established under different protocols. The majority of the drainage system was constructed during the late 1800's and early 1900's. Over the decades, much of the system was minimally maintained by different ditch authorities. Today, many ditches function as straightened creeks within a partially or marginally drained wetland slough or riparian corridor. The major public ditch systems in Lino Lakes are: • Anoka County Ditch (ACD) 10 -22 -32 • ACD 25 • ACD 55 • ACD 72 Counties have authority for managing drainage systems (under Minnesota Statute §106A) within a County, or a Joint County Drainage Authority for drainage systems that are within two or more counties. Counties have the option to delegate authority over drainage systems to watershed districts, where they exist. Counties, when acting as the drainage authority, may establish, improve or repair drainage systems and similar activities related to drainage. However, these authorities are regulated by a variety of Federal and State agencies. In Lino Lakes, Anoka and Ramsey Counties have delegated the jurisdiction over all public ditches to the Rice Creek Watershed District (RCWD). Thus, the RCWD is the ditch authority for the purposes of implementing Minnesota Statute §103E (Drainage Law). The VLAWMO is a ditch authority for Ramsey County Ditches 13 and 14, however, the VLAWMO manages the ditch system as a stormwater system under Minnesota Statute § 103B.227, subdivision 7, not as a ditch system under Minnesota Statute §103E. There are three different types of drainage projects: establishment, improvements and repairs. An establishment refers to the original construction of the drainage ditch. An improvement will institute a change from the original construction, which usually means expanding the ditches' capacity. Repairs are intended to maintain a drainage ditch to its original construction or as subsequently improved. State law has established extensive procedures to manage these activities. Projects are begun by a petition brought forward by landowners wishing either a ditch be established, improved or repaired. Counties can initiate repairs if an inspection reveals that work is necessary. State law requires an annual inspection of each drainage system, public hearings, appointing of "viewers" to determine benefits and damages of the proposed project, and engineering reports. City of Lino Lakes SWMP 1 February 8, 2013 Draft 1 38 • • • If the project is determined to be feasible and to have greater benefits than damages, it can be allowed to proceed to construction. The costs of the project are assessed to landowners, within the drainage area of the ditch, who are determined to benefit from the project. The public ditch systems are an integral part of the RMP, and the RMP serves as the ditch repair alternative for each system. Updated ditch maps and system data were developed based on field surveys and historic records (see Appendix A, RMP, Figure 3). Profile and repair reports have been completed for all of these ditch systems, and the Resource Management Unit (RMU) recommendations integrate ditch repair implementation projects. Stormsewer and Stormwater Treatment Features The City's stormsewer network and catalogued treatment devices and structures, as available in GIS, are included in the summary map for reference. The City is also actively updating their infrastructure database and will be adding information, such as pond normal water levels (NWL) and high water levels (HWL) in the future, but was not comprehensively available at this time. The RCWD also has hydrologic and hydraulic information available for the system and should be contacted if that information is needed. The numbering system and level of resolution of the RCWD data and modeling was not consistent with City information, so the RCWD information should be obtained directly from the RCWD. City of Lino Lakes SWMP I February 8, 2013 Draft 139 1 Ditch 10 -22 -32 Centerville Shtan Ditch 8 112108 0 3.000 Feet 11 Legend i JRMP Boundary —Ditch 8 Clearwater Creek Drainage Area Lakes Ditch 72 Hardwood Creek Drainage Area Major Roads Ditch 47 Ditch 10 -22 -32 Drainage Area Clearwater Creek Ditch 25 NI Ditch 8 Drainage Area - Hardwood Creek Ditch 10 -22 -32 MS Peltier Lake Drainage Area — Rice Creek Ditch 55 Ditch 25 Drainage Area ouoiceS ECR, RCWD, Minnesota Deamenent (Tansportaf"on Ass e Ule 01710 ..0 •am Figure 17. Ditch Systems in the City of Lino Lakes [from SAMP] City of Lino Lakes SWMP 1 February 8, 2013 Draft 140 • • • 3.10. Land Use • The City of Lino Lakes Comprehensive Plan outlines existing and planned future land use for the City. The Comprehensive Plan indicates that the City anticipates growth in upcoming years. The expected growth has the potential to impact water and natural resources within the City. The City has anticipated these changes and developed the Lino Lakes Special Area Management Plan (SAMP) (2010) and the Lino Lakes Resource Management Plan (RMP) to evaluate and respond to the changes. The Land Use Plan additionally incorporates the City's Parks, and the Natural Open Space /Greenways and Trail System Plan to manage and protect community resources. • • Growth in Lino Lakes is shaped by a variety of community features, including the Rice Creek Chain of Lakes Regional Park Reserve, Interstates I -35W and 1 -35E, regional sewer interceptors, and an abundance of wetlands and other natural resource areas scattered throughout the City. The Rice Creek Chain of Lakes Regional Park Reserve runs the entire length of the City, from the southwest to the northeast corner. This area provides important ecological and recreational benefits to the community. However; it also divides the City in half. Connectivity between the eastern and western areas of the City is an issue. The park reserve will shape growth, as it represents a large portion of the City's land area that will be permanently preserved as open space. Additionally, because the park reserve divides the City in two halves, development patterns and growth pressure may differ on either side of the park reserve. In addition to the park reserve, the presence of Interstates I -35W and I -35E will also affect the City's growth, as demand for available commercial and industrial land with convenient transportation access increases. In particular, a potential future interchange on I -35E will facilitate development in the northeast quadrant of the City. Growth in Lino Lakes will also be shaped by the location of regional sewer interceptors. The City contains three general growth areas based on sewer interceptors in the northwest, northeast, and southern half of the City. Development patterns extend from each growth area. Lastly, the large number of wetlands within the City will shape growth by limiting the amount of developable land within the City. Protection and management of these resources was a critical component of the comprehensive plan process. The Comprehensive Plan provides additional background information on the development of the Land Use Plan. Existing Land Use As summarized in the Comprehensive Plan, Lino Lakes contains a variety of uses including several business parks and commercial areas, large agricultural tracts, suburban and rural residential development, the Town Center, and a large park reserve. The City also contains many wetlands and upland natural areas distributed across the City, and the Rice Creek Chain of Lakes. Despite its proximity to the Minneapolis -St. Paul Central Business District and the presence of two interstate highways, the City maintains a vast amount of agriculture and rural areas. Nearly 50 percent of the City's existing land use consists of agriculture or rural residential areas. These areas will capture a majority of new growth in the City, and have been guided in the future land use plan to accommodate future development. The existing land uses in the City are displayed in Figure 18. City of Lino Lakes SWMP 1 February 8, 2013 Draft 1 41 11J8111; t ul ••. _■ / 11.7••••••• A1111 a1t11111111111110110p ,1 '.IIIIIIIIIIII\� �1i %Xh St F 140 1 El e"— a� Rice iy Lake • • Marshan Lake Rice Creek Chain of Lakes Regional Park Reserve 1 1 r 1 1 r r • r 1 11 1 1 ♦t a t 1 i a1 1 1� r I Reshanau • City of Centerville a t♦ ^r ♦ t ♦ i Baldwin Lake Centerville Lake 54 1 r Lake 1 a 1 I Birch St. 1•_.__ Otter Lake 2006 Existing Land Use City of Lino Lakes 2030 Comprehensive Plan L,] Municipal Boundary j 7MUSABoundary 1 Agricultural Rural Residential Single Family Residential Multi- Family Residential ® Commercial Industrial 4,000 0 4,0001 County Park & Recreation Feet I City Park & Recreation Figure 18. Existing Land Use [from Comprehensive Plan] Open Space/Conservation MO Public/Semi - Public [_ Airport Vacant Rural Residential Vacant Residential P.W. Vacant Commercial Vacant Industrial I Right- of-Way 1 Open Water C I r o f IN I KIS April 21, 2008 Prepxeo by aorestroo KPacR.eWorkG tSserve W 0(686-06001-0 I,nofaY.escomplenalu mnd City of Lino Lakes SWMP 1 February 8, 2013 Draft 1 42 • • • Future Land Use Lino Lakes is expected to add a significant number of households by 2030. As part of the metropolitan region, the City is required to accommodate a portion of the region's forecasted growth. As Lino Lakes grows, it is anticipated that development patterns will change in many areas of the City. As summarized in the Comprehensive Plan, a key component of developing the future land use plan was analysis of a wide variety of natural resource information. This included the location of high priority wetlands and other natural resource areas, drainage patterns, and soil suitability information, to identify environmentally sensitive areas and areas most suitable for development. This natural resource information was used to guide decisions regarding future land uses and intensities in Lino Lakes. Based on the development suitability information, a full build -out future land use plan was developed (Figure 19). The Metropolitan Council requires that communities plan for growth up to 2030 in their current comprehensive plans. Areas that will not be developed until after 2030 are designated on the 2030 future land use map as Urban Reserve (Figure 20). Although the 2030 Future Land Use Plan (Figure 20) will serve as the City's official Future Land Use Plan to regulate future development, the full build -out plan is also provided for reference to guide future land use decisions regarding 2030 Urban Reserve areas. The City's goals and strategies relating to natural resources were also considered throughout the development of the plan. Providing for higher density uses on some sites with scenic natural amenities such as wetland areas or along the shores of Peltier Lake also promotes accessibility to key community features and natural amenities, which is another community goal, for residents of higher density housing. Identifying higher density options in these areas also addresses the community's goal and related strategies to sustain Lino Lakes' natural resources by promoting more flexible development in these areas. Accommodating higher density in these areas provides for more site plan flexibility, as development can be concentrated on areas of the site more suitable for development while environmental features are preserved as open space. As Lino Lakes develops, protection of its valuable natural resources will continue to play an important role in guiding growth and shaping future development. Growth and economic development objectives should be balanced with managing natural resource systems. Natural resource protection strategies are also an essential component of a growth management plan to ensure that the community's resources are preserved. The City has several tools to protect natural areas while also managing future growth. These tools are further outlined in the Comprehensive Plan and include Parks, Natural Open Space, and Trail System Plan (2004), Rare Wildlife and Plant Habitat Models, Suitability Analysis, Handbook for Environmental Planning and Conservation Development (published in December 1999), Planned Unit Development (PUD) to promote Low Impact Design/Conservation Development Principles, Ordinances, Rice Creek Watershed District Lino Lakes Resource Management Plan. Additional information on Future Land Use is available in the City of Lino Lakes Comprehensive Plan. City of Lino Lakes SWMP 1 February 8, 2013 Draft 1 43 Full Build Out Future Land Use Map City of Lino Lakes 2030 Comprehensive Plan 4,000 0 4,000 11 .Municipal Boundary Permanent Rural Low Density Residential Medium Density Residential ® High Density Residential =Commercial Feet Mixed Use III Industrial Civic/Institutional Park/Open Space Private Airfield Right -of -Way Open Water Figure 19. Full Build Out Future Land Use [from Comprehensive Plan] June 10, 2009 Prepared by Pennine K tecMewak hservEr 65660EV01-0 IlnolakesromplaMUll build out mad City of Lino Lakes SWMP 1 February 8, 2013 Draft! 44 • • • • • p ~ It /Ir,it4 V l l-' �•- /111 !rN/;��I 4 4. �..l.i'. Iu 1 ► 5atiallo 0`?,< Peltier F5 Lake ev City of Centerville Rice Creek Chain of Lakes Regional Park Reserve 2030 Future Land Use Map City of Lino Lakes 2030 Comprehensive Plan N 4,000 0 I= Municipal Boundary Nib Mixed Use Permanent Rural IM Industrial Urban Reserve IIIII Civic/Institutional Low Density Residential Park/Open Space Medium Density Residential Private Airfield 4,000 ® High Density Residential Right - of-Way I Feet i1♦ Commercial Open Water Figure 20. 2030 Future Land Use [from Comprehensive Plan] Otter Lake C I T O F LNQL KES April 21, 2009 Prepared by Borestroo K /acbveworkG,sener/mo56GO6001 -O llrolakescomplaN3030fl, ,mo City of Lino Lakes SWMP 1 February 8, 2013 Draft 45 3.11. Unique Natural Features Biological Resource The City's Biological Resources are primarily a function of its lakes and natural habitat areas, much of which is located within its parks. Beginning in 1945, a colony of hundreds of great blue herons nested on Rice Lake, south of Lake Peltier. These birds were displaced in the early 1990s by residential development and the opening of a nearby golf course. A second heron colony inhabited Howard Lake, north of Lake Peltier, and once numbered 550 nests. The Howard Lake colony suffered severe losses during a wind storm in 1987, which downed nest trees and killed many young birds. The colony never recovered from the storm's devastation and has since relocated to Lake Peltier. Before 1998 there was an estimated 1100 nests with 1000 to 2000 birds (great blue herons, night herons and great white egrets) or more on Peltier island. The Black- crowned night herons left in 1998. During 2000 and 2001 there was total abandonment of nests of all species on the island. In 2002 a slow no -wake zone was established around the island. In 2004 Andy Von Duyke under the Conservation Biology Graduate Program at the University of Minnesota studied the island rookery through 2004. Conclusions were that the island rookery was heavily predated by raccoons. Citizen volunteers and the City of Lino Lakes have been monitoring the rookery since then and are using tree flashing on nesting trees to keep the raccoons from predating the nests. This seems to be successful. The colony is slowly recovering and in 2011 City staff counted about 57 nests and also observed great white egrets. A research project published by Custer and Galli in 20021, concludes that 47% of the great blue herons nesting in the rookery utilize Peltier Lake for food foraging and most herons travel distances less than 10 miles. Great white egrets tend to travel slightly farther distances and prefer less wet habitat for foraging than do the great blue herons. The area's mix of plant community types provides diverse habitat for amphibians, reptiles, and mammals as well as numerous species of birds found in multiple habitat niches. The most recent known bird surveys conducted in the mid 1970's for Lino Lakes and Anoka County documented well over 200 species occurring in the immediate vicinity. The shoreline and shallows north of the island serve as a spawning area for Northern pike and walleye, and as a resting area for terns, black crown night herons, and other waterfowl. The north arm of the lake is one of the few remaining places in the metro area with healthy native vegetation, including water willow, which is considered a species of special concern. The City has a notable number of rare biological resources. See Table 6 below. As the Resource Management Plan (RMP) was developed, these rare features and habitats that support rare species were prioritized for protection and incorporation into the Wetland Preservation Corridor. These important natural resource areas were carried forward into the 2030 Comprehensive Plan and identified as part of the Multi - Functional Greenway Corridor. In general the rare plant species are found along the upland - wetland transitional zones. Extensive botanical survey work has occurred within the City to document locations of these rare plant species. The City has also invested resources in identifying and protecting Blanding's turtle habitat. The critical habitat areas were identified and incorporated into the Wetland Preservation Corridor and Greenway Corridor. 1 Custer and Galli. 2002. Feeding Habitat Selection by Great Blue Herons and Great White Egrets Nesting in East Central Minnesota, Waterbirds 25(1): 115 -124, City of Lino Lakes SWMP 1 February 8, 2013 Draft 146 • • Emydoidea blandingii Blanding's Turtle 10 Table 6. Documented Rare Features in Lino Lakes Scientific Name Common Name Number of Records Plant Community Northern Poor Fen Class Tamarack Swamp (Southern) Type Plants Birds Northern Poor Fen 1 Tamarack Swamp (Southern) 2 Agalinis purpurea Purple Gerardia 4 Decodon verticillatus Waterwillow 1 Fimbristylis autumnalis Autumn Fimbristylis 5 Platanthera flava var. herbiola Tubercled Rein - orchid 1 Polygala cruciata Cross - leaved Milkwort 2 Potamogeton bicupulatus Snailseed Pondweed 1 Rotala ramosior Tooth -cup 3 Scirpus clintonii Clinton's Bulrush 1 Viola lanceolata Lance - leaved Violet 7 Xyris torta Twisted Yellow -eyed Grass 1 Bartramia longicauda Upland Sandpiper 1 Cygnus buccinator Trumpeter Swan 1 Grus canadensis Sandhill Crane 1 Haliaeetus leucocephalus Bald Eagle 7 Sterna forsteri Forster's Tern 4 Colonial Waterbird Nesting Area Colonial Waterbird Nesting Site 3 Reptiles Mammals Pipistrellus subflavus Eastern Pipistrelle 1 Presettlement Vegetation Native vegetation patterns of Lino Lakes were described at the time of Minnesota's Original Land Survey (circa 1850), and prior to European settlement of Minnesota. Native vegetation communities within the City prior to European settlement were primarily comprised of oak barrens and savannas, aspen/oak forests and woodlands, dry, mesic, and wet prairies, rich fens, poor fens, bogs, tamarack swamps, a network of shallow lakes and associated marshes, and inclusions of mesic hardwood forest (Figure 21). Large -scale natural processes dramatically influenced the formation, establishment, and succession of natural vegetation patterns and natural communities within the landscape over thousands of years prior to European settlement. These natural processes include: surface and sub - surface hydrology, flooding, drought, herbivory, wildlife migration, plant dispersal, plant community succession, and occasional to frequent wildfires. Over the past 150 years, the natural landscape and associated landscape processes have been widely altered to accommodate agricultural land uses, development, and other anthropocentric uses of the landscape. The original land survey of the Lino Lakes area was conducted in the middle 1800s. It provides good information about vegetation in and around the City of Lino Lakes prior to Euro - American settlement (U.S. General Land Office, 1853). Interpretation of surveyor's notes indicated the presence of floodplains along large lakes, wetlands, savannas, and mesic forests in protected lakeshores and on islands. City of Lino Lakes SWMP 1 February 8, 2013 Draft 1 47 Presett!ement Vegetation City of Lino Lakes, Minnesota and Surrounding Areas N [Miles 0 08 16 24 32 Piesettlement Vegetation Types MI Aspen. Oak Land oak Opening/ and Bann - Confer Bogs and Swamps - WetPraeie - Big Woodc [J Lakes (open water) Figure 21. Presettlement Vegetation [from Comprehensive Plan] March 12. 2007 City of Lino Lakes SWMP 1 February 8, 2013 Draft! 48 • • • • • • 3.12. Pollutant Sources Point Sources The Minnesota Pollution Control Agency (MPCA) is charged with regulating businesses that have applied for and received different types of environmental permits and registrations from the MPCA. The MPCA has also been tracking potentially contaminated sites since the early 1980s when major federal and state cleanup programs were created. Figure 22 depicts the locations of properties that have active environmental permits or have a record related to a potential environmental hazard. Data shown in Figure 23 is provided by the MPCA. Additional information of specific sites can be found through the "What's in My Neighborhood" feature on the MPCA website. Potential environmental hazards vary from properties where a spill or problem has already been cleaned up, to those currently being investigated or cleaned up. In addition, some sites depicted in Figure 22 have no record of known spills or problems; but rather mark locations where hazardous materials or wastes are used or generated. The most common types of sites in Lino Lakes are small to minimal quantity hazardous waste generators, multiple activity sites, and tank sites (Table 7). The following descriptions are intended to elucidate sites illustrated in Figure 22 and provide the description given by the MPCA for each site type listed in the figures legend. • CERCLIS: CERCLIS sites are places that are listed in the federal Comprehensive Environmental Response, Compensation and Liability Information System. This means that they are or were suspected of being contaminated. The CERCLIS database contains information on preliminary assessments, site inspections, and cleanup activities for these sites. After CERCLIS sites are investigated, they may be elevated to state or federal Superfund lists, or it may be determined that no action is necessary. • Superfund Projects: Superfund projects occur where known or suspected environmental contamination threatens public health, welfare or the environment. The Superfund Program identifies, investigates and determines appropriate cleanup plans for these sites. Superfund projects often occur at abandoned or uncontrolled sites, for instance, where the business that polluted a site no longer exists. Federal Superfund sites are on the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency's (EPA) National Priority List (NPL), while State Superfund sites are on Minnesota's Permanent List of Priorities (PLP). Minnesota Pollution Control Agency (MPCA) staff may work with EPA staff or other state agencies to investigate and clean up these sites. In Minnesota, sites which may have been contaminated by agricultural chemicals are managed by the Minnesota Department of Agriculture (MDA). • State Assessment Site: State Assessment sites are places that the Minnesota Pollution Control Agency (MPCA) Site Assessment staff have investigated because of suspected contamination. The sites investigated include abandoned industrial properties, small commercial businesses and publicly -owned land (note that petroleum - contaminated sites are investigated by MPCA Tanks and Leaks staff). These sites may be referred to the Site Assessment program by the Voluntary Investigation and Cleanup (VIC) program, the Petroleum Remediation program, Minnesota Duty Officer Reports or citizen complaints. Site Assessment staff do an initial assessment, and then determine if further action is needed. If a site poses a threat to human health or the environment, it is referred to CERCLIS, Superfund, RCRA Cleanup or VIC. • Unpermitted Dump Site: Unpermitted dump sites are landfills that never held a valid permit from the Minnesota Pollution Control Agency (MPCA). Generally, these dumps existed prior to the permitting program established with the creation of the MPCA in 1967. These dumps are not restricted to any type of waste, but were often old farm or municipal disposal sites that accepted household waste. State assessment staff have investigated many of these dump sites. City of Lino Lakes SWMP 1 February 8, 2013 Draft 1 49 • Voluntary Investigation & Cleanup (VIC) Site: The Voluntary Investigation and Cleanup (VIC) Program is a non - petroleum brownfield program. VIC provides technical assistance to buyers, sellers, developers or local governments seeking to voluntarily investigate or clean up contaminated land. Properties often enter the VIC program in preparation for sale, financing or redevelopment. Voluntary parties that complete investigation and / or cleanup activities under Minnesota Pollution Control Agency (MPCA) oversight can receive liability assurances that protect them from future Superfund liability. In some cases, the MPCA may use institutional controls as part of the overall site remedy and notify interested parties of any property use conditions or restrictions. • Landfill, Open: Open landfills are landfills that are still accepting waste. This includes facilities that accept household garbage, industrial waste, and debris from construction or demolition. The Minnesota Pollution Control Agency (MPCA) requires that landfills are designed to bury this garbage in a controlled manner and reduce potential impacts on the environment. Many landfills have wells installed so that groundwater can be monitored for any contaminants that might leak into the ground. • Landfill, Closed: Closed landfills are landfills that are no longer accepting waste. This includes landfills that are privately owned and managed, as well as those that are owned or managed by the Minnesota Pollution Control Agency (MPCA) and are part of the formal Closed Landfill Program. The Closed Landfill Program manages qualified closed landfills throughout Minnesota, and conducts cleanup work and maintenance at those sites. At some of these landfills, landfill gasses may be captured and used to create energy. • Landfill, Permitted by Rule: A landfill that is permitted by rule is not required to obtain an individual solid waste permit if it meets certain eligibility criteria. However, it must comply with waste management rules and regulations. Landfills may be permitted by rule if they have a small capacity and/or operate for a short period of time. Some yard waste composting facilities, recycling facilities and energy recovery facilities are also permitted by rule. • Contaminated Soil Treatment Facilities: Contaminated soil treatment facilities are places that the Minnesota Pollution Control Agency (MPCA) has approved or permitted to take petroleum - contaminated soils from leak sites and provide treatment through a number of different processes. The processes include thermal treatment (usually by roasting soils at high temperatures), composting, or thin- spreading soils and allowing natural microorganisms to biodegrade the petroleum. • Leak Site: Leak sites are locations where a release of petroleum products has occurred from a tank system. Leak sites can occur from aboveground or underground tank systems as well as from spills at tank facilities. A leak can result from an accident or from activities that occur over a long time. The Minnesota Pollution Control Agency (MPCA) Petroleum Remediation Program staff investigates potential leaks and work to minimize or clean up contamination at those sites. • Petroleum Brownfield: Petroleum Brownfield sites are places that may have been contaminated with petroleum due to a past or current leak. Minnesota Pollution Control Agency Petroleum Brownfields program staff assess the risk associated with petroleum contamination at these sites and then provide technical assistance to help get the site cleaned up, developed, and / or transferred to a new owner. • Tank Site: A tank site is a place with an underground or aboveground storage tank of a certain size on the premises. One tank site may have multiple tanks, and these tanks may contain food products, petroleum products, or other substances. Tank sites include gas stations, bus companies and trucking companies, as well as factories that process sugar beets, ethanol, pulp and paper, or chemicals. The Minnesota Pollution Control Agency (MPCA) requires monitoring and City of Lino Lakes SWMP 1 February 8, 2013 Draft 1 50 maintenance at these sites, which helps to ensure that tanks do not cause environmental contamination. • Industrial Stormwater Permit: At industrial sites such as factories, salvage yards and airports, stormwater may come into contact with harmful pollutants, including toxic metals, oil, grease, de- icing salts and other chemicals. Industrial stormwater permits are designed to limit the amount of these contaminants that reaches surface water and groundwater, by requiring good practices for storing and handling materials. Facilities with these permits must prepare a Stormwater Pollution Prevention Plan, detailing the practices they will use to limit stormwater pollution. • Wastewater Dischargers: A wastewater discharger is a facility that generates or treats wastewater for discharge onto land or into water. Wastewater dischargers include sewage treatment plants, as well as ships with ballast water permits, and some manufacturers. Minnesota Pollution Control Agency (MPCA) permits may require treatment and monitoring, and limit the amount of contaminants that a facility can release into the environment. Wastewater permits may be classified as SDS or NPDES /SDS. SDS stands for State Disposal System, and indicates that the facility needs to follow Minnesota rules and regulations for wastewater. NPDES is the National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System, and indicates that the facility is also subject to the regulations of the federal Clean Water Act. • Feedlots: Feedlots may be small farms or large -scale commercial livestock operations. They are places where animals are confined for feeding, breeding or holding. The Minnesota Pollution Control Agency (MPCA) and its county partners place requirements on how manure is managed at feedlots, so that it does not contaminate nearby surface water and groundwater. Most feedlots in Minnesota are only required to register with the MPCA, but larger feedlots may be required to obtain a National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System (NPDES) permit. This means that they must submit plans for how they will reduce their impact on the environment, including their plans to manage manure and control air pollution from the feedlot. • Hazardous Waste, LQG: A large quantity generator (LQG) is a facility that generates at least 1,000 kilograms (2,200 pounds) of hazardous waste or 1 kilogram (2.2 pounds) of acutely hazardous waste per calendar month. A Minnesota Pollution Control Agency (MPCA) permit is not required for a large quantity generator, but the facility must have a current hazardous waste license. This means that they must tell the MPCA what kinds of waste they generate, how much waste they generate, and how they dispose of the waste. • Hazardous Waste, Small to Minimal Quantity Generator: A small to minimal quantity generator is a facility that generates less than 1,000 kilograms (2,200 pounds) of hazardous waste or 1 kilogram (2.2 pounds) of acutely hazardous waste per calendar month. These facilities have less stringent rules than large quantity generators. This group includes Small Quantity Generators (SQGs), which produce 100 - 1000 kg of hazardous waste per month; Very Small Quantity Generators (VSQGs), which produce less than 100 kg of hazardous waste per month; and Conditionally Exempt Generators, which produce less than 100 kg or 10 gallons of hazardous waste per year. Like large quantity generators, SQGs and VSQGs must have current hazardous waste licenses. • Multiple Activities: Multiple Activity sites are locations where there are multiple Minnesota Pollution Control Agency (MPCA) activities occurring. These sites vary from facilities with a wastewater permit and an air quality permit to cleanup sites with more than one permit. City of Lino Lakes SWMP 1 February 8, 2013 Draft 1 51 Table 7. Number of Potential Environmental Hazard Sites in City of Lino Lakes Site Type Hazardous Waste, Small to Minimal QG Number in City 62 Multiple Activities 31 Tank Site 14 Leak Site 3 Industrial Stormwater Permit 2 Unpermitted Dump Site 2 Voluntary Investigation & Cleanup (VIC) 2 Landfill, Permitted By Rule 1 City of Lino Lakes SWMP ( February 8, 2013 Draft 1 52 • • • • O • EOM .�m y InGatrge ,..w..mn SJ Gus.. w... LOG w,.. t mow.• i.rmmM Fw • llp.mnNtl Dump 9n. pwmay 17aga..n w wct E. w.,.... , Desetsvor Figure 22. Potential Environmental Hazards • Lino Lakes Storm Water Management Plan Environmental Hazards G Miles City of Lino Lakes SWMP 1 February 8, 2013 Draft; 53 Nonpoint Sources Nonpoint source pollution is caused by rainfall or snowmelt moving over and through the ground. Runoff picks up and carries away natural and human -made pollutants, fmally depositing them into lakes, rivers, wetlands, coastal waters and ground waters. Because of the nutrient (phosphorus) impairments of the Chain of Lakes, phosphorus is the most important nonpoint source pollutant in Lino Lakes. Figure 23 shows the phosphorus loading by subwatershed for existing conditions (2005) and a Full Build -out Scenario (FBO) in Lino Lakes as modeled for the Lino Lakes Resource Management Plan (RMP) using PLOAD (pollutant loading model). PLOAD uses a combination of precipitation and anticipated runoff from the land cover by subwatershed to approximate the volume of water delivered to the waterbody in question. A gridded surface was developed in a Geographic Information System (GIS) based on the MN Hydrology Guide (SCS, 1992) to determine the annual precipitation, evaporation, and runoff by watershed. Each land use was assigned an event mean concentration (EMC), which serves to estimate the loading rate of phosphorus from runoff. Using this data, the total phosphorus loading by subwatershed can be estimated. Additionally, the Rice Creek Watershed District (RCWD) has created a P8 (Program for Predicting Polluting Particle Passage through Pits, Puddles and Ponds) model for the entire City. This model was created during the development of the Lino Lakes Resource Management Plan (RMP) and contains a great deal more detail than the PLOAD model. This model was used to assess nutrient loading to wetlands (Figure 13) and for the Lino Lakes Chain of Lakes Nutrient TMDL (Figure 24). This model could also be used to evaluate future water quality projects and development. P8 model inputs are defined by a series of watersheds and devices that can be used to describe ponds, infiltration basins and other BMPs. Watershed areas, imperviousness and curve numbers in the P8 model were defined based on the XP -SWMM Hydrologic and Hydraulic model created in 2007 for the RMP (see also Floodplain portion of Section 3.8). Additionally, device inputs such as storage and outlet configurations were created from data in the XP -SWMM model. Future water quality modeling efforts should utilize the P8 model to the greatest extent possible. The current total phosphorus budgets for the Chain of Lakes are identified in the Lino Lakes Chain of Lakes Nutrient TMDL (Draft, in process). The draft report includes phosphorus budgets that are based on an average of the data for growing seasons for 2002 -2004. City of Lino Lakes SWMP 1 February 8, 2013 Draft 54 TP Loan (: 539 {l Existing: 539 FBO: 619 j • • TP 1_0,1 Existinq 146/ 1 f80 '1623 TP Load llbs y'! Existing. 65 F60 10' TP Load (Ibstyr) Existing: 400 FBO: 446 e /tle1 23 12 — 1 r —� L &06107 TP Load (Ibs/yr) Existing: 197 FBO: 203 Rice Reshanau Wards TP Load (ibs'y, Existing: 699 FBO 1211 34 TP Load (lbslyrl Existing: 119 FBO: 120 TP Load (Ibslyr) Existing: 155 FBO 163 TP Load (Ibs/yr} Existing: 95 650 102 0 3,000 Feet 1 1 1 1 Legend _ RMP Boundary Lakes Major Roads Major Drainage Area Ss P EOR,, RCWD, 14tinck Mnnesota Department ,` cY Transpirtab n eF • Figure 23. Subwatershed phosphorus loading from major drainage areas as calculated in PLOAD. [Reproduced from LL RMP] City of Lino Lakes SWMP I February 8, 2013 Draft 155 A?nosp1e-• 0'31ndge ATE [ _Wear. _a,es NM rie-ra Legend RCWD Legal Boundary t' Municipal and Township Boundary e3 Watershed Boundaries Wetlands Phosphorus Loading Rate (Ibsiac -yri • 0.00 - 0.25 K 0.20 - 0.50 K 0.51 -0.75 gis 0.78 - 1.0o • 1.01 -2.00 3.000 1.`_•, o 3 tip:: Feet RICE CREEK WATERSHED DISTRICT Phosphorus Load rsg Rates - .111Wevick r Art3_43se: r_ SEM Pc.1t• C.eetl =ereer nnera+eny:^se: meat mm-. Ah 5i:”.3342E MA 2008 MA) Figure 24. Subwatershed phosphorus loading from major drainage areas as calculated in P8. [from Lino Lakes Chain of Lakes Draft TMDL] City of Lino Lakes SWMP 1 February 8, 2013 Draft 1 56 • • • 3.13. Water Resource Related Agreements The Cities of Lino Lakes and Centerville have entered into a Joint Powers Agreement for regulating water for which the two Cities have jointly adopted and enforce ordinance requirements. 4.0 Identified Issues, Goals and Policies Issues, goals and policies were developed for this Plan through a process of compiling issues and goals identified in plans and studies previously completed by the City and other local agencies. Primary sources of information were the previous Surface Water Management Plan, the City's Comprehensive Plan, resource management plans, and watershed management plans of the Rice Creek Watershed District and Vadnais Lake Area Watershed Management Organization. The compiled goals and policies were refined by city staff and consultants for review by the City of Lino Lakes Environmental Board (whose purpose is to advise the city council in the use and management of its natural resources). Issues, goals and policies have been identified under the following categories: 4.1 Water Rate & Quantity 4.2 Water Quality 4.3 Wetland Management 4.4 Floodplain Management 4.5 Public Ditch System • 4.6 Groundwater Management 4.7 Natural Resources 4.8 Erosion and Sediment Control 4.9 Regulations, Permitting and Reporting 4.10 Monitoring, Maintenance and Inspection 4.11 Public Participation, Information and Education 4.12 Financing 4.1. Water Rate & Quantity Issues Within the City of Lino Lakes, streams, lakes, and wetlands have been subjected to increased surface water runoff rates and volumes. Increased discharge rates and volumes have caused serious down - cutting and stream bank erosion in some areas. Increased runoff rates and volumes also contribute to flooding concerns and water quality concerns. These issues are likely to intensify in the future. The Metropolitan Council prepared and adopted a regional growth strategy that anticipates further urbanization of the City. In addition, transportation improvements in or near the City will facilitate and precipitate urbanization. Without mitigation, the inevitable impacts will be increased volume and increased peak flows of surface water runoff. Sediment loads, and with it pollutants and contaminants, would also increase. City of Lino Lakes SWMP 1 February 8, 2013 Draft 1 57 Goals & Policies Goal 4.1.1: Use the natural characteristics of the City's watersheds in combination with development standards and projects, to reduce present and future runoff rates and volumes (see also Natural Resources and Wetlands goals and policies). Policy 4.1.1A: Continue to enforce standards for storm water runoff quantity from new and re- developments consistent with RCWD, VLAWMO and NPDES Phase II requirements. The City is entirely within the legal jurisdiction of RCWD and VLAWMO, which have water resource permitting programs. The City will remain under RCWD and VLAWMO permitting jurisdiction. The City will coordinate its NPDES Phase II responsibility with the RCWD and VLAWMO permitting programs while understanding that ultimate responsibility for implementation of such a program remains with the City. Policy 4.1.1B: Implement volume control practices to address areas of identified rate and volume concern. Policy 4.1.1C: Support implementation of the RCWD program allowing banking of stormwater volume credits. Policy 4.1.1 D: Recognize the potential uncertainty associated with managing water resources and understand the implications of emerging issues including climate change, and use Adaptive Management when appropriate. Policy 4.1.1E: Promote "Better Site Design" development techniques in developing and redeveloping areas to minimize runoff volumes. Policy 4.1.1F: Promote the use of agricultural conservation and management practices to reduce the rate and volume of runoff. Policy 4.1.1 G: Promote the use of regional Best Management Practices where appropriate to reduce the rate and volume of runoff. 4.2. Water Quality Issues Current data indicate that water bodies located within the City have water quality issues. Several City lakes, such as Bald Eagle, Peltier, George Watch, Marshan and Centerville, Reshanau, Baldwin and Rice Lakes are included in the MPCA's impaired waters list. In addition, both Clearwater and Hardwood Creeks are also included on the 303(d) TMDL list due to biotic impairments. Runoff carrying nutrient -rich sediment, road salts, and hydrocarbon -based contaminants is detrimental to the water quality of the City's lakes, streams, rivers, and wetlands. Current water quality conditions present a potential stress to the diversity and population of fish and aquatic invertebrates and impact human uses of the resources. Improvement of these waters will require a watershed wide solution because in many cases much of the drainage area originates upstream of the City. Additionally it has been found that internal loading sources of phosphorus derived from the lake bed sediments in Peltier Lake are affecting the water quality of downstream water bodies. City of Lino Lakes SWMP I February 8, 2013 Draft 1 58 Goals & Policies • Goal 4.2.1: Protect and improve water quality and the scenic and ecologic values of City lakes, wetlands and other aquatic assets (see also Natural Resources and Wetlands goals and policies). Policy 4.2.1A: Encourage "Better Site Design" development techniques in developing and redeveloping areas to maintain water quality. Policy 4.2.1B: Develop specific management plans for each Resource Management Unit as necessary recognizing varying ecological, physical and cultural differences between each Resource Management Unit. Policy 4.2.1 C: Establish a surface water management system consistent with the Resource Management Plans. Policy 4.2.1D: Apply the Resource Management Unit recommendations from the RMP to meet RMP goals for aquatic resource protection and management. Policy 4.2.1 E: Preserve and improve the recreational resources associated with water. Policy 4.2.1F: Continue to enforce City water standards for storm water runoff quality from new and re- developments. Policy 4.2.1G: Incorporate TMDL limits, when determined, into the City's Surface Water Management requirements to reduce degradation and improve the quality of the City's and region's lakes, waterways and other aquatic resources. Policy 4.2.1H: Manage city -owned facilities subject to Municipal Separate Storm Sewer System (MS4) program requirements consistent with permit conditions. Policy 4.2.1I: Manage city -owned facilities in accordance with the original design purposes, periodically review these purposes, and modify operation in consideration of current resource management objectives. Policy 4.2.1J: Implement and enforce a program to detect and eliminate illicit discharges in accordance with the City's MS4 requirements. Policy 4.2.1K: Manage septic systems in conformance with state standards to protect the quality of water and natural resources. Goal 4.2.2: Initiate and continue vigorous collaborations to address, restore, and preserve the water quality of the region's lakes, wetlands and other aquatic assets. Policy 4.2.2A: Work with and partner with the RCWD, VLAWMO and adjacent local governments to protect high quality resources. Policy 4.2.2B: Collaborate with adjacent jurisdictions and agencies to meet TMDL goals and remove impaired water bodies from the impaired waters list. Policy 4.2.2C: Partner with the RCWD on the implementation of Resource Management Plans. City of Lino Lakes SWMP 1 February 8, 2013 Draft 1 59 Policy 4.2.2D: Facilitate data sharing among public entities that have jurisdiction or facilities within the City. 4.3. Wetland Management Issues Benefits attributed to wetlands include floodwater storage and retention, nutrient assimilation, sediment entrapment, ground water recharge, low flow augmentation, shoreland anchoring and erosion control, aesthetics, recreation, and education. Accordingly, the loss of wetland acres, function and value will have a direct negative effect on the City and its water resources. Goals & Policies Goal 4.3.1: Maintain and enhance, where possible, the functions and services of existing wetlands and associated habitats with the City. Policy 4.3.1 A: Continue to support the administration of the Wetland Conservation Act (WCA) requirements within the City by the RCWD and VLAWMO. Policy 4.3.1 B: Avoid impacts to upland natural communities that are critical to wetland wildlife habitat function and incorporate these into the wetland preservation corridors/buffer zones. Policy 4.3.1 C: Integrate parcel- or project -based wetland replacement with watershed -based restoration and enhancement locations Policy 4.3.1 D: Manage wetland resources using the flexibility afforded by state and federal rules, through the implementation of the Resource Management Plan and Special Area Management Plan. Policy 4.3.1 E: Consider providing incentives to private landowners to avoid wetland impact, minimize wetland impact, and restore wetlands, while acknowledging that wetland management and the monetary value of wetlands can be based upon differing value systems. Policy 4.3.1F: Require wetland functional assessments, based on accepted methodology, on new development projects to ensure wetland function and services are preserved to the extent possible. 4.4. Floodplain Management Issues Given the physical characteristics, high water table, and number of water bodies and flood prone areas, floodplain management is an important consideration to minimize future flooding events. In addition, a number of areas of current flooding concern have been identified through studies by the City and RCWD. Future flooding could also be a concern if development is not conducted in a manner that reduces runoff rates and volumes and if changes in rainfall and snowmelt patterns overwhelm existing infrastructure. Goals & Policies Goal 4.4.1: Provide adequate storage and conveyance of runoff to protect the public safety and minimize property damage. City of Lino Lakes SWMP 1 February 8, 2013 Draft 160 Policy 4.4.1A: Preserve and manage the storage associated with the 100 -year floodplain along and within water - bodies to minimize the frequency and severity of flooding caused by high water. Policy 4.4.1B: Use the natural characteristics of the City's watersheds (e.g., pond, swales, wetlands) in combination with development standards and projects, to reduce present and future flood damage and enhance the quality of surface and ground water. Policy 4.4.1 C: Require that adequate drainage facilities and easements are provided with land development activities. Policy 4.4.1D: Continue to enforce floodplain regulations to ensure that new structures are adequately elevated above identified flood elevations. Policy 4.4.1E: Update the Floodplain Overlay Ordinance as required by FEMA and the Minnesota DNR, or as needed, to ensure adequate protection for structures and eligibility for flood insurance programs. Policy 4.4.1F: Support efforts to restore and reestablish floodplain basins to improve their natural function. 4.5. Public Ditch System Issues Several of the major drainageways in the City are public ditch systems managed by the Rice Creek Watershed District. Some of the public drainage systems are located within completely urbanized areas, have been totally or partially replaced by storm sewer pipe, and no longer serve agricultural land or provide agricultural benefits. These systems function as the outlet for storm water runoff. Other public drainage systems are comprised nearly entirely of undeveloped/agricultural areas that are primarily forecasted for urban development. Public ditch systems need to be managed to provide the drainage services suited to the land contributing to the system. Goals & Policies Goal 4.5.1: Ensure the management and operation of drainage systems and use of waterways in a manner which recognizes the origin of the system (e.g., constructed vs. natural), the interconnectedness of resources, and present and future conveyance needs, while considering legally established rights. Policy 4.5.1A: Work with the RCWD to facilitate effective management of the public ditch system, as needed, to support the recognized functions of these systems. 4.6. Groundwater Management Issues The City of Lino Lakes relies solely on groundwater as its water supply source. The Prairie du Chien - Jordan aquifer serves as the City's municipal water source. There is a growing concern that water supplies may be depleting. The Master Water Supply Plan by the Metropolitan Council indicates the potential for a significant decline in aquifer water levels, up to a 50% decline in available head by 2030. This will affect not only the drinking water supplies, but also resources that may depend on groundwater, such as wetlands, lakes and streams. City of Lino Lakes SWMP 1 February 8, 2013 Draft 1 61 Goals & Policies Goal 4.6.1: Incorporate ground water considerations into the decision making process through recognizing the interconnectedness of surface water and groundwater supply and groundwater- dependent natural resources. Policy 4.6.1A: Preserve ground water recharge areas in cooperation with Anoka County. Policy 4.6.1B: Promote infiltration of stormwater to result in groundwater recharge where it is feasible and does not pose a threat to groundwater quality. Policy 4.6.1C: Continue to implement the City's Wellhead Protection Plan. Policy 4.6.1D: Participate in the Anoka County Wellhead Protection Group in implementing joint projects that benefit the City of Lino Lakes. 4.7. Natural Resources Issues Lino Lakes is rich in unique and rare natural resources. These resources are most often hydrologically dependent on natural water systems. Reduced quality and variances of water levels stemming from land use changes may have critical impacts to the sustainability of these resources. Preserving and enhancing quality natural resources within the City can have a positive effect on surface and ground water. Extensive development or misuse of the natural areas within the City can have deleterious affects on water resources. Goals & Policies Goal 4.7.1: Identify, protect and preserve the desirable natural areas and ecological and aquatic resources of the community. Policy 4.7.1A: Pursue a well - defined natural resource restoration and management plan consistent with the RCWD /Lino Lakes Resource Management Plan (RMP). Policy 4.7.1B: Maintain the partnership of Lino Lakes and Rice Creek Watershed District and other groups such as Anoka County to maintain, restore, and manage the aquatic, aquatic dependent (Such as the Blue Heron Rookery on Peltier Lake) and upland areas of the City. Policy 4.7.1 C: Require natural space buffers, where appropriate, around wetlands to preserve their function and value. Goal 4.7.2: Ensure that well - planned, quality residential, commercial, industrial and institutional development accommodates the City's projected growth needs and occurs in a manner that also conserves and enhances the City's natural resources and amenities. Policy 4.7.2A: Encourage developers, where appropriate, to use Open Space Design/Conservation Development Model to implement the Resource Management System Plan. Policy 4.7.2B: Define incentives to achieve Better Site Design to the extent feasible on all development. City of Lino Lakes SWMP 1 February 8, 2013 Draft 1 62 • • • Policy 4.7.2C: Continue to use the Alternative Urban Areawide Review (AUAR) process to assess the impact of development on the City's natural resources and infrastructure. Goal 4.7.3: Capitalize on opportunities to enhance water quality, reduce runoff volume and flood damage, and enhance ecological resources by using open space and greenways. Policy 4.7.3A: Encourage the use of open space in the design of City projects when multiple benefits are realized. Policy 4.7.3B: Capitalize on the efforts of others responsible for managing open space to enhance their ongoing recreational programs, when these programs are related to the water and resource management effort and are consistent with the City's open space priorities. Policy 4.7.3C: Seek opportunities to enhance habitat function and integrity, to benefit water resources and eco- systems. 4.8. Erosion & Sediment Control Issues Erosion prevention and sediment control is an important aspect in the effort to improve water quality and protect and improve water and natural resources. Erosion is caused by runoff over disturbed soils such as on a construction site or along streambanks. This erosion can result in the transport of sediment into water and natural resources. Sediment deposits and sediment transport can decrease water quality and increase maintenance efforts. Goals & Policies Goal 4.8.1: Prevent erosion and minimize the conveyance of sediment into surface water systems through enforcement of the City's Storm Water Pollution Prevention Plan (SWPPP). Policy 4.8.1A: Require erosion control plans for all land disturbance activities in accordance with the City's stormwater management ordinance. Policy 4.8.1 B: Continue to enforce the Illicit Discharge and Detection Elimination (IDDE) Ordinance. Policy 4.8.1C: Use best management practices (BMPs) at all construction sites per the MPCA "Protecting Water Quality in Urban Areas" and Minnesota Storm Water Manual as amended. Policy 4.8.1D: Coordinate construction site inspections and enforcement with watershed management organization inspection staff. Enforcement actions will be taken where warranted to support protection of water resources. Policy 4.8.1E: Implement and perform good housekeeping measures to minimize sediment entering the drainage system. City of Lino Lakes SWMP 1 February 8, 2013 Draft 63 4.9. Regulations, Permitting and Reporting Issues The City is regulated under a number of local, state, and/or federal programs that require the implementation of ordinances, permitting, and/or reporting. In addition, the City implements ordinances and permitting to attain the goals outlined in this Plan. Goals & Policies Goal 4.9.1: Implement the Resource Management System Plan through Resource Management Unit Plans. Policy 4.9.1A: Develop and implement Resource Management Unit plans for each RMP. Goal 4.9.2: Address regulatory requirements of local, state and federal programs through updated ordinances, permitting, and ongoing reporting. Policy 4.9.2A: Evaluate City's existing ordinances and programs to facilitate implementation of the Resource Management System Plan. Policy 4.9.2B: Coordinate with the Rice Creek Watershed District and the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers to manage local wetland resources. Policy 4.9.2C: Work with the Rice Creek Watershed District to implement the Resource Management Plan. Policy 4.9.2D: Implement programs, implement structural solutions, and complete reporting as needed to meet MPCA's requirements for MS4s. Policy 4.9.2E: Support the implementation of the SAMP by the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers. 4.10. Monitoring, Maintenance & Inspection Issues In order to protect its capital investments and provide an effective water management system, the City of Lino Lakes needs to conduct monitoring, maintenance and inspection of City infrastructure in a timely and cost - effective manner Infrastructure needs to be monitored and maintained regularly to prevent unnecessary reconstruction projects. This can only be accomplished if an effective inspection and regular maintenance program is in place. A monitoring program verifies the effectiveness of the storm water infrastructure. Goals & Policies Goal 4.10.1: Maintain the function and effectiveness of stormwater management structures through inspection, monitoring and maintenance. Policy 4.10.1A: Implement the City's plan for the regular inspection and maintenance of public water resource infrastructure consistent with the requirements of the NPDES MS4 permit. Policy 4.10.1B: Require Operation and Maintenance agreements for the inspection and maintenance of privately constructed water resource infrastructure. City of Lino Lakes SWMP I February 8, 2013 Draft 1 64 • • Policy 4.10.1C: Implement and refine a training program to prevent or reduce pollutant runoff resulting from City operations. Policy 4.10.1D: Prepare an annual report in accordance with the NPDES MS4 permit and share results with the public, City Council and Boards. Policy 4.10.1E: Conduct monitoring to evaluate the effectiveness of the City's stormwater management actions on the quality of water resources. 4.11. Public Participation, Information & Education Issues City residents, businesses and property owners need to have a clear understanding of basic stormwater management, water quality, and natural resource protection concepts, policies and regulations to support and implement stormwater management and natural resource protection efforts. Goals & Policies Goal 4.11.1: Inform and educate the public concerning urban stormwater management and the problems pollutants cause if allowed to enter into our water resources. Policy 4.11.1A: Identify and alert residents of potential ecological challenges and threats that can affect Lino Lakes and the property of residents. Policy 4.11.1B: Plan and initiate cooperative efforts with the state and other local government entities in programs that provide information to the public on how to effectively address and manage ecological and water quality threats. Policy 4.11.1C: Proactively educate the community and its residents of all ages about the specific actions they can or may be asked to take in addressing ecological and water quality threats. Goal 4.11.2: Offer programs, educational opportunities and information that facilitate an understanding of water resource issues in the City of Lino lakes. Policy 4.11.2A: Continue to encourage and support programs that measure the effectiveness of Best Management Practices. Policy 4.11.2B: Actively develop and implement a community education program relating to preserving and improving water quality consistent with the City's MS4 permit requirements and/or coordinate with regional education efforts. Policy 4.11.2C: Share infrastructure information developed through the Municipal Separate Storm Sewer System (MS4) program for City -owned facilities to educate the public about how water resources are managed, the programs and policies and projects of the City, and to encourage public involvement. Policy 4.11.2D: Utilize and engage citizens to promote sustainable stewardship of lakes. Policy 4.11.2E: Continue to support and participate in the Rice Creek Watershed District's Stream Health Evaluation Program (SHEP) City of Lino Lakes SWMP I February 8, 2013 Draft 1 65 4.12. Financing Issues The City needs to ensure that funding is available to implement the policies and actions identified in this plan and to respond to future needs of development, operation and maintenance, and repairs. In order to attain the goals identified in this plan, the City will need to provide funding and staffing resources adequate to address the goals of the plan. Current funding includes trunk stormwater improvement fees and the general fund; however, other funding options may need to be considered. Goals & Policies Goal 4.12.1: Ensure that the costs of the surface water system are equitably distributed and sufficiently funded to cover the liabilities. Policy 4.12.1A: Update and apply area based charges so that the surface water related costs of development can be fairly borne by development. Policy 4.12.1B: Consider funding options that will equitably distribute the costs of managing and implementing the City's surface water management plan, such as a stormwater utility or district - based fees. Goal 4.12.2: Leverage partnerships to cost - effectively manage the City's surface water and natural resource systems and attain the goals of this plan. Policy 4.12.2A: Pursue grants, donations, and in -kind contributions to help fund stormwater projects. Policy 4.12.2B: The City will coordinate local stormwater management issues with the member watersheds and neighboring cities in order to leverage the watershed's work and thus reducing City expenditures. City of Lino Lakes SWMP 1 February 8, 2013 Draft 66 • • • 5.0 Implementation Activities The implementation activities identified in this Section of the Plan were taken from previously conducted planning and/or resource management documents or they are new activities developed as a result of a gap analysis conducted as part of the planning process. The actions listed in Sections 5.1, 5.2, and 5.3 (Tables 9 — 23) represent the ideal list of implementation activities with full funding, which is currently beyond the city's resources. As a means of prioritizing, and aligning the efforts with a more attainable funding level, or until additional funding becomes available, the activities identified in Tables 24 and 25 represent a synthesized and focused list of actions for city implementation. The costs for the activities in Tables 24 and 25 are also organized by type of activity (CIP, Program, and Study) to better reflect the city's planning and budgeting process. For a more detailed list of the activities identified for priority implementation and the costs associated with those, Appendix B provides a breakout and list of the proposed city -wide actions in the plan making up the implementation cost table shown in Tables 24. Appendix C includes a fully- funded, alternative implementation summary for reference, in the event additional funding could be leveraged. Implementation activities are categorized as follows: • City Wide Actions - Includes implementation activities that apply on a broader scale (see Table 8). • RMU Specific Actions — Includes implementation activities that have been identified for the three highest priority RMUs: Reshanau RMU, Marshan RMU and Clearwater Creek RMU (see Tables 10 through 12). • Miscellaneous RMU Actions - Includes implementation activities that have been identified for the remaining RMUs (see Tables 13 through 24). 5.1. City -Wide Actions Within the City Wide Actions, the implementation activities are organized by the main Issue Category presented in Section 4.0 Identified Issues, Goals and Policies. These Issue Categories include: 4.1 Water Rate & Quantity 4.2 Water Quality 4.3 Wetland Management 4.4 Floodplain Management 4.5 Public Ditch System 4.6 Groundwater Management 4.7 Natural Resources 4.8 Erosion and Sediment Control 4.9 Regulations, Permitting and Reporting 4.10 Monitoring, Maintenance and Inspection 4.11 Public Participation, Information and Education 4.12 Financing City of Lino Lakes SWMP February 8, 2013 Draft l 67 To illustrate the link between the issue, goal, policy and the corresponding implementation activity or activities, the table of City Wide Actions also includes the specific goals and policies addressed by the activity. In some cases, an implementation activity may address more than one Issue Category. As a result, there is a column identifying the additional issue(s) addressed by the implementation activity. The Implementation and Capital Improvement Plan presented at the end of this Section includes estimated costs, scheduling and project partners for the Issue Category. The City of Lino Lakes will determine which specific implementation activities to implement as part of the annual budgeting process. City of Lino Lakes SWMP 1 February 8, 2013 Draft! 68 • • • • Table 8. City -Wide Actions Actions identified by Issue Category Additional Issue(s) Addressed Goals Addressed Policies Addressed Implement Better Site design (BSD) techniques for new development Water Quality, Natural 4.1.1, 4.2.1, 4.1.1E, 4.2.1A, Resources 4.7.2 4.7.2B Develop a green infrastructure program to: • Protect high priority wetlands, their biological condition, and their function as high quality habitat; • Enhance groundwater hydrology and protect groundwater- dependent natural resources; • Provide natural flood reduction; and • Integrate water quality improvement components in the landsca • e. Water Quality, Wetland Management, Floodplain Management, Natural Resources 4.2.1, 4.3.1, 4.4.1, 4.7.4, 4.2.1C, 4.3.1C, 4.4.16, 4.7.4A, Implement water quality improvements via the Subwatershed Regulations, 4 2 1 4.2.1B, Plans for each RMU specific to the waterbodies of the area and upcoming regulations (ex. TMDLs). Permitting and Re•ortinq 4.9.1 4.2.1 D, 4.9.1A Establish Wetland Bank in cooperation with RCWD and NA 4.3.1 4.3.1A VLAWMO. Provide for wetland impact replacement credit in cooperation with RCWD and VLAWMO NA 4.3.1 4.3.1C, 4.3.1D, 4.3.1E Conduct annual meeting with the RCWD to review wetland mitigation permits to ensure wetland functions are being preserved. NA 4.3.1 4 -1 E Coordinate with MnDOT and County Transportation officials on projects that propose to disturb wetlands within their ROW by holding annual meeting to discuss future road plans and wetland mitigation banking. NA 4.3.1 4.3.1A Work with RCWD and VLAWMO to establish watershed -based a• 'roaches to maintainin• or restorin• wetland functions. NA 4.3.1 4.3.1D FLOODPLAIN MANAGEMENT Review existing watershed models and work with the RCWD and VLAWMO to address flow constraints in the s stem. NA 4.4.1 4.4.1B PUBLIC DITCH SYSTEM j Work with the Rice Creek Watershed District on the ditch abandonment process for public subsurface (drain tile) systems and explore partial abandonment for surface (ditch) systems, in cases where the public drainage system requires redesign to implement the Multi- Functional Greenway NA 4.5.1 4.5.1A Corridor, Support the RCWD in the RCWD's implementation of ditch activities and Resource Management Plans by providing input where it impacts the city's drainage system and development plans by encouraging: • Integrating management of ditch systems and adjacent wetland and upland systems; NA 4.5.1 4.5.1A • Maintaining ditch systems being used for agricultural benefit; • Using branch maintenance in rural areas, retrofits in urbanizing areas and master planned communities with greenways and open space to reduce downstream flooding and retain and reuse water in City of Lino Lakes SWMP 1 February 8, 2013 Draft' 69 Actions identified by Issue Category Additional Issue(s) Addressed Goals Addressed Policies Addressed the local catchments; • Minimizing future ditch maintenance costs by develo•in• a self - sustainin• design. Work with private landowners to retrofit/implement multi- functional greenway corridor, for those parcels that are not part of a Master Plan or are alread developed. NA 4.5.1 4.5.1A Implement the wellhead protection plan to protect the • roundwater source from contamination. NA 4.6.1 4.6.1C Continue to implement the City's Water Conservation Management Plan NA 4.6.1 4.6.1A Continue to work with Anoka County and other participating agencies on the Geologic Atlas Pro'ect. Wetland Management 4.6.1, 4.3.1 4.6.1A, 4.3.1D NATURAL RESOURCES Partner with RCWD, VLAWMO and Mn /DNR to establish program to educate residents on the means to identify and eradicate invasive s•ecies. NA 4.7.1 4.7.1A Continue to manage and protect heron rookery and other im•ortant plant and animal communities. NA 4.7.1 4.7.1B Develop, distribute and present public with information regarding the im•ortance of shoreland buff ers. NA 4.7.3 4.7.3C EROSION AND SEi3MENT Ci NTROL Continue to implement the City's SWPPP and enforce re•ulato re•uirements. NA 4.8.1 4.8.1A -E REGULATIONS, PERMITTING AND REPORTING Implement Resource Management System Plan through Water Rate & development of subwatershed management plans. The Plan will establish a clear vision of the multi - functional greenway corridor for City Staff and developers and will be used as a tool early in the land development process. Quantity, Water Quality, Wetland Management, 4.9.1, 4.1.1, 4.2.1, 4.3.1, 4.9.1A, 4.1.1A, 4.2.1 D, 4.3.1D, Floodplain 4.4.1, 4.4.1B, Management, Natural 4.7.1, 4.7.1A, Resources Complete subwatershed management plans for the three highest priority RMUs: • Reshanau RMU • Marshan RMU Natural Resources 4.9.1, 4.7.1 4.9.1A, 4.7.1A • Clearwater Creek RMU Develop subwatershed management plans for the remaining RMUs in the following order: 1. Peltier RMU 2. Wilkinson RMU 3. Amelia RMU 4. Hardwood Creek RMU 5. Rice Lake RMU Natural 4.9.1, 4.9.1A, If need arises and resources allow: Resources 4.7.1 4.7.1A • Rondeau RMU • Upper Rice Creek RMU • Centerville RMU • Sherman RMU • Baldwin RMU • Middle Rice Creek RMU Evaluate the need to modify existing ordinances to ensure Water Rate & 4.9.2, 4.9.2A, City of Lino Lakes SWMP 1 February 8, 2013 Draft 1 70 • • • Actions identified by Issue Category Additional Issue(s) Addressed Goals Addressed Policies Addressed implementation of all components of the multi - functional greenway corridor. Quantity 4.1.1 4.1.1A Incorporate neighborhood stormwater planning and education into street reconstruction program. Water Rate & Quantity 4.9.2, 4.1.1 4.9.2A , 4.1.1E Evaluate Revisions to Road Design Standards including: • Reducing minimum pavement widths • Ribbon curbs and curb cuts, with roadside swales, infiltration, and biofiltration • Use of pervious pavements Water Rate & Quantity 4.9.2, 4.1.1 4.9.2A, 4.1.1A Provide guidance for staff, City Boards, and City Council regarding Better Site Design (BSD). Water Rate & Quantity, Natural Resources 4.9.2, 4.1.1, 4.7.2 4.9.2A, 4.1.1E, 4.7.2B Create design guidelines for new development to implement the Resource Management System Plan (multi - functional greenway corridor) through the use of Better Site Design (BSD). Natural Resources 4.9.2, 4.7.2 4.9.2A, 4.7.2B Continue to implement the RMP. • Create a wetland bank to provide replacement opportunities for development or roadway projects. • Utilize the runoff volume credit and banking system in collaboration with the RCWD. Water Rate & Quantity, Wetlands 4.9.2, 4.1.1, 4.3.1 4.9.2C 4.1.1C, 4.3.1C, 4.3.1 D, 4.3.1E Continue to participate in pre - permit application meetings with the RCWD and Army Corps of Engineers that support the collaborative permitting process implemented through RCWD Rule and the Corps' Programmatic General Permit that implements the Special Area Management Plan. Water Quality 4.9.2, 4.2.2 4.9.2B, 4.2.2C Implement Construction BMPs Identified in SWPPP. Erosion & Sediment Control 4.9.2, 4.8.1 4.9.2D, 4.8.1D Implement Post- Construction BMPs Identified in SWPPP. Water Rate & Quantity, Erosion & Sediment Control, Maintenance & Inspection 4.9.2, 4.1.1, 4.8.1, 4.10.1 4.9.2D, 4.1.1A, 4.8.1D, 4.10.1A Implement Education and Outreach BMPs Identified in SWPPP. Public Participation, Information & Education 4.9.2, 4.11.1, 4.11.2 4.9.2D, 4.11.1A, 4.11.1B, 4.11.1C, 4.11.2B, 4.11.2C, 4.11.2D Implement Pollution Prevention BMPs Identified in SWPPP such as: • Bi annual street sweeping program • Pond and BMP inventory Maintenance & Inspection 4.9.2, 4.10.1 4.9.2D, 4.10.1A, 4.10.1 B, 4.10.1C, 4.10.1D Work with RCWD and VLAWMO to develop a long -term monitoring program to accompany RMP implementation and to evaluate quantitatively the strategy's long -term environmental and cost benefits. NA 4.10.1 4.10.1E Participate with other public agencies and organizations on education and outreach efforts. NA 4.11.1, 4.11.2 4.11.1A, 4.11.1B, City of Lino Lakes SWMP 1 February 8, 2013 Draft' 71 Actions identified by Issue Category Additional Issue(s) Addressed Goals Addressed Policies Addressed 4.11.1C, 4.11.2B, 4.11.2C, 4.11.2D Pursue grants through the RCWD's Urban Stormwater Remediation Program to assist in the funding of projects that will reduce the impact of existing development on local water resources. NA 4.12.2 4.12.2A Pursue funding support from VLAWMO for projects in the Amelia Lake watershed. NA 4.12.2 4.12.2B Review and evaluate funding sources for surface water management including ad valorem taxes, development charges, grants and user fees. NA 4.12.1 4.12.1A, 4.12.1B Update and continue to implement Trunk Surface Water Management Fee System. NA 4.12.1 4.12.1A, 4.12.1B Implement the updated Parks, Greenways and Trail System Plan through (1) dedication of parks, greenways, open space and trail corridors or (2) Park Dedication Fee. Review park dedication fee annually to ensure adequate funding for parks, greenways, open space and trail system development. NA 4.12.1 4.12.1A, 4.12.1B Pursue funding through Federal and State grant opportunities NA 4.12.2 4.12.2A 5.2. Priority RMU Specific Actions This section includes implementation activities that have been identified for the three highest priority Resource Management Units (RMUs), or subwatersheds, in the City of Lino Lakes: • Reshanau RMU • Marshan RMU • Clearwater Creek RMU. 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 26 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. City of Lino Lakes SWMP 1 February 8, 2013 Draft 1 72 • 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 February 8, 2013 Draft 1 73 Setting Type A Stormwater BMP Retrofit f LID Stormwater BM Retrofit / LID Flood Plain Drainage Feature / Stream Setting Type B Park / Trails m Stormwater BMP Retrofit / LID Stormwater BMP Retrofit / LID Critical / Rare Habitat Preservation Drainage Feature / Stream Setting Type C Park / Trails Stormwater BMP Retrofit / LID Stormwater BMP Retrofit / LID Figure 25. Conceptual Lino Lakes Resource Management Unit (RMU) Corridor Configurations Critical ; Habitat Preservation City of Lino Lakes SWMP 1 February 8, 2013 Draft 1 74 • • • 5.2.1 Reshanau RMU Subwatershed Table 9. RMU Specific Actions: Reshanau RMU Actions identified by Issue Category Work with RCWD to develop management plans (including outlet control structures and vegetation management) for Wards Lake and Cedar Lake which are currently controlled by ditched outlets. Address pollutant loads to Reshanau Lake, Cedar Lake and Wards Lake as well as those smaller lakes contributing to overall loads. Work with RCWD to investigate water quality benefits of a control structure for Cedar lake. Incorporate interspersed upland areas into the greenway corridor of the wetland plant communities comprising the backbone of the Ditch 25 system in order to increase habitat functioning of the wetlands and provide passive recreation. Work with RCWD to develop a restoration plan for partially drained wetlands of the Ditch 25 system to attain wetland restoration credit. Implement Cedar Lake Restoration Project and explore options for wetland mitigation credit. Address the three areas where road overtopping occurs in the RMU in conjunction with surrounding development proposals. Collaborate with the Rice Creek Watershed District (RCWD) to design the ACD -25 ditch corridor in a way that will help mitigate the impacts of increased flows and volumes within the corridor. Minimize road crossings of ACD -25 in order to maintain a continuous corridor. It is also recommended that field crossings be eliminated or converted into trail crossings as development occurs. In some cases these crossings are serving as rate control features. At the time that they are proposed to be altered, downstream impacts would need to be assessed and a mitigation strategy would need to be developed if needed. No implementation activities identified. No implementation activities identified. NDSEDIME< Encourage property owners to restore their shoreline with native plants to reduce erosion, capture direct runoff, and to limit removal of beneficial vegetation that is perceived to be a nuisance or undesirable. Complete Subwatershed Management Plan. NG, MAINTE No implementation activities identified. .11 UCATION No implementation activities identified. No implementation activities identified. City of Lino Lakes SWMP 1 February 8, 2013 Draft 1 75 5.2.2 Marshan RMU Subwatershed Table 10. RMU Specific Actions: Marshan RMU Actions identified by Issue Category wiTrER RATE & QUA x Evaluate opportunities for volume reduction in key subwatersheds including MAR -0059, MAR -108 and MAR -110. Ensure that development and redevelopment construct onsite volume controls to alleviate the potential flooding without increasing downstream discharge of urban hydrology to Marshan Lake. Address impairments for Marshan Lake as identified in the TMDL study and in the implementation plan when this effort is completed. Maximize load reduction on city projects. Evaluate cost effective options to improve water quality treatment BMPs for both development and redevelopment projects to increase treatment efficiency beyond the minimum required. Promote the use of rain gardens, native plantings, and reforestation within existing development areas as a means of increasing infiltration, evapotranspiration, and filtration of runoff conveying pollutant loads to the lakes. Investigate the potential for expanding storage and nutrient retention /removal from the existing loads (prior to discha • in • to Marshan Lake ad'acent to the lower branch of 10 -22 -32 between I -35W and Lake Drive WETLAND MANAGEMENT , Conduct wetland restoration projects for banking in the upper branches of the 10 -22 -32 ditch system and in the large area in northwest Lino Lakes (the area generally located north of Carl Street and west of 4th Avenue) that is rimaril used for sod MAR -097 . Evaluate and address floodplain impacts with new and redevelopment proposals in accordance with watershed and city requirements. ,gg Collaborate with the RCWD to design culverts in catchments MAR -059, MAR -108, and MAR- 110 to resolve capacity issues in Anoka County Ditch 10- 22 -32. Review RCWD Consolidation Report for 10 -22 -32 to determine how much of a management plan the District has develo•ed to date. GROUNDWATER MANA ENT` No implementation activities identified. Provide an open space connection between Columbus and Blaine as identified in the DNR Metro Greenways corridor. Address corridor gap caused by habitat fragmentation from existing and planned housing and roads. Address gap through landscaping strategies, wildlife movement strategies, road design and minimal runoff, and homeowner education. EROSION AND SEDI s Evaluation of current stream bank erosion sites on 10- 22 -32. REGULATIONS, PERM! Complete Subwatershed Management Plan. Coordinate with future developers to implement cross - sections for Penoc Branch, Branch 14 Lower, and Branch 15 Lower into Resource Management System plan. No implementation activities identified. ' N, I No implementation activities identified. No implementation activities identified. City of Lino Lakes SWMP 1 February 8, 2013 Draft 1 76 • • • • • • 5.2.3 Clearwater Creek RMU Subwatershed Table 11. RMU Specific Actions: Clearwater Creek RMU Actions identified by Issue Category Develop a stormwater runoff volume reduction plan for the Clearwater Creek RMU that emphasizes non - infiltration based BMPs given the heavy hydric soils underlying the area. Integrate Clearwater Creek into district and site planning to preserve the natural amenities of this water course. Address nutrient impairment of Bald Eagle Lake as identified in the TMDL study and in the implementation plan when this effort is completed. Address biological impairment of Clearwater Creek as identified in the TMDL study and implementation plan when these efforts are completed. Restore drained wetlands associated with abandoned ditch 47 to provide wetland mitigation credit for use in a bank and to establish a greenway corridor valuable for open space, water quality, and flood control. Investigate the current and future effects of the pipe and pond drainage system from the urban area just east of 1- 35E and south of Cedar Street for effects on the condition of this wetland complex. The highly susceptible portion of the wetland complex is a hardwood swamp adjacent to the city of Hugo. Target wetland restoration projects in the northern drainage ditch of ACD 55 (a tile system) to alleviate flooding problems and potentially generate mitigation credit. Address the potential flooding concerns in the urban area just east of 135E and south of Cedar Street: there are several ponds that are expected to overtop in a high rainfall event. Coordinate with the RCWD in advance of repairs needed forACD -55 (tile system). This system has been identified as being ineffective at managing future runoff (potential pond flooding problems during high rain events) which should be addressed via the multi - functional .reenwa corridor. GROUNDWATER MANAGEMENT No implementation activities identified. NATURAL RESOURCES Work with RCWD and land developer to implement Clearwater Creek restoration project between 20 Avenue and 35E. Work with RCWD to Conduct Clearwater Creek instream habitat improvement for the biotic impairment TMDL. CON 1. sw No implementation activities identified. 4NS P Complete Subwatershed Management Plan. Monitor the wetland complex to the northwest of Bald Eagle Lake for signs of deterioration from the adjacent urban drainage system. Investigate the localized urban discharges into the wetland complex north of Otter and monitor the wetlands for signs of stress. ON & EDUCATION No implementation activities identified. No implementation activities identified. City of Lino Lakes SWMP 1 February 8, 2013 Draft! 77 5.3. Other RMU Actions This section includes implementation activities that have been identified for the remaining Resource Management Units (RMUs), or subwatersheds, in the City of Lino Lakes. Most of the area in these RMUs lies outside of proposed development areas through 2030. Therefore, these actions generally have a low priority for implementation. As this section illustrates, there are fewer implementation activities identified for these RMUs because of their low priority relative to those presented in Section 5.2 RMU Specific Actions. As a result, if the need arises to develop a subwatershed management plan or Resource Management Plan for these RMUs, the level of effort required to develop that plan for these RMUs may be greater than for the previously discussed RMUs. 5.3.1 George Watch RMU Subwatershed Table 12. RMU Specific Actions: George Watch RMU 5.3.2 Rondeau RMU Subwatershed Table 13. RMU Specific Actions: Rondeau RMU Employ Better Site Design (BSD) and volume control strategies to maintain recharge and avoid stormwater discharges to Rondeau Lake. Protect the large wetlands in the drainage area west of Rondeau Lake from stormwater input and from use for stormwater treatment. Develop Resource Management System Plan. City of Lino Lakes SWMP 1 February 8, 2013 Draft 1 78 Implement a network of BMPs in the conveyance area along Lake Drive NE to reduce stormwater discharges from pond which currently outlets to a channel and ultimately enters stormwater- sensitive wetland complex (located north of I -35W and south of Oak Lane). Work with the commercial area north of George Watch Lake to implement stormwater retrofits (e.g. rain gardens and pervious pavements) that will achieve volume control to mitigate loading to the large and highly susceptible coniferous swamp located next to George Watch Lake. Develop source control plan, in conjunction with new development for areas in the George Watch RMU north of Hwy 14 to prevent loading to wetlands along with source control retrofits in areas draining to groundwater wetlands. Implement watershed -based measures to reduce the inputs from the direct drainage area to George Watch Lake once the nutrient reduction goal is established as part of the Chain of Lakes TMDL. Address the area where there is less than 1 foot of freeboard on the road. Develop Subwatershed Management Plan. 5.3.2 Rondeau RMU Subwatershed Table 13. RMU Specific Actions: Rondeau RMU Employ Better Site Design (BSD) and volume control strategies to maintain recharge and avoid stormwater discharges to Rondeau Lake. Protect the large wetlands in the drainage area west of Rondeau Lake from stormwater input and from use for stormwater treatment. Develop Resource Management System Plan. City of Lino Lakes SWMP 1 February 8, 2013 Draft 1 78 • 5.3.3 Peltier RMU Subwatershed Table 14. RMU Specific Actions: Peltier RMU Avoid discharges to Peltier Lake through implementation of infiltration BMPs on non - hydric soil upland areas and implementation of small site storage and biofiltration BMPs on hydric soil areas that are developing. Target wetland restoration projects in the northern drainage ditch of ACD 55 (a tile system) to alleviate flooding problems and potentially generate mitigation credit. Address the two areas within the City of Lino Lakes where there is less than 1 foot of freeboard on the road. Develop Subwatershed Management Plan utilizing the concepts already developed by the City for a large flow - through wetland system. 5.3.4 Hardwood Creek RMU Subwatershed Table 15. RMU Specific Actions: Hardwood Creek RMU Protect and buffer the high priority wetlands in the Hardwood Creek RMU Ensure that existing culvert crossings will function under future conditions. Address the wildlife barrier that exists as a result of the interstate and discuss options with MnDNOT to make existing culvert a safer crossing for wildlife. Develop Subwatershed Management Plan. 5.3.5 Upper Rice Creek RMU Subwatershed Table 16. RMU Specific Actions: Upper Rice Creek RMU Conduct inspections and maintenance to prevent flooding of major roads in Upper Rice Creek RMU in areas planned for industrial, commercial and medium density residential land use (URC_001 and URC_002). Ensure that existing culvert crossings will function under future conditions. Develop Subwatershed Management Plan. City of Lino Lakes SWMP February 8, 2013 Draft l 79 5.3.6 Rice Lake RMU Subwatershed Table 17. RMU Specific Actions: Rice Lake RMU 5.3.7 Centerville RMU Subwatershed Table 18. RMU Specific Actions: Centerville RMU Conduct a feasibility study for the Lamotte Water Quality Improvement Project in conjunction with street reconstruction planning. 5.3.8 Sherman RMU Subwatershed Table 19. RMU Specific Actions: Sherman RMU Evaluate the potential to implement volume reduction practices in the catchments discharging to stormwater- sensitive wetlands which are at risk under current conditions. 5.3.9 Amelia RMU Subwatershed Table 20. RMU Specific Actions: Amelia RMU Work with MnDOT to evaluate wildlife crossings in future projects. Restore the wetland on the private ditch that enters the lake on the north side in catchments AME -004 and AME- 005 in the Amelia RMU. Develop Subwatershed Management Plan. Work with the Vadnais Lakes Area Watershed Management Organization (VLAWMO) to evaluate the feasibility of projects in the Amelia RMU. City of Lino Lakes SWMP 1 February 8, 2013 Draft! 80 Conduct feasibility studies to quantify the potential for retrofit (in site volume control measures) projects in the northwest portion of the Rice Lake RMU (an area with very sandy soils). Decrease stormwater flows to the sensitive wetlands located in catchment RLA -021 on the north side of Lake Drive. Implement urban retrofits (on -site volume control measures) to address the two sensitive water level points at ponds in the south Rice Lake neighborhood. All wetlands in the neighborhood are already being used for stormwater. Evaluate nutrient loading through stormsewer lines to area wetlands in the Rice Lake RMU. Reduce nutrient loading by optimizing the wetland and channel interaction in the Rice Lake RMU. Develop Subwatershed Management Plan. 5.3.7 Centerville RMU Subwatershed Table 18. RMU Specific Actions: Centerville RMU Conduct a feasibility study for the Lamotte Water Quality Improvement Project in conjunction with street reconstruction planning. 5.3.8 Sherman RMU Subwatershed Table 19. RMU Specific Actions: Sherman RMU Evaluate the potential to implement volume reduction practices in the catchments discharging to stormwater- sensitive wetlands which are at risk under current conditions. 5.3.9 Amelia RMU Subwatershed Table 20. RMU Specific Actions: Amelia RMU Work with MnDOT to evaluate wildlife crossings in future projects. Restore the wetland on the private ditch that enters the lake on the north side in catchments AME -004 and AME- 005 in the Amelia RMU. Develop Subwatershed Management Plan. Work with the Vadnais Lakes Area Watershed Management Organization (VLAWMO) to evaluate the feasibility of projects in the Amelia RMU. City of Lino Lakes SWMP 1 February 8, 2013 Draft! 80 5.3.10 Baldwin RMU Subwatershed Table 21. RMU Specific Actions: Baldwin RMU Evaluate the potential to implement volume reduction practices in the catchments discharging to stormwater- sensitive wetlands which are at risk under current conditions. Develop Subwatershed Management Plan. 5.3.11 Middle Rice Creek RMU Subwatershed Table 22. RMU Specific Actions: Middle Rice Creek RMU Work with MnDOT to address corridor gaps and wildlife barriers in Middle Creek RMU. Wetlands at risk from stormwater should be evaluated for reducing volume effects in the catchments. Develop Resource Management System Plan. 5.3.12 Wilkinson RMU Subwatershed Table 23. RMU Specific Actions: Wilkinson RMU Develop Subwatershed Management Plan. 5.4. Implementation Costs The estimated costs for the City of Lino Lakes to implement the city -wide and RMU- specific actions included in this implementation plan as defined in Section 5.1 are summarized in Table 24. These actions are broken down into 3 project types; 1) Capital Improvement Projects (CIP), 2) Programs, and 3) Studies. Capital Improvement Projects include but are not limited to new stormwater capacity, quality or volume control improvements as well as wetland mitigation or restoration activities. Programs include ongoing education, inspection, maintenance, and pollution prevention activities that are necessary to maintain the existing system and meet the requirements of the City's NPDES permit. The Study category includes projects necessary to evaluate the City's system including subwatershed drainage plans and feasibility studies. Actions in the implementation plan as defined in Sections 5.2 and 5.3 are summarized in Table 25. The total estimated cost to implement this plan, including City -wide and all RMU Subwatershed Areas, is $2,901,800 over 10 years, or approximately $290,180 per year. It should be noted, that some of the costs should be recovered through surface water management impact fees collected in conjunction with development. While there are some infrastructure costs included here, it is fairly minimal on infrastructure projects. The majority of costs are related to maintenance of the existing system and satisfying the programmatic requirements of the City's NPDES permit. It is further assumed that once the more detailed RMU Subwatershed Plans are completed, more of the infrastructure costs will be defined so it can be included in developer fees for each area. City of Lino Lakes SWMP 1 February 8, 2013 Draft 81 • Table 24. Estimated Costs of City -Wide Actions in 2012 dollars Project Type Year 1 Year 2 Year 3 Year 4 Year 5 Years 0 -10 Total CIP $30,000 $20,000 $20,000 $200,000 $270,000 Programs $180,500 $176,700 $192,500 $177,700 $183,500 $845,900 $1,756,800 Studies $49,000 $15,000 $25,000 $25,000 $60,000 $174,000 Total $259,500 $191,700 $217,500 $197,700 $228,500 $1,105,900 $2,200,800 Table 25. Estimated Costs of RMU- Specific Actions in 2012 dollars RMU- Specific Actions b RMU y Year 1 Year 2 Year 3 Year 4 Year 5 Years 6 -10 Total 10 -year Cost Reshanau RMU (Ditch 25) $5,000 $10,000 $250,000 $265,000 Marshan RMU (Ditch 10- 22 -32) $25,000 $11,000 $151,000 $6,000 $75,000 $268,000 Clearwater Creek RMU (Ditch 55) $15,000 $8,000 $65,000 $40,000 $128,000 George Watch RMU Rondeau RMU Peltier RMU Hardwood Creek RMU Upper Rice Creek RMU Rice Lake RMU $40,000 $40,000 Centerville RMU Sherman RMU Amelia RMU Baldwin RMU Middle Rice Creek RMU Wilkinson RMU Total $40,000 $19,000 $156,000 $81,000 $405,000 $701,000 City of Lino Lakes SWMP 1 February 8, 2013 Draft 82 • • • 6.0 Administration Administration of this plan includes coordination of activities with federal, state and regional agencies as well as the coordination of activities within the City. This section outlines the activities needed to administer this Plan. 6.1. Regulatory Coordination Federal Coordination with federal agencies on water issues for the City of Lino Lakes often is with the Army Corps of Engineers, and sometimes also with the Environmental Protection Agency, the United States Geological Survey, the United States Department of Agriculture, the Fish and Wildlife Service, and the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration. The Army Corps of Engineers regulate activities in navigable waters and wetlands. Therefore, coordination is required for activities that have the potential to affect wetland and lake systems in the City of Lino Lakes. The Army Corps of Engineers issues permits under Section 404 of the Clean Water Act and also allow for approval of permitting and replacement plans that meet the requirements of Section 404 on a regional basis. Lino Lakes has and approved Special Area Management (SAMP) with the Army Corps of Engineers. The SAMP is implemented through a Programmatic General Permit (PGP) that includes special wetland regulatory conditions for the City of Lino Lakes. In summary, the PGP provides mitigation flexibility for impacts that are consistent with the SAMP. The Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) has delegated many of its responsibilities within Minnesota to the Minnesota Pollution Control Agency including the administration and enforcement of National Pollutant Discharge and Elimination (NPDES) permits and the Total Maximum Daily Load (TMDL) program. The United States Geological Survey (USGS) collect data on stream flow, groundwater levels, and other information which is useful to the City in evaluating its resources. The United States Department of Agriculture (USDA) oversees the National Resource Conservation Service and the Farm Service Agency who provide technical services, conservation programs and funding to agricultural producers. In addition, the soils and technical data collected by the NRCS is information used by the City. The Fish and Wildlife Service works to conserve and improve fish and wildlife and their habitat. The National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA), among other activities, collects weather and climate data. State On a state level, regulatory coordination related to water and natural resources includes addressing impaired waters, managing stormsewer systems and construction sites, managing shorelines, and a number of other areas. Agencies the City may coordinate with include the Minnesota Pollution Control Agency, the Department of Natural Resources, the Minnesota Department of Transportation, and the Minnesota Department of Health. The Minnesota Pollution Control Agency (MPCA) oversees the programs addressing municipal separate storm sewer systems (MS4s), construction site stormwater, industrial stormwater, impaired lakes and streams, feedlots, soil and groundwater contamination, and wastewater treatment. A number of these programs affect the City of Lino Lakes. The two main areas requiring coordination are the MS4 program and addressing impaired waters. City of Lino Lakes SWMP 1 February 8, 2013 Draft 183 The City's stormwater system is designated as a Municipal Separate Storm Sewer System (MS4) by the MPCA. The City's Storm Water Pollution Prevention Program (SWPPP) was developed to address the requirements for MS4s. A permit re- issuance is expected in August 2012. The reissued permit may require changes to the City's SWPPP. A number of Total Maximum Daily Load studies (TMDLs) are in process and others have been completed. These studies establish daily load limits for certain compounds that were found to contribute to the impairment. The City of Lino Lakes will likely have a wasteload allocation that establishes the maximum allowed discharge of the regulated pollutant for each TMDL. The Rice Creek Watershed District (RCWD) will document progress towards achieving the load reductions needed to meet the TMDL allocations for impaired water bodies within its jurisdiction. The City of Lino Lakes will provide information on a routine basis to the RCWD regarding new projects and programs that lead to load reductions needed to meet a TMDL. The Department of Natural Resources (DNR) leads programs that regulate shoreline and floodplain development, groundwater use, and conducts various efforts to support water -based recreation and quality fisheries. The City has a shoreline and floodplain ordinance that is in compliance with the DNR's standards. The Minnesota Department of Transportation (MnDOT) manages the state's transportation system including a number of highways in the City of Lino Lakes. Coordination with MnDOT is needed when an activity may impact a state highway or its right of way. The Minnesota Department of Health works to address a number of health issues, but the primary area of coordination for the City is with the protection of drinking water resources including wellhead protection and drinking water treatment. Regional Regulatory coordination on a regional level involves coordination with the Metropolitan Council and with watershed management organizations, particularly the Rice Creek Watershed District and the Vadnais Lake Area Watershed Management Organization. The City addresses the water - related concerns of the Metropolitan Council primarily through the City's Comprehensive Plan and this Plan. The Comprehensive Plan frames how the city will address issues such as housing and transportation along with water concerns noted by the Metropolitan Council. The Rice Creek Watershed District (RCWD) implements and enforces a set of rules related to stormwater and natural resource management. In addition, the RCWD is the WCA Local Government Unit (LGU) for a number of jurisdictions including Lino Lakes. The City works with the RCWD to protect and manage the wetland and water resources of the City. The Vadnais Lake Area Watershed Management Organization (VLAWMO) also works to protect and improve water resources. VLAWMO is also the WCA LGU for a number of jurisdictions including those portions of Lino Lakes within their jurisdictional boundary. 6.2. City Administration of Surface Water Management Plan The implementation of this Plan will be coordinated by staff with input from the Environmental Board. The staff will coordinate within the various departments as needed to ensure implementation of this plan over the next ten years. City of Lino Lakes SWMP I February 8, 2013 Draft 84 After this Plan is approved by the watershed organizations, the City of Lino Lakes will adopt and implement the Plan within 120 days and will update and approve its ordinances and official controls to be consistent with this Plan within 180 days. 6.3. Amendments to Surface Water Management Plan The City of Lino Lakes intends that this Plan extend through 2021. The City may need to revise this Plan prior to the next update for it to remain a useful long -term planning tool. Plan amendments will be needed if significant changes are required involving goals, policies, administrative procedures, funding or the capital improvement program, or if problems arise that are not addressed in the Plan. This Plan will remain in full effect through 2021 unless an updated plan is approved prior to that date. Technical information (i.e. from City -led studies and monitoring and new data from City partners) will require frequent updating. The City intends to post this updated information on the City website. Technical information that results in new action items will be incorporated into City operations through implementation of the City's programs, projects and watershed management strategies as appropriate. Generally, these technical updates and studies are considered part of the normal City operations consistent with the intent of this Plan and will not trigger a Plan amendment. However, when the new technical information or study findings result in a significant policy change, or the District intends to initiate a program or construct a capital improvement not sufficiently identified in the Plan, a plan amendment will be required. All major amendments to the Plan that deviate from the existing Plan scope and direction will be submitted to the Rice Creek Watershed District and the Vadnais Lake Area Watershed Management Organization for review and approval. The review process is 60 days unless the City agrees to an extension of the review period. The Plan amendment may also be submitted to the Metropolitan Council for a 45 -day review to be incorporated into the review of the RCWD and VLAWMO. City of Lino Lakes SWMP j February 8, 2013 Draft I 85 7.0 Financial Considerations Plan implementation tasks are presented in two ways. First are city -wide costs for stormwater related activities that would apply city -wide and are not specific to a certain subwatershed. Those costs are further divided into the 12 Issue Categories identified during the planning process and reflected in the City's Local Surface Water Management Plan. For cost estimating, the 12 categories are listed separately, but in the implementation of those activities from a practical stand point, there will be some activities that can be coordinated to facilitate ease of implementation. There has been an effort NOT to duplicate or create redundant funding in these costs estimates, so some efficiency of implementation is included in the costs. Secondly, implementation costs are also provided based on the subwatershed. The city contains 15 Subwatersheds of various sizes and complexity and therefore the needs of each will be unique. The management at the Subwatershed level is to reinforce the City's Comprehensive Plan approach of developing Resource Management Unit level planning and management at that Subwatershed scale. The top 3 priority subwatersheds have the costs provided with more detail due to their higher likelihood of experiencing growth and development. All the Subwatershed/RMUs will require a more detailed RMU Plan be developed for them to better detail the trunk infrastructure costs needed. Those RMU Plan costs are included in the cost estimate table for approximately half of the RMUs based on the expected need for the plans and local issues arising (development, TMDLs, etc.) Many of the items fall under past activities that have been typically included in the City's budget for stormwater infrastructure. The City currently has a Surface Water Management Charge that is updated annually based on the Engineering News Record (ENR) Index for new development to cover the cost of administration, planning, and trunk/regional infrastructure. It is recommended that this fee, updated with the new cost information, will be used to fund the Subwatershed/RMU Plans. The costs identified in the RMU studies would then be used to update the fee schedule in future years. With each RMU identified individually, the City will have the opportunity to decide if they would like the fee schedules different for the various RMUs or combined for a city -wide average. The remainder of the stormwater funding comes from the general fund of the city which also covers some of the stormwater planning and implementation needs. While this is common practice in many communities such as Lino Lakes, the more the specialized, user -fee type funds can be used, typically the more stable and adequate the funding is. Other sources of funding and revenue are also worth considering. The creation of a wetland bank as shown in the implementation plan, with time can be self - funded since there is a need for wetland bank credits. Grant opportunities at the state and local (ex. watershed) level can and should be leveraged to relieve local funding pressures and in some cases accelerate implementation. City of Lino Lakes SWMP 1 February 8, 2013 Draft 1 86 • • • • • 8.0 Glossary & Acronyms 8.1. Glossary Adaptive management An iterative process of evaluating progress toward stated goals and revising and refining implementation actions to ensure that progress is being made toward the goal. Bacteria Microorganisms that can live in a variety of conditions, some types can cause illness in humans. The quantity of E. coli, a specific type of bacteria, is used as a metric to evaluate potential fecal contamination in surface water resources. Best Management Practices (BMPs) Methods used to control the speed and total amount of stormwater that flows off a site after a rainstorm and used to improve the quality of the runoff water. Can also refer to practices for control of sediment and erosion. Climate change A long -term change in climate measures such as temperature and rainfall. Changes in climate have a large impact on water quality as well as lake and wetland water levels and stream and river flows. Eutrophication The process of increased water body productivity (growth of algae and aquatic vegetation) caused by increasing nutrient input to the water body. Floodplain The land adjacent to a water body that is expected to be inundated with water after a large rainfall event. Green infrastructure A stormwater management approach that utilizes natural landscape features and hydrologic processes to treat stormwater by infiltration, evapotranspiration, and/or reuse of runoff. Green infrastructure also achieves other environmental goals such as carbon sequestration, reductions in urban heat island effect, improved air quality, improved wildlife habitat and increased opportunities for outdoor recreation. (Definition adapted from US EPA) Groundwater Water located below ground in the spaces present in soil and bedrock. Groundwater recharge Water moving through the soil surface and deeper underground to become groundwater. Hydrology The movement of water. Often used in reference to water movement as runoff over the soil after a rainfall event as it contributes to surface water bodies. Illicit discharges Any contribution to the storm sewer system that isn't stormwater (i.e. illegal connections to the storm sewer, dumping of materials in the storm sewer). Impervious surfaces Surfaces that severely restrict the movement of water through the surface of the earth and into the soil below. Impervious surface typically refers to manmade surfaces such as non - porous asphalt or concrete roadways, buildings, and heavily compacted soils. Infiltration The movement of water into the soil. Mercury A metal that cycles between land, air and water. The primary source of mercury in water bodies is air pollution. Mercury accumulates in fish and often results in fish consumption advisories for lakes and rivers. Mercury can have toxic effects on the nervous system of animals, including humans, that eat large quantities of fish. City of Lino Lakes SWMP 1 February 8, 2013 Draft 1 87 Metals Metals dissolved in water. Typical metals included in monitoring programs are cadmium, chromium, copper, lead, nickel, and zinc. Nonpoint source pollution Pollution, such as nutrients and sediment, that are not from one distinct origin. For example, soil can run off of land throughout the watershed, it does not come from just one point. Nutrient Element essential for plant or animal growth. Major nutrients include nitrogen, phosphorus, carbon, oxygen, sulfur, and potassium. Within surface water systems, nutrients such as phosphorus and nitrogen can lead to the excessive growth of algae. Nutrient /Eutrophication Biological Indicators A surface water impairment based on high levels of nutrients that cause eutrophication and changes in the biological community. Outwash plain A region of relatively flat to undulating topography covered by sediment deposited by the glacier meltwater. Outwash is usually composed of sand, sand and gravel, or fine sand and silt. Special Area Management Plan (SAMP) The SAMP provides a watershed -based and conservation -based framework for aquatic resource management, particularly as development and redevelopment occur within the City. The SAMP addresses future water quality, quantity, flow rates and wetland function and condition in light of forecasted development and potential changes to surface and groundwater characteristics. The Army Corps of Engineers St. Paul District (Corps) uses the SAMP in its Clean Water Act Section 404 permit evaluations within the area addressed by the SAMP. Stormwater /Stormwater runoff The water that flows off a site after a rainstorm. Subwatershed A smaller geographic section of a larger watershed unit with a drainage area of typically between 2 and 15 square miles and whose boundaries include all the land area draining to a specified point. Total Maximum Daily Load (TMDL) The maximum quantity of a particular water pollutant that can be discharged into a body of water without violating a water quality standard. TMDL also refers to the process of allocating pollutant loadings among point and nonpoint sources. Watershed The geographic region within which water drains into a particular river, stream, or body of water. Water Quality Water quality is a term used to describe the chemical, physical, and biological characteristics of water, usually in respect to its suitability for a particular use. In the case of surface waters, uses are typically swimming and fishing. Wetland Restoration The re- establishment of a wetland functions in a wetland area that had previously been altered due to draining, filling or other means. City of Lino Lakes SWMP 1 February 8, 2013 Draft 88 • 8.2. Acronyms ACD Anoka County Ditch DNR Minnesota Department of Natural Resources EPA United States Environmental Protection Agency FEMA Federal Emergency Management Agency MnDOT Minnesota Department of Transportation MNRAM Minnesota Routine Assessment Method MPCA Minnesota Pollution Control Agency MS4 Municipal Separate Stormsewer System NPDES National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System RCWD Rice Creek Watershed District RMP Resource Management Plan • RMU Resource Management Unit SAMP Special Area Management Plan SWMP Surface Water Management Plan SWPPP Stormwater Pollution Prevention Plan TMDL Total Maximum Daily Load VLAWMO Vadnais Lake Area Watershed Management Organization WCA Wetland Conservation Act City of Lino Lakes SWMP February 8, 2013 Draft! 89 Proximity to, Lino Lakes IN Z Z Z Z IN /Upstream Z Z Z Z Z Continue to Use? No - CN's not documented No - CN's not documented No - CN's not documented co 3 m O o `O E . a N a a m } m a To' L 2 = Hydrology: Low/ Medium Hydraulics; High Low Modeled Land Use 'A. Existing / Do Nothing / Full Repair / RMP Existing, Future (Full Build Out), Future RMP Existing / Future (2020) O1 C X W GIS Subwatershed a to See Lino Lakes RMP yes O C a T a j Water Quality Water Quality 0 La v 3 Groundwater Groundwater Water Quality Natural Resources Regulations, Permitting and Reporting Natural Resources Erosion & Sediment Control Regulations, Permitting and Reporting �x x This includes future, specific projects (planning and implementation) that come from Subwatershed Plans. Example - Wolan Park. Potentially cost neutral with future recover of funds via sale of credits. See also RMU Subwatershed Plans. Coordinate with volume bankin•? Ex. Sprinkler kits, rain sensors Provide technical and financial resources to support an educational campaign with RCWD to encourage BMP Implementation Staff time and coordination. Mailers and printing costs Staff time and coordination. Staff time and coordination with RCWD. See also Maintenance, and Inspection Staff Time General Fund w cn Water Utility Water Utility V. C7 w General Fund General Fund General Fund General Fund General Fund — `6 ~ 0 °^ 0 N 69 $30,000 O O 69 o 0 69 O 0 649 Op O N 69 o 0 69 000`5 l $ 0 co 69 69 69 N 0 69 69 0 69 0 44 O 69 0 69 $3,400 6A 4, U 'r' R m } 0 0^ O N 69 0 0 6- 69 000`f$ 000`5$ 0 00 n 69 000`£$ 0 0 _ 69 0 00 -; 69 69 69 V R m ).- ° 69 0 0 699 000`f$ 0 o 6699 $3,000 0 69 0 669 69 44 c• 06 O 0 69 v-, 0 0 669 000`5$ OOS` 0 0 69 0 0 664 l$ O o _. 49 44 44 N tr3 ›.- O O 69 0 O 69 0 O 69 000`£$ 005'1$ 0 669 44 64 0 O c.1 69 O O V1 b9 000'E$ 000`5$ co O M 69 0 n 44 0 O fA 44 44 Construct water quality improvements during reconstruction projects or complete stand -alone projects to address TMDL requirements, water .uali or floodin • issues. Public Works Pond/Drainage Improvements Establish Wetland Bank in cooperation with RCWD and VLAWMO - Assessing feasibility of sites. Implement the wellhead protection plan to protect the groundwater source from contamination. Continue to implement the City's Water Conservation Management Plan Promote the use of rain gardens, native plantings, and reforestation within existing development areas as a means of increasing infiltration, evapotranspiration, and filtration of runoff conveying pollutant loads to the lakes. Continue water resource and stormwater education program (SWPPP) Provide annual training for City Staff on stormwater management (SWPPP) Continue to manage and protect heron rookery and other important plant and animal communities. Construction Phase - Continue to implement the City's SWPPP and enforce regulatory requirements. Update and maintain the City's website with stormwater management information CIP E m G a` Program Program E 0 E ` Program Program Program Program Program Regulations, Permitting and Reporting Regulations, Permitting and Reporting Regulations, Permitting and Reporting Regulations, Permitting and Reporting Regulations, Permitting and Reporting Regulations, Permitting and Reporting Regulations, Permitting and Reporting Maintenance & Inspection Public Participation Coordinate so it is after development of the first RMU Subwatershed Plan so specific areas of ordinance changes are known. Planning & design work. Periodic audit of process and follow through by wetland specialist. City costs include staff time and Equipment Staff time and consultant Staff time Staff time and coordination. General Fund Potential cost share with RCWD. Stormwater utility could help fund. c. ,=. 5 General Fund General Fund General Fund General Fund General Fund General Fund C7w General Fund 0 0 W 69 00 0 °� 69 00 0 0 69 00 0 69 s5 000`SZ$ 69 000`SS$ 000`05$ o °^ o o rt 0 000`OS IS 6%j O 6N9 0 0 V 649 63 0 0 CVi 64 69 000`SZ$ 0 O 0 vl 44 0 0 0 664 0 668 6's bs 6ia 0 0 E9 69 0 0 kel 669 69 000`5$ 0 0 4., 0 0 In 69 O 000`51$ 63 0 0 69 69 0 0 69 6A 0 0 N 69 6A 000`5$ 0 0 69 0 S v; eV 69 0 0 69 0 0 7 69 0 0 vi 69 0 O vi 69 0 '1., .-. 68 64 0 V) hj 64 69 000`5$ 0 o vj 44 0 o l() 44 0 0 O kr, .-. 6q 0 S V 69 69 69 0 n — 69 69 00S`Z$ 64 000`5$ 0 O 44 v 643 o 0 O .-- 69 69 68 64 0 69 69 00S`Z$ 69 0 0 0 69 0 O 69 0 0. h CA 69 0 0 0 kr) 69 Update ordinances to reflect policies identified in this plan Incorporate neighborhood stormwater planning and education into street reconstruction program. Continue to participate in pre - permit application meetings with TEP (Technical Evaluation Panel) including RCWD and Army Corps of Engineers that implements the Special Area Mana:ement Plan. Continue to update and maintain GIS database and storm sewer map (SWPPP) Sweep Streets at least twice annually (SWPPP) Inspect 20% of stromwater ponds and MS4 outfalls each year (SWPPP) Annually inspect and maintain exposed stockpiles and storage areas on City Property (SWPPP) SWPPP Updates and 5 -yr Renewal. Maintain and submit annual inspection reports, maintenance records, and other documentation in conformance with the NPDES rmit SWPPP Conduct annual maintenance on sump catch basins, structural treatment devices, and manholes, ponds and other storm water BMP's annually and keep detailed record of work performed ( SWPPP) Complete a program for inspecting and maintaining existing ponds and other BMP's Program .3 0 0. E 0 0. Program Program Program Program Program Program E 0 0. Program OD U =N C w o/a U R C i�. Regulations, Permitting and Reporting Regulations, Permitting and Reporting Financing a .2 w Public Ditch Groundwater Regulations, Permitting and Reporting Regulations, Permitting and Reporting Regulations, Permitting and Reporting Staff time and coordination. Occasional outside help on special projects. Staff time Staff Time Staff Time Staff time and coordination - periodic (5 -yr) review of city's funding approach. Feasibility Study for funding options in Year 2 Assumes no capital costs. See also RMU Subwatershed Plans for specific sites/areas. See RMU Subwatershed Plans Staff time and coordination. Assumes modeling by others. Assumes modeling by others. General Fund General Fund General Fund General Fund SWMF for Trunk Improvement s, 3w h Water Utility 0 0 s m 69 69 6H9 69 000`S I $ $5,000 69 $17,000 69 000'SZ$ 0 0 `,7,.. vi • 69 O O 0, 69 6A 69 69 O O e+ 69 69 69 69 000`Sz$ O 0 e+ 69 6A 69 664 O 0 0 6 8 68 6A 6 9 69 000,SZ$ 0 0 0 69 6 8 64 69 0 0 0^ 69 0 O M 69 69 69 69 0 O O 69 0 0 if, Pursue grants: State, Federal, Local. Ex. RCWD's Urban Stormwater Remediation Program (retrofits), VLAWMO for work in Amelia Lk watershed. Update and continue to implement TrunkSurface Water Management Fee System. Annually review mowing, road salt application, fertilizing, and herbicide practices within the City and update practices as feasible to srotect water • uali Continue to implement Elicit Discharge and Eliminartion Projgram including annual training Review and evaluate funding sources for surface water management including ad valorem taxes, development char es, rants and user fees. Review existing watershed models and work with the RCWD and VLAWMO to address flow constraints in the system. Work with the Rice Creek Watershed District on the ditch abandonment process for public subsurface (drain tile) systems and explore partial abandonment for surface (ditch) systems, in cases where the public drainage system requires redesign to implement the Multi- Functional Greenway Corridor, Prepare Wellhead Protection Plan, Part 1 Amendment Complete subwatershed management plans for the three highest priority RMUs: Reshanau/Ditch 25 RMU Marshan/Ditch 10 -22 -32 RMU E O at E O a Program Program Study Study cn Study 7 rn Study Study U N Ct czt O E O o ct Regulations, Permitting and Reporting Regulations, Permitting and Reporting Regulations, Permitting and Reporting Regulations, Permitting and Reporting Regulations, Permitting and Reporting Regulations, Permitting and Reporting Regulations, Permitting and Reporting Regulations, Permitting and Reporting Assumes modeling by others. c D VD VD General Fund 0 0 6N'9 $30,000 o 0 M9 H9 49 000`S$ 0 se m o ° Qs o° o p 6ri9 °S. es O M 69 o 0 M 69 69 69 69 0 a ter 0 iA 0 0 r, ac; es 69 I Annual Avg. City -Wide Costs j I! A a • 0 Annual Avg. RMUs Costs= Total 10 yr Cost Annual Avg. Cost= 0 r v 0 0 r, r_ N O 0 r 0 tos o o o N N EA O O V O 0 v. a es ios Clearwater Creek/Ditch 55 RMU Develop subwatershed management plans for the remaining RMUs in the following order: I. Peltier RMU 2 rx C O L 3 3. Amelia RMU 4. Hardwood Creek RMU 5. Rice Lake RMU Evaluate Revisions to Road Design Standards including: road widths, infiltration BM Ps, pervious pavements TOTAL Study Study • • • Appendix C Fully- Funded Scenario Implementation Costs (if Additional Funding is Obtained) - By Issue Category /Resource Management Unit (RMU) City -Wide Actions by Issue Category Water Rate and Quantity Year 1 Year 2 Year 3 Year 4 Year 5 $50,000 Years 6-10 $100,000 Total 10 -year Cost $150,000 Water Quality - - - - - $200,000 $200,000 Wetland Management $9,000 $7,000 $7,000 $7,000 $7,000 $35,000 $72,000 Floodplain Management $5,000 - - - - - $5,000 Public Ditch System $5,000 $50,000 - $50,000 $5,000 $50,000 $160,000 Groundwater Management $8,000 $3,000 $8,000 $3,000 $8,000 $25,000 $55,000 Natural Resources $1,000 - $1,000 - $1,000 $3,000 $6,000 Erosion and Sediment Control $5,000 $5,000 $5,000 $5,000 $5,000 $25,000 $50,000 Regulations, Permitting and Reporting $68,000 $32,000 $76,000 $42,000 $90,000 $151,000 $459,000 Monitoring, Maintenance And Inspection $110,000 $115,000 $115,000 $115,000 $115,000 $575,000 $1,145,000 Public Participation, Information & Education $2,000 $2,000 $2,000 $2,000 $2,000 $10,000 $20,000 Financing $6,000 $3,000 $3,000 $3,000 $3,000 $15,000 $33,000 Total $219,000 $217,000 $217,000 $227,000 $286,000 $1,189,000 $2,355,800 RMU- Specific Actions by Subwatershed Year 1 Year 2 Year 3 Year 4 Year 5 Years 6 -10 Total 10 -year Cost Reshanau RMU (Ditch 25) $8,000 $8,000 $200,000 $5,000 $20,000 $247,000 $488,000 Marshan RMU (Ditch 10- 22 -32) $10,000 $13,000 $24,000 $14,000 $206,000 $190,000 $457,000 Clearwater Creek RMU (Ditch 55) - $50,000 $8,000 $270,000 - $50,000 $378,000 George Watch RMU - - - - - - - Rondeau RMU - - - - - - - Peltier RMU - - - - - $65,000 $65,000 Hardwood Creek RMU - - - - - $13,000 $13,000 Upper Rice Creek RMU - - - - - - - Rice Lake RMU - - - - - $85,000 $85,000 Centerville RMU - - - - - - - Sherman RMU - - - - - - - Amelia RMU - - - - - $95,000 $95,000 Baldwin RMU - - - - - - - Middle Rice Creek RMU - - - - - - - Wilkinson RMU - - - - - - - Total $18,000 $71,000 $232,000 $289,000 $226,000 $745,000 $1,581,000