The URL can be used to link to this page

Home My WebLink About02-01-2016 Council PacketWORK SESSION AGENDA CITY OF LINO LAKES Monday, February 1, 2016 CITY COUNCIL WORK SESSION Community Room (not televised) 6:00 P.M. 1. Public Safety Vehicle Capital Replacement Plan — Fire Division, John Swenson 2. League of Minnesota Cities' Charter Assistance Program, Jeff Karlson 3. I -35W North Managed Lanes Project — Noise Wall, Michael Grochala 4. Metropolitan Council 2015 System Statement, Katie Larsen 5. Local Surface Water Management Plan Update, Michael Grochala 6. Community Development Project Update, Michael Grochala 7. MXU Change -Out Program, Rick DeGardner 8. 2015 Overlay Project Update, Diane Hankee 9. Council Updates on Boards/Commissions, City Council 10. Monthly Progress Report, Jeff Karlson 11. Review Regular Agenda 12. Adjourn WS — Item 1 WORK SESSION STAFF REPORT Work Session Item Date: February 1, 2016 To: City Council From: John Swenson, Director of Public Safety Re: Public Safety Vehicle Capital Replacement Plan — Fire Division Background As part of the 2016 Budget Adoption discussion, during the Council Work Session on December 7, 2015, Council members requested more information on the 2016 Capital Replacement Schedule and directed staff to remove the 2016 Capital Replacement portion of the 2016 Budget which was adopted at the December 14, 2015 City Council Meeting. During the December 28, 2015 Council Work Session, Council directed staff to move Capital Replacement Plan discussion to the January 4, 2016 Work Session. During the January 4, 2016 Work Session, Council requested further information which was sent to Council via email. The entire email string is attached to this report for your review. Staff has also attached photos of other light rescue / mini pumper which Custom Fire has built for other fire agencies. The current inventory as of January 30, 2016 for the Public Safety Department Fire Division is: Fire Division: YEAR DESCRIPTION MILEAGE HOURS ORIGIN 1991 Ford L8000 Toyne 250GPM/1800 Gal Tank 15,212 1,241 CFD 1995 Ford L8000/Custom Fire 1500GPM/750 Tank 71,336 Not Working Woodbury 2000 Freightliner Toyne 1250GPM/500 Tank/ 75 ft. 29,591 NA CFD 1994 Chev S10 PU - Grass Unit 13,650 N/A CFD 2004 Ford F150 Disctrict Chief 72,479 NA CFD 2012 Zodiac Boatw/trailer NA NA CFD 2000 Polaris UTV Grass Equipped w/ trailer 134.4 NA CFD 1997 Yamaha Snowmobile 255.9 NA CFD 1992 Ford L8000 Toyne 250GPM/1800 Gal Tank 11,995 1,731 CFD 1995 Ford L8000/Custom Fire 1500GPM/750 Tank 62,844 Not Working Woodbury 1994 GMC PU Grass Unit 18,043 NA CFD 2013 Ford F350 Resue 21 16,070 NA CFD 2009 Ford Escape District Chief 77,702 NA CFD 2004 Ford Expedition Fire Investigation/Inspection 93,809 NA CFD 2015 Ford Explorer AWD 4DR Deputy Director 9,634 NA Purchase 2015 Ford Explorer AWD 4DR Public Safety Capt. 7,638 NA Purchase As presented and discussed at the February 2, 2015 Council Work Session (staff report attached), staff has engaged in a process to identify a fire vehicle replacement plan that meets all industry standards, addresses all community needs in an effective and efficient manner, and most importantly puts the safety of our community members and staff as priority one. Staff recommendation for 2016 fire vehicle replacement remains the same. Staff recommends that Lino Lakes purchase two light rescue/mini pumpers in 2016. The cost of the recommended purchase is a total of $450,000 ($225,000 each). Staff recommends this purchase be funded with the dollars apportioned to Lino Lakes from the Centennial Fire District (CFD) Capital Replacement fund. Utilizing these funds in this manner is consistent with the intended use of capital replacement funds and enables the City to reduce bonding costs for equipment. The City of Lino Lakes portion of the CFD Capital Replacement fund is projected to be $744,332.41. This projected balance does not include any assets that have been purchased since the August 2014 asset distribution process. These new assets will be distributed as outlined in the JPA during the CFD Operations Committee meeting on January 14, 2016, and ratified by the CFD Steering Committee at its January 28, 2016 meeting. The purchase of two light rescue/mini pumpers will: 1. prolong the useful life of aged fire vehicles in our fleet; 2. address significant repair costs and out of service time for older apparatus; 3. reduce the size of the fire vehicle inventory; 4. improve the City of Lino Lakes Insurance Services Office (ISO) fire vehicle rating score; and 5. provide options to reduce future replacement costs. As noted in the February 2, 2015 presentation and report to Council, the light rescue/mini pumpers would be utilized as "first out" vehicles on nearly all of the fire calls for service in Lino Lakes. This will enable El 1 and E21 to be utilized as "second out" vehicles, greatly reducing their usage in the hopes of prolonging their useful life. Since purchasing Ell and E21 used from City of Woodbury in spring of 2015, the apparatus has been used for training staff. To date in 2015, Lino Lakes has incurred a total of $15,514.59 in repair costs for these pieces of apparatus. E21 was utilized more frequently for training and consequently accounted for $10,155.69 of the total repairs and Ell was utilized less frequently and accounted for $5,358.90. This demonstrates that increased usage will likely result in increased repair costs. With the purchase of two light rescue/mini pumpers, staff would recommend that fire vehicle inventory be reduced as follows: 1. Sell both grass units (1994 Chev S10 and 1994 GMC PU) which are outfitted for use during grass fires. The new light rescue/mini pumper can be utilized in the same fashion and will provide more equipment and better service in response to grass fires. 2. Upon a complete evaluation of Rescue 21 by the City's mechanic, a determination regarding whether Rescue 21 would be sold or transferred for use within the City fleet to replace current asset. The net result of this purchase would be a reduction in the Fire Division vehicle inventory by one vehicle. Staff has analyzed the ISO scoring tables for fire vehicles and determined that the purchase of two light rescue/mini pumpers would improve the City Lino Lakes ISO rating by 1,248 points (624 points per unit). With the fire vehicle inventory as on January 30, 2016, Lino Lakes ISO fire vehicle score will be 2,430 points. With the addition of the two light recue/mini pumpers, the ISO fire vehicle score would increase to 3,668. As Council may recall from previous discussion on fire matters, the ISO rating system is utilized by some insurance companies to set homeowners insurance premiums. The increased ISO scoring could result in some residents obtaining a lower homeowners insurance premium. The purchase of the two light rescue/mini pumpers will provide opportunities to reduce future fire vehicle replacement costs. The proposed light rescue/mini pumper vehicles are built on Ford F550 chassis with custom built fire components and pump. This will allow future replacement of these light rescue/mini pumpers to be accomplished by purchasing a new chassis and placing the custom built fire components and pump on the chassis. Attachments Council Work Session Staff Report — February 2, 2015 Fire Division Vehicle Replacement Schedule Information sent via email January 5 — 14, 2016 Memo from Station 1 District Chief Werpy Photos of Light Rescue / Mini Pumpers Custom Fire Plan for LLPSD Lt. Rescue / Mini Pumper WS — Item 3 WORK SESSION STAFF REPORT Work Session Item Date: February 2, 2015 To: City Council From: John Swenson, Director of Public Safety Re: Fire Apparatus/Vehicle Capital Replacement Plan Background During the Council Meeting on June 2, 2014, Council approved Resolution 14-50 which directed staff to integrate fire services for the City of Lino Lakes into the Public Safety Department. In order to effectively and efficiently plan to address the community needs for fire protection apparatus and vehicles, staff has: • reviewed the Centennial Fire District apparatus replacement plan, • reviewed available maintenance and repair records, • researched other fire organization's replacement and maintenance plans, • met with the staff at Emergency Apparatus Maintenance, • spoke with manufacturers of fire apparatus. The below table compares the Centennial Fire District (CFD) replacement plan with the LLPSD Fire Division proposed plan as well as provides a cost forecast for the purchase of fire apparatus. VEHICLE/APPARATUS CFD SCHEDULE* LINO LAKES PROSPOSED SCHEDULE COST FORECAST Tanker 31 - 1992 2016 2018 $300,000 Tanker 21 - 1991 2017 2019 $300,000 Aerial 21 - 2000 2018 2025 $1,300,000 G521 - Chev S10 - 1994 2020 ** $125,000 G531 GMC P/U - 1994 2020 ** $125,000 Rescue 21 - 2013 Not Listed ** $110,000 Staff - Ford Expedition - 2004 2015 2016 Rotate from Police Fleet Staff - Ford Escape - 2009 2019 2016 Rotate from Police Fleet Inspection Ford F-150 - 2004 Not Listed 2016 Rotate from Police Fleet Zodiac Boat Not Listed 2022 $30,000 Yamaha Snowmobile - 1997 Not Listed Evaluate in 2016 Polaris UT 14 w/trailer - 2000 Not Listed Evaluate in 2016 Woodbury EN 9517 - 1995 *** 2022 $550,000 Woodbury EN 9518 - 1995 *** 2023 $550,000 Light Rescue/Brush ** 2016 $225,000 Light Rescue/Brush ** 2016 $225,000 Deputy Director - 2015 2020 $36,000 * Based on CFD 2014 Budget documents **G521, G531 & Rescue 21 - sold with purchase of 2 Lt Rescue/Brush * * * If Council approves the purchase of this equipment As the above table demonstrates, the apparatus which Lino Lakes will take possession of as part of the distribution of the CFD assets is at or near the end of its useful life per National Fire Protection Association (NFPA) guidelines. It should be noted the apparatus which is Circle Pines and Centerville will take possession of are also at or near the end of its useful life per NFPA guidelines. The proposed replacement schedule for fire apparatus is based on the assumption that Lino Lakes purchases two used fire vehicles from Woodbury (presented in Council Work Session Agenda item #1) for use as engines/pumpers in the Lino Lakes response plan. After reviewing available repair and maintenance documents and meeting with EAM and other fire professionals, staff is confident that through proper budgeting for repairs and maintenance the proposed apparatus/vehicle replacement schedule is a responsible use of equipment in a manner that will provide financial efficiencies. Utilization of the apparatus in this manner will afford our community the opportunity to extend the replacement of fire apparatus and ensures that we address all community needs for fire protection. Requested Council Direction Staff is seeking Council input on this item. LINO LAKES PUBLIC SAFETY DEPARTMENT PROPOSED FIRE DIVISION VEHICLE REPLACEMENT SCHEDULE UNIT YEAR DESCRIPTION MILEAGE REPLACEMENT DATE REPLACEMENT COST EST. U-11 1994 *Chev S10 PU - Grass Unit 13,650 Replace w/Light Rescue U-21 1994 *GMC PU Grass Unit 18,043 Replace w/Light Rescue R-11 2013 *Ford F350 Resue 21 16,070 Replace w/Light Rescue T-21 1991 Ford L8000 Toyne 250GPM/1800 Gal Tank 15,212 2018 350,000.00 T-11 1992 Ford L8000 Toyne 250GPM/1800 Gal Tank 11,995 2019 350,000.00 600 2015 Ford Explorer AWD 4DR Deputy Director 9,634 2020 36,000.00 603 2015 Ford Explorer AWD 4DR Public Safety Capt. 7,638 2020 36,000.00 2012 Zodiac Boat w/ trailer NA 2022 25,000.00 E-11 1995 Ford L8000/Custom Fire 1500GPM/750 Tank 62,844 2022 550,000.00 E-21 1995 Ford L8000/Custom Fire 1500GPM/750 Tank 71,336 2023 550,000.00 A-21 2000 Freightliner Toyne 1250GPM/500 Tank/ 75 ft. 29,591 2025 1,500,000.00 1-1 2004 Ford Expedition Fire Investigation/Inspection 93,809 Evaluate 2016 **36000.00 C-4 2004 Ford F150 Disctrict Chief 72,479 Evaluate 2016 **36000.00 2000 Polaris UTV Grass Equipped w/ trailer 134.4 Evaluate 2016 25,000.00 1997 Yamaha Snowmobile 255.9 Evaluate 2016 12,000.00 C-3 2009 Ford Escape District Chief 77,702 Evaluate 2016 **36000.00 * Proposed to rotate out of fleet with 2016 capital vehicle purchase. ** Staff to evaluate rotation schedule for police patrol fleet. John Swenson From: John Swenson Sent: Thursday, January 14, 2016 9:01 AM To: Jeff Reinert; Rob Rafferty; Bill Kusterman; 'WDKusterman@centurylink.net; Melissa Maher; Michael Manthey Cc: Jeff Karlson; Sarah Cotton; Rick DeGardner; Michael Grochala Subject: RE: Capital Replacement - Fire Attachments: John Swenson4.vcf Staff has spoken with personnel from Custom Fire and the Ford dealership. Ford has not formally announced what changes will be made to the F550 chassis. Some of the rumored changes are moving from steel to aluminum frame, adding cross members to the frame, and changes to the electronic control system. If these are the changes the dealership is forecasting the cost will increase for the chassis. Until Custom Fire is able to review detailed specs and plans of the 2017 model they are unable to forecast costs for the 2017 model. If the rumored changes do in fact move forward, Custom Fire does anticipate increased engineering time to address the additional cross members and any • changes in the electronic control system. I think it is a good bet the costs associated with the customization for fire will likely increase with the 2017 F550 model. Staff also has some concerns with purchasing a 2017 model and thus being one of the first agencies, if not the first agency, to work through the new engineering that will need to take place as a result of the Ford changes. Custom Fire has been working with the 2016 Ford chassis for several years and has worked through the engineering process associated with installing aftermarket fire equipment on the chassis with great success. Staff is requesting that this topic be placed on the January 25th or February 1st Council Work Session. Staff needs definitive Council direction on this matter as we are holding off on decisions related to installation of vehicle graphics on assets transferred from CFD that would be sold if the proposed fire capital replacement plan is approved with the purchase of two light rescue / mini pumpers. If the proposed fire capital replacement schedule is not adopted, staff needs to begin work on creating a new fire capital replacement plan that will address our community needs and aging fire apparatus. Please advise which Council Work Session agenda this topic should be added to. John Swenson Department of Public Safety Public Safety Director (651) 982-2301 orl John.swenson©ci,lino-lakes,,.. 640 Town Center Parkway Lino Lakes, MN 55014-2189 Visit us on the web: You 1 Confidentiality Statement: This transmission and documents accompanying this transmission may contain confidential information that is legally privileged. This information is intended only for the use of the individuals or entities listed above. If you are not the intended recipient, you are hereby notified that any disclosure, copying, distribution, or action taken in reliance on the contents of these documents is strictly prohibited. If you have received this information in error, please notify the sender immediately and arrange for the return. From: John Swenson Sent: Friday, January 08, 2016 2:38 PM To: Jeff Reinert; Rob Rafferty; Bill Kusterman; 'WDKusterman@centurylink.net; Melissa Maher; Michael Manthey Cc: Jeff Karlson; Sarah Cotton; Rick DeGardner; Michael Grochala Subject: RE: Capital Replacement - Fire Attached is a memo from Station #1 District Chief Jonas Werpy. I thought you may find District Chief Werpy's knowledge and firsthand experience with light rescue / mini pumpers helpful. We are also working with Custom Fire to determine if any of the proposed changes to model year 2017 Ford F550 'chassis would further increase or decrease the cost on the proposed light rescue / mini pumpers. As directed by Council, staff is looking for further Council direction as to when to bring the fire capital replacement back to Council for further discussion. Have a great weekend! U• 14.11 KFS John Swenson Department of Public Safety Public Safety Director (651) 982-2301 orl john.swenson@ci,lino-lakes.... 640 Town Center Parkway Lino Lakes, MN 55014-2189 Visit us on the web: Confidentiality Statement: This transmission and documents accompanying this transmission may contain confidential information that is legally privileged. This information is intended only for the use of the individuals or entities listed above. If you are not the intended recipient, you are hereby notified that any disclosure, copying, distribution, or action taken in reliance on the contents of these documents is strictly prohibited. If you have received this informationin error, please notify the sender immediately and arranr for the return. From: John Swenson Sent: Tuesday, January 05, 2016 1:46 PM To: Jeff Reinert; Rob Rafferty; Bill Kusterman; 'WDKusterman@centurylink.net'; 'mantheym@Iive.com'; 'melissasmaher@gmail.com' Cc: Jeff Karlson; Sarah Cotton; Rick DeGardner; Michael Grochala Subject: RE: Capital Replacement - Fire I forgot to attach the schematic of the Lt Rescue / Mini Pumper from last night. Thank you to Council Member Rafferty for scanning this for us. John Swenson Department of Public Safety Public Safety Director (651) 982-2301 0 r i johnswenson©o lino -lakes.... 640 Town Center Parkway lino Lakes, MN 55014-2189 Visit us on the web: ` You Confidentiality Statement: This transmission and documents accompanying this transmission may contain confidential information that is legally privileged. This information is intended only for the use of the individuals or entities listed above. If you are not the intended recipient, you are hereby notified that any disclosure, copying, distribution, or action taken in reliance on the contents of these documents is strictly prohibited. If you have received this information in error, please notify the sender immediately and arrange for the return. From: John Swenson Sent: Tuesday, January 05, 2016 1:35 PM To: Jeff Reinert; Rob Rafferty; Bill Kusterman; WDKusterman@centurylink.net; mantheym@live.com; meiissasmaherOgmail.com Cc: Jeff Karlson; Sarah Cotton; Rick DeGardner; Michael Grochala Subject: Capital Replacement - Fire As directed by Council during last night's Capital Replacement discussion, staff contacted the Ford dealership that has been awarded the state bid and below is the response: From: Travis Swanson<tswanson@rosevillemidwayford.com> Date: January 5, 2016 at 10:43:13 AM CST To: "Dan L'Allier" <dan.lallierAci.lino-lakes.mn.us> Subject: Re: F-550 Chassis Per our conversation, the ordering of the 2016 SuperDuty's will most likely be cut off in February. I base this on when the 2015 model year ended last year. The 2017 model year is a body style change so most likely, the price increase for the model year will be more than usual. I recommend ordering as soon as possible to get the 2016 pricing. The best information we have at this point is Ford will not accept any new orders for the 2016 F550 Chassis in February. We were also informed that the dealership anticipates a larger than normal price increase for 2017 model. Staff was also informed that Ford will not accept any orders for the 2017 model until sometime in the fall of 2016. Staff would like further Council direction as to when to bring the capital replacement back to Council for further discussion. 3 John Swenson Department of Public Safety ••. Public Safety Director U"()L KFS ater 1,4-27.„0 1551) 932-2301 john.swensonLnci.lino-lakes.... 640 Town Center Parkway Lino Lakes, MN 55014-2189 Visit us on the web: IV You Confidentiality Statement: This transmission and documents accompanying this transmission may contain confidential information that is legally privileged. This information is intended only for the use of the individuals or entities listed above. If you are not the intended recipient, you are hereby notified that any disclosure, copying, distribution, or action taken in reliance on the contents of these documents is strictly prohibited. If you have received this information in error, please notify the sender immediately and arrange for the return. 4 Lino Lakes Public Safety Department Memo DATE: January 7, 2016 TO: John Swenson, Public Safety Director CC: Dan L'Allier, Deputy Public Safety Director — Fire Division FROM: Jonas Werpy, Station #1 District Chief RE: Light Rescue / Mini Pumper I want to share my experience with light rescue / mini -pumpers to illustrate the capabilities of these vehicles. As indicated below, the vehicle I reference is not as capable as the vehicles we are proposing for purchase here in Lino Lakes. Stillwater 6107 LLPSD Proposed Model/Year Ford/2004 Ford/2016 GPM Pump 250 1250 Class 1 engine No Yes Onboard Water 250 gallons 330 gallons I have personally responded in a light rescue / mini -pumper (that I can remember) to three structure fires. In all cases, the fires were extinguished with the water on board (250 gallons). o On Dec 18, 2008, I drove a mini -pumper to the scene of a fire with two other firefighters during a heavy snowfall. We arrived as the first piece of apparatus and were able to extinguish the fire and pull an unconscious victim from the home, resulting in his survival, and prior to any additional vehicles responding. I have been to more accidents and car fires than I can remember as the first arriving piece of fire apparatus with this type of vehicle. I have never found it insufficient to handle the incident. o One occasion we extinguished a fully -involved Heavy Duty truck and construction trailer. How we will use the Mini -pumpers It will be a multi-purpose vehicle taken on nearly all calls. It allows firefighters to respond to medicals and other service calls in a smaller vehicle (saving fuel, wear and ONE VISION. ONE MISSION. LINO LAKES PUBLIC SAFETY DEPARTMENT. tear on larger vehicles, quicker response) while at the same time being able to respond to any fires/accidents that may come in while they are out. This is a common scenario. Our intention would be to utilize these vehicles in a flexible manner. For example, a confirmed working structure fire we would likely take the full sized engine over the mini - pumper in most cases. Our utilization of cross -trained police officers will ensure fire staff gets confirmed information from the police officer on the fire scene, which will ensure that proper piece of apparatus responds based on confirmed information. These vehicles are suitable for the majority of grass fires. Using the proper hose configuration, we could handle most grass fires and any fires that threaten structures (and actually have a major advantage over the traditional grass rig in this regard). Being in the Rice Creek watershed district a major hazard is swamps, which is off limits to all vehicles and would require DNR intervention regardless of vehicle. I am happy to attend any future meetings to discuss this further and provide my first-hand experience with this type of emergency equipment or provide any other information that would assist in this process. ONE VISION. ONE MISSION. LINO LAKES PUBLIC SAFETY DEPARTMENT. _, r �d , 1.6fcc,azzcarer. +'i't7-Gri2FC13.*, f..�. irrr,Lert�frrf ... _ffll�Irfr£fZl.+"frlfflP{.'{f7fCiflf{rBifff PrIVIIrryolarr fi fi WS — Item 2 WORK SESSION STAFF REPORT Work Session Item No. 2 Date: February 1, 2016 To: City Council From: Jeff Karlson, City Administrator Re: League of Minnesota Cities' Charter Assistance Program Background The Lino Lakes Charter Commission has requested specific assistance from the League of Minnesota Cities through its Charter Assistance Program. Pursuant to Minnesota Statute § 410.06, subd 1, a charter commission may obtain legal counsel for charter revision or amendment. At the commission's request, the League is able to provide charter services by one of its staff attorneys. On January 14, 2016, the Charter Commission agreed to work with the League of Minnesota Cities on a charter amendment to establish council election wards in the City. Commission Chair Caroline Dahl sent a letter to the League requesting assistance for an amendment that would be included on the ballot for the upcoming November election. The League will only agree to provide assistance to the Charter Commission with the approval of the City Council. Requested Council Direction The City Council is being asked to support the Charter Commission's request for charter services from the League of Minnesota Cities. Attachments January 20, 2016 Letter from Caroline Dahl, Charter Commission Chair LMC's Charter Assistance Agreement January 20, 2016 Amber G. Eisenschenk Staff Attorney League of Minnesota Cities 145 University Ave. West St. Paul, MN 55103 Dear Ms. Eisenshenk, On January 14, 2016, the Lino Lakes Charter Commission formally agreed to work with the League of Minnesota Cities for a Charter amendment to establish council election wards in the City. We are requesting that you represent us and work under the direction of the Commission to accomplish this. This amendment is to be submitted to the voters of the City in the upcoming November election. The Charter Commission already has a draft amendment proposal to build upon. Commissioners request that you review the draft and re -word as needed for legality, maintaining as closely as possible the provisions therein with respect to applicable law. If applicable law requires that a provision in the draft be substantively altered, you should demonstrate why and how that is the case and suggest alternative(s) to the Commission. Research Manager Jeanette Behr, J.D. informs that "the Charter Assistance Program requires is agreement on the work to be done by the council and the commission and a signed contract. Amber will provide information on that as you explore the possibility of assistance." I look forward to hearing from you soon. Sincerely, Caroline Dahl, Chair, Lino Lakes Charter Commission LEAGUE OF MINNESOTA CITIES January 13, 2016 City of Lino Lakes Charter Commission Chair 600 Town Center Parkway Lino Lakes, MN 55014 Dear Lino Lakes Charter Commission, CONNECTING & INNOVATING SINCE 1913 This letter describes how the League's Charter Assistance Program performs charter review services. Pursuant to Minnesota Statute § 410.06, subd. 1, the charter commission may request assistance of legal counsel for charter revision and amendment. At the commission's request, the League is therefore able to provide charter review services by one of its staff attorneys. Charter review for the Lino Lakes charter commission includes review of the existing charter and recommendations for revisions. I will review the existing charter and provide viewpoint -neutral analysis and commentary in a written memorandum. I read charter provisions for conflicts with state or federal laws and court decisions. I also make recommendations to assure the charter complies with current principles of good governance, including charter fundamentals like a comprehensive grant of power, and providing for a workable, responsive organization of the city government. Additionally, I read the charter for internal consistency, brevity, clarity and mechanical errors. At the charter commission's request, I will also appear at a meeting to discuss the commentary and respond to questions. The cost of initial charter review, and attendance at one meeting if requested, is $75.00 per hour with a maximum charge of $750.00, plus any costs for mileage and overnight expenses. The League will send the bill to the Charter Commission Chair at the completion of the initial review. Any subsequent charter review or attendance at additional meetings will also be at a rate of $75.00 per hour. While I am working on behalf of the charter commission, my intent is to keep the city fully informed while in the review process. Therefore, any attorney/client relationship created between myself and the charter commission is waived with respect to the city council and the city's chief administrative officer. Additionally, I cannot begin the charter review until and unless the city is informed that the charter commission has agreed to seek review services from the League's Charter Assistance Program. The League reserves the right not to proceed with charter review upon the city's objection. The city will also receive any and all documents and reports generated from the charter review. Your city is a League member, so it is important that we have their support for any work I undertake on behalf of the Charter commission. 145 UNIVERSITY AVE. WEST ST. PAUL, MN 55103-2044 PHONE: (651) 281-1200 FAX: (651) 2814299 TOLL FREE: (800) 925-1122 WEB: WWW.LMC.ORG City of Lino Lakes January 13, 2016 Page 2 Before I begin review, please sign and return a copy of this letter to show that the charter commission understands and accepts the terms I've described. You can mail it to the League's Charter Assistance Program, Attn. Amber Eisenschenk, 145 University Avenue West, St. Paul, MN 55103, or fax it to 651-215-4127. Thank you for your request. I look forward to working with you. Sincerely, Amber G. Eisenschenk 1 Staff Attorney Tel: 651-281-1227 Cell: 612-750-4825 Fax: 651-215-4127 aeisenschenk©Imc.org 1 www.lmc.org League of Minnesota Cities 145 University Ave. West 1 St. Paul, MN 55103 Accepted by: , Charter Commission Chair Date: Cc: Jeff Karlson, City Administrator WS — Item 3 WORK SESSION STAFF REPORT Work Session Item No. 3 Date: February 1, 2016 To: City Council From: Michael Grochala Re: I -35W North Managed Lanes Project — Noise Wall Background The Minnesota Department of Transportation (Mn/DOT) is currently working on the preliminary design of the 35W North Managed Lanes Project. The I -35W north corridor has been shown to have some of the worst congestion in the metro area. The proposed project will add a lane in each direction from Highway 36 to Lexington Avenue in Blaine. The lanes will be managed under the MnPass program. Eight (8) additions spot improvements along the corridor are also being recommended as part of the project. Construction is anticipated to start in 2019. The project will include construction of noise walls along the corridor. While the added lane only extends to Lexington Avenue the project will involve some resurfacing work past Sunset Avenue and into Lino Lakes. As a result a noise wall is being proposed for the south side of the interstate. Mn/DOT constructed a sound wall along the north side of 35W in 2009. Following its completion the City received a petition from residents requesting a barrier on the south side. Construction of the newly proposed wall would address this request. Approval of the wall construction is subject to a prescribed public outreach process that ultimately provides for a vote on the wall by benefitted property owners/residents. Voting eligibility is determined by Mn/DOT after evaluation of the sound analysis. Votes are weighted in favor of the property owner in instances where the property is renter occupied. As part of the public outreach Mn/DOT has proposed three (3) public engagement alternatives as follows: 1. Noise wall committee: a. This means make a small 6 person committee in each City. Usually a staff person, an elected official, and a few members of the community that are willing to spread the word in their neighborhoods. b. This committee would approve the noise wall recommendations. The committee would meet a few times. c. The only public meeting would be the one meeting at the time of voting. 2. Public meetings per city: a. This means we would have two sets of meetings per city receiving new noise walls: This really applies to cities will multiple walls being constructed in different locations. b. The meetings would likely occur at the respective city halls. c. The first meeting would be in the April to June timeframe, be open to the public, and explain the noise wall recommendations, process, and voting procedure. d. The second meeting would be in the July to August timeframe, target the voters specifically, still be open to the public, and officially start the voting process. 3. Public meetings per wall: a. This process is the same as 2 above but would be neighborhood specific. b. Here we would try to find a facility closer to the neighborhood than city hall. Staff is recommending option 2/3. Two meetings would be held either at City Hall or at a neighborhood location such as St. Joseph's. Requested Council Direction 1. Does the Council have a preferred public engagement process? 2. Would the Council want a presentation on the project from Mn/DOT staff? Attachments 1. Project Overview Map 2. Spot Improvement Description and Map 3. Noise Wall Improvements The project ► Hwy 36 to Lexington Ave. ► Add a lane in each direction ► Noise walls will be evaluated ► 2019 construction project ($120 to 180 million) 1 I -35W North Corridor — Recommended Spot Improvements Solutions to these issues may be on the congested route or may apply to connecting routes in cases where this may provide relief. The attached figure shows the potential solutions and following bullets describe the problem locations and potential solutions. • 1-35W Southbound 1. Lane drop at CR C (bridges over railroad and CR C) ■ Extend 4 lanes across bridges; tie into existing left add - lane to Cleveland 2. Entrance from 1-694 eastbound ■ Auxiliary lane from 1-694 EB entrance to CR E2 exit 3. Exit to 1-694 westbound ■ Auxiliary lane from CSAH 96 entrance to 1-694 WB exit 4. Exit to TH 10 eastbound ■ Expand to 2 -lane exit with option lane and 2 -lane connection to TH 10 EB ■ Expand to 2 -lane exit with option lane and 2 -lane connection to TH 10 EB and SB 35W AUX lane from CR 1 Ramp to TH 10 • 1-35W Northbound 7. Exit to TH 10 westbound (queue spills back from connecting route) ■ Auxiliary lane on TH 10 WB from I -35W SB entrance to add -lane near 93rd Lane 9. Loop to loop weave from 1-694 eastbound to 1-694 westbound ■ 9a. Buffer lane through loop -to -loop weave and deceleration lane extending back to entrance from CR E2 ■ 9b. Flyover/Turbine to replace northeast loop with westbound auxiliary lane to Long Lake Rd • TH 10 Westbound (east) 11.Connection to I -35W northbound ■ Provide 2 -lane entrance to I -35W NB and carry lane to TH 10 north interchange • 1-694 Eastbound 12.Exit to I -35W northbound (queue spills back from connecting route) ■ Auxiliary lane along I -35W NB from 1-694 WB entrance to CSAH 96 exit SRF Consulting Group, Inc. 1/14/2016 H:\Projects\7574\HI-MU\Base\8598_enhancements_schematic_graphic_preferred.dgn 0 cEs 0 — — ct 1 Long Lake Road IIIA-arllllllr County Road B2 County Road C (Terminal Road) (City Centre Drive) Railroad Bridge County Road 46 (Cleveland Avenue) County Road 88 County Road D 9B: County Road 10 County Road 96 / / rte/ / /' ice / Creek : �ri' MIK ,-,-/..---0.--/ 4.0h, j=am � ` ; / �� / / 11 35W 10 Old Highway 8 5th Avenue I I I I I I I I County Road E2 (5th Street) t moo_tans r olorW e A1 ') 1, County Road F (Lake Valentine Road a tr b y County Road H County Road 1 tt Service Road County Road 96 County Road J (85th Avenue) County Road 23 (Lake Drive) LIN I I -35W NORTH CORRIDOR PRELIMINARY DESIGN PROJECT Consulting Group, int. Spot Improvement Overview Map 8598 Ramsey and Anoka County 1/14/2016 Figure 1 Jr-- - l tel firr II T a 1I Noise Walls Status Existing Wall - Reconstructed Existing Wall - Remain Unchanged Not Proposed Wall Proposed Wall January 2016 Kimley»>Horn I -35W North Managed Lanes Project Noise Receptor and Wall Locations: Page 12 of 13 Ifikt 0 ;Novi ryroFTRP� 600 1,200 Feet n Noise Wall Design Precedents Concrete Columns (Tan) Wood Planking (Brown, "Tree" Motif) 2 LANES WHEN METERP Noise Walls at County Rd 96 Interchange I -35W North Corridor Preliminary Design Project SRF IMMw Noise Wall Design Precedents Concrete ` o umns Grown) Wood Planking (Brown, "Tree" Motif) Noise Walls at County Rd 96 Interchange I -35W North Corridor Preliminary Design Project SRF WS — Item #4 WORK SESSION STAFF REPORT Work Session Item No. 4 Date: February 1, 2016 To: City Council From: Katie Larsen, City Planner Re: Metropolitan Council 2015 System Statement Background Minn. Stat. 473.145 requires the Metropolitan Council (Met Council) to adopt a comprehensive development guide for the metropolitan area. Minn. Stat. 473.175 requires the Met Council to review local government comprehensive plans to determine compatibility with this regional development guide. These plans are developed and updated every 10 years. In May 2014, the Met Council adopted Thrive MSP 2040 (Thrive) as the comprehensive development guide. It establishes the regional vision for the 7 -county metropolitan area for the next 30 years. The Met Council subsequently adopted 3 policy plans related to the 3 regional systems: 1. 2040 Transportation Policy Plan 2. 2040 Water Resources Policy Plan 3. 2040 Regional Parks Policy Plan The Met Council also adopted the 2040 Housing Policy Plan. Consistent with Minn. Stat. 473.859, subd. 2(c) and subd. 4), communities must include a housing element and implementation program in their local comprehensive plans that address existing and projected housing needs. On September 17, 2015, the Met Council issued the 2015 System Statement for Lino Lakes. The system statement explains the implications of the policy plans for each individual community. Upon receipt of the system statement, Lino Lakes is required to update its 2030 Comprehensive Plan by December 31, 2018. ANALYSIS Community Designation Thrive identifies Lino Lakes with the community designation of Emerging Suburban Edge. Emerging Suburban Edge communities include cities, townships and portions of both that are in the early stages of transitioning into urbanized levels of development. 1 These communities are expected to plan for forecasted population and household growth at average densities of at least 3-5 units per acre for new development and redevelopment. In addition, Emerging Suburban Edge communities are expected to target opportunities for more intensive development near regional transit investments at densities and in a manner articulated in the 2040 Transportation Policy Plan. Forecasts Thrive 2040 forecasts for Lino Lakes' population, households and employment are: The following chart compares the City's current 2030 Comprehensive Plan projections with Thrive 2040. 2010 (actual) 2014 (est.) 2020 2030 2040 Population 20,216 21,129 22,800 26,900 31,100 Households 6,174 6,374 7,300 9,000 10,600 Employment 3,313 3,944 4,700 5,300 6,000 The following chart compares the City's current 2030 Comprehensive Plan projections with Thrive 2040. When compared to 2030, Thrive 2040 population projections increase only 400 persons and there is no increase in the number of households. Employment projections decrease by 2,000. Housing Policy Plan Communities are required to include a housing element and implementation program in their comprehensive plan updates that address existing and projected housing needs. Housing needs include affordable housing. The Housing Policy Plan defines affordable housing as housing that is affordable to low -and -moderate income families For 2015, the affordability limit is 80% of the area median income (AMI) for both rental and ownership housing. In 2015, the area median income for a household of four is $86,600. Under these limits, a family of four can earn up to $65,800 to qualify for affordable housing. Per the System Statement, Lino Lakes' share of the region's need for low and moderate income housing for the decade of 2021-2030 is 515 new units affordable to households earning 80% of area median income (AMI) or below. In comparison, the Met Council's goal for 2011-2020 was 560 units. 2 Comp Plan 2030 Thriv 2040 Difference Population 30,700 31,100 +400 Households 10,600 10,600 0 Employment 8,000 6,000 -2,000 When compared to 2030, Thrive 2040 population projections increase only 400 persons and there is no increase in the number of households. Employment projections decrease by 2,000. Housing Policy Plan Communities are required to include a housing element and implementation program in their comprehensive plan updates that address existing and projected housing needs. Housing needs include affordable housing. The Housing Policy Plan defines affordable housing as housing that is affordable to low -and -moderate income families For 2015, the affordability limit is 80% of the area median income (AMI) for both rental and ownership housing. In 2015, the area median income for a household of four is $86,600. Under these limits, a family of four can earn up to $65,800 to qualify for affordable housing. Per the System Statement, Lino Lakes' share of the region's need for low and moderate income housing for the decade of 2021-2030 is 515 new units affordable to households earning 80% of area median income (AMI) or below. In comparison, the Met Council's goal for 2011-2020 was 560 units. 2 Affordable Housing Unit Needs for Lino Lakes Is # Housing Units At or below 30% AMI 284 31 to 50% AMI 197 51 to 80% AMI 34 Total Units To accommodate our share of the region's affordable housing need, we are required to guide residential land at densities sufficient to create opportunities for affordable housing. For example, we can guide 64 acres of residential land at 8 units per acre to satisfy our affordable housing unit needs (515 units/8 units per acre = 64 acres). This goal was met with the 2030 Comprehensive Plan by default to accommodate an overall city density at 3.0 units per acre. Transportation Policy Plan The 2040 Transportation Policy Plan is the metropolitan system plan for highways, transit and aviation to which local comprehensive plans must conform. The System Statement does not identify any major improvements or changes to the highway (I -35E, I - 35W or CR 14), transit (Metro Transit) or aviation (Seaplane Base) systems in Lino Lakes. During the comprehensive plan update, we will identify potential transit service options and review any updates to Met Council's aviation long term comprehensive plan. Other plan considerations include Regional Bicycle Transportation Network, Minor System/Functional Classification and Freight. The Regional Bicycle Transportation Network (RBTN) identifies trunk arterials of the overall bikeways system that connect to regional employment and activity centers. The RBTN identifies routes along CR 14 and CSAH 54 and through the Regional Park and these routes have already been incorporated into the City's Park, Greenway and Trail System Plan. Lino Lakes will describe and map the functional classification of all existing roads and identify any changes from the existing to proposed classifications. No freight terminals are identified in Lino Lakes. Water Resources Policy Plan The Water Resources Plan takes an integrated approach to water supply, water quality and wastewater issues and identifies key concepts to maximize the benefits of regional investments into wastewater, water supply and surface water. Lino Lakes shall development components in the comprehensive plan to address wastewater, surface water and water supply issues. The City currently has a draft Surface Water Management Plan that it anticipates adoption in early 2016. 3 Regional Parks Policy Plan The Met Council Regional Parks System includes 62 regional parks and 340 miles of regional trails. Regional parks and trails within Lino Lakes are: • Park Reserves o Rice Creek Chain of Lakes Park Reserve • Regional Trails o Bunker Hills -Chain of Lakes Regional Trail o Central Anoka Trail o Rice Creek North Regional Trail Anoka County is one of Met Council's ten regional park implementing agencies and Lino Lakes will continue to work with the County on regional park development. Requested Council Direction Discussion item only. On January 13, 2016, the Planning & Zoning Board reviewed the System Statement and had no major comments or concerns. Attachments 1. 2015 System Statement 4 bs ,ingt i. i,114.15".4Nita „,,, 01;40ww,211-ar, 04 rarripir imaiiii." wipAai ,rwarr OP, r 414,411,10A11.1. Ringili fr A 111441. ipmer FlAys'ionAinall illy A r 1f i,1 METROPOLITAN COUNCIL 2015 SYSTEM STATEMENT FOR CITY OF LINO LAKES September 17, 2015 Regional Development Plan Adoption In May 2014, the Metropolitan Council adopted Thrive MSP 2040. Following adoption of Thrive, the Council adopted the 2040 Transportation Policy Plan, the 2040 Regional Parks Policy Plan, the 2040 Water Resources Policy Plan, and the 2040 Housing Policy Plan. The Metropolitan Council is now issuing system statements pursuant to State statute. Receipt of this system statement and the metropolitan system plans triggers a community's obligation to review and, as necessary, amend its comprehensive plan within the next three years, by the end of 2018. The complete text of Thrive MSP 2040 as well as complete copies of the recently adopted metropolitan system and policy plans are available for viewing and downloading at http://www.metrocouncil.org/Communities/Planninq.aspx. Paper copies are available by calling the Council's Data Center at 651-602-1140. System Statement Definition Metropolitan system plans are long-range comprehensive plans for the regional systems — transit, highways, and airports; wastewater services; and parks and open space — along with the capital budgets for metropolitan wastewater services, transportation, and regional recreation open space. System statements explain the implications of metropolitan system plans for each individual community in the metropolitan area. They are intended to help communities prepare or update their comprehensive plan, as required by the Metropolitan Land Planning Act: Within nine months after receiving a system statement for an amendment to a metropolitan system plan, and within three years after receiving a system statement issued in conjunction with the decennial review required under section 473.864, subdivision 2, each affected local governmental unit shall review its comprehensive plan to determine if an amendment is necessary to ensure continued conformity with metropolitan system plans. If an amendment is necessary, the governmental unit shall prepare the amendment and submit it to the council for review. Local comprehensive plans, and amendments thereto, will be reviewed by the Council for conformance to metropolitan system plans, consistency with Council policies, and compatibility with adjacent and affected governmental units. Updated local comprehensive plans are due to the Council for review by December 31, 2018. What is in this System Statement The system statement includes information specific to your community, including: • your community designation or designation(s); • forecasted population, households, and employment through the year 2040; • guidance on appropriate densities to ensure that regional services and costly regional infrastructure can be provided as efficiently as possible. • affordable housing need allocation; Page - 1 1 2015 SYSTEM STATEMENT — LINO LAKES INTRODUCTION In the following sections, this system statement contains an overview of each of the system plan updates and specific system changes that affect your community. The sections are: • Transportation, including metropolitan highways, aviation, and transit • Water Resources, including wastewater, surface water, and water supply planning • Regional parks and trails Dispute Process If your community disagrees with elements of this system statement, or has any questions about this system statement, please contact your Sector Representative, Ryan Garcia, at 651-602-1832, to review and discuss potential issues or concerns. The Council and local government units and districts have usually resolved issues relating to the system statement through discussion. Request for Hearing If a local governmental unit and the Council are unable to resolve disagreements over the content of a system statement, the unit or district may, by resolution, request that a hearing be conducted by the Council's Land Use Advisory Committee or by the State Office of Administrative Hearings for the purpose of considering amendments to the system statement. According to Minnesota Statutes section 473.857, the request shall be made by the local governmental unit or school district within 60 days after receipt of the system statement. If no request for a hearing is received by the Council within 60 days, the statement becomes final. Page - 2 1 2015 SYSTEM STATEMENT — LINO LAKES INTRODUCTION Regional Development Guide The Council adopted Thrive MSP 2040 as the new regional development guide on May 28, 2014. Thrive identifies five outcomes that set the policy direction for the region's system and policy plans. Building on our region's history of effective stewardship of our resources, Thrive envisions a prosperous, equitable, and livable region that is sustainable for today and generations to come. The Council is directing its operations, plans, policies, programs, and resources toward achieving this shared long-term vision. Zai Thrive isp Three principles define the Council's approach to implementing regional policy: integration, collaboration, and accountability. These principles reflect the Council's roles in integrating policy areas, supporting local governments and regional partners, and promoting and implementing the regional vision. The principles define the Council's approach to policy implementation and set expectations for how the Council interacts with local governments. Thrive also outlines seven land use policies and community designations important for local comprehensive planning updates. The land use policies establish a series of commitments from the Council for local governments and uses community designations to shape development policies for communities. Community designations group jurisdictions with similar characteristics based on Urban or Rural character for the application of regional policies. Together, the land use policies and community designations help to implement the region's vision by setting expectations for development density and the character of development throughout the region. Community Designation Community designations group jurisdictions with similar characteristics for the application of regional policies. The Council uses community designations to guide regional growth and development; establish land use expectations including overall development densities and patterns; and outline the respective roles of the Council and individual communities, along with strategies for planning for forecasted growth. If there are discrepancies between the Thrive MSP 2040 Community Designations Map and the Community Designation map contained herein because of adjustments and refinements that occurred subsequent to the adoption of Thrive, communities should follow the specific guidance contained in this System Statement. Thrive identifies Lino Lakes with the community designation of Emerging Suburban Edge (Figure 1). Emerging Suburban Edge communities include cities, townships and portions of both that are in the early stages of transitioning into urbanized levels of development. Emerging Suburban Edge communities are expected to plan for forecasted population and household growth at average densities of at least 3-5 units per acre for new development and redevelopment. In addition, Emerging Suburban Edge communities are expected to target opportunities for more intensive development near regional transit investments at densities and in a manner articulated in the 2040 Transportation Policy Plan. Specific strategies for Emerging Suburban Edge communities can be found on Lino Lakes' Community Pape in the Local Planning Handbook. Forecasts The Council uses the forecasts developed as part of Thrive to plan for regional systems. Communities should base their planning work on these forecasts. Given the nature of long-range forecasts and the planning timeline undertaken by most communities, the Council will maintain on-going dialogue with Page - 3 1 2015 SYSTEM STATEMENT — LINO LAKES INTRODUCTION communities to consider any changes in growth trends or community expectations about growth that may have an impact on regional systems. The Thrive forecasts for population, households, and employment for your community are: 2010 (actual) 2014 (est.) 2020 2030 2040 Population 20,216 21,129 22,800 26,900 31,100 Households 6,174 6,374 7,300 9,000 10,600 Employment 3,313 3,944 4,700 5,300 6,000 Housing Policy The Council adopted the Housing Policy Plan on December 10, 2014, and amended the plan on July 8, 2015. The purpose of the plan is to provide leadership and guidance on regional housing needs and challenges and to support Thrive MSP 2040. The Housing Policy Plan provides an integrated policy framework to address housing challenges greater than any one city or county can tackle alone. Consistent with state statute (Minn. Stat. 473.859, subd. 2(c) and subd. 4), communities must include a housing element and implementation program in their local comprehensive plans that address existing and projected housing needs. The Council has also determined the regional need for low and moderate income housing for the decade of 2021-2030 (see Part III and Appendix B in the Housing Policy Plan). Lino Lakes' share of the region's need for low and moderate income housing is 515 new units affordable to households earning 80% of area median income (AMI) or below. Of these new units, the need is for 284 affordable to households earning at or below 30% of AMI, 197 affordable to households earning 31% to 50% of AMI, and 34 affordable to households earning 51% to 80% of AMI. Affordable Housing Need Allocation for Lino Lakes At or below 30% AMI 31 to 50% AMI 51 to 80% AMI Total Units 284 197 34 515 Specific requirements for the housing element and housing implementation programs of local comprehensive plans can be found in the Local Planning Handbook. Page - 4 1 2015 SYSTEM STATEMENT — LINO LAKES INTRODUCTION Figure 1. Lino Lakes Community Designation Ham Lake Spring Lake Pak Mounds — -.I View Fridley New Blaine Circle Pines Lekin`gton I Columbus Shoreview Arden Hills 6 005 1 4 Mikes Forest Lake Hugo __ i r 1 White ; L —, I r ----F3 ear `iwp. i 4 r.. North , Dellwood 1Grant 1 Oaks 1 j„ j. -r -.i' 1�' j. I - _1 L., �.� j ; - White if I ,.�. 'a_ �;---�1 Bear rir., I t. I 1 /r-- 1 Lake.7 ' j - •- "1,.., ' 1 .. —..,.I — I t• lc 1% r S�e — I Vadnais _ Heights I__,„ i , 1 Mahtomedi I Extent of Main Map / 1. - 1 I Cc.,. CAKp— j I 1- j.... Community Designations Outside Council planning authority Agricultural Rural Residential Diversified Rural Rural Center Emerging Suburban Edge Suburban Edge Suburban Urban Urban Center County Boundaries City and Township Boundaries Lakes and Major Rivers Page - 5 1 2015 SYSTEM STATEMENT — LINO LAKES INTRODUCTION TRANSPORTATION SYSTEM STATEMENT City of Lino Lakes The 2040 Transportation Policy Plan (TPP) is the metropolitan system plan for highways, transit, and aviation to which local comprehensive plans must conform. This system statement summarizes significant changes to these three systems, as well as other changes made to the Transportation Policy Plan since the last 2030 TPP was adopted in 2010, and highlights those elements of the system plan that apply specifically to your community. The TPP incorporates the policy direction and the new 2040 socio economic forecasts adopted by the Metropolitan Council in the Thrive MSP 2040, and extends the planning horizon from 2030 to 2040. Federal Requirements The TPP must respond to requirements outlined in state statute, as well as federal law, such as some new requirements included in the federal law known as the Moving Ahead for Progress in the 21St Century Act (MAP -21). For instance, metropolitan transportation plans must now be performance based, so the TPP now includes goals, objectives, and strategies outlined in chapter 2. In previous versions of the TPP the strategies were known as policies; while some are new, the wording of many strategies are similar to the wording of policies in previous plans. Performance measurements for this plan are also discussed in Chapter 12, Federal Requirements. Federal law requires the long range plan to identify regionally significant transportation investments expected to be made over the next two decades, and to demonstrate that these planned investments can be afforded under the plan's financial assumptions. Both costs and available revenues have changed since the last plan was adopted in 2010, resulting in many changes in the plan. Federal law does allow the plan to provide a vision for how an increased level of transportation revenue might be spent if more resources become available, but the programs or projects identified in this scenario are not considered part of the approved plan. The TPP includes two funding scenarios for the metropolitan highway and transit systems: the "Current Revenue Scenario" and the "Increased Revenue Scenario." • The Current Revenue Scenario represents the fiscally constrained regional transportation plan, which assumes revenues that the region can reasonably expect to be available based on past experience and current laws and allocation formulas. • The Increased Revenue Scenario represents an illustration of what be achieved with a reasonable increase in revenues for transportation. Under the Metropolitan Land Planning Act, local comprehensive plans are expected to conform to the Current Revenue Scenario, which is the official metropolitan system plan. Potential improvements in the Increased Revenue Scenario can be identified separately in local plans as unfunded proposals. A more detailed description of how to handle the various improvements in this category is included under Other Plan Considerations. In addition to reviewing this system statement, your community should consult the entire 2040 Transportation Policy Plan to ensure that your community's local comprehensive plan and plan amendments conform to the metropolitan transportation system plan. Chapter 3, Land Use and Local Planning, has been expanded and all communities should carefully review this chapter. A PDF file of Page - 6 1 2015 SYSTEM STATEMENT — LINO LAKES TRANSPORTATION the entire 2040 Transportation Policy Plan can be found at the Metropolitan Council's website: http://www.metrocouncil.orq/Transportation/Planning-2/Key-Transportation-Planninq- Documents/Transportation-Policy-Plan-(1)/The-Adopted-2040-TPP-(1).aspx. The format of the plan is slightly different than past Transportation Policy Plans. An introductory Overview, Chapter 1: Existing System and Chapter 10: Equity and Environmental Justice have been added to this version of the TPP, in addition to the changes noted in the first paragraph. Please note some modifications have been made to the appendices as well. Key Changes in the 2040 Transportation Policy Plan Adopted by the Metropolitan Council in January 2015, the revised 2040 Transportation Policy Plan incorporates the following changes: Metropolitan Highway System - Chapter 5 The Metropolitan Highway System is made up of principal arterials, shown in Fig 1-1 of the TPP and also attached to this system statement. Although no new highways have been added to this system in the 2040 TPP, the last incomplete segment of this system, TH 610, is now under construction in Maple Grove. • The TPP acknowledges that congestion cannot be eliminated or greatly reduced. The region's mobility efforts will need to focus on managing congestion and working to provide alternatives. The majority of resources available between now and 2040 will be needed for preservation, management and operation of the existing highway system. • Due to increased costs and decreased revenue expectations, many long -planned major projects to add general purpose highway lanes are not in this fiscally constrained plan. While the preservation, safety, and mobility needs of these corridors are recognized, investments in these corridors will be focused on implementing traffic management strategies, lower cost -high benefit spot mobility improvements, and implementing MnPASS lanes. Some specific projects have been identified in this plan, but funding has primarily been allocated into various investment categories rather than specific projects. The highway projects specifically identified in the Current Revenue Scenario are shown in Figure 5-8 of the TPP which is also attached to this system statement. • Modifications were made to Appendix D - Functional Classification Criteria, and Appendix F — Highway Interchange Requests. Appendix C — Project List is new and contains all of the transit and highway projects that have been identified between 2014 and 2023. Transit System - Chapter 6 The transit system plan provides an overview of the basic components of transit planning, including demographic factors, transit route and network design factors and urban design factors that support transit usage. Local governments have the primary responsibility for planning transit -supportive land use, through their comprehensive planning, and subdivision and zoning ordinances. • The TPP includes updated Transit Market Areas (shown in TPP Figure 6-3, also attached) which reflect 2010 Census information and an updated methodology that better aligns types and levels of transit service to expected demand. These market areas identify the types of transit services that are provided within each area. • The TPP includes limited capital funding for transit expansion and modernization. Opportunities primarily exist through competitive grant programs such as the regional solicitation for US DOT Page - 7 1 2015 SYSTEM STATEMENT — LINO LAKES TRANSPORTATION funding. These opportunities are guided by the strategies in the TPP and the various elements of the Transit Investment Plan. • The TPP includes an updated transitway system plan that more clearly articulates which projects can be funded within reasonable revenue expectations through year 2040 (Current Revenue Scenario as shown in TPP Figure 6-8, which is also attached). The plan includes five new or expanded METRO lines, three new arterial bus rapid transit lines, and three corridors under study for mode and alignment but identified in the Counties Transit Improvement Board's (CTIB) Phase I Program of Projects. This system was developed in collaboration with CTIB, a major partner in regional transitway expansion. • The TPP does not include operating funding for transit service expansion beyond the existing network of regular route bus, general public dial -a -ride, and Metro Vanpool. • The Increased Revenue Scenario (shown TPP Figure 6-9, which is also attached) illustrates the level of expansion for the bus and support system and transitway system that might be reasonable if additional revenues were made available to accelerate construction of the transitway vision for the region. • The plan includes updated requirements and considerations for land use planning around the region's transit system. This includes new residential density standards for areas near major regional transit investments and an increased emphasis on proactive land use planning in coordination with the planning of the transit system. Aviation System - Chapter 9 The Metropolitan Aviation System is comprised of nine airports (shown in Figure 1-9 of the TPP and also attached to this system statement) and off -airport navigational aids. There are no new airports or navigational aids that have been added to the system in the 2040 TPP. • The TPP discusses the regional airport classification system as well as providing an overview of roles and responsibilities in aviation for our regional and national partners. The investment plan in includes an overview of funding sources for projects, and an overview of projects proposed for the local airports that will maintain and enhance the regional airport system. • Modifications were made to Appendix I — Regional Airspace, Appendix J — Metropolitan Airports Commission Capital Investment Review Process, Appendix K — Airport Long Term Comprehensive Plans and Appendix L — Aviation Land Use Compatibility. Other Plan Changes Regional Bicycle Transportation Network - Chapter 7 The 2040 TPP encourages the use of bicycles as a mode of transportation. To that end, the TPP establishes for the first time a Regional Bicycle Transportation Network (RBTN). The goal of the RBTN is to establish an integrated seamless network of on -street bikeways and off-road trails that complement each other to most effectively improve conditions for bicycle transportation at the regional level. Cities, counties, and parks agencies are encouraged to plan for and implement future bikeways within and along these designated corridors and alignments to support the RBTN vision. Page - 8 1 2015 SYSTEM STATEMENT — LINO LAKES TRANSPORTATION Freight - Chapter 8 Most aspects of freight movement are controlled by the private sector, so unlike other sections of the TPP, there is not a specific plan adopted for future public sector investment in freight facilities. However, the discussion of the need for a safe and efficient multimodal freight system has been updated and expanded in the TPP to recognize challenges and opportunities for freight movement as well as the future direction of freight by mode. It acknowledges the closure of the Minneapolis Upper Harbor in 2015, leaving St Paul and Shakopee as the region's major barge terminal areas in the future. The plan also acknowledges the increase of trains since 2010 carrying oil from North Dakota on BNSF and CP rail tracks, which is expected to continue into the future. Although railroad trackage in the region was significantly decreased over the last 20 years to "right size" the system after federal deregulation, communities should not expect much additional rail abandonment. Many tracks that appear to be seldom used are owned by the smaller Class III railroads that serve local businesses by providing direct rail connections from manufacturing and warehousing/distribution facilities to the major national railroads. The major Class I railroads are approaching capacity and actually adding tracks in some locations. System Plan Considerations Affecting Your Community Lino Lakes should consult the complete 2040 Transportation Policy Plan in preparing its local comprehensive plan. In addition, Lino Lakes should consult Thrive MSP 2040 and the current version of the Metropolitan Council's Local Planning Handbook for specific information needed in its comprehensive plan. Specific system plan considerations affecting Lino Lakes are detailed below. Metropolitan Highways There are three principal arterials located within the Lino Lakes: I -35W, I -35E and CR 14. The TPP does not identify any specific regional mobility improvements on these highways, although maintenance and preservation investments will be made on all highways. Transit System Lino Lakes includes the following Transit Market Areas: Transit Market Market Area Description and Typical Transit Services Market Area IV Transit Market Area IV has lower concentrations of population and employment and a higher rate of auto ownership. It is primarily composed of Suburban Edge and Emerging Suburban Edge communities. This market can support peak -period express bus services if a sufficient concentration of commuters likely to use transit service is located along a corridor. The low-density development and suburban form of development presents challenges to fixed -route transit. General public dial -a -ride services are appropriate in Market Area IV. Lino Lakes should identify and map existing transit services and facilities in the local comprehensive plan. Lino Lakes should also work with transit providers serving their community to identify potential future transit service options and facilities that are consistent with the TPP and the applicable Transit Market Areas. Communities can find further maps and guidance for transit planning in the Transportation section of the Local Planning Handbook. Page - 9 1 2015 SYSTEM STATEMENT — LINO LAKES TRANSPORTATION Transitways Current Revenue Scenario Transitways The TPP's Transit Investment Plan does not show any transitway investments planned for Lino Lakes in the Current Revenue Scenario (TPP Figure 6-8). Increased Revenue Scenario Transitways The TPP Increased Revenue Scenario shows additional transitway corridors beyond the scope of the plan's adopted and fiscally constrained Transit Investment Plan (the Current Revenue Scenario). These corridors are listed on page 6.63 of the TPP, and TPP Figure 6-9, which is attached, shows the complete transitway vision for the region. If Lino Lakes believes it might be directly impacted by transitways in the Increased Revenue Scenario (for example, because they are participating in transitway corridor studies or feasibility analyses), the transitways may be acknowledged in the Comprehensive Plan. These additional corridors are or will be under study for mode and alignment recommendations, but they are not included in fiscally constrained plan. However, they should be clearly identified as not funded within the currently expected resources for transitways. The Council recognizes the important planning work that goes into a corridor prior to it becoming part of the region's Transit Investment Plan, especially if increased revenues were to become available. Similar to Current Revenue Scenario Transitways, communities should identify known potential stations along planned transitways and consider guiding land use policies, station area plans, and associated zoning, infrastructure, and implementation tools that support future growth around transit stations. These policies can also influence station siting in initial planning phases of transitway corridors and influence the competitiveness of a transitway for funding. Communities can find further guidance for station area planning in the Transportation section of the Local Planning Handbook and the Transit Oriented Development Guide. Aviation All communities must include an aviation element in the transportation sections of their comprehensive plans. The degree of aviation planning and development considerations that need to be included in the comprehensive plan varies by community. Even those communities not impacted directly by an airport have a responsibility to include airspace protection in their comprehensive plan. The protection element should include potential hazards to air navigation including electronic interference. Rice Lake Seaplane Base is within Lino Lakes. The long term comprehensive plan (LTCP) for this airport shown in Appendix K of the 2040 TPP has not changed from the LTCP included in the 2030 TPP adopted by the Metropolitan Council in 2010. However, updated LTCP's are anticipated prior to 2018. Communities influenced by this airport should review the LTCP to assure that the updated comprehensive plan developed by the community remains consistent with the airport plans. Consult the Local Planning Handbook for specific comprehensive planning requirements and considerations such as airport zoning, noise and other environmental mitigation, airport development and economic impacts, ground access needs, infrastructure requirements, and general land use compatibility. Page - 10 1 2015 SYSTEM STATEMENT — LINO LAKES TRANSPORTATION Other Plan Considerations Regional Bicycle Transportation Network TPP Figure 7-1 shows the RBTN as established for the first time in the 2040 TPP. The network consists of a series of prioritized Tier 1 and Tier 2 corridors and dedicated alignments (routes). The process used to develop the RBTN, as well as the general principles and analysis factors used in its development, can be found in the Bicycle and Pedestrian Chapter of the TPP. The RBTN corridors and alignments make up the "trunk arterials" of the overall system of bikeways that connect to regional employment and activity centers. These are not intended to be the only bicycle facilities in the region, and local units should also consider planning for any additional bike facilities desired by their communities. RBTN corridors are shown where more specific alignments within those corridors have not yet been designated, so local governments are encouraged to use their comprehensive planning process to identify suitable alignments within the RBTN corridors for future incorporation into the TPP. In addition, agencies should plan their local on and off-road bikeway networks to connect to the designated Tier 1 and Tier 2 alignments, as well as any new network alignments within RBTN corridors to be proposed in local comprehensive plans. Bikeway projects that complete segments of, or connect to, the RBTN are given priority for federal transportation funds through the Transportation Advisory Board's biannual regional solicitation. Figure 7-1 shows that your community currently has one or more RBTN corridors and alignments within its jurisdiction. The Council encourages local governments to incorporate the RBTN map within their local bicycle plan maps to show how the local and regional systems are planned to work together. An on-line interactive RBTN map, which allows communities to view the RBTN links in their community at a much more detailed scale than Figure 7-1, can be found in the Transportation section of the Local Planning Handbook. The handbook also includes best practices, references, and guidance for all local bicycle planning. A Minor System / Functional Classification The TPP has always recognized the A minor arterial system as an important supplement to the regional highway system, and the Transportation Advisory Board (TAB) continues to maintain the official regional map of these roads. The 2040 TPP does include an updated functional classification map (Fig. 1-2 in Chapter 1) and a modified Appendix D - Functional Classification Criteria. Communities should consult the Local Plan Handbook for more information on functional classification, how to reflect the A minor arterial system in their plan, and how to request functional classification changes if necessary. Freight The Council encourages all local governments to plan for freight movement in their communities. Trucks are the major mode of freight movement in the region and across the nation to distribute consumer goods as well as move manufactured goods and commodities, and they operate in every community. Communities with special freight facilities shown on TPP Figure 8-1, Metropolitan Freight System, (attached) should also include those additional modes and facilities in their local plan, and plan for compatible adjacent land uses. Page - 11 1 2015 SYSTEM STATEMENT — LINO LAKES TRANSPORTATION Figure 1-1 of the TPP Principal Arterials Principal Arterial - Existing ar ` *+.,~ Principal Arterial - Under Construction Reference Items Lakes and Rivers City Boundary County Boundary MUSA 2040 MPO Area AJ 0 5 10 20 Miles Nov 2014 I t t t I t t 1 I 2040 TRANSPORTATION POLICY PLAN 1 METROPOLITAN COUNCIL Figure 1-1 METROPOLITAN C OUNCII_ Page - 12 1 2015 SYSTEM STATEMENT — LINO LAKES TRANSPORTATION Figure 1-2 of the TPP Functional Class Roads Reference Items Lakes and Rivers City Boundary County Boundary "-"\_, Principal Arterial Roads MUSA 2040 MPO Area - a 0 5 10 I 1 1 1 1 20 Miles l i I Existing r_p Principal Arterial A -Minor Augmentor A -Minor Reliever A -Minor Expander A -Minor Connector eN./ Other Minor Arterial Planned Principal Arterial A-MinorAugmentor A -Minor Reliever A -Minor Expander A -Minor Connector Other Minor Arterial Thrive Planning Areas Nov 2014 Urban Core & Urban & Suburban Suburban Edge & Emerging Suburban Edge Rural Service Areas MPO Area outside the Seven County Area Page - 13 1 2015 SYSTEM STATEMENT — LINO LAKES TRANSPORTATION Figure 5-8 of the TPP Identified Projects* in Highway Current Revenue Scenario Reference Items Principal Arterial Highways Other Trunk Highways Rivers City Boundary County Boundary sil 2D40 Urban Service Area MPO Area *Nat intended to represent a!1 projects until 2040. includes only those projects identified by May 2014. Subject to change and amendment. 0 2015-2018 TIP Bridges 2019 - 2024 Bridges 0%/ Strategic Capacity a Roadside Infrastructure ON,/ Roadside Infrastructure / Safety 2015-2018 TIP Pavement '/ 2019 - 2024 Pavement Projects "No 2015 - 2018 Pavement 1 MnPass 'N/ 2015 - 2018 Pavement / Safety Tier 1 MnPASS Expansion Page - 14 1 2015 SYSTEM STATEMENT — LINO LAKES TRANSPORTATION Figure 6-3 of the TPP Transit Market Areas Sherburne Anoka IIId 1 %mo1 111111"I I 1 1 ---CScott I 1,0 Dakota ,r 0 5 10 20 Miles i Nov 2014 felA Market Area I Market Area 11 Emerging Market Area 11 Market Area 111 Page - 15 1 2015 SYSTEM STATEMENT - LINO LAKES 0 Emerging Market Area 111 Market Area IV Market Area V Freestanding Town Center TRANSPORTATION Figure 6-8 of the TPP Current Revenue Scenario Transitways and CTIB Phase I Program of Projects Sherburne Anoka Reference Items �i Principal Arterial Highways \.� Other Trunk Highways Lakes and Rivers City Boundary County Boundary 2D4G Urban Service Area MPO Area ) a Scott Dakota 0 5 10 20 Miles 1 1 1 Northstar Line 0%0 Red Line Blue Line Orange Line "ft/ Green Line Gold Line Page - 16 1 2015 SYSTEM STATEMENT — LINO LAKES - -1 IN.,/ Arterial BRT CTIB Phase l Program of Projects under study mode and alignment not yet specified Regional Multimodal Hub Noy 2014 TRANSPORTATION Figure 6-9 of the TPP Increased Revenue Scenario Transitways Building an Accelerated Transitway Vision Reference Items Principal Arterial Highways Other Trunk High+relays Lakes and Rivers City Boundary County Boundary 2040 Urban Serviee Area MPO Area Sherburne el:n c� ir1 Ramsey Penn Ave. 2. G7,4avv: Er.!eyaop -prenrv�t Ave I 3. Nasi BrZiesi sy Ave C !Sk 5. •h'ico,!s.r 5. Hernei Ave Hwy 36rNE' Midtown men en 67, ,mow m j 0c3 Scott DaKOe 10 I 20 Miles I �Northstar Line *Nu" Blue Line r`/ Green Line /N., Red Line Orange Line Gold Line Accelerated Arterial BRT Accelerated Transitways under study 1/ mode and alignment not yet specified Regional Multimodal Hub Page - 17 1 2015 SYSTEM STATEMENT — LINO LAKES Nov 2014 Increased Revenue Scenario would also include at least 1% average annual bus expansion. TRANSPORTATION Figure 7-1 of the TPP Regional Bicycle Transportation Network Vision Sherburne Wright ` • Reference Items �f Principal Arterial Roads Lakes and Rivers City Boundary County Boundary 2040 Urban Service Area MPO Area r_ 0 Carver Scott 0 5 10 I 1 1 1 I 20 Miles i I RBTN Alignments ON., Tier 1 Alignments 60w4/1NI Tier 2 Alignments RBTN Corridors (Alignments Undefined) Tier 1 Priority Regional Bicycle Transportation Corridor Tier 2 Regional Bicycle Transportation Corridors Regional Destinations • Metropolitan Job Centers • Regional Job Centers • Subregional Job Centers • Large High Schools • Colleges & Universities Highly Visited Regional Parks • Major Sport & Entertainment Centers Page - 18 12015 SYSTEM STATEMENT — LINO LAKES Nov 2014 Other Trail Systems Regional Trails (Regional Parks Policy Plan) Mississippi River Trail "Th\--` (US Route 45) "—N_, State Trails (DNR) TRANSPORTATION Figure 8-1 of the TPP Metropolitan Freight System Sherburne Reference Items Lakes and Rivers City Boundary County Boundary Wright 2040 Urban Service Area MIP 0 Area y5)j Nov 2014 Scott 0 5 10 20 Miles 'tom Principal Arterial Highways --+� Railroads (Functional and Abandoned) Freight Terminals ■ Air 1 Truck ■ Barge / Truck ■ Rail 1 Truck Page - 19 1 2015 SYSTEM STATEMENT — LINO LAKES St. Paul Inset TRANSPORTATION Figure 9-1 of the TPP Airport Service Areas -1 1 SHERBURN. ISANTI CH1ISA�G 't L W RI I G -H T w J V 2 L POLK L z�v r '^'1l SIBLEY 1!I r ti r #T 4FCM i 1 ,�'�.�-:s ter: +• `' C aR V E -R �- .+ wi 1_ ,s l^ SCQTT LE DHUE SUEUR I r, r: 10 Mlles 1213 Public Owned Public Use Airport / •Airport Compatibility Area r (3 NM's - Noise, Zoning, f f Infrastructure) « - ' (6 NM's - Land>rlls, — Mad Towers) MSP Minneapolis - St. Paul International Airport (Wold -Chamberlain Field) STP St Paul Downtown Airport (Hdman Field) ANE Anoka County- Blaine Airport (Janes Field) FCM Flying Cloud Airport MIC Crystal Argot SGS South St. Paul Airport (Fleming Field) ELM Lake Elmo Airport LVN Airlake Airport FOR Forest Lake Airport • Privately Owned Public Use Airport SFS Surf -Side Seaplane Base (Rice Lake) WPL Wipline Seaplane Base (Mrss. River) 0 Minneapolis Class -B Airspace Boundary SPermitted Seaplane Surface Waters (within 7 County Area only) VOR Protection Zone Tall Tower Areas -Aviation Facility Located in Community Community Directly Affected by Facility(s) General Airspace Notification/Protection Page - 20 1 2015 SYSTEM STATEMENT — LINO LAKES TRANSPORTATION WATER RESOURCE REQUIREMENTS/ WASTEWATER SYSTEM STATEMENT City of Lino Lakes The 2040 Water Resources Policy Plan includes policies and strategies to achieve the following goal: To protect, conserve, and utilize the region's groundwater and surface water in ways that protect public health, support economical growth and development, maintain habitat and ecosystem health, and provide for recreational opportunities, which are essential to our region's quality of life. The Policy Plan takes an integrated approach to water supply, water quality, and wastewater issues. This approach moves beyond managing wastewater and stormwater only to meet regulatory requirements by viewing wastewater and stormwater as resources, with the goal of protecting the quantity and quality of water our region needs now and for future generations. The Policy Plan includes policies and strategies to: • Maximize regional benefits from regional investments in the areas of wastewater, water supply and surface water. • Pursue reuse of wastewater and stormwater to offset demands on groundwater supplies. • Promote greater collaboration, financial support, and technical support in working with partners to address wastewater, water quality, water quantity and water supply issues. • Implement environmental stewardship in operating the regional wastewater system by reusing wastewater, reducing energy use and air pollutant emissions, and reducing, reusing, and recycling solid waste. Key Concepts in the 2040 Water Resources Policy Plan Adopted by the Metropolitan Council in May 2015, the 2040 Water Resources Policy Plan is the metropolitan system plan for metropolitan wastewater services with which local comprehensive plans must conform. The Policy Plan incorporates the following changes: • Centers on and around an integrated approach to water supply, wastewater, and surface water planning. • Promotes the investigation of the issues and challenges in furthering our work in water conservation, wastewater and stormwater reuse, and low impact development practices in order to promote a more sustainable region. • Promotes the concept of sustainable water resources where, through collaboration and cooperation, the region will take steps to manage its water resources in a sustainable way aimed at: o Providing an adequate water supply for the region o Promoting and implementing best management practices that protect the quality and quantity of our resources o Providing efficient and cost effective wastewater services to the region o Efficiently addressing nonpoint and point sources pollution issues and solutions, and, o Assessing and monitoring lakes, rivers, and streams so that we can adequately manage, protect, and restore our valued resources. • Continues the Council's position that communities that permit the construction and operation of subsurface sewage treatment systems and other private wastewater treatment systems are Page - 21 1 2015 SYSTEM STATEMENT — LINO LAKES WATER RESOURCES responsible for ensuring that these systems are installed, maintained, managed and regulated consistent with Minnesota Rules Chapter 7080-7083. • Includes requirements in Appendix C for comprehensive sewer plans, local water plans, and local water supply plans. • Establishes inflow and infiltration goals for all communities served by the regional wastewater system and requires all communities to include their inflow and infiltration mitigation programs in their comprehensive sewer plan. • Works with the State to attempt to (1) make funds available for inflow and infiltration mitigation, and (2) promote statutes, rules, and regulations to encourage I/1 mitigation. Lino Lakes should consult the complete Policy Plan in preparing its local comprehensive plan. In addition, Lino Lakes should consult Thrive MSP 2040 and the Local Planning Handbook for specific information needed in its comprehensive plan. System Plan Considerations Affecting Your Community Metropolitan Sewer Service Under state law (Minn. Stat. 473.513) local governments are required to submit both a wastewater plan element to their comprehensive plan as well as a comprehensive sewer plan describing service needs from the Council. Specific requirements for the sewer element of your comprehensive plan can be found in the Water Resources section of the Local Planning Handbook. Forecasts The forecasts of population, households, employment, and wastewater flows for Lino Lakes as contained in the adopted 2040 Water Resources Policy Plan can be found at: http://www.metrocouncil.orq/Wastewater-Water/Planning/2040-Water-Resources-Policy-Plan.aspx and on your Community Page in the Local Planning Handbook. These forecasts are for sewered development. The sewered housing forecasts were estimated using SAC data, annual city reports, current trends, existing and future local wastewater service areas and other information relating to your community. The wastewater flows are based on historical wastewater flow data, future projected wastewater generation rates, and the projected sewered population and employment data. The Council will use these growth and wastewater flow forecasts to plan future interceptor and treatment works improvements needed to serve your community. The Council will not design future interceptor improvements or treatment facilities to handle peak hourly flows in excess of the allowable rate for your community. Lino Lakes, through its comprehensive planning process, must decide the location and staging of development, and then plan and design its local wastewater collection system to serve this development. The Council will use its judgment as to where to assign growth within your community to determine regional system capacity adequacy. If Lino Lakes wishes to identify specific areas within the community to concentrate its growth, it should do so within its Comprehensive Sewer Plan. You should also note that urban development at overall densities that are substantially lower than those identified for your community in the Community Designation Section of this Systems Statement will also be analyzed by the Council for their potential adverse effects on the cost of providing metropolitan sewer service. Description of the Metropolitan Disposal System Serving Your Community Figure 1 shows the location of the Metropolitan Disposal System (MDS) serving your community. Wastewater flow from Lino Lakes is treated at the Metropolitan WWTP. Page - 22 1 2015 SYSTEM STATEMENT — LINO LAKES WATER RESOURCES Description of the Regional Inflow/Infiltration (I/I) Program The 2040 Water Resources Policy Plan states that the Council will establish 1/1 goals for all communities discharging wastewater to the MDS. Communities that have excessive 1/1 in their sanitary sewer systems will be required to eliminate excessive 1/1. The Council will continue the implementation of its on-going 1/1 reduction program. Communities identified through the program as needing to eliminate excessive 1/1 will be required to submit a work plan that details work activities to identify and eliminate sources of 1/1. The Council can limit increases in service within those communities having excess 1/1 that do not demonstrate progress in reducing their excess 1/1. The Council will meet with the community and discuss this alternative before it is implemented. It is required that those communities that have been identified as contributors of excessive 1/1, and that have not already addressed private property sources, do so as part of their 1/1 program. Significant work has been accomplished on the public infrastructure portion of the wastewater system. The Council will pursue making funds available through the State for 1/1 mitigation, and promote statutes, rules and regulations to encourage 1/1 mitigation. Management of Subsurface Sewage Treatment Systems (SSTS) and Private Systems The Metropolitan Land Planning Act requires the sewer element of the local comprehensive plan to describe the standards and conditions under which the installation of subsurface sewage treatment systems and other private wastewater treatment systems will be permitted and to the extent practicable, the areas not suitable for public or private systems. The appropriate density for development with subsurface sewage treatment systems depends on the suitability of the soils to treat wastewater and whether space is available for a primary and back up drainfield. It is the Council's position that all municipalities and counties allowing subsurface sewage treatment systems should incorporate current MPCA regulations (Minn. Rules Chapter 7080-7083) as part of a program for managing subsurface sewage treatment systems in the sewer element of their local comprehensive plan and implement the standards in issuing permits. Lino Lakes should adopt a management program consistent with state rules. An overview of Lino Lakes's management program must be included in the community's local comprehensive plan update. If adequate information on the management program is not included; the comprehensive plan will be found incomplete for review until the required information is provided to the Council. Specific requirements for the local comprehensive plan can be found in the Local Planning Handbook. Small private treatment plants are located throughout the Metropolitan Area serving such developments as individual industries, mobile home parks, and other urban type uses. The Council's position is that such private wastewater treatment plants should be permitted only if they are in areas not programmed for metropolitan sewer service in the future and they are provided for in a community's comprehensive plan that the Council has approved. Furthermore, the community is responsible for permitting all community or cluster wastewater treatment systems consistent with Minnesota Rules Chapter 7080- 7083 and MPCA standards. The Council will not provide financial support to assist communities if these systems fail. Lino Lakes should include in the sewer element of its local comprehensive plan the conditions under which private treatment plants or municipal treatments would be allowed, and include appropriate management techniques sufficiently detailed to ensure that the facilities conform to permit conditions. Lino Lakes is responsible for ensuring that permit conditions for private treatment plants are met and financial resources to manage these facilities are available. Page - 23 1 2015 SYSTEM STATEMENT — LINO LAKES WATER RESOURCES Surface Water Management In 1995, Minnesota Statutes Section 473.859, subd. 2 was amended to make the local water plan (often referred to as local surface water management plans) required by section 1036. 235 a part of the land use plan of the local comprehensive plan. Minnesota Rules Chapter 8410, updated in July of 2015, includes the requirements for local water management plans. The main change that you need to be aware of is that all communities in the metropolitan area must update their local water plan between January 1, 2017 and December 31, 2018. This means that Lino Lakes must update its local water plan as part of the comprehensive plan update. The community's updated local water plan should be submitted to the Council for its review concurrent with the review by the Watershed Management Organization(s) within whose watershed(s) the community is located. Failure to have an updated local water plan will result in the comprehensive plan being found incomplete for review until the required plan is provided to the Council. Local water plans must meet the requirements for local water plans in Minnesota Statutes, section 1036.235 and Minnesota Rules Chapter 8410. In general, local surface water plans need to include a summary of the priorities and problems in the community; structural, nonstructural and programmatic actions to take to address the priorities and problems; and clearly identified funding mechanisms to fix the problems. More detailed guidance for the local water plans can be found in Appendix C of the Council's 2040 Water Resources Policy Plan and in the Council's current Local Planning Handbook. In addition, the Council has also updated its priority lake list that was first developed in the 1980s as part of the Water Resources Policy Plan update. Figure 2 shows the priority lakes for Lino Lakes. The Council uses the priority lake list to focus its limited resources. The list is also used in the environmental review process. Where a proposed development may impact a priority lake, the project proposer must complete a nutrient budget analysis for the lake as part of the environmental review process. Also included on Figure 2 is the watershed organization(s) that Lino Lakes is part of and a list of impaired waters in the community for use in development of your local water plans. Other Plan Considerations Water Supply Local comprehensive plans also address water supply (Minn. Stat., Sec. 473.859). For communities in the metropolitan area with municipal water supply systems, this local comprehensive plan requirement is met by completing the local water supply plan template, which was jointly developed by the Metropolitan Council and the Minnesota Department of Natural Resource (DNR). FOR COMMUNITIES WHO OWN/OPERATE A PUBLIC WATER SUPPLY SYSTEM: Because your community owns/operates a municipal community public water supply system (PWS), the local water supply plan must be updated as part of the local comprehensive plan (Minn. Stat., Sec. 103G.291). The updated local water supply plan should include information about your community along with information about any neighboring communities served by your system. You should update your local water supply plan upon notification by DNR. Local water supply plan due dates will be staggered between January 1, 2017 and December 31, 2018. Your updated local water supply plan should be submitted to the DNR. DNR will share the plan with the Council, and it will be Page - 24 1 2015 SYSTEM STATEMENT — LINO LAKES WATER RESOURCES reviewed concurrently by both agencies. This schedule allows the local water supply plans to be completed and included in the local comprehensive plan. Failure to have an updated local water plan will result in the comprehensive plan being found incomplete for review until the required plan is provided to the Council. The water supply plan template fulfills multiple statutory obligations including: • Minn. Stat., Sec. 103G.291 to complete a water supply plan including demand reduction • Minn. Stat., Sec. 473.859 to address water supply in local comprehensive plans • Minn. Administrative Rules 4720.5280 to address contingency planning for water supply interruption The plan must be officially adopted by your community, and if applicable the utility board, as part of the local comprehensive plan. At a minimum, the updated local water supply plan must use the joint DNR and Metropolitan Council template and include water demand projections that are consistent with the community's population forecast provided in the introductory section of this system statement. Potential water supply issues should be acknowledged, monitoring and conservation programs should be developed, and approaches to resolve any issues should be identified. Guidance and information for water supply planning can be found in the Appendix C of the 2040 Water Resources Policy Plan, the Local Planning Handbook, and the Council's Master Water Supply Plan. The Council's Master Water Supply Plan provides communities in the region with planning assistance for water supply in a way that: • Recognizes local control and responsibility for owning, maintaining and operating water systems • Is developed in cooperation and consultation with municipal water suppliers, regional stakeholders and state agencies • Protects critical habitat and water resources over the long term • Meets regional needs for a reliable, secure water supply • Highlights the benefits of integrated planning for stormwater, wastewater and water supply • Emphasizes and supports conservation and inter -jurisdictional cooperation • Provides clear guidance by identifying key challenges/issues/considerations in the region and available approaches without dictating solutions Figures 3-5 illustrate some water supply considerations that the community may consider as they develop their local water supply plans, such as: aquifer water levels, groundwater and surface water interactions, areas where aquifer tests or monitoring may be needed to reduce uncertainty, regulatory and management areas, and emergency interconnections. Page - 25 1 2015 SYSTEM STATEMENT — LINO LAKES WATER RESOURCES Figure 1. MCES Sanitary Sewer Meter Service Areas City of Lino Lakes, Anoka County Ham Lake Blaine Ta Meter # M207 MP Mil 6367 M Circle Pines To Meter # M205 To Meter # M211 To Mete Y+u: # M204 Shoreview Columbus To Meter # M219 Gmo Lino Lakes Centerville MI m Meter Ia' M # M210 7651 Forest Lake Hugo To Meter # M220 61 -- North I^ Oaks I` White Bear Twp. us 2 Miles Interceptors by Type - outfall - Gravity - Low Head Crossing - Forcemain - Bypass - Siphon Areas of Unmetered Flow into the Community Rural Center WWTP Service Areas 2040 MUSA Interceptor Meter Sery ice Areas ;1 Meters A� Lift Stations 4, M MCES Wastewater Treatment Plants To Meter # 700 Aieas Not Served r _I County Boundaries E -_--J City and Township Boundaries Lakes and Rivers NCompass Street Centerlines Park, Recreational or Preserve Goll Course Page - 26 1 2015 SYSTEM STATEMENT — LINO LAKES WATER RESOURCES Figure 2. Surface Water Resources Lino Lakes, Anoka County "� Forest COON CREEKColumbus Rondeau Lake }fir fff F oo d Cree4. 2 Hugo C U g Bald Eagle –_ Blaine— Lino Lakes – 1, RICE Peltier George Watch '. ' Ness Marsham //r/ t entervffF ..__._–.•--- – Circle Or Rice f Centerville Sherman ftLshanaur;sy' .,1 Pines Golden 4f IRici: _– •,� -y,8aldwin /, //pAurelia VADNAIS 'LAKE AREA r , tatter 1 ----- Evergreen ' Normwraxrnson ILp Shoreview Evergreen Poplar 1 Oaks tt i Whillte Bear Twp. 0.5 2 Watershed Management Organization Boundaries O Impaired Lakes (2014 Draft MPCA 303(d) List) Watershed Management Organization Type -+v- Impaired Rivers & Streams (2014 Draft MPCA 303(d) List) County ji. 2014 Priority Lakes Watershed District Watershed Management Organization E._ County Boundaries 1_1 1 City and Township Boundaries Other Lakes and Major Rivers – Other Streams NCompass Street Centerlines Page - 27 1 2015 SYSTEM STATEMENT – LINO LAKES WATER RESOURCES Figure 3. Surface water features and interaction with the regional groundwater system, and state -protected surface water features Lino Lakes • Harr ;ke Columbus ti r Forest Lake • Shoreview North Oaks Lakes and Major Rivers spring (DNR) Surface water type (regional screening by Met Council) Disconnected from the regional groundwater system • Calcareous Fen {DNR) Recharges aquifers Trwt Scream (DNR) Receives and discharges groundwater li Karst Feature (DNR) - Supported by upwelling groundwater White Bear Twp. Page - 28 1 2015 SYSTEM STATEMENT — LINO LAKES WATER RESOURCES Figure 4. Availability of MN Department of Natural Resources groundwater level and MN Department of Health aquifer test data Lino Lakes i HarnfLake—i CI Columbus\ !- Forest Lake 1 I 1/ , '----4--,..- --.." Hugo 1, i Blaine Liao Lakes ' - ` ) Centerville, • . N.? j Circle Pinesrir-N i N, ,7 i °• H ---\\ rd P ,. ! ; , , , Shoreview --1 f— "'� North`Oaks 1 White Bear Twp. Lakes and Major Rivers lbObservation well showing no trend in annual minimum values (DNR) • Observation well showing an upward trend in annual minimum values (DNR) 0 Observation weir showing a downward trend in annual minimum values DNR 0 Observation well with insufficient data to evaluate a trend in annual minimum values {MIR) 6 Aquifer Test (MOH) Page - 29 12015 SYSTEM STATEMENT — LINO LAKES WATER RESOURCES Figure 5. Municipal public water supply system interconnections and regulatory management areas Lino Lakes 0.5 1 2 3 411 lies Lakes and Major Rivers The community's most recent local water supply plan reports that the public water supply system has no interconnections 111111 The community's most recent local water supply plan reports that the public water supply system has one or more interconnections Special Well and Boring Construction Area (MDH) North and East Metro Groundwater Management Area (DNR) - Moderate to Highly Vulnerable Dniking Water Supply Management Area (MDH) Drinking Water Supply Management Area for Minneapolis/St Paul 4121100 Page - 30 12015 SYSTEM STATEMENT — LINO LAKES WATER RESOURCES REGIONAL PARKS SYSTEM STATEMENT City of Lino Lakes The Regional Parks System includes 62 regional parks, park reserves, and special recreation features, plus more than 340 miles of regional trails that showcase the unique landscapes of the region and provide year-round recreation. The Regional Parks System is well -loved by our region's residents and attracted over 48 million annual visits in 2014. The organizational structure of the Regional Parks System is unique, built upon a strong partnership between the Council and the ten regional park implementing agencies that own and operate Regional Parks System units. The regional park implementing agencies are: Anoka County Ramsey County City of Bloomington City of Saint Paul Carver County Scott County Dakota County Three Rivers Park District Minneapolis Park and Recreation Board Washington County The 2040 Regional Parks Policy Plan was developed based on furthering the Thrive MSP 2040 outcomes of Stewardship, Prosperity, Equity, Livability, and Sustainability. Thrive MSP 2040 states that the Council will collaborate with the Metropolitan Parks and Open Space Commission, the regional park agencies, and state partners to: • Expand the Regional Parks System to conserve, maintain, and connect natural resources identified as being of high quality or having regional importance, as identified in the 2040 Regional Parks Policy Plan. • Provide a comprehensive regional park and trail system that preserves high-quality natural resources, increases climate resiliency, fosters healthy outcomes, connects communities, and enhances quality of life in the region. • Promote expanded multimodal access to regional parks, regional trails, and the transit network, where appropriate. • Strengthen equitable usage of regional parks and trails by all our region's residents, such as across age, race, ethnicity, income, national origin, and ability. Key Concepts in the 2040 Regional Parks Policy Plan The 2040 Regional Parks Policy Plan includes the following policies, each with specific associated strategies: • Recreation Activities and Facilities Policy: Provide a regional system of recreation opportunities for all residents, while maintaining the integrity of the natural resource base within the Regional Parks System. Page - 31 1 2015 SYSTEM STATEMENT — LINO LAKES REGIONAL PARKS • Siting and Acquisition Policy: Identify lands with high-quality natural resources that are desirable for Regional Parks System activities and put these lands in a protected status so they will be available for recreational uses and conservation purposes in perpetuity. • Planning Policy: Promote master planning and help provide integrated resource planning across jurisdictions. • Finance Policy: Provide adequate and equitable funding for the Regional Parks System units and facilities in a manner that provides the greatest possible benefits to the people of the region. • System Protection Policy: Protect public investment in acquisition and development by assuring that every component in the system is able to fully carry out its designated role as long as a need for it can be demonstrated. The 2040 Regional Parks Policy Plan is the metropolitan system plan for regional recreation open space with which local comprehensive plans must conform. This system statement highlights the elements of the system plan which apply specifically to your community. Find the complete text of the 2040 Regional Parks Policy Plan on the Council's website. 2040 Regional Parks System Facilities The Regional Parks System is comprised of four main types of facilities: regional parks, park reserves, special recreation features and regional trails. Regional Parks Regional parks most notably contain a diversity of nature -based resources, either naturally occurring or human -built, and are typically 200-500 acres in size. Regional parks accommodate a variety of passive recreation activities. Park Reserves Park reserves, like regional parks, provide for a diversity of outdoor recreation activities. One major feature that distinguishes a park reserve from a regional park is its size. The minimum size for a park reserve is 1,000 acres. An additional characteristic of park reserves is that up to 20 percent of the park reserve can be developed for recreational use, with at least 80 percent of the park reserve to be managed as natural lands that protect the ecological functions of the native landscape. Special Recreation Features Special recreation features are defined as Regional Parks System opportunities not generally found in the regional parks, park reserves or trail corridors. Special recreation features often require a unique managing or programming effort. Regional Trails Regional trails are classified as 1) destination or greenway trails and 2) linking trails. Destination or greenway trails typically follow along routes with high-quality natural resources that make the trail itself a destination. Linking trails are predominately intended to provide connections between various Regional Parks System facilities, most notably regional parks or park reserves. Page - 32 1 2015 SYSTEM STATEMENT — LINO LAKES REGIONAL PARKS 2040 Regional Parks System Components The 2040 Regional Parks Policy Plan identifies six components which together comprise the vision for the Regional Parks System in 2040, as described below. Existing Regional Parks System Facilities: include Regional Parks System Facilities that are open for public use. These facilities include land that is owned by regional park implementing agencies, and may include inholding parcels within the boundaries of these parks and trail corridors that have not yet been acquired. Existing regional trails may include planned segments that will be developed in the future. Planned Regional Parks System Facilities (not yet open to the public): include Regional Parks System Facilities that have a Council -approved master plan and may be in stages of acquisition and development, but are not yet open for public use. Regional Parks System Boundary Adjustments: include general areas identified as potential additions to existing Regional Parks System Facilities to add recreational opportunities or protect natural resources. Specific adjustments to park or trail corridor boundaries have not yet been planned. Regional Park Search Areas: include general areas for future regional parks to meet the recreational needs of the region by 2040 where the regional park boundary has not yet been planned. Regional Trail Search Corridors: include proposed regional trails to provide connections between Regional Parks System facilities where the trail alignment has not yet been planned. 2040 Regional Trail Search Corridor System Additions: include regional trail search corridors that were added to the Regional Parks System as part of the 2040 Regional Parks Policy Plan. Key Changes in the 2040 Regional Parks Policy Plan Adopted by the Metropolitan Council in February 2015, the 2040 Regional Parks Policy Plan incorporates the following changes: Identify all proposed regional trails as regional trail search corridors All proposed regional trails that are not yet open to the public and do not have a Metropolitan Council approved master plan are represented as a general regional trail search corridor. The 2030 Regional Parks Policy Plan depicted these trails with a proposed alignment. The alignment of these regional trails will be determined in the future through a planning process led by the regional park implementing agency. The alignment of these trails is subject to Metropolitan Council approval of a regional trail master plan. Acquire and develop ten new regional trails or trail extensions to meet the needs of the region in 2040. The 2040 Regional Trail Search Corridor Additions include: Carver County: • County Road 61 • Highway 41 Page - 33 1 2015 SYSTEM STATEMENT — LINO LAKES REGIONAL PARKS Three Rivers Park District: • CP Rail Extension • Dakota Rail Extension • Lake Independence Extension • Lake Sarah Extension • Minnetrista Extension • North-South 1 • North-South 2 • West Mississippi River The 2040 Regional Parks System Plan Map is depicted in Figure 1. Lino Lakes should consult the complete 2040 Regional Parks Policy Plan in preparing its local comprehensive plan. In addition, Lino Lakes should consult Thrive MSP 2040 and the current version of the Metropolitan Council's Local Planning Handbook for specific information needed in its comprehensive plan. System Plan Considerations Affecting Your Community Regional Parks System Components in your community The following Regional Parks System Components within Lino Lakes as identified in the 2040 Regional Parks Policy Plan are listed below. Regional Parks, Park Reserves, and Special Recreation Features Rice Creek Chain of Lakes Park Reserve: This is an existing park reserve with an established boundary. The park reserve boundary as shown in Figure 2 should be acknowledged in the comprehensive plan. Regional Trails Bunker Hills -Chain of Lakes Regional Trail: This is a regional trail that includes segments that are open to the public as well as planned segments that will be developed in the future. The regional trail travels through Blaine and Lino Lakes as it connects Bunker Hills Regional Park, Rice Creek North Regional Trail and Rice Creek Chain of Lakes Park Reserve. The regional trail alignment as shown in Figure 2 should be acknowledged in the comprehensive plan. Central Anoka Regional Trail: This is a regional trail that includes segments that are open to the public as well as planned segments that will be developed in the future. The regional trail travels through Ramsey, Andover, Ham Lake, Blaine, Lino Lakes, and Centerville as it connects Mississippi West Regional Park, Rum River Regional Trail, Bunker Hills Regional Park, East Anoka County Regional Trail and Rice Creek Chain of Lakes Park Reserve. The regional trail alignment as shown in Figure 2 should be acknowledged in the comprehensive plan. Rice Creek North Regional Trail: This is a regional trail that includes segments that are open to the public as well as planned segments that will be developed in the future. The regional trail travels through New Brighton, Arden Hills, Shoreview, Circle Pines, and Lino Lakes as it connects Long Lake Regional Park, Rice Creek West Regional Trail, Highway 96 Regional Trail, Lexington Parkway Regional Trail Search Corridor, and Rice Creek Chain of Lakes Park Reserve. The regional trail alignment as shown in Figure 2 should be acknowledged in the comprehensive plan. Page - 34 1 2015 SYSTEM STATEMENT — LINO LAKES REGIONAL PARKS Chain of Lakes -Otter Lake Regional Trail Search Corridor: The regional trail search corridor travels through Centerville and Lino Lakes as it connects Rice Creek Chain of Lakes Park Reserve and Bald Eagle -Otter Lake Regional Park in White Bear Township. A master plan identifying the alignment of the Chain of Lakes -Otter Lake Regional Trail has been approved since adoption of the 2040 Regional Parks Policy Plan. The alignment of the regional trail should be acknowledged in the local comprehensive plan. Anoka County will lead a planning process in the future to determine the alignment of the regional trail. When preparing its comprehensive plan, Lino Lakes should verify whether a master plan has been approved by the Metropolitan Council. If a master plan has been approved, the planned regional trail alignment should be acknowledged in the comprehensive plan. Otherwise, the general search corridor as shown in Figure 2 should be acknowledged in the comprehensive plan. Please contact Anoka County for more information regarding Regional Parks System Components in Lino Lakes. Page - 35 1 2015 SYSTEM STATEMENT — LINO LAKES REGIONAL PARKS Figure 1. 2040 Regional Parks System Plan Map Regional Parks System Twin Cities Metropolitan Area Anoka County Rarn'sey 1 rw 1 Washington, County ' •I County r' tl I 1 I Garner - - h - -Iu--- County' I I i I } I `{r''k LA —I • 1 r (4i y r•` ` r - I it 4 J I o _ Fri pakofa -County . w 01 A -- i + f ) l,Ea ,z,rJ1 i N 0 2 r J �k. 10 10 20 Mies Regional Parks Regional Parks Park Reserves Special Recreation Features v2 Planned Units Regional Trail Corridor Land Regional Trails — Existing -- Planned Regional Park Search Areas and Regional Trail Search Corridors • Boundary Adjustments Search Areas Regional Trail Search Corridors Regional Trails - 2040 System Additions Existing State Trails Lakes and Major Rivers Minnesota Valley National Wildlife Refuge State Parks ediState Wildlife Management Areas (Publicly Accessible) Scientific and Natural Areas (SNA) Other Parks and Preserves Page - 36 1 2015 SYSTEM STATEMENT — LINO LAKES REGIONAL PARKS Figure 2. Regional Parks System Facilities in and adjacent to Lino Lakes Regional Parks System City of Lino Lakes, Anoka County Ham Lake i Columbus Blaine Central Anoka Calmly siker !f!sl Chafe of Lakes 1 Centerville cenaa; .lr, ok;; Ct?u.' O _ j Creek Norm Circle Pines Shoreview 1 North -� Oaks White Eagle-Orter Bear Twp. take I Forest I Lake Hugo 4. —1 a Regional Parks Regional Parks Park Reserves Special Recreation Features /7, Planned Units Regional Trail Corridor Land Regional Trails — Existing - - - Planned Regional Park Search Areas and Regional Trail Search Corridors • Boundary Adjustments Search Areas Regional Trail Search Corridors Regional Trails - 2040 System Additions Page - 37 12015 SYSTEM STATEMENT — LINO LAKES Existing State Trails Street Centerlines (NCompass) Lakes and Major Rivers Minnesota Valley National Wildlife Refuge State Parks State Wildlife ManagementAreas (Publicly Accessible) Scientific and Natural Areas (SNA) Other Parks and Preserves REGIONAL PARKS WS — Item # 5 WORK SESSION STAFF REPORT Work Session Item No. 5 Date: February 1, 2016 To: City Council From: Michael Grochala Re: Local Surface Water Management Plan Background The City of Lino Lakes is required to prepare a Surface Water Management Plan that must, at a minimum, meet the requirements for local plans in Minnesota Statutes, Section 103B.235 and be 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 which subsequently required an update to the City's plan. The plan provides an assessment of the City's land and water resources, identifies issues and establishes goals and policies for 12 management categories, identifies proposed actions to implement the plan and estimated costs, as well as describing the process to administer the plan and coordinate with other local and regional agencies. The City Council authorized preparation of the plan in June of 2011. The City's Environmental Board reviewed the plan, prepared by EOR, Inc., at their March 27, 2013 regular meeting and recommended approval of the plan. Under state law the plan must be distributed for review and comment to RCWD, VLAWMO, Metropolitan Council, and Anoka County prior to City approval of the document. The plan was approved for distribution by the City Council on May 13, 2013 (Resolution 13-64). No comments were received from the Vadnais Lake Area Water Management Organization (VLAWMO) or Anoka County. Metropolitan Council completed its review in June of 2013 and commended the City on its proactive approach to water management. The City received comments from the RCWD in July of 2013 requesting modification to the plan primarily related to intercommunity surface water flows. This led to continued discussions with the RCWD regarding the NE Drainage Area. Additional language was added to the plan to acknowledge the City's work on the NE Drainage Area and that implementation of planning for the area would be subject to RCWD rules and approvals. The RCWD Board of Managers approved the plan on January 13, 2016. Pursuant to Minn. Stat. 103B.235 Subd. 4 and as a result of the approval by RCWD and Metropolitan Council, as described above, the City of Lino Lakes shall adopt and implement its plan within 120 days of watershed adoption (no later than May 12, 2016) and shall amend its official controls accordingly within 180 days (no later than July 13, 2016). Staff does not anticipate the need for any further amendments to official controls, outside of the NE Drainage Area, as a result of the plans adoption. The City's Stormwater, Erosion and Sediment Control ordinance was amended in 2015. Requested Council Direction Staff is requesting council direction to place the item on the February 8, 2016 agenda for approval. Attachments 1. EOR Inc., Recommendation 2. Final Surface Water Management Plan technical memo ECR w a t e r c o i o g „r'mmnnity Project Name To / Contact info 1 Cc / Contact info 1 From / Contact info 1 Regarding Lino Lakes Surface Water Management Plan Date 01.22.16 Mike Grochala, City of Lino Lakes Jason Naber, Brett Emmons, EOR City Council Approval of Lino Lakes LSWMP It is recommended that the City Council of Lino Lakes consider the adoption of the Local Surface Water Management Plan (LSWMP). Minnesota Rules Chapter 8410, subd. 9b. requires a schedule for implementation of local water plans that requires all local water plans to be adopted not more than two years before the local comprehensive plan is due. The following timeline summary indicates that the City has completed the requirements pursuant to the entirety of Minn. Stat. 103B.235 for Local Water Management Plans, including Subd.1 and Subd. 2: As referenced in the letter the City provided the Rice Creek Watershed District (RCWD) with the LWSMP on June 6, 2013. On July 16, 2013, and within the required 60 day review period pursuant to section 103B.235 Subd. 3, the City of Lino Lakes received the attached comments from RCWD on the LSWMP dated March 25, 2013 (See Attachment A). On July 11, 2013, and within the required 45 day review period pursuant to section 103B.235 Subd. 3a the City of Lino Lakes, the Vadnais Lakes Area Watershed Management Organization (VLAWMO), and RCWD received the attached comments on the LSWMP from the Metropolitan Council (See Attachment B). Prior to and culminating on December 15 and 23, 2015 EOR submitted to the City of Lino Lakes, and forwarded to RCWD, a response to the most recent RCWD comments pursuant to 103B.235 Subd. 5 (See Attachment C). This memo was reviewed by RCWD and later revised to reflect suggested changes (reflected in redlines). On January 13, 2016, RCWD Board of Managers approved the City of Lino Lakes LSWMP pursuant to Minn Stat. 103B.235 Subd. 3 (See Attachment D). Pursuant to Minn. Stat. 103B.235 Subd. 4 and as a result of the approval by RCWD and Metropolitan Council, as described above, the City of Lino Lakes shall adopt and implement its plan within 120 days of watershed adoption (no later than May 12, 2016) and shall amend its official controls accordingly within 180 days (no later than July 13, 2016). RCWD has respectively requested that a copy of the City's resolution or motion of local adoption be forwarded to the District Office (Attachment D). Emmons & Olivier Resources, Inc. 651 Hale Ave N. Oakdale, MN 55128 T/ 651.770.8448 www.eorinc.com page 1 of 1 Attachment A ��'RCWD •-vis,--rri RICE CREEK WATERSHED DISTRICT July 16, 2013 Michael Grochala Community Development Director City of Lino Lakes 600 Town Center Parkway Lino Lakes, MN 55014 RE: City of Lino Lakes LSWMP Comments Dear Mr. Grochala, The Rice Creek Watershed District (RCWD) has completed a formal review of the City of Lino Lakes Local Surface Water Management Plan (LSWMP) for compliance with the current RCWD Watershed Management Plan, as well as MN Statutes 1036.235 and MN Rules 8410. The reviewed plan was dated March 25, 2013 and received by the District on June 6, 2013. The plan is largely compliant in terms of formatting and the general level of detail provided, however, the District offers a few comments that must be addressed before staff can recommend that the LSWMP be approved by the RCWD Board of Managers. 1. Page 5 and elsewhere as appropriate: RCWD Rules RMP -2 and RMP -3 have been consolidated into Rule F as of June 26, 2013 (effective date: July 1, 2013). The District understands that the LSWMP was drafted during its Rule revision process, but suggests that the LSWMP be amended accordingly. 2. Page 34: RCWD's floodplain modeling effort is complete. The language indicates that it is still underway in 2012. This section is not current. 3. As in comment #2, several portions of the plan read as though they were written in 2012 and have not been reviewed for accuracy since then. Please ensure that the plan is up-to-date in this fashion. 4. A map should be included that clearly shows which areas of the City are under the jurisdiction of RCWD and VLAWMO, respectively. 5. No land cover map was found within the plan. A current land cover map using MLCCS or other land cover data should be included. This could be inserted after Figure 21. 6. Policy 4.1.1.0 is no longer consistent with RCWD Rule C. Please modify this policy to be in alignment with RCWD Rule C.5(f) and C.6(f). 7. The TMDL discussions are generally very good, but appear to omit discussions of key downstream impaired waters such as Middle Rice Creek and Long Lake (New Brighton). If TMDL's were to be developed for these waterbodies, Lino Lakes would likely be listed as a regulated MS4. 8. The City's Shoreland, Floodplain and Erosion Control ordinances and MS4 SWPPP should be attached as appendices to the LSWMP 9. The plan must acknowledge and identify those locations where flows leave the City and are transferred downstream, with some assessment of the estimated rate assuming full build out 4325 Pheasant Ridge Drive NE #6111 Blaine, MN 55449 1 T: 763-398-3070 1 F: 763-398-3088 1 www.ricecreek.org BOARD OF Barbara A. Haake Steven P. Wagamon Harley M. Ogata Patricia L. Preiner John J. Waller MANAGERS Ramsey County Anoka County Ramsey County Anoka County Washington County conditions and describe measures being implemented to reduce flows if necessary. Keep in mind that implementation of RCWD Rules will ensure that peak runoff rates are not increased. Locations of "intercommunity flows" leaving the City are listed on the attached sheets. We look forward to reviewing a revised draft for possible consideration by the RCWD Board of Managers. Thank you for your commitment to the preservation and enhancement of water resources within the Rice Creek Watershed and the City of Lino Lakes. If you have any further questions please contact me at (763) 398-3072 or kaxtell@ricecreek.org. Kyle Axtell Water Resource Specialist Cc: Brett Emmons, EOR Judy Sventek, Met Council Stephanie McNamara, VLAWMO Enc. Rice Creek Watershed District District Wide Modeling Final Report Table 8 Planning Region Peak Discharges and Runoff Volumes. Planning Region 2 year, 24 hour precipitation event 10 year, 24 hour precipitation event 100 year, 24 hour precipitation event 100 year, 10 day snowmelt runoff event Peak Discharge (cfs) Volume* (ac -ft) Peak Discharge (cfs) Volume* (ac -ft) Peak Discharge (cfs) Volume* (ac -ft) Peak Discharge (cfs) Volume* (ac -ft) Upper Rice Creek 178.3 925 289.3 1,734 413.5 2,978 439.4 7,068 Hardwood Creek 195.0 517 303.2 922 422.0 1,724 413.1 6,003 Clearwater Creek 91.6 657 180.8 1,436 491.4 3,182 907.5 9,392 Middle Rice Creek 111.2 1,165 272.6 2,967 575.6 6,315 1,207.2 18,136 Lower Rice Creek 349.2 2,705 743.5 6,247 1285.7 11,881 1534.7 27,413 *Volume for 24 hour event is the volume over a 7 day period following start of a 24 -hr event, and 13 days following the start of the 10 day event 4.3.3 Intercommunity Flows The final category identified in the WMP as Regional Assessment Locations are intercommunity flows. The public drainage systems of the Rice Creek Watershed District convey much of the stormwater discharge between the cities within the District, and are relatively easy locations to quantify, assess, and manage stormwater discharge. Figure 10 shows the locations of intercommunity flows along the public drainage systems and public waterways of the District. A summary of modeled peak discharges for each of these locations is provided in Table 9. These discharges are based upon current land uses and provide a benchmark for evaluating potential intercommunity issues. In the future, the conveyance capacity of these locations can be compared to current and projected flows, and subsequently be assessed for any potential deficiencies. These values may also be used by the cities to assess the adequacy of capacity within the conveyance system. HEI Project No. R11.5555-060.19 Page 23 of 54 RCWD Account No. 60-19-4500 Rice Creek Watershed District District Wide Modeling Final Report Table 9 Intercommunity Flows. Discharging City Receiving City Watercourse Peak Flows (cfs) 2 -Year, 24 -Hour Rainfall 10 -Year, 24-hour Rainfall 100 -Year, 24-hour Rainfall 100 -Year, 10 -Day Snowmelt Arden Hills Mounds View Rice Creek 225 460 761 1377 Arden Hills New Brighton Lake Johanna Outlet 40 72 96 109 Arden Hills Shoreview RCD 1 Main Trunk 3 9 12 29 Blaine Circle Pines ACD 53-62 Main Trunk 48 88 132 153 Blaine Lino Lakes ACD 53-62 overflow to ACD 10-22-32 (Sunset Ave.) 3 5 13 24 Blaine Mounds View ARJD 1 Main Trunk 53 72 89 83 Blaine Shoreview Rice Creek 68 145 632 1326 Centerville Lino Lakes AWJD 3 Main Trunk 195 303 422 413 Circle Pines Blaine Rice Creek 113 284 632 1325 Columbus Lino Lakes Rice Creek 158 265 443 426 Columbus Lino Lakes ACD 10-22-32 Branch 4 1 3 7 7 Columbus Lino Lakes ACD 10-22-32 Main Trunk 2 6 14 15 Dellwood White Bear Twp. RWJD 1 Main Trunk 38 101 254 248 Forest Lake Columbus AWJD 4 Branch 4 5 13 20 30 Forest Lake Columbus AWJD 4 Branch 3 4 6 13 28 Forest Lake Columbus AWJD 4 Main Trunk 31 73 140 148 Forest Lake Columbus Rice Creek 11 21 36 37 Forest Lake Hugo AWJD 2 Main Trunk 83 235 713 1044 Grant Dellwood Private Open Channel 34 49 59 64 Grant Dellwood Private Open Channel 2 4 7 13 Hugo Forest Lake AWJD 2 Main Trunk 36 100 469 673 Hugo Grant Private Open Channel 26 47 54 33 Hugo Lino Lakes AWJD 2 Main Trunk 92 186 497 945 Hueo Lino Lakes Lino Lakes Centerville AWJD 3 Main Trunk 160 266 439 394 Lino Lakes Circle Pines RCD 8 Main Trunk 6 14 29 36 Lino Lakes Circle Pines Rice Creek 111 273 570 1206 Lino Lakes Hugo AWJD 3 Branch 4 25 40 66 34 Lino Lakes Hugo AWJD 3 Branch 1 8 14 25 24 Mounds View New Brighton Rice Creek 243 480 782 1376 Mounds View Shoreview ARJD1 Main Trunk 75 126 202 142 New Brighton Fridley Rice Creek 338 715 1093 1530 Roseville Arden Hills RCD 4 Main Trunk 290 423 594 298 Roseville New Brighton RCD 5 Main Trunk 36 35 36 31 Shoreview Arden Hills Rice Creek 195 397 667 1379 Shoreview Lino Lakes RCD 8 Main Trunk 3 8 19 28 St. Anthony New Brighton RCD 3 Main Trunk 164 225 173 151 White Bear Lake White Bear Twp. RCD 11 Main Trunk 17 29 44 37 HEI Project No. R11.5555-060.19 RCWD Account No. 60-19-4500 Page 24 of 54 Attachment B AAA Metropolitan CouncilAA Environmental Services July 11, 2013 Stephanie McNamara, Administrator Vadnais Lakes Area Watershed Management Organization 800 East Co. Rd. E Vadnais Heights, MN 55127 RE: Lino Lakes Local Water Management Plan Metropolitan Council Reviews File No. 21135-1 Dear Ms. McNamara: Metropolitan Council staff (Council) has completed its review of the City of Lino Lakes' Local Surface Water Management Plan update (plan), dated June 2013. The plan provides an excellent foundation for the city to manage its water resources, and is consistent with Council policies, and the Council's Water Resources Management Policy Plan. The city, in cooperation with Rice Creek Watershed District, has completed a Resource Management Plan that divides the city into 15 resource management units (RMUs). These RMUs were used in formulating the plan, and one of the implementation activities is completion of detailed subwatershed management plans for the three highest priority RMUs. The Council commends Lino Lakes on its proactive approach and willingness to work with the watershed district to improve water management in the city. One minor suggestion to improve the plan would be to include a map clearly showing which areas of the city are included in Rice Creek Watershed District and Vadnais Lake Watershed Management Organization. Thank you for the opportunity to comment on this plan. If you have any questions regarding our comments you can contact Joe Mulcahy at 651-602-1104. Sincerely, William Moore Deputy General Manager Cc: Michael Grochala, Community Development Director, City of Lino Lakes Brett Emmons, EOR Sandy Rummel, Metropolitan Council District 11 Keith Buttleman, Assistant General Manager, Environmental Quality Assurance Lisa Barajas, Manager, Metropolitan Council Local Planning Assistance Raya Esmaeili, Metropolitan Council Reviews Coordinator Joe Mulcahy, Water Resources Assessment Section www.metrocouncil.org 390 Robert Street North • St. Paul, MN 55101-1805 • (651) 602-1005 • Fax (651) 602-1477 • TTY (651) 291-0904 Art Equal Opportunity Employer 2,4 Metropolitan Council AA July 11, 2013 Phil Belfiori, Administrator Rice Creek Watershed District 4325 Pheasant Ridge Dr. NE, Suite 611 Blaine, MN 55449-4539 RE: Lino Lakes Local Water Management Plan Metropolitan Council Reviews File No. 21135-1 Dear Mr. Belfiori: Environmental Services Metropolitan Council staff (Council) has completed its review of the City of Lino Lakes' Local Surface Water Management Plan update (plan), dated June 2013. The plan provides an excellent foundation for the city to manage its water resources, and is consistent with Council policies, and the Council's Water Resources Management Policy Plan. The city, in cooperation with Rice Creek Watershed District, has completed a Resource Management Plan that divides the city into 15 resource management units (RMUs). These RMUs were used in formulating the plan, and one of the implementation activities is completion of detailed subwatershed management plans for the three highest priority RMUs. The Council commends Lino Lakes on its proactive approach and willingness to work with the watershed district to improve water management in the city. One minor suggestion to improve the plan would be to include a map clearly showing which areas of the city are included in Rice Creek Watershed District and Vadnais Lake Watershed Management Organization. Thank you for the opportunity to comment on this plan. If you have any questions regarding our comments you can contact Joe Mulcahy at 651-602-1104. Sincerely, William Moore Deputy General Manager Cc: Michael Grochala, Community Development Director, City of Lino Lakes Brett Emmons, EOR Sandy Rummel, Metropolitan Council District 11 Keith Buttleman, Assistant General Manager, Environmental Quality Assurance Lisa Barajas, Manager, Metropolitan Council Local Planning Assistance Raya Esmaeili, Metropolitan Council Reviews Coordinator Joe Mulcahy, Water Resources Assessment Section www.metrocouncil.org 390 Robert Street North • St. Paul, MN 55101-1805 • (651) 602-1005 • Fax (651) 602-1477 • TTY (651) 291-0904 An Equal Opportunity Employer Attachment C technical memo EOZ water ecology community Project Name 1 Lino Lakes Surface Water Management Plan To / Contact info 1 Mike Grochala, City of Lino Lakes Cc / Contact info 1 From / Contact info 1 Jason Naber, Joe Pallardy; EOR Regarding 1 City of Lino Lakes LSWMP Comments and Updates Date 1 12.1-523.15 The following comments were offered in the RCWD December 2, 2015 letter to the City of Lino Lakes regarding its submitted LSWMP, which is pending final approval from the RCWD. The plan review process has been protracted and the city wishes to work cooperatively with the RCWD to finalize this document so the city can move onto implementing the plan. Following the summary of each comment and response, proposed plan language, citing the comment, is attached for consideration and discussion at our meeting scheduled for Dec. 15, 2015. Comment from RCWD Dec, 2, 2015 Letter 1. Section 2.2, RCWD Management Plans and Rule F: RCWD Rules RMP -2 and RMP -3 have been consolidated into Rule F as ofJune 26, 2013 (effective date: July 1, 2013). Note that the consolidation of the RMP rules does not replace the need for permit review under District Rules C and F, as indicated in this section; the requirements of each rule must still be met. Response: Text updated on pages 5 and 6 of SWMP. See yellow highlighted sections below. Rice Creek Watershed District WMP The Rice Creek Watershed District Watershed Management Plan was last updated in November of 2014. 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 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. RCWD rule RMP -3 was consolidated into Rule F on June 26, 2013. RMP rules do not replace the need for permit review under District Rules C and F, the requirements of each rule must still be met. Emmons & Olivier Resources, Inc. 651 Hale Ave N. Oakdale, MN 55128 T/ 651.770.8448 www.eorinc.com page 1 of 5 Comment from RCWD Dec. 2, 2015 Letter 2. Section 2.2, Downstream Impairments: Rice Creek Watershed Management District should be corrected to Rice Creek Watershed District to avoid confusion that the management District is a subset of the District itself Response: Text updated on page 4 of SWMP. See yellow highlighted section below. Downstream Impairments: Middle Rice Creek Middle Rice Creek includes a stretch of river that extends from Baldwin Lake in Circle Pines to Long Lake in New Brighton. This stretch of Rice Creek is impaired for aquatic recreation and aquatic life caused by accelerated erosion and sedimentation. Middle Rice Creek flows into North Long Lake which is currently listed as impaired for excess nutrients (eutrophication). The impairment for North Long Lake was deferred by the MPCA due to extremely short water residence times in the lake, but a TMDL study for Middle Rice Creek will be completed as part of a future Watershed Restoration and Protection Plan. Lino Lakes will likely be listed as a regulated MS4 when this TMDL is developed. The Rice Creek Watershed District was recently awarded a BWSR Clean Water Fund grant. The grant is a targeted watershed demonstration grant with the ultimate goal of improving water quality in Long Lake. Grant funds will be used to stabilize the banks of Middle Rice Creek to reduce sediment and nutrient transport to Long Lake and for carp management and control for Long Lake. Comment from RCWD Dec, 2, 2015 Letter 3. Section 3.14, Intercommunity Flows (For the following comments, see Houston Engineering Technical Memo dated July 9, 2015) • Revision required in the first paragraph, sentence beginning with "The City is evaluating...', the improvements being evaluated by the city are not to the agricultural drainage system; rather the city is proposing an alternate outlet for build out conditions pursuant to the development of a Comprehensive Stormwater Management Plan (CSMP) under RCWD Rule C.5 (f). The City will develop with the RCWD an outlet with no adverse impacts to water quality and rate. • The wording "allowable flows" is a misnomer, as "allowable flows', does not necessarily mean any adverse impacts, which is the requirement of RCWD Rules and is determined by District engineer. • Lastly, a statement should be included indicating that the City intends to propose alternative standards (stormwater rules) to demonstrate no adverse impacts through the use of the proposed CSMP. Response: Text updated on page 61 of SWMP. See yellow highlighted section below. Emmons & Olivier Resources, Inc. - page 2 of 5 3.14. Intercommunity Flows The City of Lino Lakes is surrounded by several neighboring communities and receives watershed runoff from Blaine, Centerville, Columbus, Hugo, Shoreview, and White Bear Township. Rice Creek Watershed District (RCWD) has estimated the flows to its jurisdictional reaches and, as such, downstream communities, like Lino Lakes, are required to include their allocated flows in their future planning studies, so as to limit adverse impacts to their downstream neighbors of Centerville, Hugo and Circle Pines (Figure 28). The city is contemplating an alternate outlet for build -out conditions pursuant to the development of a Comprehensive Stormwater Management Plan (CSMP) under RCWD Rule C.5 (f). Intercommunity flows and modeled peak flow rates as provided by RCWD are shown below (Table 8). A detailed figure showing all stormwater ponds, streams, lakes and wetlands and structural pollution control devices, pipes, pipe sizes, and conveyances is provided as a larger map in Appendix E. Comment from RCWD Dec. 2, 2015 Letter 4. Section 4.1: • Section should also include discussion on the city's intent to adopt alternative standards or "special rules" within the ACD 55 drainage area to ensure no adverse impacts by limiting the rate of discharge to be less than existing conditions. The City should indicate their proposed Comprehensive Stormwater Management Plan (CSMP) as their approach to reaching these standards. Note that the District would adopt these standards as well. • Statement "Without mitigation, the inevitable impacts from the proposed development will be increased volume and increased peak flows of surface water runoff' is true locally, but not if served by ACD 55, which would restrict downstream flows. Please incorporate this into the text. Response: Text updated on page 63, 64 of SWMP. See yellow highlighted section below. 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. The City of Lino Lakes is planning for development of 1,400 acres east of Peltier Lake, North of Main Street. Furthermore, the City of Hugo is planning for development of a 215 acre area; both areas are currently being drained by Anoka County Ditch 55 (ACD 55). Currently, precipitation events larger Emmons & Olivier Resources, Inc. - page 3 of 5 than 0.25 inches results in surface water ponding and surface water runoff within the ACD 55 drainage area (Houston Engineering, 2013b). Without -an alternative outlet or increased capacity development may be limited mitigation, the inevitable impacts from the proposed development will be increased volume and increased peak flows of surface water runoff within the ACD 55 drainage area. This would may exacerbate current flooding up stream in the ACD 55 system since ACD 55 restricts downstream flows and can only accommodate a small amount of flow. Sediment loads, and with it pollutants and contaminants, would also increase. Flow from the 215 -acre area within the City of Hugo may be up to 62 CFS during the 100 -year 24-hour storm. Additionally, 54 CFS will be generated from the 534 acre area within Lino Lakes that is currently served by ACD 55. The ACD 55 infrastructure currently reaches capacity at 1-2 CFS. As a result, the City of Lino Lakes is contemplating a new conveyance system and outlet structure to Peltier Lake from the 1,400 acre development area, which would be subject to review and approval by the RCWD via the CSMP. This may require the development of alternative standards (stormwater rules) to demonstrate no adverse impacts through the use of RCWD Comprehensive Stormwater Management Plan (CSMP) provisions. Emmons & Olivier Resources, Inc. - page 4 of 5 Comment from RCWD Dec. 2, 2015 Letter 5. Table 8: In Table 8, it is not clear what is meant by overtopping, the asterisk, the double asterisk, or the highlighted portions. Please revise the table for clarity, utilizing the below table if needed. Response: Table 8 updated, page 62 of SWMP. Table 8. Lino Lakes Intercommunity Flows. Discharging City Lino Lakes1 Receiving City Centerville Watercourse AWJD 3 Main Trunk 2 -Year, 24 -Hour Rainfall 160 Peak Flow (cfs) 10 -year, 100- 100 -Year, Year, 24- 10 -Da 24 -Hour Hour y Rainfall Rainfall Snowmelt 266 439 394 Lino Lakes1 Circle Pines RCD 8 Main Trunk 6 14 29 36 Lino Lakes1 Circle Pines Rice Creek 111 273 570 1206 Lino Lakes' Hugo AWJD 3 Branch 4 25 40 66 34 Lino Lakes1 Hugo AWJD 3 Branch 1 8 14 25 24 Lino Lakes2 Centerville ACD 55 Main Trunk 4.7 20.2* 63.4* --- 1 Source: Table 9, Intercommunity Flows, RCWD District Wide Modeling Program Summary, Houston Engineering, Inc., February 24, 2012. 2 Source: Hydraulics and Hydrology Evaluation - Anoka County Ditch 55, Houston Engineering, Inc., May 6, 2013. *Includes overflow/over topping Emmons & Olivier Resources, Inc. - page 5 of 5 Attachment D Lrh.,„RCWD IRA RICE CREEK WATERSHED DISTRICT January 13, 2016 Michael Grochala Lino Lakes City Hall 600 Town Center Parkway Lino Lakes, MN 55014 Re: Lino Lakes Local Surface Water Management Plan Approval Dear Mr. Grochala, The Board of Managers of the Rice Creek Watershed District (RCWD) is pleased to inform you that at their January 13, 2016 regular meeting the RCWD approved the City of Lino Lakes Local Surface Water Management Plan as submitted on December 28, 2015. We appreciate the City's efforts to protect and improve the water resources in Lino Lakes and the Rice Creek Watershed. The District looks forward to collaborating and working together with the City on the implementation of the Plan. We respectively request that a copy of the City's resolution or motion of local adoption be forwarded to the District office. Sincerely, Samantha Berger District Technician Cc: Jason Naber - EOR Enc: RCWD Resolution 2016-01 4325 PlAzaya.w-Ridge Drove NE #011 I 13Laim-e', MN 55449 I T: 763-398-3070 I F: 763-398-3088 Iw-ww: vit.-et-rex-1c. org BOARD OF MANAC,ERS 13a--1,aro' A. Ha-rLey M. Patlriaia, L. Stevew P. Jo -14,w J. Ho-a-k.e Oga4-a Prei,h -r Wagawww WaLLer Wai0.9+aw Ravielyey Cou y Ra.uwyey Couwhy Av..mk,a Couvvhy AK.ok,c, Lowy Gly CITY. LLNOL KES City of Lino Lakes Surface Water Management Plan George Watch Lake Peltier �f Lake ■ City of C - R.aTIj i!r] • f.■..r.�jl ��Ihoa mr- , ^ i� E 71=1 YY'nm 4,I.. eke RMU Rice Lake Lau Wilkinson 41 I December, 2015 Prepared by Emmons & Olivier Resources, Inc. water ecology community Document Component Specs Text: Staples • multipurpose paper, 24 Ib. text — 50% post-consumer fibers, FSC Certified. Back Cover: Neenah Paper • Esse • Texture, Sapphire • 100 Ib. cover • 30% post-consumerfibers, Green Seal® Certified Wire Binding: Manufactured using recycled high carbon steel 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 8 3.1. History 8 3.2. Resource Management Framework 10 3.3. Climate & Precipitation 12 3.4. Topography 13 3.5. Geology 13 3.6. Soils 16 3.7. Groundwater Resources 19 3.8. Surface Water Resources 24 3.9. Stormwater Management System 40 3.10. Land Use 44 3.11. Unique Natural Features 49 3.12. Pollutant Sources 53 3.13. Water Resource Related Agreements 61 3.14. Intercommunity Flows 61 4.0 Identified Issues, Goals and Policies 64 4.1. Water Rate & Quantity 64 4.2. Water Quality 65 4.3. Wetland Management 67 4.4. Floodplain Management 67 4.5. Public Ditch System 68 4.6. Groundwater Management 69 4.7. Natural Resources 69 4.8. Erosion & Sediment Control 70 4.9. Regulations, Permitting and Reporting 71 4.10. Monitoring, Maintenance & Inspection Issues 71 4.11. Public Participation, Information & Education 72 4.12. Financing 73 City of Lino Lakes SWMP 1 December 20151 i 5.0 Implementation Activities 74 5.1. City -Wide Actions 74 5.2. Priority RMU Specific Actions 79 5.3. Other RMU Actions 85 5.4. Implementation Costs 88 6.0 Administration 90 6.1. Regulatory Coordination 90 6.2. City Administration of Surface Water Management Plan 91 6.3. Amendments to Surface Water Management Plan 92 7.0 Financial Considerations 93 8.0 Glossary & Acronyms 94 8.1. Glossary 94 8.2. Acronyms 96 Appendix A Summary of Relevent Modeling Appendix B Breakdown of Implementation Plan Activities Appendix C Fully -Funded Scenario Implementation Costs Appendix D Water -Related Local Ordinances 1. Shoreland Management Overlay 2. Flood Plain Management 3. Stormwater and Erosion and Sediment Control 4. NPDES Storm Water Pollution Prevention Plan (SWPPP) & Application for Reauthorization Appendix E Stormwater Management Plan Map City of Lino Lakes SWMP 1 December 20151 ii List of Tables Table 1. Monthly Averages, 1981-2010 12 Table 2. Design Storm Events 13 Table 3. Soil hydrologic groups 16 Table 4. Impaired Waters in Lino Lakes 25 Table 5. Summary of Flooding Concerns by Resource Management Unit 38 Table 6. Documented Rare Features in Lino Lakes 50 Table 7. Number of Potential Environmental Hazard Sites in City of Lino Lakes 56 Table 8. Lino Lakes Intercommunity Flows, Yellow highlighted areas represent critical flows 62 Table 9. City -Wide Actions 76 Table 10. RMU Specific Actions: Reshanau RMU 82 Table 11. RMU Specific Actions: Marshan RMU 83 Table 12. RMU Specific Actions: Clearwater Creek RMU 85 Table 13. RMU Specific Actions: George Watch RMU 85 Table 14. RMU Specific Actions: Rondeau RMU 85 Table 15. RMU Specific Actions: Peltier RMU 86 Table 16. RMU Specific Actions: Hardwood Creek RMU 86 Table 17. RMU Specific Actions: Upper Rice Creek RMU 86 Table 18. RMU Specific Actions: Rice Lake RMU 87 Table 19. RMU Specific Actions: Centerville RMU 87 Table 20. RMU Specific Actions: Sherman RMU 87 Table 21. RMU Specific Actions: Amelia RMU 87 Table 22. RMU Specific Actions: Baldwin RMU 88 Table 23. RMU Specific Actions: Middle Rice Creek RMU 88 Table 24. RMU Specific Actions: Wilkinson RMU 88 Table 25. Estimated Costs of City -Wide Actions in 2012 dollars 89 Table 26. Estimated Costs of RMU-Specific Actions in 2012 dollars 89 City of Lino Lakes SWMP 1 December 20151 iii List of Figures Figure 1. City of Lino Lakes Location Map [from SAMP] 9 Figure 2. Resource Management Units [from Comprehensive Plan] 11 Figure 3. Surficial Geology 14 Figure 4. Bedrock Geology 15 Figure 5. Hydrologic Soil Group 17 Figure 6 Infiltration Potential within the Rice Creek Watershed District [from RCWD, 2003 Infiltration Implementation Study] 18 Figure 7. Groundwater contours [from RCWD 2009 Groundwater Planning & Management Program] 20 Figure 8. Groundwater recharge and discharge areas [from RCWD 2009 Groundwater Planning & Mgt. Program] 21 Figure 9. Groundwater dependent resources [from RCWD 2009 Groundwater Planning & Mgt. Program] 22 Figure 10. Areas not recommended for infiltration [from RCWD 2009 Groundwater Planning & Mgt. Program] 23 Figure 11. Pollutant reductions required by TMDLs completed within the City of Lino Lakes boundary29 Figure 12. Impaired Lakes within the City of Lino Lakes 29 Figure 13. St. Paul Water Utility Area [from 2005 Lino Lakes Surface Water Management Plan] 31 Figure 14. Nutrient Loading to Wetlands [from SAMP] 34 Figure 15. Wetland Restoration Potential based on MnRAM Evaluation [from SAMP] 35 Figure 16. FEMA Floodplain 37 Figure 17. Points of Flooding Concern identified in Lino Lakes RMP (2008) [from Lino Lakes RMP]39 Figure 18. Ditch Systems in the City of Lino Lakes [from SAMP] 42 Figure 19. Watershed Districts in the City of Lino Lakes 43 Figure 20. Existing Land Use [from Comprehensive Plan] 45 Figure 21. Full Build Out Future Land Use [from Comprehensive Plan] 47 Figure 22.2030 Future Land Use [from Comprehensive Plan] 48 Figure 23. Presettlement Vegetation [from Comprehensive Plan] 51 Figure 24. Land Coverage Map 52 Figure 25. Potential Environmental Hazards 57 Figure 26. Subwatershed phosphorus loading from major drainage areas as calculated in PLOAD. [Reproduced from LL RMP] 59 Figure 27. Subwatershed phosphorus loading from major drainage areas as calculated in P8. [from Lino Lakes Chain of Lakes Draft TMDL] 60 Figure 28. Intercommunity flows 60 Figure 29. Conceptual Lino Lakes Resource Management Unit (RMU) Corridor Configurations 81 City of Lino Lakes SWMP 1 December 20151 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, Reshanau, 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 2014 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 approved by the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) and the Minnesota Pollution Control Agency (MPCA). The City of Lino Lakes has received wasteload allocations (WLA) for the TMDLs listed above. The City will need to continue to demonstrate progress towards meeting the WLAs. The City has been reissued a NPDES general permit in 2014. 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 December 201511 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 1 December 20151 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 the policy foundations for ordinances regulating zoning, subdivision, and other official controls related to the use of land. City of Lino Lakes SWMP 1 December 20151 3 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 EPA approved TMDL report (September 2013) 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 EPA approved TMDL report (September 2013) 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. The TMDL was approved by the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) in June of 2012. 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. The TMDL report was completed in July 2013 and provides wasteload allocations for the City of Lino Lakes with respect to Wilkinson Lake. Downstream Impairments: Middle Rice Creek Middle Rice Creek includes a stretch of river that extends from Baldwin Lake in Circle Pines to Long Lake in New Brighton. This stretch of Rice Creek is impaired for aquatic recreation and aquatic life caused by accelerated erosion and sedimentation. Middle Rice Creek flows into North Long Lake which is currently listed as impaired for excess nutrients (eutrophication). The impairment for North Long Lake was deferred by the MPCA due to extremely short water residence times in the lake, but a TMDL study for Middle Rice Creek will be completed as part of a future Watershed Restoration and Protection Plan. Lino Lakes will likely be listed as a regulated MS4 when this TMDL is developed. The Rice Creek Watershed District was recently awarded a BWSR Clean Water Fund grant. The grant is a targeted watershed demonstration grant with the ultimate goal of improving water quality in Long Lake. Grant funds will be used to stabilize the banks of Middle Rice Creek to reduce sediment and nutrient transport to Long Lake and for carp management and control for Long Lake. City of Lino Lakes SWMP 1 December 20151 4 Rice Creek Watershed District WMP The Rice Creek Watershed District Watershed Management Plan was last updated in November of 2014. 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 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. RCWD rule RMP -3 was consolidated into Rule F on June 26, 2013. RMP rules do not replace the need for permit review under District Rules C and F, the requirements of each rule must still be met. 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 F 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 F 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). City of Lino Lakes SWMP 1 December 20151 5 JD4 Resource Management Plan and Rule F 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. Rule F 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 Depal tment 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. City of Lino Lakes SWMP 1 December 20151 6 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 December 20151 7 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. LaValle, 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 1 December 20151 8 s4 s,. .0 ANOKA COUNTY City of Lino Lakes CHISAGO COUNTY Rice Creek Watershed HENNEPIN COUNTY RAMSEY COUNTY ■ Minneapolis St. Paul Q''Slef, DAKOTA WASHINGTON COUNTY 0 0 10 Mlles 0J/30/2009 Emmons 8. Olivier Resources, Inc. 651 Hale Ave Noah Oakdale. MN 55126 Tele. 651.776.84m8 were. ec rin c. coin Figure 1. City of Lino Lakes Location Map [from SAMP] F City of Lino Lakes SWMP 1 December 20151 9 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 (Figure 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 December 20151 10 SO �amm1::IMI T _ fi 110 II VIII: ■IIIIA ri_ nub�1r �n11 rl `■ ENZ sJi��mmos1 51D•• Rondeau RMU Rondeau 11111 p M■■r/j7�1My Ribm Et 1�1 1m nlllllllllllllllll w..,/41 Hump �+ I IIS , II.[:, 1 Xlo nnl= d1!m��711ri :m nnnnrt �/ 1 / Upper Rice i. Creek�RM1J �� IteHardwood-; ��,_�� =I. '10 Creek Creek. R,,4 _�._�- = 54 mai,III/I aI Pero_ -` ■UI I Peltier RMU Allwrlra arm N . MIM �r Marshan ■11 RMU II c IT Peltier Lake City of C tr. Ems: / hili I l -.p..„n MIN oin Clearwater Creek,RMU'i ►, / Aim, "`Middle'il■i: =Rice Creek j MU-' �R;11II lJ f/11I\�ll 4 :i '■ITIIIII!Iali■■0'•^ mo�llll�m/ ®XiCmmi( Amelia .. // �Y'� „,WilkinsonLake RMU Ame is=RMU .. Atzgaii ow 4APILLIFigAll if atifir-OLL: Otter Lake Resource Management Units (RM Us) City of Lino Lakes 2030 Comprehensive Plan 4,000 0 4,000 Feet 11173 Municipal Boundary Resource Management Unit Boundary I Right -of -Way Open Water Figure 2. Resource Management Units [from Comprehensive Plan] August 6, 2008 Prepared by Bonestroo Kloonvewoi1:/Glssenrer/00B58506001-0 IlnolakescomplaniRMMU mxd City of Lino Lakes SWMP 1 December 20151 11 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 M 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 IffiriOct Nov Dec ANN Snowfall in Mean Temperature, 10.87 8.15 10.04 1981-2010 Jan Feb Mar 2.12 Apr 0.01 May 0.00 Jun 0.00 Jul 0.00 Aug 0.01 Sep 0.55 Oct 8.77 Nov 11.10 Dec 51.6 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 (Atlas 14 - Draft) 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 December 2015112 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 December 2015113 2 2 Da a Sou Emmons & Olivier Resources, Mi nesota Dep& ment of Natural Resource Mi nesota Depa ment of T nsporation Mi nesota Geol gicel Survey EOT w a l e r ecology comm unity Legend Alluvium Lake Sand (Des Moines) -rill (Des Moines) Organic Deposists Modern Lakes L _ _I Lino Lakes County Figure 3. Surficial Geology 11121101 Nati 711.9•4 no Lino Lakes Storm Water Management Plan Surficial Geology O Miles 1 City of Lino Lakes SWMP 1 December 20151 14 Lin o_Lakes10001_SWMP109_GI MS_P ojectNamelG aSou Emmons & 0/ivi rResources,, Mi nesofa Depatfinenf of Natural Resource Mi nesota Depa ment of Transp0rat/on Minnesota Geo/ gical Survey w a l e r ecology comm unity Legend ST.LAWRENCE-FRANCONIAFm [-1 Lino Lakes JORDAN SANDSTONE County PRAIRIE DU CHIEN GROUP Stream ST. PETER SANDSTONE Lake Figure 4. Bedrock Geology rep= 1.1� •. i,j a :TM. Lino Lakes Storm Water Management Plan Bedrock Geology O Miles 1 City of Lino Lakes SWMP 1 December 20151 15 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 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 fine texture or fine 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. Data from Natural Resource Conservation Service, 1977. City of Lino Lakes SWMP 1 December 2015116 E 0 George Watch Peltier 32% Da a Sou Emmons & Olivier Resources, Minnesota Depe}tmResources entofNatural Resours Minnesota Depe mentofTT!&&.tl uorafion USDA, MRCS w at e r ecology community Evergreen Ponds Poplar Charley Pleasant Please& Legend _ l Lino Lakes Soil Survey County A Lake ND Stream B B/D D Unidentified Figure 5. Hydrologic Soil Group � r aft =la Mak 0 Bald Eagle Lino Lakes Storm Water Management Plan O Soils Miles 1 City of Lino Lakes SWMP 1 December 2015117 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 MI Low WETLAND COMPLEX/ ORGANIC SOILS LOCATION OF TEST SITES ANC4, .0.111's1nu.¢cawsv. Inco Approximate City of Lino Lakes Boundary TARGETS -TORE, LINO LAKES CLEAR LAKE MEADOWS. FOREST LAKE 1121 4106,1 FS, Ccu ENEMMONS 8 OLIVIER 2 MILES Figure 6. Infiltration Potential within the Rice Creek Watershed District [from RCWD, 2003 Infiltration Implementation Study] City of Lino Lakes SWMP 1 December 20151 18 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 December 2015119 ANOKA Approximate City of Lino Lakes Boundary CHISAGO 950 qb SPrmg Late PAIN/ \I eco YJ bco r U9 I 900 940 Ne Columbia HOW. '70 909 ,.( HENNEPIN,,?13 a7 � L1 le �aleon H Iq�e RAMSEY Legend n Political Boundary Jl County Boundary Water Table Elevation (10' Interval) Sources: Rice Creek Watershed Arsldct Emmons a Olivier Resources, Inc. MHnnesota Depertmenr of i/ensperteNan M17lnnesote Department or Natural Resources 0 1.25 2 5 5 Miles 12/1IR00e Figure 7. Groundwater contours [from RCWD 2009 Groundwater Planning & Management Program] City of Lino Lakes SWMP 1 December 20151 20 ANOKA Approximate City of Lino Lakes Boundary CHISAGO WINO. 4pLL4k M iNamedl 9lrchwo*d 14 W ASHINGTON HENNE Legend nJPolitical Boundary Il County Boundary Groundwatershed Discharge Area = Recharge Area 1�1 sore.. Rice Greek Werer herra,Iricl Emmons a 011W.r R..uurn., Inc. Mrnnasota Dap.rtmsntol rr.nspemeon 0 1.25 2 5 5 Miles riro wlk 72, Figure 8. Groundwater recharge and discharge areas [from RCWD 2009 Groundwater Planning & Mgt. Program] City of Lino Lakes SWMP 1 December 20151 21 ANOKA fi 1 Approximate City of Lino Lakes :1 Boundary 1J i 1.1 1 L_ Spnnq Lake Park/ - / hawed, 1 � E Fntiley I 1 1 1_ Columna nnehu A .. L HENNEPIN -- CHISAGO -- I_—.,_11 1� I Merle Clrel Pine Mean/410 ""14 =1 1 14 MIL; 1 '�,Ileon H.l L RAMSEY I WI 111 WhI.I.r —i T"',Downrad L F `I et. 1 I/ Two .1 venue ‘BF` e - Mnhkameel Chat 1ii 811,11..1 Valle F-� �mN6r �e Pane apnnes 1 WASHINGTON Project ID Description GW 1 Ramsey Mounds Kettle Bogs GW 2 Highniew Middle School Wetland Complex GW 3 Poplar Lake Open Space GW 4 Turtle Lake Flowage GW 5 White Bear Tamarack Swamp GW B Forest Lake Headwaters Complex GW 7 St Croix Moraine Kettle Bogs Legend C1 Political Boundary (l County Boundary Q Small Groundwater Dependent Aggregates Large Gourndwater Dependent Aggregates Groundwater and Surface Water Dependent Resource Groundwater Dependent Resource Sources RVae Creak Watershed Olsmct(M 12005) Emmons a Omar Resourt»e, Inc, Mklnesote Department of Transportation Onneaote Department of Natural Resources Washington County 0 1.25 2 5 5 Miles LTD 12/17 Figure 9. Groundwater dependent resources [from RCWD 2009 Groundwater Planning & Mgt. Program] City of Lino Lakes SWMP 1 December 20151 22 ANOKA ri 1 Approximate ,II City of Lino Lakes L1 Boundary N J '1 ;r Id CHISAGO s4Mmo Hugo e • 011011 PIn.. • 1 Spine Lake Peril'./ rilound• r 11 1 Columbia Heights 1 - —wonnwwp —1 PO NA. r_� I, White BOW 1 ,wp. ' 1 Meht0medl Pine Sprin a RAMSEY HENNEPIN La ertl ton He1:17.4t WASHINGTON Legend `JPolitical Boundary (1 County Boundary air Infiltration Not Recommended Sources Rica Creek Watershed District Emmons 8 Caner Resources. Inc. eanneeore Department orhansponason inennesote Ceof0picel Survey hannesote Department of Met, Cioadelm.r The 040111 shown on InIS map ere Intended rel use ata Watenshed•scale. Sae sp•cIPc Infolmetlon 10.,g NMH data, proposed rend use emergency spar conleminantprorocm ava40l1ty..Ic l ahoerd he reNewed and conslowed In these areas when marine a final detemlmaa0n as to whetherinflrah'on la ulamaMly appropnete fora given sib 0 1.25 2 5 5 Miles 1 Figure 10. Areas not recommended for infiltration [from RCWD 2009 Groundwater Planning & Mgt. Program] City of Lino Lakes SWMP 1 December 20151 23 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 2014 Draft 303d list of impaired waters (Table 4, Figure 12). 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. TMDL reports have been written for the eight impaired lakes with nutrient impairments. The Bald Eagle Lake nutrient TMDL was approved by the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) on June 11, 2012, and an implementation plan has been completed and approved by the MPCA. The public comment period for the TMDL reports for the other seven lakes ended on February 29, 2012. The TMDLs for these lakes were approved by the EPA in September of 2013. The implementation plans for two separate TMDL reports were drafted for these lakes: Peltier Lake and Centerville Lake TMDL, and Lino Lakes Chain of Lakes Nutrient TMDL. 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 received wasteload allocations (WLA) for one or more of the TMDLs listed below (Figure 11). The WLAs were approved by the EPA; the City has demonstrated progress towards meeting the WLAs. The MPCA has reissued the General Permit for Small MS4s, which identified the process for demonstrating progress towards meeting the WLA. City of Lino Lakes SWMP 1 December 20151 24 Golden Lake TMDL: Categorical WLA with: City of Blaine City of Circle Pines RCWD City of Lexington To collectively achieve a: 4% TP reduction (7 Ib/yr) in 2000 existing loads, and a 41% TP reduction (103 Ib/yr) in 2020 future loads rshan R L,. Marshan Lake TMDL (Lino Lakes Chain of Lakes): 0% TP reduction (all TP reductions from upstream lakes and internal Inad George Watch Lake TMDL (Lino Lakes Chain of Lakes): 0% TP reduction (all TP reductions from upstream lakes and internal Inaril deau RMU Up • Rice eek RMU Hardwood CreekRr Ronde. `.eke cele` �. Lake Peltier RMU George Watch RMU GeOrge Watch Lake n.`ek Lake-, i1 Fark Resnive Rice Lake RMU Lake Baldwin RMU Mdale IRice Creek City of Centerville Centerrelle Lake i Centerville RMU Reshanau Brea SI Clearwater Creek RMU! herman RMU Resha; au RMU Anne RMU, Leder L eke Wilkinson RMU Reshanau Lake TMDL (Lino Lakes Chain of Lakes): 0% reduction (all reductions from upstream lakes and internal load) Baldwin Lake TMDL (Lino Lakes Chain of Lakes): 0% reduction (all reductions from upstream lakes and internal load) Lok erre, Lake Hardwood Creek TMDL: Categorical WLA with: Hugo RCWD Anoka County Washington County MNDOT To collectively achieve a: 16% TSS reduction (8,000 lbs/yr) Peltier Lake TMDL: Categorical WLA with: Anoka County City of Centerville City of Forest Lake City of Hugo Mahtomedi Ramsey County County City of White Bear Lake White Bear Township City of Willernie To collectively achieve a: 62% TP reduction (943 lbs/vr) Birchwood Village City of Dellwood City of Grant City of Washington Centerville Lake TMDL: 0% reduction (all reductions from Peltier Lake backflow) Rice Lake TMDL (Lino Lakes Chain of Lakes): 0% reduction (all reductions from upstream lakes and internal load) Bald Eagle Lake TMDL: Categorical WLA with: City of White Bear Lake White Bear Township City of Hugo City of Grant City of Dellwood Washington County Ramsey County To work together to collectively achieve a 38% TP reduction (453 lbs/yr) Lake Wilkinson TMDL (Vadnais Lake Area WMO TMDL): Individual WLA of: 76% TP reduction (1.6 lbs/yr) Figure 11. Pollutant reductions required by TMDLs completed within the City of Lino Lakes boundary. City of Lino Lakes SWMP 1 December 20151 25 Table 4. Impaired Waters in Lino Lakes Impaired Water Lake or River ID Affected use Pollutant or Stressor List Date 2002 Bald Eagle Lake* 62-0002-00 Aquatic Recreation 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 Nutrient/Eutrophication 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: Imnairments from the MPCA 2014 Draft 303d List of Imnaired 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 2). 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- foilning 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 December 20151 26 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 2014 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 December 20151 27 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 December 20151 28 7 0 0 ----------Rcrt3desu Peltier Wards She( amI ne- Shery✓ood Pon 0141 ?amsey Otter---------' Bald Eagle Da a Sou Emmons & Olivi@r Resources, Mi nesota Department of Natural Resources Minnesota DepattmentofrT.F&.1poration FederalEmergency Management Agency Chailey Pleasant Pleasant Eosr Ov a t e ecology community Legend —_I Lino Lakes TMDL Lake Marshan County TMDL Lake Drainage Areas Peltier Lake Baldwin Reshanau Stream Centerville Rice Lake George Watch Rondeau Figure 12. Impaired Lakes within the City of Lino Lakes Lino Lakes Storm Water Management Plan Impaired Lakes O Miles 1 City of Lino Lakes SWMP 1 December 20151 29 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 . 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 SWMP 1 December 20151 30 0 i a SCALE II SILLS TAMARAC L. RANDEA PELTIER LAKE OAM, MO 60 AYCN CONOV►T"S R NTERVILLE PUMPIiYS STATION EEP L. MISSISSIPPI RIVER PCM P/AfB STATION LEGEND Q'1 PUMPING STATION clamicaaff OPEN CANAL. TKDA ENGINEERS • ARCHITEC I S • PLANNERS CITY OF LINO LAKES SURFACE WATER MANAGEMENT PLAN FIGURE NO, 2-1 ST. PAUL WATER UTILITY AREA Figure 13. St. Paul Water Utility Area [from 2005 Lino Lakes Surface Water Management Plan] City of Lino Lakes SWMP 1 December 20151 31 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 2014 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 December 20151 32 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 . 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 5, 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 1 December 20151 33 0'06 07 Legend In Lino Lakes sip Lakes F €'t ®P8 Model Area Major Roads uality of Vegetation Subwatershed Nutrient Loading Value I= High (331) MI High Medium (332) Medium Low (333) Low gma. FOR, RCWD, Hunama Deprbnert d 71arv.-mca, DI 141PII nsax,c Figure 14. Nutrient Loading to Wetlands [from SAMP] Lb M: WDII07 RL WDj City of Lino Lakes SWMP 1 December 20151 34 6?66 07 0 3,000 Feet I I Legend CILino Lakes Lakes Major Roads Restoration Potential High Medium Medi y. Low FOR, RCWD, Rhirremt DeparRmrt cJ Tran portab n OCR.1.110 IX rvxx Figure 15. Wetland Restoration Potential based on MnRAM Evaluation [from SAMP] City of Lino Lakes SWMP 1 December 20151 35 Floodplain Figure 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 updated the Flood Insurance Rate Maps for the Lino Lakes area in 2012. Hydrologic and hydraulic modeling has been conducted throughout the City for many previous efforts (Appendix A). The most recent and detailed modeling was completed 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 2.8 -inch infiltration standard is no longer included in RCWD rules. 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 17). In addition, the RMP identifies flooding concerns by Resource Management Unit (Table 5). City of Lino Lakes SWMP 1 December 20151 36 a - Data Spwces. Emmons & Olivier Resources; Minnesota Dopattment of Natural Resource Minnesota Depa'ttment of Transparatfon Federal Ennergekcy Management Agency EO' Legend i Lino Lakes I772 4 1OOyr Floodplain County ® 5OOyr Floodplain Stream Lake Figure 16. FEMA Floodplain Lino Lakes Storm Water Management Plan FEMA Floodplain O Miles 1 City of Lino Lakes SWMP 1 December 20151 37 Table 5. Summary of Flooding Concerns by Resource Management Unit RAIL- Existing C:onditions Full Build Out C:oustructed C:onveyance C oiii"evaiice Endpoint Endpoint of Concern Flood- ing Partially Drained Wetlands Land I:se Land Use Flood- ing Load- ing Upper Rice Creek None ria nia no yeS coral urban yes yes Hardwood Creek None, Natural Channel Peltier Lake yes 110 110 neral urban yes yes Clearwater Creek ? Ditch 55 Ditch and pipe Clearwater CreekTPeltier Lake yes yes yes — Ditch 47 and Ditch 55 urban (Centerville); rural urban yes yes Rondeau None or private ditch nia n!a no no rural urban no yes Peltier 1 Ditch 72 Pipe and pond; ditch and pipe; private ditch Peltier wetlands yes yes yes Ditch 72 urban (Centerville); neral urban pOssib ly 110 Centerville Pipe and pond Centerville wetlands and lake yes minor no urban (Centerville) and rural existing no no George Watch Pipe and pond; private ditch George Watch groundwater- supported wetlands and lake yes no no urban and rural urban no yes Marsham / Ditch 10-2.2-32 Ditch and pipe Marshan wetlands and lake yes yes yes urban and rural urban yes yes Resliariau Pipe and pond. ditch Reshanau wetlands or lake yes minor 110 mainly urban existing no ves Rice Pipe Groundwater -supported wetlands and Rice wetlands and lake no no no urban existing no yes Baldwin Pipe Baldwin wetlands yes no no mainly urban existing no no Sherman Pipe Sheeran Lake and high priority wetlands yes n!a no mainly urban existing no no Amelia Pipe Melia Lake and high priority wetlands no nia no mainly urban existing no no 'Wilkinson None nia uja nia no mainly urban existing no no Middle Rice Creek pipe High priority wetlands ves lila no manly urban. existing no yes City of Lino Lakes SWMP 1 December 20151 38 0 0.25 0.5 1 Miles 1 1 1 1 1 1 I i 1 Legend Resource Management Unit Sensitive Water Level Points Catchments In Municipal Boundary • Road Overtops i Less Than 1' Freeboard on Road • Pond Overtops Under 100 -Year Flood Event sower EOR, RCWD, Lino Cakes, 155 DNR CLIVIEI RESOCKIS Figure 17. Points of Flooding Concern identified in Lino Lakes RMP (2008) [from Lino Lakes RMP] City of Lino Lakes SWMP 1 December 20151 39 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 Judicial 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 (Figure 19). 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 December 20151 40 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 1 December 20151 41 0 3,000 Feet i I Legend i JRMP Boundary 0 Lakes Major Roads Clearwater Creek - Hardwood Creek — Rice Creek — Ditch 8 - Ditch 72 - Ditch 47 Ditch 25 - Ditch 10-22-32 Ditch 55 Clearwater Creek Drainage Area Hardwood Creek Drainage Area Ditch 10-22-32 Drainage Area MI Ditch 8 Drainage Area Peltier Lake Drainage Area Ditch 25 Drainage Area Sources EOR, REND, M esate Vepariment of Transportaticm Remove 8 61'nE Re Ronne Oakdale kiAl .551211 rein P91 710 “.18 Figure 18. Ditch Systems in the City of Lino Lakes [from SAMP] City of Lino Lakes SWMP 1 December 20151 42 Crossways r I ■ i `tr 1 i1 Baldwin Evergreen Ponds Sherwood Pond Poplar MIkirrson Deep Bafd Eagle EO' Legend 1_7_1, Lino Lakes RCVVD County VLAVVMO Lake Coon Creek Stream Figure 19. Watershed Districts in the City of Lino Lakes Lino Lakes Storm Water Management Plan Watershed Districts Miles 1 City of Lino Lakes SWMP 1 December 20151 43 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 I -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 20. City of Lino Lakes SWMP 1 December 20151 44 C 1 1 r�rr�rul :i =f 1I I> --40. ,,, i "Ira! Rondeau iILs 1111111EMOni MO— =mpg NE m ::i=ce ! El re'��C��■i--. �, + Al 53 . „ n Innes L 1� ■I' 740 `�J=Ili' I"'��i �' I■► jvre, � ��1, '!r M. 1 �>_IIIIIIIIIIIII��iPn,m. .r ., �. I'1 1■ms lh um iuII111111IIIIIIIIIIIIIII ' _ em IlilM 11�-111111111 kmar "War - 41 IIIIAj III mp-- - ;,�a 'y"Irriona 1 111/® • 'wimp . 'WV . ' 1 ,Y�.rl,r�r 1 1 Baldwin —..1 Lake 111„ ozz noun i •Ill"�� Otter � : �11�"►3., Lake + I� 2006 Existing Land Use City of Lino Lakes 2030 Comprehensive Plan ,,i Municipal Boundary [_! MUSA Boundary Agricultural Rural Residential 47A Single Family Residential Multi -Family Residential N =Commercial Industrial 4,000 0 4,000 County Park & Recreation Feet City Park & Recreation I I I I I I I Figure 20. Existing Land Use [from Comprehensive Plan] Open Space/Conservation Public/Semi-Public =Airport Vacant Rural Residential Vacant Residential ® Vacant Commercial Vacant Industrial I ] I: l CITOF 1.11 Right -of -Way April 21, 2008 Open Water Prepared by Bonestroo K/acfrveworuGls aerverf000585o6001-O hnolakescomplan/el u.mxd City of Lino Lakes SWMP 1 December 20151 45 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 21). 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 22). Although the 2030 Future Land Use Plan (Figure 23) 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 December 20151 46 53 eW I I I I I I I I I I I I I-10 vI , I qbej ANN IOak Lf ��I �■ liilllllllll 1111111 's l/IIIIla�iii11 Iii. Rice Creek Chain of Lake =' Regional Park Reserve Baldwin Lake i'1 'III"UII1111■t■■ • 411,4,Aid11111111 I rr.r°i Otter a10. lig• �� Full Build Out Future Land Use Map City of Lino Lakes 2030 Comprehensive Plan 4,000 0 4,000 i—,,, Municipal Boundary Permanent Rural Low Density Residential Medium Density Residential High Density Residential Commercial Feet Mixed Use ▪ Industrial ▪ Civic/Institutional Park/Open Space Mg Private Airfield Right -of -Way Open Water Figure 21. Full Build Out Future Land Use [from Comprehensive Plan] CITF INS KE June 10, 2009 Prepared by Bonestroo K/activework/G Is server/000586-06001-0 linolakescomplanttull b011d out mxd City of Lino Lakes SWMP 1 December 20151 47 q■�Ir4 ■ 11■ F . al1osorr_11 IIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIII�\ Q� Pelti:E Rice Creek Chain of Lakes egipnal Park. Reserve 2030 Future Land Use Map City of Lino Lakes 2030 Comprehensive Plan 4,000 0 j_„ i Municipal Boundary Permanent Rural Urban Reserve Low Density Residential MI Medium Density Residential 4,000 High Density Residential Feet Commercial Mixed Use Industrial Civic/Institutional Park/Open Space I® Private Airfield Right -of -Way Open Water Figure 22. 2030 Future Land Use [from Comprehensive Plan] April 21, 2009 Prepared try Bonestroo k.iactwewoC/GIssenen000ae6-oenoi-o I lnolakescomplan/2030flu.mxd City of Lino Lakes SWMP 1 December 20151 48 3.11. Unique Natural Features Biological Resources 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. 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 December 20151 49 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 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 Northern Poor Fen 1 Tamarack Swamp (Southern) PLANTS 1 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 lanceolate Lance -leaved Violet 7 Xyris torta Twisted Yellow -eyed Grass 1 BIRDS 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 23). 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 December 20151 50 Pres ettlem ent Vegetation City of Lino Lakes. Minnesota and Surrounding Areas 16 1.6 2 4 3 Plesenlehielkr Vegetation Types _ Aspen Dir Land ` I Oak Openings and Barras - Confer Fogs and a'7ruamps l I WetPrairie Big Woods lakes (open water) Figure 23. Presettlement Vegetation [from Comprehensive Plan] March 12, 2047 1 CJL KFS ornm 6Nllli4RV?Allf` re. City of Lino Lakes SWMP 1 December 20151 51 0 Legend 5-10% Impervious 11-25% Impervious 26-50% Impervious 5'1-75% Impervious I= 76-100% Impervious Short Grasses Agricultural Land Maintained Tall Grass Tree Plantation Forest Wetland Forest Shrubland Wetland Shrubs Tall Grasses Wetland Emergent Veg. Dry Tall Grasses Open Water Wetland Open Water ECS Legend I f Lino Lakes Lake Stream County Data Sources. MLCCS 2006 Minnesota Department of Natural Resources, Minnesota Department ofTransportation, Emmons & Olivier Resources, Inc. Figure 24. Land Coverage Map Lino Lakes Storm Water Management Plan MLCCS O Miles 1 City of Lino Lakes SWMP 1 December 20151 52 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 25 depicts the locations of properties that have active environmental permits or have a record related to a potential environmental hazard. Data shown in Figure 25 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 25have 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 25 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. Voluntary Investigation & Cleanup (VIC) Site: The Voluntary Investigation and Cleanup (VIC) Program is a non -petroleum brownfield program. VIC provides technical assistance to City of Lino Lakes SWMP 1 December 20151 53 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 assesses 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 maintenance at these sites, which helps to ensure that tanks do not cause environmental contamination. City of Lino Lakes SWMP 1 December 20151 54 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 December 20151 55 Table 7. Number of Potential Environmental Hazard Sites in City of Lino Lakes Site Type Number in City Hazardous Waste, Small to Minimal QG 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 1 December 20151 56 0 m c m a©1 c ') 0 0 4 I'O 0101011ily Legend r$i c.aalM a maeemal-.memer Perm Q X¢nEave Waste. LOG landfill.OlmS Landfill, open WWII. Permim. By Rine Leek SYe lierereaus Wenn .3 Smell b !Selma! OG - - Me®p0000tje: Seek Srta UnpermMel Dump see Cnen�q uMey lnree "'" 8 {VIC) II!, Waxle,a.Itt Dleon.rg.r Figure 25. Potential Environmental Hazards wooifiEl iPs. flat im Lino Lakes Storm Water Management Plan Environmental Hazards O Miles 1 City of Lino Lakes SWMP 1 December 20151 57 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, finally 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 26 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 14) and for the Lino Lakes Chain of Lakes Nutrient TMDL (Figure 27). 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 December 20151 58 TP Load (Ibslyr) Existing: 1068 FBO: 1623 12 TP Load (ibs/yr) Existing: 539 FBO: 619 — 1 Ifdw!n J TP Load (Ibslyr) Exisling: 155 ,FPO: 163 I 6. Rice Maga Warshan TP Load Ibslyr) Existing: 65 FBO: 103 TP Load (Ibslyr) Existing: 400 FBO: 446 I �llrl�l Rondeat TP Load (lbs/yr) Exisling: 342 FBO: 661 George Watch TP Load (lbs/yr) Existing: 95 FBO: 192 - = Sherman Wards' TP Load (Ibslyr) Existing: 197 FBO: 203 TP Load (Ibslyr) Existing: 119 FBO: 120 Cedar TP Load (lbs/yr) Existing: 699 FBO: 1211 Otter 6106107 0 3,000 Feet I I I Legend _ JRMP Boundary Lakes Major Roads Major Drainage Area Sources FOR, RLWD, VCFncC Minnesota Department A�,t of TransportationTransportation�� Figure 26. Subwatershed phosphorus loading from major drainage areas as calculated in PLOAD. [Reproduced from LL RMP] City of Lino Lakes SWMP 1 December 20151 59 PripNarus is adin . 111 -.,„erre 0 Drainage Areas ucaueam -ares [Mees Legend RCWQ Legal Boundary V Municipal and Township Boundary Watershed Boundaries '6/elands Phosphorus Loading Rate (Ibsiac-yr) C_Cr D.25 L= 0.20-C.50 gig 0.51-0.75 lig 07d -r -r00 04 1,a' - 2.00 .• PileftropA Marl.. C a.nDn 1 500 0 3,000 Feet RCE CREEK WATERSHED DISTRICT Phosphorus Loading Rates rx 2C2? Figure 27. 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 December 20151 60 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. 3.14. Intercommunity Flows The City of Lino Lakes is surrounded by several neighboring communities and receives watershed runoff from Blaine, Centerville, Columbus, Hugo, Shoreview, and White Bear Township. Rice Creek Watershed District (RCWD) has estimated the flows to its jurisdictional reaches and, as such, downstream communities, like Lino Lakes, are required to include their allocated flows in their future planning studies, so as to limit adverse impacts to their downstream neighbors of Centerville, Hugo and Circle Pines (Figure 28). The city is contemplating an alternate outlet for build -out conditions pursuant to the development of a Comprehensive Stormwater Management Plan (CSMP) under RCWD Rule C.5 (f). Intercommunity flows and modeled peak flow rates as provided by RCWD are shown below (Table 8). A detailed figure showing all stormwater ponds, streams, lakes and wetlands and structural pollution control devices, pipes, pipe sizes, and conveyances is provided as a larger map in Appendix E. Anoka Washington Judicial Ditch 3 — All Branches & Main Branch The 100 -year 24 hour rainfall event is considered critical in the upper and lower portions of the Anoka - Washington Judicial Ditch 3. The 10 -day snowmelt event is considered critical in the middle portion of the system. The 100 -year floodplain boundary is relatively narrow due to the large amounts of storage provided by the natural lakes and constructed stormwater ponds in the system. No public roadway structures on the main trunk are overtopped in the critical 100 -year event (Houston Engineering, 2013a). Ramsey County Ditch 8 The culverts at the primary road crossings are sufficiently sized to convey flood flows from the public drainage system. None of the crossings are overtopped by the 100- year critical flood event (Houston Engineering, 2013a). Rice Creek Currently, road crossings are sufficiently sized to convey 100 -year flood flows without overtopping, with the exception 85th Avenue, also known as County Road J. Currently; the restriction is caused by the downstream trail crossing. As previously mentioned, Rice Creek will undergo a channel restoration and realignment that is slated to begin in the winter of 2015-2016. The goals of this project will be to restore a more natural, meandering path. This project should prevent the 100 -year event from resulting in overtopping. Anoka County Ditch 55 The Anoka County Ditch 55 consists of a series of buried drain tiles that have historically been prone to blowouts at multiple locations. The system currently experiences surcharges even during moderate 2 -year 24-hour rain fall events. As a result, RCWD has completed an analysis of repair options for County Ditch 55 (HEI Memo 6/19/14). Repairs to ACD 55 are slated to take place over a span of several years. Significant future development is planned for the drainage area to ACD 55, planning will be extremely important since ACD55 discharges to Clearwater Creek and ultimately to Peltier Lake. City of Lino Lakes SWMP 1 December 20151 61 Table 8. Lino Lakes Intercommunity Flows. 1 Source: Table 9, Intercommunity Flows, RCWD District Wide Mode mg Program Summary, Houston Engineering, Inc., February 24, 2012. 2 Source: Hydraulics and Hydrology Evaluation — Anoka County Ditch 55, Houston Engineering, Inc., May 6, 2013. *Includes overflow/over topping City of Lino Lakes SWMP 1 December 20151 62 Peak Flow (cfs) Discharging City Receiving City Watercourse 2 -Year, 24 -Hour Rainfall 10 -year, 24 -Hour Rainfall 100 -Year, 24 -Hour Rainfall 100 -Year, 10 -Day Snowmelt Lino Lakes' Centerville AWJD 3 Main Trunk 160 266 439 394 Lino Lakes Circle RCD 8 Main Pines Trunk 6 14 29 36 Lino Lakes' Circle Rice Creek Pines 111 273 570 1206 Lino Lakes' Hugo AWJD 3 Branch 4 25 40 66 34 Lino Lakes' Hugo AWJD 3 Branch 1 8 14 25 24 Lino Lakes2 Centerville ACD 55 Main Trunk 4.7 20.2* 63.4* --- 1 Source: Table 9, Intercommunity Flows, RCWD District Wide Mode mg Program Summary, Houston Engineering, Inc., February 24, 2012. 2 Source: Hydraulics and Hydrology Evaluation — Anoka County Ditch 55, Houston Engineering, Inc., May 6, 2013. *Includes overflow/over topping City of Lino Lakes SWMP 1 December 20151 62 Ham Lake Columbus Forest Lake Circle Pines North Oaks White Bear Twp. Legend L J Municipality —>-- Creek DNR Water Surface –>-- Ditch * Inter -community Flow )--t Tile 0 Mules r `'i/ Date: 9,212015 Time: 9:43:33 AM Author: ejensen Document Path: X:\Clients_Municipal\01003_Lino_Lakes\0001_SWMP\ 09_GIMS_ProhectName\GIS\SWMP_concentratedflow.mxd Figure 28. Intercommunity flows City of Lino Lakes SWMP 1 December 20151 63 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. The City of Lino Lakes is planning for development of 1,400 acres east of Peltier Lake, North of Main Street. Furthermore, the City of Hugo is planning for development of a 215 acre area; both areas are currently being drained by Anoka County Ditch 55 (ACD 55). Currently, precipitation events larger than 0.25 inches results in surface water ponding and surface water runoff within the ACD 55 drainage area (Houston Engineering, 2013b). Without an alternative outlet or increased capacity the development may be limited within the ACD 55 drainage area. This may exacerbate current flooding up stream in the ACD 55 system since ACD 55 restricts downstream flows and can only accommodate a small amount of flow. Sediment loads, and with it pollutants and contaminants, would also increase. Flow from the 215 -acre area within the City of Hugo may be up to 62 CFS during the 100 -year 24-hour storm. Additionally, 54 CFS will be generated from the 534 acre area within Lino Lakes that is currently served by ACD 55. The ACD 55 infrastructure currently City of Lino Lakes SWMP 1 December 20151 64 reaches capacity at 1-2 CFS. As a result, the City of Lino Lakes is contemplating a new conveyance system and outlet structure to Peltier Lake from the 1,400 acre development area, which would be subject to review and approval by the RCWD. This may require the development of alternative standards (stormwater rules) to demonstrate no adverse impacts through the use of RCWD Comprehensive Stormwater Management Plan (CSMP) provisions. 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 for a municipality or public road authority to prepare a comprehensive stormwater management plan setting forth an alternative means of meeting water quality treatment standards. Banked "volume control" credits established by public entities for public linear projects with the RCWD prior to July 1, 2013 will continue to be recognized and enforced until all credits are used or all debits are fulfilled. Policy 4.1.1D: 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 4.1.1G: 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. City of Lino Lakes SWMP 1 December 20151 65 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. 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 4.2.1C: 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 4.2.1E: 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. City of Lino Lakes SWMP 1 December 20151 66 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. 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 4.3.1A: Continue to support the administration of the Wetland Conservation Act (WCA) requirements within the City by the RCWD and VLAWMO. Policy 4.3.1B: 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 4.3.1C: Integrate parcel- or project -based wetland replacement with watershed -based restoration and enhancement locations Policy 4.3.1D: 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 4.3.1E: 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 City of Lino Lakes SWMP 1 December 20151 67 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. 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. City of Lino Lakes SWMP 1 December 20151 68 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. 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 effects 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. City of Lino Lakes SWMP 1 December 20151 69 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. 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 4.8.1B: 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. City of Lino Lakes SWMP 1 December 20151 70 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. 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. City of Lino Lakes SWMP 1 December 20151 71 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. 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 City of Lino Lakes SWMP 1 December 20151 72 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) 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 December 20151 73 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 10 — 24) 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 25 and 26 represent a synthesized and focused list of actions for city implementation. The costs for the activities in Tables 25 and 26 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 25. 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 1 December 20151 74 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 December 20151 75 Table 8. City -Wide Actions Actions identified by Issue Category Additional Issue(s) Addressed Goals Addressed Policies Addressed WATER RATE & QUANTITY' 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; Water Quality, Wetland Management, 4.2.1, 4.3.1, 4.2.1C, 4.3.1C, Enhance groundwater hydrology and protect groundwater -dependent natural resources; Provide natural flood reduction; and Integrate water quality improvement components in the landscape. Floodplain Management, Natural Resources 4.4.1, 4.7.4, 4.4.1B, 4.7.4A, WATER QUALITY Implement water quality improvements via the Subwatershed Regulations, 4.2.1B, Plans for each RMU specific to the waterbodies of the area and upcoming regulations (ex. TMDLs). Permitting and Reporting 4 2 1 4.9.1 4.2.1D, 4.9.1A WETLAND MANAGEMENT Establish Wetland Bank in cooperation with RCWD and VLAWMO. NA 4.3.1 4.3.1A 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 4-1E 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 approaches to maintaining or restoring wetland functions. NA 4.3.1 4.3.1D FLOODPLAIN MANAGEMENT i Review existing watershed models and work with the RCWD and VLAWMO to address flow constraints in the system. NA 4.4.1 4.4.1B PUBLIC DITCH 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 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: N.1 4.5.1 4.5.1A Integrating management of ditch systems and adjacent wetland and upland systems; City of Lino Lakes SWMP 1 December 20151 76 Actions identified by Issue Category Additional Issue(s) Addressed Goals Addressed Policies Addressed 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 the local catchments; Minimizing future ditch maintenance costs by developing a self-sustaining 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 already developed. NA 4.5.1 4.5.1A GROUNDWATER MANAGEMENT Implement the wellhead protection plan to protect the groundwater 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 Project. 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 species. NA 4.7.1 4.7.1A Continue to manage and protect heron rookery and other important plant and animal communities. NA 4.7.1 4.7.1B Develop, distribute and present public with information regarding the importance of shoreland buffers. NA 4.7.3 4.7.3C EROSION AND SEDIMENT CONTROL The City's construction site stormwater runoff control regulatory mechanism will be reviewed and updated to be at least as stringent as the MPCA CSW permit. This effort will completed within 12 months of the date permit coverage is extended NA 4.8.1 4.8.1A -E REGULATIONS, PERMITTING AND REPORTING a 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, 4.2.1D, 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 Natural 4.9.1, 4.9.1A, Marshan RMU Resources 4.7.1 4.7.1A Clearwater Creek RMU Develop subwatershed management plans for the remaining Natural 4.9.1, 4.9.1A, RMUs in the following order: 1. Peltier RMU Resources 4.7.1 4.7.1A City of Lino Lakes SWMP 1 December 20151 77 Actions identified by Issue Category Additional Issue(s) Addressed Goals Addressed Policies Addressed 2. Wilkinson RMU 3. Amelia RMU 4. Hardwood Creek RMU 5. Rice Lake RMU If need arises and resources allow: 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 implementation of all components of the multi -functional greenway corridor. Water Rate & Quantity 4.9.2, 4.1.1 4.9.2A, 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 Water Rate & 4.9.2, 4.9.2A, Ribbon curbs and curb cuts, with roadside swales, infiltration, and biofiltration Quantity 4.1.1 4.1.1A Use of pervious pavements Provide guidance for staff, City Boards, and City Council Water Rate & 4.9.2, 4.9.2A, regarding Better Site Design (BSD). Quantity, 4.1.1, 4.1.1E, Natural Resources 4.7.2 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 Natural Resources 4.9.2, 4.7.2 4.9.2A, 4.7.2B (BSD). Continue to implement the RMP. Create a wetland bank to provide replacement Water Rate &4.1.1C, 4.9.2, 4.1.1, 4.9.2C opportunities for development or roadway projects. Utilize the runoff volume credit and banking system in collaboration with the RCWD. Quantity, Wetlands 4.3.1 4.3.1C, 4.3.1D, 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 Water Quality 4.9.2, 4.2.2 4.9.2B, 4.2.2C RCWD Rule and the Corps' Programmatic General Permit that implements the Special Area Management Plan. Implement Construction BMPs Identified in SWPPP. Erosion & 4.9.2, 4.9.2D, Sediment Control 4.8.1 4.8.1D Implement Post -Construction BMPs Identified in SWPPP. Water Rate & Quantity, Erosion & 4.9.2, 4.9.2D, Sediment 4.1.1, 4.1.1A, Control, 4.8.1, 4.8.1D, Maintenance & 4.10.1 4.10.1A Inspection Implement Education and Outreach BMPs Identified in Public 4.9.2, 4.9.2D, SWPPP. Participation, 4.11.1, 4.11.1A, City of Lino Lakes SWMP 1 December 20151 78 Actions identified by Issue Category Additional Issue(s) Addressed Goals Addressed Policies Addressed Information & 4.11.2 4.11.1B, Education 4.11.1C, 4.11.2B, 4.11.2C, 4.11.2D Implement Pollution Prevention BMPs Identified in SWPPP such as: 4.9.2D, 4.10.1A, Bi annual street sweeping program Maintenance & Inspection 4.9.2, 4.10.1 4.10.1B, Pond and BMP inventory 4.10.1C, 4.10.1D MONITORING, MAINTENANCE AND INSPECTION 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. N 4.10.1 4.10.1E PUBLIC PARTICIPATION, INFORMATION & EDUCATION Participate with other public agencies and organizations on education and outreach efforts. 4.11.1A, 4.11.1B, N A 4.11.1, 4.11.2 4.11.1C, 4.11.2B, 4.11.2C, 4.11.2D FINANCING 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 4.12.1A, Management Fee System. NA 4.12.1 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. City of Lino Lakes SWMP 1 December 20151 79 These RMUs have been identified as a higher priority for the City of Lino because they have the potential for developing sooner than other portions of the City and have been more closely evaluated through the Alternative Urban Areawide Review (AUAR) process or the development of other Master Plans. Like Section 5.1 City -Wide Actions, this section includes RMU specific implementation activities previously identified by the City or other entity (e.g. RCWD, VLAWMO, Anoka County, etc.) in past planning efforts. However, this section does add a schematic to help visualize the multi -functional greenway corridor using a general cross-section that the City can use to demonstrate its vision and goals to developers early in the land development process. The information provided in this section will form the basis for the development of a more in-depth Subwatershed Plans for each RMU which will clearly lay the framework for how the City would like to see future development tie into the multi -functional greenway corridor. The use of RMU corridor plans is to maximize the value and benefit with efficient use of the corridors for multiple public functions: flood control, conveyance infrastructure, water quality and volume treatment, public trail systems, and habitat corridor enhancement. Figure 29 below illustrates the variable cross section configurations that implement the multifunctional greenway corridor. Each of the RMU's would have unique configurations due to the variable landscape settings of the major drainageways. The need to address water quality within the city is partially illustrated in the map showing the various impaired lakes (Figure 12) which has regulatory implications that are still being developed. And wetland impacts are also a consideration (Figure 14). The natural landscape is different throughout the city. To visualize how the corridors would take shape, Figure 2 shows the city divided into the RMUs. The drainage networks, often agricultural ditch systems that make up the backbone of the needed city stormwater infrastructure are shown in Figure 18. Now comparing Figure 18 waterway locations with the naturally low-lying, flood -prone wetland areas of Figure 15, it begins to take shape that each corridor will have a unique characteristic. To illustrate this, one can look at the three priority RMUs. Narrower corridors - Clearwater Creek RMU (Clearwater Creek, Ditch 55, and Ditch 47) and Marshan RMU (Ditch 10-22-32) corridors Wider corridors - Reshanau (Ditch 25) corridor Both could have portions with occasional sections that are medium width. The wider corridors are due to large low-lying areas and wetlands along the drainageway. The cross sections below provide a generic illustration of how those various corridors can be organized when development comes to maximize their public potential to serve the multiple functions and benefits within one area. As shown below, "Setting Type A" illustrates a narrow corridor that does not include significant existing natural feature but still accomplishes the multifunctional goals. "Setting Type C" is a much wider section that incorporates existing natural features with the recreational and stormwater conveyance components easily included. In these ways, additional benefits are provided to the community and with small additional costs and can be incorporated into the city process so they produce a direct outcome of the development process. City of Lino Lakes SWMP 1 December 20151 80 Setting Type A Park / Trails Setting Type B Park / Trails Critical / Rare Habitat Preservation Setting Type C Park / Trails Figure 29. Conceptual Lino Lakes Resource Management Unit (RMU) Corridor Configurations Aquatic Resource Preservation City of Lino Lakes SWMP 1 December 20151 81 5.2.1 Reshanau RMU Subwatershed Table 9. RMU Specific Actions: Reshanau RMU Actions identified by Issue Category WATER RATE & QUANTITY 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. WATER QUALITY 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. WETLAND MANAGEMENT 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. FLOODPLAIN MANAGEMENT Address the three areas where road overtopping occurs in the RMU in conjunction with surrounding development proposals. PUBLIC DITCH SYSTEM 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. GROUNDWATER MANAGEMENT No implementation activities identified. NATURAL RESOURCES No implementation activities identified. EROSION AND SEDIMENT CONTROL 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. REGULATIONS, PERMITTING AND REPORTING Complete Subwatershed Management Plan. MONITORING, MAINTENANCE AND INSPECTION No implementation activities identified. PUBLIC PARTICIPATION, INFORMATION & EDUCATION i No implementation activities identified. FINANCING No implementation activities identified. City of Lino Lakes SWMP 1 December 20151 82 5.2.2 Marshan RMU Subwatershed Table 10. RMU Specific Actions: Marshan RMU Actions identified by Issue Category WATER RATE & QUANTITY 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. WATER QUALITY 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 discharging to Marshan Lake ad'acent to the lower branch of 10-22-32 between I -35W and Lake Drive WETLAND MANAGEMEN l' 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 primarily used for sod (MAR -097). FLOODPLAIN MANAGEMENT Evaluate and address floodplain impacts with new and redevelopment proposals in accordance with watershed and city requirements. PUBLIC DITCH SYSTEM 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 developed to date. GROUNDWATER MANAGEMENT No implementation activities identified. ml NATURAL RESOURCES 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 ' 1 SEDIMENT CONTROL Evaluation of current stream bank erosion sites on 10-22-32. REGULATIONS, PERMITTING AND REPORTING 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. MONITORING, MAINTENANCE AND INSPECTION No implementation activities identified. PUBLIC PARTICIPATION, INFORMATION & EDUCATION No implementation activities identified. FINANCING No implementation activities identified. City of Lino Lakes SWMP 1 December 20151 83 5.2.3 Clearwater Creek RMU Subwatershed Table 11. RMU Specific Actions: Clearwater Creek RMU Actions identified by Issue Category WATER RATE & QUANTITY 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. WATER QUALITY 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. WETLAND MANAGEMENT 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 I -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. FLOODPLAIN MANAGEMENT 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. PUBLIC DITCH SYSTEM Coordinate with the RCWD in advance of repairs needed for ACD -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 greenway corridor. GROUNDWATER MANAGEMENT No implementation activities identified. NATURAL RESOURCES Work with RCWD and land developer to implement Clearwater Creek restoration project between 20th Avenue and 35E. Work with RCWD to Conduct Clearwater Creek instream habitat improvement for the biotic impairment TMDL. EROSION AND SEDIMENT CONTROL No implementation activities identified. REGULATIONS, PERMITTING AND REPORTING Complete Subwatershed Management Plan. MONITORING, MAINTENANCE AND INSPECTION 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. PUBLIC PARTICIPATION, INFORMATION & EDUCATION No implementation activities identified. FINANCING No implementation activities identified. City of Lino Lakes SWMP 1 December 20151 84 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 WATER RATE & QUANTITY 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. WATER QUALITY 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. FLOODPLAIN MANAGEMENT Address the area where there is less than 1 foot of freeboard on the road. REGULATIONS, PERMITTING AND REPORTING Develop Subwatershed Management Plan. 5.3.2 Rondeau RMU Subwatershed Table 13. RMU Specific Actions: Rondeau RMU WATER RATE & QUANTITY Employ Better Site Design (BSD) and volume control strategies to maintain recharge and avoid stormwater discharges to Rondeau Lake. Bet WETLAND MANAGEMENT Protect the large wetlands in the drainage area west of Rondeau Lake from stormwater input and from use for stormwater treatment. REGULATIONS, PERMITTING AND REPORTING Develop Resource Management System Plan. City of Lino Lakes SWMP 1 December 20151 85 5.3.3 Peltier RMU Subwatershed Table 14. RMU Specific Actions: Peltier RMU WATER QUALITY Protect and buffer the high priority wetlands in the Hardwood Creek 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. FLOODPLAIN MANAGEMENT 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. REGULATIONS, PERMITTING AND REPORTING i 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 WETLAND MANAGEMENT Protect and buffer the high priority wetlands in the Hardwood Creek RMU FLOODPLAIN MANAGEMENT Ensure that existing culvert crossings will function under future conditions. NATURAL RESOURCES 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. REGULATIONS, PERMITTING AND REPORTING MI Develop Subwatershed Management Plan. 5.3.5 Upper Rice Creek RMU Subwatershed Table 16. RMU Specific Actions: Upper Rice Creek RMU FLOODPLAIN MANAGEMENT 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. REGULATIONS, PERMITTING AND REPORTING 1 Develop Subwatershed Management Plan. City of Lino Lakes SWMP 1 December 20151 86 5.3.6 Rice Lake RMU Subwatershed Table 17. RMU Specific Actions: Rice Lake RMU WATER RATE & QUANTITY 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). WETLAND MANAGEMENT Decrease stormwater flows to the sensitive wetlands located in catchment RLA-021 on the north side of Lake Drive. FLOODPLAIN MANAGEMENT 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. WATER QUALITY 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. REGULATIONS, PERMITTING AND REPORTING Develop Subwatershed Management Plan. 5.3.7 Centerville RMU Subwatershed Table 18. RMU Specific Actions: Centerville RMU WATER QUALITY 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 WETLAND MANAGEMENT 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 NATURAL RESOURCES Work with MnDOT to evaluate wildlife crossings in future projects. WETLAND MANAGEMENT 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. REGULATIONS, PERMITTING AND REPORTING 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 December 20151 87 5.3.10 Baldwin RMU Subwatershed Table 21. RMU Specific Actions: Baldwin RMU WETLAND MANAGEMENT Evaluate the potential to implement volume reduction practices in the catchments discharging to stormwater- sensitive wetlands which are at risk under current conditions. REGULATIONS, PERMITTING AND REPORTING - Develop Subwatershed Management Plan. 5.3.11 Middle Rice Creek RMU Subwatershed Table 22. RMU Specific Actions: Middle Rice Creek RMU NATURAL RESOURCES Work with MnDOT to address corridor gaps and wildlife barriers in Middle Creek RMU. WETLAND MANAGEMENT Wetlands at risk from stormwater should be evaluated for reducing volume effects in the catchments. REGULATIONS, PERMITTING AND REPORTING Develop Resource Management System Plan. 5.3.12 Wilkinson RMU Subwatershed Table 23. RMU Specific Actions: Wilkinson RMU REGULATIONS, PERMITTING AND REPORTING 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 December 20151 88 Table 24. Estimated Costs of City -Wide Actions in 2012 dollars Project Type Year 1 Year 2 Year 3 Year 4 Year 5 Years 6-10 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 December 20151 89 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, collect 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 December 20151 90 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 was approved in May 2013 and went into effect August 1, 2013. The reissued permit will 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 1 December 20151 91 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 1 December 20151 92 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 December 20151 93 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 December 20151 94 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 December 20151 95 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 1 December 20151 96 References Houston Engineering, 2013a Northeast Minneapolis, Columbia Heights and Fridley H&H Model. October 21, 2013 Houston Engineering, 2013b External Memorandum: Impact Analysis for Clearwater Creek (Anoka - Washington Judicial Ditch 3 October 11, 2013. City of Lino Lakes SWMP 1 December 20151 97 WS — Item 6 WORK SESSION STAFF REPORT Work Session Item No. 6 Date: February 1, 2016 To: City Council From: Michael Grochala Re: Community Development Update Background Staff will provide a brief verbal update on the status of various projects currently ongoing within the City. The projects include: • D.R. Horton Land Sale and Legacy Development • Watermark — Mattamy Development along 35E • Watermark — Stormwater Reuse Study • 49 Club Demolition • NE Drainage Area Plan • Fox Road connection (Saddle Club to Foxborough) Requested Council Direction None. Attachments None. WS — Item 7 WORK SESSION STAFF REPORT Work Session Item No. 7 Date: February 1, 2016 To: Mayor Reinert and City Council From: Rick DeGardner, Public Services Director Re: MXU Change -Out Program Background The Utilities Department has identified 706 water meter reading devices that are obsolete and need to be upgraded. These devices have passed their warranted life and are starting to fail. The original reading devices were installed inside the resident's home. The new units have a twenty- year warranty and will in most cases be mounted on the exterior of the home, limiting the need for access to homes in the future. In addition, all water meters registering over 2,000,000 gallons of consumption will be replaced. The manufacturer's suggested warranty on accuracy is 2,250,000 gallons (The typical residence will accumulate about 2,000,000 gallons over a 20 year period). The City has contracted with Midwest Testing to perform the change -outs. Midwest Testing has previously worked with the City of Lino Lakes and other area cities. All installers have completed background checks, possess photo ID badges, and drive clearly marked vehicles. In the unfortunate event that a customer is not willing to schedule an appointment, we are recommending that the current Fee Schedule be amended to include the following charges for non-compliance. This would only be charged as a last resort. $40 for the quarter in which the notice was given and $250 for the subsequent quarters. This project is being funded by the Water Operating Fund. Attached is the letter that will be sent to the affected residences. Requested Council Direction For informational purposes Attachments Letter sent to affected residents Lino Lakes Public Services Department 600 Town Center Parkway Lino Lakes, MN 55014 (651) 982-2440 Fax (651)982-2439 www.ci.Iino-Iakes.mn.us January 25, 2016 Resident's name Address Lino Lakes, MN 55014 Dear Water Utility Customer, The City of Lino Lakes is in the process of upgrading all water meter reading devices that are obsolete. These devices have passed their warranted life and are starting to fail. The new units have a 20 year warranty and will in most cases be mounted on the exterior of your home. The City has contracted with Midwest Testing to perform the change -outs. In addition, Midwest Testing will be replacing all water meters registering over 2,000,000 gallons of consumption. To avoid any service interruptions, please contact Midwest Testing at 651-229-3504 to schedule an appointment by February 15, 2016. Appointments are available 9am-6pm, Monday -Friday and typically take 30-45 minutes. An adult at least 18 years of age must be home during the actual installation. There is no charge for the upgrade of the meter reading device or the water meter replacement (if applicable). This project is being funded by the Water Operating Fund. Midwest Testing has previously worked with the City of Lino Lakes and other area cities. All installers have completed background checks, possess photo ID badges, and drive clearly marked vehicles. I am confident that you will be pleased with the customer service offered by Midwest Testing. If you have any questions or concerns regarding this project please contact me at (651)928-2452. Sincerely, Tim Hillesheim Utility Supervisor - Public Services Department Item #10 Monthly Progress Report February 1, 2016 Item Last Action Taken Staff Status Digital Scanning Project 7/13/15 — Council approved hiring of PT Jeff Scanner Operator Approximately 5% of the property files have been scanned White Bear Lake Restoration Assn. v. Dept. of Natural Resources (DNR) The WBL Restoration Assn. & WBL Homeowners' Assn. reached a settlement agreement with the DNR that imposes a three-year stay on the lawsuit so funds can be appropriated for a Northeast Metro Project. This involves a construction project to connect Northeast cities to the St. Paul Regional Water Service. Lino Lakes is one of seven cities included in the second phase of the project. Jeff A project update meeting was held January 20th to discuss progress on the USGS evaluation of groundwater and surface water interaction in the northeast metro area. The report should be completed in September 2016. Polling Locations 12/7/15 — Council requested that staff look into alternative polling locations Julie Staff looked at other possible locations and prepared a timeline for precinct boundary changes Laserfisch System 12/7/15 — Council suggested the Laserfisch system include a date change column for Council packet updates Jeff Staff will propose the change to Metro I -Net's member cities at the next meeting on February 25 Approval Process for Capital Expenditures 12/28/15 — Council requested that a discussion regarding an approval process for capital expenditures be placed on the 1/4/16 work session agenda Jeff Finance Director will create a status tracker and the directors will keep the Council informed through the Weekly Update Union History Report 5/4/15 — Council requested staff to put together a union history report to educate future councils Jeff On hold