Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout1988 06-27 CCP Regular Session CITY COUNCIL AGENDA CITY OF BROOKLYN CENTER JUNE 27, 1988 7 p.m. 1. Call to Order 2. Roll Call 3. I nvocat ion 4. Open Forum 5. Approval of Consent Agenda -All items listed with an asterisk are considered to be routine by the City Council and will be enacted by one motion. There will be no separate discussion of these items unless a Councilmember so requests, in which event the item will be removed from the consent agenda and considered in its normal sequence on the agenda. 6. Approval of Minutes: a. June 13, 1988 - Regular Session 7. Resolutions: a. Appropriating Funds and Approving Payment for Emergency Repairs of Air Conditioning System for Civic Center O DEI - ETE ------- -b -- Fs l s nef- -- rej� --- idb 19� - 5-- 14 i2epla - -- 0 f -- Eeeet�--- Sdta�3 - -xt- M3scel�reotxs Lotirnis- and Ac�pttrict for- �rzs�ari� -- *c. Accepting Work Performed under Improvement Project No. 1987 -24 (Reconditioning Well No. 6) *d. Accepting Work Performed under Improvement Project No. 1988 -08 (Installation of Pressure Tanks at Wells No. 2, 4, 5, 7, and 8) *e. Accepting Work p g Performed under Improvement Project No. 1988 -09 (Reconditioning Well No. 8) *f. Declaring a Public Nuisance and Ordering the Removal of Shade Trees (Order No. DST 6/27/88) *g. Accepting Proposal for Noise Reduction on the H.V.A.C. System in Council Chambers, Improvement Project No. 1988 -12 h. Acknowledging Gift from the Brooklyn Center Lions Club -$420 gift for replacement of speaker system in Park and Recreation puppet wagon. CITY COUNCIL AGENDA -2- June 27, 1988 i. Acknowledging Gift from the Brooklyn Center American Legion Post No. 630 - $1,000 gift for purchase of mobile phone for police department. 8. Ordinances: a. An Ordinance Amending Chapter 35 Regarding the Parking Requirements for Places of Public Assembly -This item is offered this evening for a first reading. b. An Ordinance Amending Chapter 6 of the City Ordinances Regarding Administrative Code -This item covers primarily housekeeping changes to the code and is offered this evening for a first reading. 9. Planning Commission Items: (7:30 p.m.) a. Planning Commission Application No. 88004 submitted by Steve and Debra Hougton requesting special use permit approval for a carpet cleaning service in the residence at 2818 Mumford Road -This item was recommended for approval by the Planning Commission at its June 16, 1988, meeting. b. Planning Commission Application No. 88005 submitted by Bernard Herman Architects requesting site and building plan approval for an addition to the office building located at 1915 57th Avenue North -This item was recommended for approval by the Planning Commission at its June 16, 1988, meeting. c. Planning Commission Application No. 88006 submitted by Robert Reagan requesting site and building plan and special use permit approval for an addition to the Osseo Brooklyn Bus Company garage at 4435 68th Avenue North -This item was recommended for approval by the Planning Commission at its June 16, 1988, meeting. 10. Discussion Items: a. Water Use Restrictions -- Update b. Management Plans for Shingle Creek Watershed and for West Mississippi Watershed -The Shingle Creek Watershed Commission and the West Mississippi Watershed Commission were formed by Joint Powers Agreements in 1984, to meet the requirements of the Metropolitan Surface Water Management Act (M.S. 473.875 to 473.883). These commissions have now developed their draft plans and have submitted them to the member cities for review and comment. The commission will hold public hearings on their plans on August 11, 1988. City staff will provide a summary presentation of the plans at the Council meeting. CITY COUNCIL AGENDA -3- June 27, 1988 C. Constitutional Challenge to 1988 Omnibus Tax Bill d. Recommended Use for Property at 65th and Brooklyn Boulevard (Church on the Move property) e. Anoka County LRT Study f. Annual Audited Financial Report g. Executive Session -Union Contract -Legal Issues *11. Licenses 12. Adjournment MINUTES OF THE PROCEEDINGS OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF BROOKLYN CENTER IN THE COUNTY OF HENNEPIN AND THE STATE OF MINNESOTA REGULAR SESSION JUNE 13, 1988 CITY HALL CALL TO ORDER The Brooklyn Center City Council met in regular session and was called to order by Mayor Pro tem Bill Hawes at 7:03 p.m. ROLL CALL Mayor Pro tem Bill Hawes, Councilmembers Gene Lhotka, Celia Scott, and Rich Theis. Also present were City Manager Gerald Splinter, Director of Public Works Sy Knapp, Finance Director Paul Holmlund, Director of Planning and Inspection Ron Warren, City Attorney Ron Batty, City Engineer Bo Spurrier, Personnel Coordinator Geralyn Barone, and Administrative Aid Patti Page. Mayor Pro tem Hawes noted Mayor Nyquist would be absent from this evening's meeting. INVOCATION The invocation was offered by Councilmember Lhotka. OPEN FORUM Mayor Pro tem Hawes noted the Council had not received any requests to use the open forum session Sion this evening. He inquired if there was anyone present who wished to address the Council. There being none, he continued with the regular agenda items. CONSENT AGENDA Mayor Pro tem Hawes inquired if any Councilmembers requested any items removed from the consent agenda. Councilmember Lhotka requested items 91, 9p, and 9r be removed, and Mayor Pro tem Hawes requested 9j and 9k be removed from the consent agenda. MAYORAL APPOINTMENT There was a motion by Councilmember Lhotka and seconded by Councilmember Theis to appoint Mr. Nicholas Eoloff to the Brooklyn Center Housing Commission. The motion passed unanimously. PERFORMANCE BOND REDUCTION - MAINSTREET DEPARTMENT STORE There was a motion by Councilmember Lhotka and seconded by Councilmember Theis to reduce the performance guarantee for Mainstreet Department Store from $188,600 to $20,000. The motion passed unanimously. RESOLUTIONS RESOLUTION NO. 88 -87 Member Gene Lhotka introduced the following resolution and moved its adoption: 6 -13 -88 _1_ RESOLUTION AUTHORIZING EXECUTION OF AN AGREEMENT BETWEEN METROPOLITAN CLINIC OF COUNSELING, INC. AND THE CITY OF BROOKLYN CENTER FOR AN EMPLOYEE ASSISTANCE PROGRAM The motion for the adoption of the foregoing resolution was duly seconded by member Rich Theis, and the motion passed unanimously. RESOLUTION NO. 88 -88 Member Gene Lhotka introduced the following resolution and moved its adoption: RESOLUTION AMENDING THE 1988 GENERAL FUND BUDGET The motion for the adoption of the foregoing resolution was duly seconded by member Rich Theis, and the motion passed unanimously. RESOLUTION NO. 88 -89 Member Gene Lhotka introduced the following resolution and moved its adoption: RESOLUTION AMENDING THE 1988 GENERAL FUND BUDGET The motion for the adoption of the foregoing resolution was duly seconded by member Rich Theis, and the motion passed unanimously. RESOLUTION NO. 88 -90 Member Gene Lhotka introduced the following resolution and moved its adoption: RESOLUTION ACCEPTING WORK PERFORMED UNDER CONTRACT 1987 -C (COMMUNITY CENTER ROOFING IMPROVEMENT PROJECT NO. 1987 -05) The motion for the adoption of the foregoing resolution was duly seconded by member Rich Theis, and the motion passed unanimously. RESOLUTION NO. 88 -91 Member Gene Lhotka introduced the following resolution and moved its adoption: RESOLUTION DECLARING A PUBLIC NUISANCE AND ORDERING THE REMOVAL OF SHADE TREES (ORDER NO. DST 06/13/88) The motion for the adoption of the foregoing resolution was duly seconded by member Rich Theis, and the motion passed unanimously. RESOLUTION NO. 88 -92 Member Gene Lhotka introduced the following resolution and moved its adoption: RESOLUTION ACCEPTING PETITION, RECEIVING ENGINEER'S REPORT, AND INCLUDING CONSTRUCTION OF CURB AND GUTTER ON 48TH AVENUE NORTH IN IMPROVEMENT PROJECT NO. 1988 -05, FRANCE AVENUE NORTH RECONSTRUCTION The motion for the adoption of the foregoing resolution was duly seconded by member Rich Theis, and the motion passed unanimously. i 6 -13 -88 -2- RESOLUTION NO. 88 -93 Member Gene Lhotka introduced the following resolution and moved its adoption: RESOLUTION APPROVING AGREEMENT WITH JOSLYN CORPORATION FOR CONSTRUCTION AND MAINTENANCE OF SANITARY SEWER LIFT STATION The motion for the adoption of the foregoing resolution was duly seconded by member Rich Theis, and the motion passed unanimously. RESOLUTION NO. 88 -94 Member Gene Lhotka introduced the following resolution and moved its adoption: RESOLUTION ACKNOWLEDGING VOLUNTARY DEDICATION OF EASEMENTS TO THE CITY The motion for the adoption of the foregoing resolution was duly seconded by member Rich Theis, and the motion passed unanimously. LICENSES There was a motion by Councilmember Lhotka and seconded by Councilmember Theis to approve the following list of licenses: AMUSEMENT DEVICE - OPERATOR K -Mart 5930 Earle Brown Drive COURTESY BENCH United States Bench Corp. 3300 Snelling Ave. FOOD ESTABLISHMENT Lynbrook Bowl, Inc. 6357 North Lilac Drive ITINERANT FOOD ESTABLISHMENT Brooklyn Center Lions Lions Park Brooklyn Center Park & Rec Dept. Central Park First Brookdale Bank 5620 Brooklyn Blvd. First Brookdale Bank 5920 Brooklyn Blvd. MECHANICAL SYSTEMS Airco Heating & A/C Co. 4014 Central Ave. NE Guaranty Heating Co. 11741 Elm Creek Road Rouse Mechanical, Inc. 11348 K -Tel Drive SIGN HANGER Crosstown Sign Company 10166 Central Ave. NE Poblocki & Sons, Inc. P. 0. Box 04665 TAXICAB Suburban Taxi Corp. 9614 Humboldt Ave. S. The motion passed unanimously. i 6 -13 -88 -3- APPROVAL OF MINUTES - MAY 23. 1988 - REGULAR SESSION There was a motion by Councilmember Scott and seconded by Councilmember Theis to approve the minutes of the May 23, 1988, City Council meeting. The motion passed. Councilmember Lhotka abstained from the vote. RESOLUTIONS (CONTINUED) The City Manager presented a Resolution Expressing Recognition of and Appreciation for the Dedicated Public Service of Don Krefting. RESOLUTION NO. 88 -95 Member Rich Theis introduced the following resolution and moved its adoption: RESOLUTION EXPRESSING RECOGNITION OF AND APPRECIATION FOR THE DEDICATED PUBLIC SERVICE OF DON KREFTING The motion for the adoption of the foregoing resolution was duly seconded by member Celia Scott, and the motion passed unanimously. The City Manager presented a Resolution Establishing Taxicab Rates of Fare. He noted the taxicab rates of fare have been modeled after the Minneapolis rates, and all licensed taxicab companies within Brooklyn Center have been notified of the proposed rates. RESOLUTION NO. 88 -96 Member Gene Lhotka introduced the following resolution and moved its adoption: RESOLUTION ESTABLISHING TAXICAB RATES OF FARE The motion for the adoption of the foregoing resolution was duly seconded by member Rich Theis, and the motion passed unanimously. The City Manager noted staff is working with a number of other communities to set up a joint program for inspecting the taxicabs. The City Manager presented a Resolution Expressing Recognition of and Appreciation for the Dedicated Public Service of Violet Lewandowski. RESOLUTION NO. 88 -97 Member Celia Scott introduced the following resolution and moved its adoption: RESOLUTION EXPRESSING RECOGNITION OF AND APPRECIATION FOR THE DEDICATED PUBLIC SERVICE OF VIOLET LEWANDOWSKI The motion for the adoption of the foregoing resolution was duly seconded by member Rich Theis, and the motion passed unanimously. The City Manager presented a Resolution Approving Plans and Specifications for the Improvement of I -694 within the Corporate Limits of the City of Brooklyn Center. The Director of Public Works noted this project initially started in 1987 and will be complete by the end of 1990. He added the total cost of the project will be between $35 million and $40 million. He noted the project extends from Brooklyn Boulevard in Brooklyn Center east to I -35W and in some i s 6 -13 -88 -4- areas as far east as Rice Street. He briefly reviewed the new project area and noted this basically covers the improvements to the on and off ramps. He noted there will be incentive payments if the loops are completed early and penalties if the project runs over the deadline. He noted staff had a few concerns regarding some parts of the project, but after review they have found there are no suitable alternatives. He noted one area of concern was traffic would be detoured along 65th /66th Avenues North to Shingle Creek Parkway and added there is no other alternate route. He stated another concern was the noise from the pile driving. He noted MNDOT has stated it is impossible to delete the nighttime pile driving completely from the project, but they will try to hold it at a minimum. He went on to state even though MNDOT has done everything in its power to make this a smooth running project, he is sure there will still be some complaints regarding the detours and the noise, but these cannot be avoided. The Director of Public Works stated Glen Elise and Bob Kozel from MNDOT are present this evening to answer any questions the Council may have. Councilmember Lhotka inquired if the ramp improvements would be done individually or as a group. Mr. Kozel stated the ramps will be done on an individual basis. Councilmember Theis inquired the hours of the pile driving. Mr. Kozel stated the pile driving could possibly run from 7 p.m. to 5 a.m. Councilmember Theis inquired if the neighborhood would be notified of this and how MNDOT would accomplish the notification. Mr. Kozel stated it is his personal intent to notify the neighborhood of what to expect and when the pile driving is planned for. Councilmember Theis stated he would like to see the notification done in the form of a flyer drop. Councilmember Theis added he thought the City Council had approved the plans for this project before. The Director of Public Works stated the Council has previously approved the plans for this project, but each construction contract must be approved individually by the City Council. Councilmember Scott stated she and the other Councilmembers would very much appreciate it if MNDOT will notify the neighborhood of the pile driving activities because it does cut down on the number of calls they receive. RESOLUTION NO. 88 -98 Member Celia Scott introduced the following resolution and moved its adoption: RESOLUTION APPROVING PLANS AND SPECIFICATIONS FOR THE IMPROVEMENT OF I -694 WITHIN THE CORPORATE LIMITS OF THE CITY OF BROOKLYN CENTER The motion for the adoption of the foregoing resolution was duly seconded by member Gene Lhotka, and the motion passed unanimously. ORDINANCES The City Manager presented An Ordinance Amending Section 11 -602, Subdivision 2A, of the Brooklyn Center Code of Ordinances, to Change the Percent of Revenue Derived from the Serving of Food for On -sale Wine Licenses. He noted this ordinance was first read on May 23, 1988, published in the City's official newspaper on June 2, 1988, and is offered this evening for a second reading. He added this ordinance amendment will bring the City's ordinance into conformance with the State Statutes. 6 -13 -88 -5- i Mayor Pro tem Hawes opened the meeting for the purpose of a public hearing on An Ordinance Amending Section 11 -602, Subdivision 2A of the Brooklyn Center Code of Ordinances, to Change the Percent of Revenue Derived from the Serving of Food for On -sale Wine Licenses and inquired there was anyone present who wished to speak. There being none, he entertained a motion to close the public hearing. There was a motion by Councilmember Scott and seconded by Councilmember Theis to close the public hearing. The motion passed unanimously. ORDINANCE NO. 88 -09 Member Celia Scott introduced the following ordinance and moved its adoption: AN ORDINANCE AMENDING SECTION 11 -602, SUBDIVISION 2A, OF THE BROOKLYN CENTER CODE OF ORDINANCES, TO CHANGE THE PERCENT OF REVENUE DERIVED FROM THE SERVING OF FOOD FOR ON -SALE WINE LICENSES The motion for the adoption of the foregoing ordinance was duly seconded by member Gene Lhotka, and the motion passed unanimously. The City Manager presented An Ordinance Amending Section 11 -106 of the Brooklyn Center Code of Ordinances, Authorizing the Sale of Beer with an Alcohol Content in Excess of 3.2 Percent to Holders of both Wine and Beer Licenses. He noted this ordinance was first read on May 23, 1988, published in the City's official newspaper on June 2, 1988, and is offered this evening for a second reading. He added this ordinance amendment would bring the Brooklyn Center Ordinances into conformance with the State Statutes. Mayor Pro tem Hawes opened the meeting for the purpose of a public hearing on An Ordinance Amending Section 11 -106 of the Brooklyn Center Code of Ordinances, Authorizing the Sale of Beer with an Alcohol Content in Excess of 3.2 Percent to Holders of both Wine and Beer Licenses and inquired if there was anyone present who wished to speak. There being none, he entertained a motion to close the public hearing. There was a motion by Councilmember Lhotka and seconded by Councilmember Theis to close the public hearing. The motion passed unanimously. ORDINANCE NO. 88 -10 Member Rich Theis introduced the following ordinance and moved its adoption: AN ORDINANCE AMENDING SECTION 11 -106 OF THE BROOKLYN CENTER CODE OF ORDINANCES, AUTHORIZING THE SALE OF BEER WITH AN ALCOHOL CONTENT IN EXCESS OF 3.2 PERCENT TO HOLDERS OF BOTH WINE AND BEER LICENSES The motion for the adoption of the foregoing ordinance was duly seconded by member Gene Lhotka, and the motion passed unanimously. The City Manager presented An Ordinance Amending Chapter 13 Relating to Parks and Recreation. He noted this ordinance was first read on May 9, 1988, published in the City's official newspaper on May 19, 1988, and is offered this evening for a second reading. He noted the Park & Recreation Commission has proposed new alternative language for Sections 13 -102 and 13 -108 relating to curfew. Is 6 -13 -88 -6- Mayor Pro tem Hawes opened the meeting for the purpose of a public hearing on An Ordinance Amending Chapter 13 Relating to Parks and Recreation and inquired if there was anyone present who wished to speak at the public hearing. Councilmember Theis inquired how this revision would affect the use of parks and trails. The City Manager noted the revision would allow people to use the parks one -half hour before sunrise or 6 a.m, whichever is earlier. Mayor Pro tem Hawes recognized Bud Sorenson from the Park and Recreation Commission. Mr. Sorenson stated he would like to speak as a citizen of Brooklyn Center not on behalf of the Park and Recreation Commission. He noted he would like to see the parks and trails open to people who work the second and third shifts. He stated he and other members of the Park and Recreation Commission felt this was a good compromise since the Council did not approve the other proposed amendments. The Personnel Coordinator pointed out Section 13 -108 had to do with the posting of signs and handbills. She noted this proposed amendment would allow the City to post signs and handbills in the parks pertaining to City activities. Mayor Pro tem Hawes inquired if there was anyone else present who wished to speak at the public hearing. There being none, he entertained a motion to close the public hearing. There was a motion by Councilmember Lhotka and seconded by Councilmember Theis to close the public hearing. The motion passed unanimously. There was a motion by Councilmember Scott and seconded by Councilmember Theis to approve the ordinance with the noted amendments for a second reading. The motion passed unanimously. ORDINANCE NO. 88 -11 Member Celia Scott introduced the following ordinance and moved its adoption: AN ORDINANCE AMENDING CHAPTER 13 RELATING TO PARKS AND RECREATION The motion for the adoption of the foregoing ordinance was duly seconded by member Rich Theis, and the motion passed unanimously. The City Manager presented An Ordinance Amending Chapter 34 of the City Ordinances Regarding the Size of Home Occupation Signs. He noted this ordinance was first read on May 9, 1988, published in the City's official newspaper on May 19, 1988, and is offered this evening for a second reading. Mayor Pro tem Hawes opened the meeting for the purpose of a public hearing on An Ordinance Amending Chapter 34 of the City Ordinances Regarding the Size of Home Occupation Signs and inquired if there was anyone present who wished to speak. There being none, he entertained a motion to close the public hearing. There was a motion by Councilmember Scott and seconded by Councilmember Theis to close the public hearing. The motion passed unanimously. ORDINANCE NO. 88 -12 Member Gene Lhotka introduced the following ordinance and moved its adoption: 6 -13 -88 -7- AN ORDINANCE AMENDING CHAPTER 34 OF THE CITY ORDINANCES REGARDING THE SIZE OF HOME OCCUPATION SIGNS The motion for the adoption of the foregoing ordinance was duly seconded by member Celia Scott, and the motion passed unanimously. The City Manager presented An Ordinance Amending Chapter 11 Relating to Hours of Operation for a Bottle Club. He noted the City does not currently have any bottle clubs licensed, but the ordinance is in place. He added this amendment would bring our ordinances into conformance with the State Statutes. There was a motion by Councilmember Scott and seconded by Councilmember Theis to approve for first reading An Ordinance Amending Chapter 11 Relating to Hours of Operation for a Bottle Club and setting a public hearing date for July 11, 1988, at 7:30 p.m. The motion passed unanimously. The City Manager presented An Ordinance Amending Chapter 25 Changing the Name of County State Aid Highway No. 10 between T.H. 100 and Brooklyn Boulevard to Bass Lake Road. He noted this ordinance was first read on October 26, 1987, published in the City's official newspaper on November 5, 1987, and the second reading and public hearing was held on November 23, 1987. He stated following the public hearing, the City Council tabled action on the ordinance to allow an informational meeting to be held with interested persons. He added that meeting was held on May 16, 1988. The Director of Public Works noted at the public hearing on November 23, 1987, the City Council stated it did not wish to rename the sections of road east of T.H. 100 or west of Brooklyn Boulevard. The Council did, however, agree to the renaming of the middle section. The Director of Public Works added the Council tabled action on the item to allow an informational meeting to be held with interested persons. He noted an informational meeting was held on May 16, 1988, and staff has not received any adverse comments other than the letter from Health One. He stated the legal department of Health One has sent a letter to the City noting that although Health One will not oppose the name change, it would like the City to accept this letter as Health Ones' written notice of dissatisfaction with the proposal. It was noted there would be a substantial cost to Health One for the cost for state regulatory filings, new business supplies, a new sign, and notifications to businesses. The Director of Public Works noted the post office has stated it will cooperate and deliver mail addressed to Health One at 57th Avenue North if the name is changed to Bass Lake Road, but there is no way of guaranteeing how long this will continue. He added if it is the Council's wish to deny the name change Hennepin County should be asked to remove its sign at the intersection of Brooklyn Boulevard and County Road 10 because it does note the street name as Bass Lake Road. There was a motion by Councilmember Lhotka and seconded by Councilmember Scott to deny An Ordinance Amending Chapter 25 Changing the Name of County State Aid Highway No. 10 between T.H. 100 and Brooklyn Boulevard to Bass Lake Road. The motion passed unanimously. 6 -13 -88 -8- DISCUSSION ITEMS REQUEST BY FIRE RELIEF ASSOCIATION FOR CHANGES TO BENEFIT PLAN The Finance Director noted that he has worked with the association and the actuary for approximately one year on these proposed changes. He added he feels these changes are significant enough to require some detailed explanation. He noted the City Council last increased the association benefits effective January 1, 1985, and the Fire Relief Association is requesting these proposed changes become effective July 1, 1988. He went on to explain some of the areas of change and noted they include a 10% increase for inactive members, monthly benefit level per year of service increased from $15 to $22.50, increased lump sum benefits, maximum service credit increased from 25 to 30 years, members choice for post - retirement benefits, and providing benefits to designated beneficiaries of unmarried active members. He went on to review the current benefits plan. The Finance Director then reviewed the benefits plan with the proposed changes. He noted Jim McClure and Jay Hruska from the Fire Relief Association and Vicky Slomiany representing the Wyatt Company are present this evening. The Finance Director noted the proposed benefits plan has been submitted to the City Attorney's office for its review and comment, and if the Council agrees with the proposed benefits plan the appropriate action this evening would be to direct the association to amend the bylaws. Mr. McClure stated many retirement benefit plans which are being used by area fire departments currently are being used to draw people into their organization. He explained Brooklyn Center has a more traditional volunteer organization where all benefits are received at the time of, or after, retirement. Councilmember Scott inquired if the proposed changes were approved, does he foresee more people taking a lump sum at retirement versus the monthly annuity. Mr. McClure stated that would be hard to predict, but he believes it could still be more beneficial to take a monthly annuity. Mr. McClure noted the monthly benefit level of $22.50 is the maximum allowed by the State of Minnesota. Councilmember Lhotka inquired if in 1985 when the changes were made was the monthly benefit level increased to the State maximum. Mr. McClure responded negatively. Councilmember Theis stated he had some concerns with keeping people on the fire department for 30 years who can no longer perform the necessary duties. Mr. McClure stated there are annual tests which each fireman must complete along with maintaining the firecall percentages and attending meetings. A brief discussion then ensued regarding the pros and cons of increasing the maximum service credit from 25 to 30 years. The Finance Director noted an actuarial valuation of the current and proposed plans was completed and briefly explained the findings. He noted there would be an increase from $59,328 to $105,421. A lengthy discussion then ensued relative to the large increase in the benefits plan. Councilmember Theis raised some concerns regarding the survivors benefits and whether each member and /or survivor was being treated equally. Ms. Slominany addressed Councilmember Theis' concerns regarding survivors benefits and went on to review the analysis of change in cost of plan transparency. 6 -13 -88 -9- I Councilmember Scott stated she feels the residents of Brooklyn Center are getting a good deal for their money because she is sure many of the surrounding communities which pay their firemen for firecalls are receiving much more than the $22.50 per month. She added she would like staff to survey the surrounding communities and find out what the average monthly wage is for their fire department members. There was a motion by Councilmember Theis and seconded by Councilmember Lhotka directing the association to amend its bylaws to provide for the changes to the plan and submit the amendments to the City Council for approval. The motion passed unanimously. I RECESS The Brooklyn Center City Council recessed at 9:22 p.m. and reconvened at 9:34 p.m. SALE OF PULL -TABS AT DUDLEY TOURNAMENT The City Manager stated the Lions Club has asked for City Council authorization to allow it to sell pull -tabs at the Dudley Tournament on Saturday, June 18, 1988. He noted the State allows one 12 hour per year off -site sale. He noted the State allows for only one day, and the 12 hours must be continuous. He stated the Finance Director has checked with the insurance company, and they have stated though they were not pleased with the idea of this type of sale taking place it would be covered under our current policies. The City Manager stated this is basically a policy question for the City Council. Councilmember Scott inquired where the pull -tabs would be sold. Mr. Bob Spies of the Brooklyn Center Lions Club stated the Lions Club would have a booth close to the beer tent and the pull -tabs would only be sold from the booth. Councilmember Theis inquired if any provisions have been made for the litter cleanup. Mr. p Spies stated there would be large barrels near the booth for people to deposit their used pull -tabs in, but a problem could arise when pull - tab purchasers take them back to their seats and do not dispose of them properly. Councilmember Lhotka stated he feels the sale of pull -tabs at this type of function is inappropriate. He stated if the Council is desirous of approving this sale, he feels they should check with the sponsoring agency. The City Manager stated the Minnesota Recreation and Park Association used to sponsor the Dudley Tournament, but approximately two years ago they dropped out of sponsoring and the City o P g y f Brooklyn Center and the Crime Prevention Fund are now the sponsors of the Dudley Tournament. He added he has talked to Mr. Mavis regarding the sale of pull -tabs, and Mr. Mavis' only concern was that the sale of pull -tabs may detract from the amount of beer sales. Councilmember Lhotka stated the Lions Club already has a permit to sell in two or three locations, and he does not know what more the Lions Club need. Mr. Spies stated the Lions Club does not need anything, and all profits are turned back to helping the City and community. Councilmember Theis inquired if the Lions Club would have a problem if the Council were to suggest that all profits go to the Crime Prevention Fund for this year to make up for the loss of beer sales. Mr. Spies stated he could not speak for the total Lions Club, but he personally felt it would be a good idea. He added that he could not commit to this suggestion at 6 -13 -88 -10- r this time. Councilmember Lhotka inquired how much money is taken in at the bowling alley locations each month. Mr. Spies stated approximately $8,000 a month is taken in during the bowling season. He added he believes the Lions Club would make approximately $2,000 off the Dudley Tournament sales. There was a motion by Councilmember Theis and seconded by Councilmember Scott to approve the 12 hour sale of pull -tabs at the Dudley Tournament on a trial basis for the year 1988 and to waive the 30 day waiting period. Councilmember Lhotka stated he would like to amend the motion and to direct staff to review the past resolution pertaining to the other sale locations to make sure there would be no conflicts in approving this permit. Councilmember Theis and Councilmember Scott agreed to this amendment. Upon vote being taken on the foregoing motion and amendment, the motion passed with Councilmember Lhotka opposed. PROGRESS UPDATE -- REFUSE AND RECYCLING PROGRAM The City Manager stated basically what is needed this evening is an affirmation of the motion stating the consortium method as the City Council's first choice and the bidding method as the City's second choice. There was a motion by Councilmember Lhotka and seconded by Councilmember Scott reaffirming the Council's choices as the consortium method and the bidding method. The motion passed unanimously. NUISANCE ORDINANCE AMENDMENTS The City Manager noted the Council received rough drafts of proposed amendments to the nuisance ordinance and noted they were a discussion item this evening, but if the Council so wished they could be given a first reading also this evening. The Director of Planning and Inspection briefly went on to explain the amendments to each ordinance and noted staff is not recommending any type of grandfather clause. The Finance Director left the meeting at 10:08 p.m. The City Manager noted there would be a phase -in time allowing people a set amount of time to rectify the situation. Councilmember Theis stated he could not support some of the proposed amendments. Councilmember Lhotka stated he hopes the Council will not approve these ordinance amendments for a first reading tonight because he would like additional time to review the amendments. Councilmember Scott added she does not want to make a hurried decision on this matter either. There was a general consensus among Councilmembers that this item should be placed on the next City Council agenda as a discussion item. Councilmember Theis stated he would also like to see some examples of the more sensitive issues which the Council may be facing if these amendments are approved. DISCUSSION OF WATER USAGE AND WATER RESTRICTIONS The Director of Public Works stated the water use restrictions have been in effect since May 24, 1988. He noted the City -wide ban is on lawn and garden 6 -13 -88 -11- sprinkling between the hours of 3 p.m. and 9 p.m. and will stay in effect until further notice. He stated the decision was made because of the high daily consumption which occurred on May 23, 1988, but also because of the extended peak consumption rate which occurred for a six hour period on that afternoon. He noted that peak usage resulted in lowering the City's retained storage to one million gallons which is the minimum the City has established to assure the availability of water in the event of a major fire. He went on to review the chart from the supervisory control and data acquisition ( SCADA) system. He noted these charts show the usage as well as the pumping and storage capabilities. The Director of Public Works stated on June 4, 1988, a water main leak occurred in the 24 inch water main which crosses under I -694 near Dupont Avenue North. He stated on June 7, 1988, the area was excavated and the leak was located approximately ten feet beyond the end of the casing pipe which extends under 1- 694. He noted if the leak had been under the freeway, it would have taken two to three weeks to repair. The water main leak was repaired, and the main was operating properly by the afternoon of June 8. The Director of Public Works noted several cities have much more severe restrictions than the City of Brooklyn Center. He added that up to this point all wells and towers have been operating efficiently, and the water department has been able to remain using the same chemical treatment as usual. He went on to briefly review the two options that have been considered a long term plan for the system improvements. He noted these options would be considered at a later date. Councilmember Lhotka stated he was concerned with the notification process used by the City, and he believes a better way should be found of notifying the residents. The Director of Public Works stated his office has records of the notification which was sent to the newspapers and other news media but added just because the City notifies the news media, does not insure they will publish the information or publish it correctly. Councilmember Theis inquired if there were any other cities with the same SCADA system who are currently using the odd /even water restriction. The Director of Public Works stated he is not sure there are any other systems similar to Brooklyn Center. He noted in 1987 the City did try the odd /even system but found this did not show a negligible difference. Councilmember Theis stated he would like staff to look into how the odd /even system would work for Brooklyn Center and compare it to other cities. The Director of Public Works stated he would contact some other cities to try and find one that is using a SCADA system similar to Brooklyn Center. RESOLUTIONS (CONTINUED) The City Manager noted the following resolutions all relate to the France Avenue and Logan Avenue area improvements. He presented a Resolution Establishing Parking Restrictions on S.A.P. 109 - 106 -02, Logan Avenue and Lilac Drive from 57th Avenue to 59th Avenue in the City of Brooklyn Center, Minnesota. Councilmember Lhotka inquired if the street was going to be any narrower after the improvement than it is today. The City Engineer stated the streets would remain the same width, but parking would not be allowed on both sides because 6 -13 -88 -12- State Aid Standards do not accommodate parking. RESOLUTION NO. 88 -99 Member Gene Lhotka introduced the following resolution and moved its adoption: RESOLUTION ESTABLISHING PARKING RESTRICTIONS ON S.A.P. 109- 106 -02, LOGAN AVENUE AND LILAC DRIVE FROM 57TH AVENUE TO 59TH AVENUE IN THE CITY OF BROOKLYN CENTER, MINNESOTA The motion for the adoption of the foregoing resolution was duly seconded by member Celia Scott, and the motion passed unanimously. The City Manager presented a Resolution Establishing Parking Restrictions on S.A.P. 109 - 105 -01, France Avenue from the South City Limits to 50th Avenue in the City of Brooklyn Center, Minnesota. RESOLUTION NO. 88 -100 Member Celia Scott introduced the following resolution and moved its adoption: RESOLUTION ESTABLISHING PARKING RESTRICTIONS ON S.A.P. 109 - 105 -01, FRANCE AVENUE FROM THE SOUTH CITY LIMITS TO 50TH AVENUE IN THE CITY OF BROOKLYN CENTER, MINNESOTA The motion for the adoption of the foregoing resolution was duly seconded by member Gene Lhotka, and the motion passed unanimously. The City Manager presented a Resolution Establishing Parking Restrictions on S.A.P. 109- 104 -01, 50th Avenue from France Avenue to T.H. 100 in the City of Brooklyn Center, Minnesota. RESOLUTION NO. 88 -101 Member Gene Lhotka introduced the following resolution and moved its adoption: RESOLUTION ESTABLISHING PARKING RESTRICTIONS ON S.A.P. 109 - 104 -01, 50TH AVENUE FROM FRANCE AVENUE TO T.H. 100 IN THE CITY OF BROOKLYN CENTER, MINNESOTA The motion for the adoption of the foregoing resolution was duly seconded by member Celia Scott, and the motion passed unanimously. The City Manager noted no formal agreement has been reached with J & M Talmage relating to parking. The Director of Public Works stated he feels there is a good chance an agreement will still be reached regarding this item. He noted if the Council agrees with the staff's actions, they will continue on the same course and update the Council at a later date. There was a motion by Councilmember Scott and seconded by Councilmember Theis to give conceptual approval to the agreement with J & M Talmage and to table the item. The motion passed. Councilmember Theis abstained from the vote. The City Manager presented a Resolution Approving Appraisals and Amounts of Settlement for Easements Required for Contract 1988 -H (France Avenue Area Improvements and Logan Avenue Area Improvements). Councilmember Lhotka inquired 6 -13 -88 -13- I what types of easements these were and where they were located. The Director of Public Works stated the majority of the easements are construction easements. Councilmember Lhotka stated he would like to be able to see where the easements are if the City is going to spend money on them. The City Engineer briefly explained where a few of the easements were located. Councilmember Lhotka stated in the future he would like this information included with the other agenda material. The Director of Public Works stated he would have the information compiled and sent to the Councilmembers. RESOLUTION NO. 88 -102 Member Gene Lhotka introduced the following resolution and moved its adoption: RESOLUTION APPROVING APPRAISALS AND AMOUNTS OF SETTLEMENT FOR EASEMENTS REQUIRED FOR CONTRACT 1988 -H (FRANCE AVENUE AREA IMPROVEMENTS AND LOGAN AVENUE AREA IMPROVEMENTS) The motion for the adoption of the foregoing resolution was duly seconded by member Rich Theis, and the motion passed unanimously. The City Manager presented a Resolution Accepting Bid and Approving Contract 1988 -H, for Logan Avenue North Reconstruction, Improvement Project No. 1988 -04; France Avenue North Reconstruction, Improvement Project No. 1988 -05; Lakebreeze Avenue Reconstruction and Lift Station, Improvement Project No. 1988 -06; and 50th Avenue North Reconstruction, Improvement Project No. 1988 -07. RESOLUTION N0. 88 -103 Member Gene Lhotka introduced the following resolution and moved its adoption: RESOLUTION ACCEPTING BID AND APPROVING CONTRACT 1988 -H, FOR LOGAN AVENUE NORTH RECONSTRUCTION, IMPROVEMENT PROJECT NO. 1988 -04; FRANCE AVENUE NORTH RECONSTRUCTION, IMPROVEMENT PROJECT NO. 1988 -05; LAKEBREEZE AVENUE RECONSTRUCTION AND LIFT STATION, IMPROVEMENT PROJECT NO. 1988 -06; AND 50TH AVENUE NORTH RECONSTRUCTION, IMPROVEMENT PROJECT NO. 1988 -07 The motion for the adoption of the foregoing resolution was duly seconded by member Celia Scott, and the motion passed unanimously. ADJOURNMENT There was a motion by Councilmember Scott and seconded by Councilmember Theis to adjourn the meeting. The motion passed unanimously. The Brooklyn Center City Council adjourned at 11:13 p.m. City Clerk Mayor I 6 -13 -88 -14- CITY OF BROOKLYN CENTER Council Meeting Date 6127/88 Agenda Item Numbe REQUEST FOR COUNCIL CONSIDERATION ITEM DESCRIPTION: RESOLUTION APPROPRIATING FUNDS AND APPROVING PAYMENT FOR EMERGENCY REPAIRS OF AIR CONDITIONING SYSTEM FOR CIVIC CENTER. DEPT. APPROVAL: SY KN PP DIRE OR OF PUBLIC WORKS MANAGER'S REVIEW /RECOMMENDATION: No comments to supplement this report Comments below /attached * **************** * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * ** SUMMARY EXPLANATION: (supplemental sheets attached YQS ) Explanation • On Friday, May 20, Compressor No. 1 (one of the two compressors which provides air conditioning to the Civic Cent t because n unusual g Center complex) was shutdown bec of a noise which had developed. An inspection of the compressor showed that it had a broken piston and rod and a scored crankshaft, making it inoperable. An evaluation of the situation was conducted by City staff, with the assistance of Crammer Services (the contractor who provides maintenance services on our H.V.A.C. equipment) and reviewed with OL&B (our mechanical engineers). It was agreed that 3 options were available, i.e. (1) rebuilding the existing compressor at an estimated cost of $6000; (2) replacing the compressor with a factory rebuilt compressor at an estimated cost of $11,000; and (3) replacing the entire unit with a new unit at a cost in excess of $30,000. After discussion, it was agreed that "Option 1 should be chosen. Because of the emergency condition (i.e. the entire Civic complex would have been without air conditioning if Compressor No. 2 also failed for any reason) and because it was not possible to exactly describe the limits of work required we authorized Crammer Services to proceed with "Option 1" on a time- and - materials basis. That work was completed and the compressor was placed on -line on June 15. The actual total cost for this work is $6,122.85. Staff Comments Compressor No. 1 had been inspected and repaired in 1985 and was scheduled for routine inspection and repair in 1989. Unfortunately, the current failure occurred before that inspection could be done. Compressor sso r # experienced total failure 84 s p 2 xper lu in 19 and was replaced with a factory rebuilt unit. Than unit was inspected and repaired in spring of 1988. Recommedation • Adoption of the attached resolution which appropriates funds and approves payment for repair of Compressor No. 1. • • 7a Member introduced the following resolution and moved its adoption: 0 RESOLUTION NO. RESOLUTION APPROPRIATING FUNDS AND APPROVING PAYMENT FOR EMERGENCY REPAIRS OF AIR CONDITIONING SYSTEM FOR CIVIC CENTER WHEREAS, Compressor No. 1 which provides for air conditioning of the Civic complex experienced mechanical failure on May 20, 1988, and WHEREAS, emergency repairs were authorized by the City Manager and completed by Crammer Services, at a total cost of $6,122.85. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED - BY THE CITY COUNCIL of the City of Brooklyn Center, Minnesota, that: 1. The amount of that $6,122.85 is hereby appropriated from the Unallocated Departmental Expenses Division 80 of the General Fund to the Government Buildings Division 19 of the General Fund. 2. Payment in the total amount of $6,122.85 to Crammer Services for completion of the emergency repairs is hereby approved. Date Mayor ATTEST: Clerk The motion for the adoption of the foregoing resolution was duly seconded by member , and upon vote being taken thereon, the following voted in favor thereof: and the following voted against the same: whereupon said resolution was declared duly passed and adopted. CITY OF BROOKLYN CENTER Council Meeting Date 6127 Agenda Item Number 7G REQUEST FOR COUNCIL CONSIDERATION ITEM DESCRIPTION: RESOLUTION ACCEPTING WORK PERFORMED UNDER IMPROVEMENT PROJECT NO. 1987 -24 (RECONDITIONING WELL NO. 6) DEPT. APPROVAL: * * * * * * * ** * * *VPPP* DIRECTOR *O** PUBLIC * WORKS ********** * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * ** MANAGER'S REVIEW /RECOMMENDATION: No comments to supplement this report Comments below /attached SUMMARY EXPLANATION: (supplemental sheets attached Summary The attached resolution accepts the work performed under Improvement Project No. 1987 -24. The work performed under this improvement has been completed in accordance with the approved plans and specifications. Past Council Actions 1. Established Improvement Project No. 1987 -24 Reconditioning Well No. 6 P J g and authorized a study by Short Elliott Hendrickson (SEH) to determine the proper replacement pump by resolution of November 9, 1987. 2. Accepted proposals for the improvements recommended in the SEH report by resolution of February 22, 1988. Recommendation It is recommended that City Council approve the attached resolution Accepting Work Performed Under Improvement Project No. 1987 -24 (Reconditioning Well No. 6). u • i 7c Member introduced the following resolution and moved its adoption: RESOLUTION NO. RESOLUTION ACCEPTING WORK PERFORMED UNDER IMPROVEMENT PROJECT NO. 1987 -24 (RECONDITIONING WELL NO. 6) WHEREAS, pursuant to contracts approved by the City Council of the City of Brooklyn Center, Minnesota, on February 22, 1988, the contractors listed below have satisfactorily completed the work to recondition Well No. 6: Layne Minnesota Company Deep Well Turbine Pump Bacon's Electric Co. Electric Service Modification Layne Minnesota Company Electric Motor NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED BY THE CITY COUNCIL of the City of Brooklyn Center, Minnesota, that: 1. The work completed under the Contract with Layne Minnesota Company of Minneapolis, Minnesota, for the deep well turbine pump is accepted and approved according to the following schedule: As Approved Final Amount Original Contract $13,431.00 $13,431.00 TOTAL $13,431.00 $13,431.00 2. The value of work performed is equal to the original amount of the contract. 3. It is hereby directed that final payment be made on said contract, taking the Contractor's receipt in full. The total amount to be paid for said improvement under said contract shall be $14;x"7`45. 4. The work completed under the contract with Bacon's Electronic Co. of Fridley, Minnesota for the electric service modification is accepted and approved according to the following schedule: As Approved Final Amount Original Contract $1,500.00 $1,883.45 TOTAL $1,500.00 $1,883.45 5. The value of the work performed is greater than the original amount by $383.45, due to a general under estimation of planned quantities. 6. It is hereby directed that final payment be made on said contract, taking the Contractor's receipt in full. The total amount to be paid for said improvement under said contract shall be $1,883.45. 7. The work completed under the contract with Layne Minnesota Company of Minneapolis, Minnesota for the electric motor is accepted and approved according to the following schedule: As Approved Final Amount Original Contract $5,487.00 5,487.00 8. It is hereby directed that final payment be made on said contract, taking the Contractor's receipt in full. The total amount to be paid for said improvement under said contract shall be $1 - 8-83 - .4 - 5 BE IT FURTHER resolved, by the City Council of the City of Brooklyn Center, Minnesota, that: 1. There is appropriated the sum of $383.45 for additional costs. 2. The appropriation will be financed by: As Approved Final Amount Utility Fund $20,418.00 $20,801.45 TOTAL $20,418.00 $20,801.45 Date Mayor ATTEST: Clerk The motion for the adoption of the foregoing resolution was duly seconded by member ➢ and upon vote being taken thereon, the following voted in favor thereof: and the following voted against the same: whereupon said resolution was declared duly passed and adopted. CITY OF BROOKLYN CENTER Council Meeting Date 6/27/88 Agenda Item Numbe REQUEST FOR COUNCIL CONSIDERATION ITEM DESCRIPTION: RESOLUTION ACCEPTING WORK PERFORMED UNDER IMPROVEMENT PROJECT NO. 1988 -08 (INSTALLATION OF PRESSURE TANKS AT WELLS NO. 2, 4, 5, 7, AND 8) DEPT. APPROVAL: MANAGER'S REVIEW /RECOMMENDATION: No comments to supplement this report Comments below /attached SUMMA RY EXPLANATION: (supplemental sheets attached +� Summary • This project modified the operation of 5 City wells, resulting in smoother operation by eliminating water hammer or other shock caused by starting and stopping the pumps. This work was performed by City forces. Past City Council Actions Received report, established improvement project and approved contracts by resolution on January 25, 1988. Recommendation It is recommended that City Council approve the attached resolution Accepting Work Performed Under Improvement Project No. 1988 -08 (Installation of Pressure Tanks at Wells No. 2, 4, 5, 7, and 8). • 7d Member introduced the following resolution and moved its adoption: RESOLUTION NO. RESOLUTION ACCEPTING WORK PERFORMED UNDER IMPROVEMENT PROJECT NO. 1988 -08 (INSTALLATION OF PRESSURE TANKS AT WELLS NO. 2, 4, 5, 7, AND 8) WHEREAS, pursuant to written contract signed with the City of Brooklyn Center, Minnesota, Wheeler Tank Manufacturing Company has satisfactorily completed and supplied tanks for Improvement Project 1988 -08; and WHEREAS, pursuant to written contract signed with the City of Brooklyn, Minnesota, North Star Water Products has satisfactorily completed and supplied miscellaneous parts for Improvement Project 1988 -08. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED BY THE CITY COUNCIL of the City of Brooklyn Center, Minnesota, that: 1. The work completed under said contract with Wheeler Tank Manufacturing Company of St. Paul, Minnesota is hereby accepted and approved according to the following schedule: As Approved Final Amount Original Contract $5,830 $5,810 2. The value of work performed is less than the original contract amount by $20.00 due to a general under estimation of planned quantities. 3. It is hereby directed that final payment be made on said contract, taking the Contractor's receipt in full. The total amount to be paid for said improvement under said contract shall be $5,810. 4. The work completed under said contract with North Star Water Works Products of Apple Valley, Minnesota, is accepted and approved according to the following schedule: As Approved Final Amount Original Contract $10,313.34 $11,040.40 5. The value of the work performed is more than the original contract amount by $727.06 due to a general under estimation of planned quantities. 6. It is hereby directed that final payment be made on said contract, taking the contractor's receipt in full. The total amount to be paid for said improvement under said contract shall be $11,040.40. 7. The work completed under said contract required certain parts be taken from the existing inventory. It is accepted and approved according to the following schedule: As Approved Final Amount Original Amount $1,500 $1,485.63 8. The value of parts taken from inventory is less than the original amount by $14.37 due a general under estimation of planned quantities. 9. The total amount to be taken from inventory for said improvement shall be $1,485.63. BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED BY THE CITY COUNCIL, of the City of Brooklyn Center, Minnesota that: 1. There is appropriated the sum of $692.69 for additional costs. 2. The appropriation will be financed by: As Approved Final Amount Utility Fund $17,643.34 $18,336.03 Date Mayor ATTEST: Clerk The motion for the adoption of the foregoing resolution was duly seconded by member , and upon vote being taken thereon, the following voted in favor thereof: and the following voted against the same: whereupon said resolution was declared duly passed and adopted. CITY OF BROOKLYN CENTER Council Meeting Date 6/27/88 Agenda Item Number 7E REQUEST FOR COUNCIL CONSIDERATION ITEM DESCRIPTION: RESOLUTION ACCEPTING WORK PERFORMED UNDER IMPROVEMENT PROJECT NO. 1988 -09 (RECONDITIONING WELL NO. 8) DEPT. APPROVAL: v * * * * * * * * * * * * *NAPP.* D *R * ** OR *o ** PUBLIC * WORKS ********** * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * *� * * * * * * * * * ** MANAGER'S REVIEW /RECOMMENDATION: No comments to supplement this report Comments below /attached SUMMARY EXPLANATION: (supplemental sheets attached Summary A study prepared by Short Elliott Hendrickson (SEH) identified serious capacity • problems at Well No. 8 that required replacement of the pump. The work has been completed in accordance with the specifications and the new pump has been in service during the period of high water demand. The replacement was timely given the high water use experienced this year. Past City Council Action Established the project and accepted proposal by resolution for Water Improvement Project No. 1988 -09 on February 22, 1988. Recommendation It is recommended that City Council approve the attached resolution Accepting Work Performed Under Improvement Project No. 1988 -09 (Reconditioning Well No. 8). • 7E Member introduced the following resolution and moved its adoption: RESOLUTION NO. RESOLUTION ACCEPTING WORK PERFORMED UNDER IMPROVEMENT PROJECT NO. 1988 -09 (RECONDITIONING WELL NO. 8) WHEREAS, pursuant to written contract signed with the City of Brooklyn Center, Minnesota, Layne Minnesota Company, Minneapolis, Minnesota has satisfactorily completed the following improvements in accordance with said contract. RECONDITIONING WELL NO. 8, WATER IMPROVEMENT PROJECT NO. 1988 -09 NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED BY THE CITY COUNCIL of the City of Brooklyn Center, Minnesota, that: 1. The work completed under said contract is accepted and approved according to the following schedule: As Approved Final Amount Original Contract $4,949 $4,949 2. It is hereby directed that the final payment be made on said contract, taking the contractor's receipt in full. The total amount to be paid for said improvement under said contract shall be $4,949. BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED BY THE CITY COUNCIL of the City of Brooklyn Center, Minnesota, that: The appropriation will be financed by: As Approved Final Amount Utility Fund $4,949.00 $4,949.00 Date Mayor ATTEST: Clerk The motion for the adoption of the foregoing resolution was duly seconded by member , and upon vote being taken thereon, the following voted in favor thereof: and the following voted against the same: whereupon said resolution was declared duly passed and adopted. CITY OF BROOKLYN CENTER Council Meetin Date 6/ Agenda Item Number / F REQUEST FOR COUNCIL CONSIDERATION ITEM DESCRIPTION: RESOLUTION DECLARING A PUBLIC NUISANCE AND ORDERING THE REMOVAL OF SHADE TREES DEPT. APPROVAL; j,j 2� * * * * * * * * * * ** *NAPPY* DIREC OF PUBLIC ,t* WORK' MANAGER'S REVIEW /RECOMMENDATION: *� No comments to supplement this report Comments below /attached SUMMARY EXPLANATION: (supplemental sheets attached NO The attached resolution represents the official council action required to expedite removal of the trees most recently marked by the city tree inspector in accordance with the procedures outlined therein. It is anticipated that this resolution will be submitted for council consideration each meeting during the summer and fall as new trees are marked. RECOMMENDATION It is recommended the council adopt the attached resolution. 7F Member introduced the following resolution and moved its adoption: RESOLUTION NO. RESOLUTION DECLARING A PUBLIC NUISANCE AND ORDERING THE REMOVAL OF SHADE TREES (ORDER NO. DST 06/27/88) WHEREAS, a Notice to Abate Nuisance and Shade Tree Removal Agreement has been issued to the owners of certain properties in the City of Brooklyn Center giving the owners twenty (20) days to remove shade trees on the owners' property; and WHEREAS, the City can expedite the removal of these shade trees by declaring them a public nuisance: NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED BY THE CITY COUNCIL of the City of Brooklyn Center, Minnesota that: 1 e Th shade trees at the following addresses are hereb y declared to be a public nuisance. PROPERTY OWNER PROPERTY ADDRESS TREE NUMBER EUGENE SULLIVAN 5401 BROOKLYN BLVD 100 TARSIA KALWAY 3306 53RD AVE N 101 JOHN LANNES 5101 DREW AVE N 102 JOHN LANNES 5101 DREW AVE N 103 JOHN LANNES 5101 DREW AVE N 104 JOHN LANNES 5101 DREW AVE N 105 JOHN LANNES 5101 DREW AVE N 106 JOHN LANNES 5101 DREW AVE N 107 JOHN LANNES 5101 DREW AVE N 108 HENRY HOLM 5200 DREW AVE N 109 BENNIE ROZMAN 3305 53RD AVE N 110 BENNIE ROZMAN 3305 53RD AVE N 111 BENNIE ROZMAN 3305 53RD AVE N 112 P & M ROCHE /R VETTER 5301 BROOKLYN BLVD 113 DOROTHY MAXWELL 2229 BROOKVIEW DR 114 SIDNEY WILLKOM 6617 UNITY AVE N 115 ALDEN WYMORE 5230 HOWE LA 116 TIMOTHY ELFTMANN 5301 HOWE LA 117 LAURIE CORBETT 5306 66TH AVE N 118 MASOOD /NASRIN SARIM 4512 65TH AVE N 119 RICHARD KAHLER 4512 WINCHESTER LA 120 ALCUIN ROERING 4606 66TH AVE N 121 PHILIP & CAROL DELL 4318 66TH AVE N 122 MYRON HAGEL 6430 LEE AVE N 123 SHELDON BURNS 4218 65TH AVE N 124 ALBERT WAHL 6225 KYLE AVE N 125 AUDEEN RICHETTO 6225 PERRY AVE N 126 AUDEEN RICHETTO 6225 PERRY AVE N 127 MARANTHA BAPT HOME 5401 69TH AVE N 128 MARANTHA BAPT HOME 5401 69TH AVE N 129 MARANTHA BAPT HOME 5401 69TH AVE N 130 ARVID SORENSON 6901 TOLEDO AVE N 131 RESOLUTION NO. PROPERTY OWNER PROPERTY ADDRESS TREE NUMBER CITY OF BRKLYN CTR WILLOW LA PARK 132 CITY OF BRKLYN CTR PALMER LAKE W 133 CITY OF BRKLYN CTR PALMER LAKE W 134 THOMAS MYLAN 6907 PALMER LK DR W 135 BRIAN & MARTA HUNT 1120 69TH AVE N 136 BRIAN & MARTA HUNT 1120 69TH AVE N 137 JOHN HERMERDING 5743 EMERSON AVE N 138 ROBERT STOLTMAN 5130 66TH AVE N 60 HELEN HANSON 2906 64th AVE N 69 ROBERT LANG 7061 PERRY AVE N 70 COLLEEN MULLEN 7055 PERRY AVE N 71 ROBERT LANG 7061 PERRY AVE N 72 ANTOINE POMERLEAU 5821 EWING AVE N 73A VIOLA HARTY 5827 EWING AVE N 73B ANTOINE POMERLEAU 5821 EWING AVE N 74 ELIZABETH OLSON 5459 BROOKLYN BLVD 75 DAVID PALMER 5654 NORTHPORT DR 76 DONNA LARSON 5354 NORTHPORT DR 77 PAUL RYMANOWSKI 5300 NORTHPORT DR 78 LOIS ISENBERG 6009 ALDRICH AVE N 79 THOMAS /MARIA WONDRA 6012 CAMDEN AVE N 80 JAMES /MARY TALMAGE 3715 50TH AVE N 81 JAMES BAKER 4925 BEARD AVE N 82 VERNON / SUZAN RECK 5427 EMERSON AVE N 83 TERRY CASE 5639 HUMBOLDT AVE N 84 STANLEY TRUCHINSKI 5633 HUMBOLDT AVE N 85 JEROME /LAURIE WABNER 6336 LEE AVE N 86 JOHN /SYLVIA NORDBERG 6912 LOGAN AVE N 87 EUAN KRAUSE 6937 LOGAN AVE N 88 PATRICIA WALLNER 7200 RIVERDALE RD 89 GORDON BERG 5913 HALIFAX PL 90 ELIZABETH BUSH 5925 HALIFAX PL 91 BOYD /JEANNE DUFAULT 6012 HALIFAX PL 92 L HERTLE /M RASSATT 6013 HALIFAX PL 93 KEVIN /KYLER BAKEY 5822 PEARSON DR 94 ARLEN STREHLO 5809 PEARSON DR 95 ARLEN STREHLO 5809 PEARSON DR 96 DAVID /LUCINDA PALM 5808 PEARSON DR 97 F REYNOLD LINDSTROM 5349 NORTHPORT DR 98 LAWRENCE /SUSAN LORD 5348 NORTHPORT DR 99 2. After twenty (20) days from the date of the notice, the property owners will receive a second written notice that will give them (5) business days in which to contest the determination of City Council by requesting a hearing in writing. Said request shall be filed with the City Clerk. 3. After five (5) days, if the property owner fails to request a hearing, the tree(s) shall be removed by the City. 4. All removal costs, including legal, financing and administrative charges, shall be specially assessed against the property. RESOLUTION NO. 0 Date Mayor ATTEST: Clerk The motion for the adoption of the foregoing resolution was duly seconded P g g y e by member , and upon vote being taken thereon, the following voted in favor thereof: and the following voted against the same: whereupon said resolution was declared duly passed and adopted. CITY OF BROOKLYN CENTER Council Meeting Date LZZ 88 Agenda item Numbe REQUEST FOR COUNCIL CONSIDERATION ITEM DESCRIPTION: RESOLUTION ACCEPTING PROPOSAL FOR NOISE REDUCTION ON THE H.V.A.C. SYSTEM IN CITY COUNCIL CHAMBERS, IMPROVEMENT PROJECT NO. 1988 -12 DEPT. APPROVAL: SY KNAPP IREC OR OF PUBLIC WORKS MANAGER'S REVIEW /RECOMMENDATION: No comments to supplement this report Comments below /attached SUMMARY EXPLANATION: (supplemental sheets attached Explanation The 1988 budget for Government Buildings, Division 19 of the General Fund ® includes an appropriation of $18,000 to provide for noise reduction and $3200 for improvement of the u p public address (P.A.) system in the City Council Chambers. On April 11, the Council approved a contract for acoustical engineering services PP g g with Wm. H. D. 'Kroll and Associates to analyze existing conditions and make recommendations for improvements. As a first step, Mr.. Kroll has recommended the installation of insulation- lined baffle boxes in the three supply -air ducts to the Council room. He estimates this will reduce the noise level from the existing 73 dBa to 55 dBa, i.e. nearly a 90% reduction in noise level from this source. If this forecast is correct, there would be very little noticeable noise remaining from the H.V.A,C. system. However, with this noise removed, a new problem will be noted, such as echoes from the walls and ceiling. Should this problem become serious, an acoustical treatment will need to be applied to the walls and ceiling. A very preliminary estimate for this work is $15,000 to $22,000. In addition, Mr. Kroll has estimated the costs for installing a totally new P.A> system, with provisions for future connections to C.A.T.V., etc. Two options are suggested: - a manually operated system a $12,000 to $15,000 - a fully automatic system _ $20,000 to $25,000 Staff Recommendation ® It is recommended that we roceed with the first step improvement, i.e. P P installation of the noise reduction system, then evaluate the conditions before deciding if additional improvements should be made. • Requests for proposals were sent to three contractors who specialize in this kind of work, and proposals were received from all three. We recommend acceptance of the "low bid" proposal from Rouse Mechanical in the amount of $7600. In addition, it will be necessary to hire a drywall contractor to repair the holes in the ceilings which will be made to allow installation of the baffles. It is estimated that the cost of this work will be approximately $ 1,000 (no firm quotation can be obtained until after the mechanical contractor completes his work). Recommendation A resolution o ion acce tin the proposal p g of Rouse Mechanical and authorizing the City g y Manager to hire a drywall contractor to complete the necessary ceiling repairs is provided for consideration by the City Council. I • 73 Member introduced the following resolution and moved its adoption: i RESOLUTION NO. RESOLUTION ACCEPTING PROPOSAL FOR NOISE REDUCTION ON THE H.V.A.C. SYSTEM IN CITY COUNCIL CHAMBERS, IMPROVEMENT PROJECT NO. 1988 -12 WHEREAS, the following proposals have been received for furnishing and installation of H.V.A.C. noise reduction equipment for the City Council Chambers: Contractor Amount of Proposal Rouse Mechanical $7600.00 Egan and Sons Inc. $7675.00 Modern Air $9800.00 AND WHEREAS, the Director of Public Works estimates that the cost for repair of ceilings removed during the process of equipment installation to be approximately $1,000. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED BY THE CITY COUNCIL of the City of Brooklyn Center, Minnesota, that: 1. The proposal of Rouse Mechanical to furnish and install said equipment at a cost of $7600.00 is hereby accepted. The City Manager is hereby authorized and directed to execute such contract. 2. The City Manager is authorized and directed to enter into contract for repair of ceilings as required following installation of the noise reduction equipment. 3. All costs for said improvements will be paid from the 1988 budget for Government Buildings, Division 19. Date Mayor ATTEST: Clerk The motion for the adoption of the foregoing resolution was duly seconded by member , and upon vote being taken thereon, the following voted in favor thereof: and the following voted against the same: whereupon said resolution was declared duly passed and adopted. Member introduced the following resolution and moved 7N its adoption: 1 RESOLUTION NO. RESOLUTION ACKNOWLEDGING GIFT FROM THE BROOKLYN CENTER LIONS CLUB WHEREAS, THE BROOKLYN CENTER LIONS CLUB has presented the City a gift of four hundred twenty dollars ($420) and has designated that it be used to purchase a replacement public address system for the Parks and Recreation Department Puppet Playhouse; and WHEREAS, the City Council is appreciative of the gift and commends the Brooklyn Center Lions Club for its civic efforts: NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the City Council of the City of Brooklyn Center to acknowledge the gift with gratitude; and BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that the gift of $420 be appropriated to the Parks and Recreation Department Capital Outlay Budget to be used to purchase the public address system. t D Mayor ay or ATTEST: Clerk The motion for the adoption of the foregoing resolution was °duly seconded by member , and upon vote being taken thereon, the following voted in favor thereof: and the following voted against the same: whereupon said resolution was declared duly passed and adopted. CITY OF BROOKLYN CENTER Council Meeting Date 06 -27 -8 8 Agenda Item Numbe REQUEST FOR COUNCIL CONSIDERATION ITEM DESCRIPTION: RESOLUTION ACKNOWLEDGING GIFT FROM BROOKLYN CENTER AMERICAN LEGION POST NO. 630 DEPT. APPROVAL: Signature itle Chief of/ e MANAGER'S REVIEW /RECOMMENDATION: No comments to supplement this report Comments below /attached SUMMARY EXPLANATION: (supplemental sheets attached Yes The American Legion Club donated $1,000.00 to the City of Brooklyn Center for the purchase of a mobile phone for the police • department. The phone will be purchased and installed by U.S. West under a contract with Hennepin County. The money is enough for one mobile phone and two additional harnesses. The additional harnesses will provide for the phone to be moved to two other vehicles: RECOMMENDATION• To approve resolution accepting donation and authorizing purchase of mobile phone. Member introduced the following resolution and moved its adoption: RESOLUTION NO. RESOLUTION ACKNOWLEDGING GIFT FROM BROOKLYN CENTER AMERICAN LEGION POST N0. 630 WHEREAS, BROOKLYN CENTER AMERICAN LEGION POST N0. 630 has presented the City a gift of one thousand dollars ($1,000) and has designated that it be used to purchase a mobile phone for the Police Department; and WHEREAS, the City Council is appreciative of the gift and commends Brooklyn Center American Legion Post No. 630 for its civic efforts: NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the City Council of the City of Brooklyn Center to acknowledge the gift with gratitude; and BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that the gift of $1,000 be appropriated to the Police Department Capital Outlay Budget to be used to purchase the mobile phone. Date Mayor ATTEST: Clerk The motion for the adoption of the foregoing resolution was duly seconded by member , and upon vote being taken thereon, the following voted in favor thereof: and the following voted against the same: whereupon said resolution was declared duly passed and adopted. CITY OF BROOKLYN CENTER council Meeting Date 6 -27 -88 Agenda Item Numbe REQUEST FOR COUNCIL CONSIDERATION • ITEM DESCRIPTION: An ordinance amending Chapter 35 regarding parking for theatres and places of public assembly. DEPT. AP AL: Signature - title i n lion MANAGER'S REVIEW /RECOMMENDATION: No comments to supplement this report o Comments below /attached SUMMARY EXPLANATION: (supplemental sheets attached X ) This proposed ordinance amendment is the result of review and a recommendation by the Planning Commission at its meetings on May 26 and June 16, 1988. Attached are copies of the minutes from those meetings as well as a memo explaining the proposed amendment. This action is the result of much discussion between members of the City staff and Mr. Robert Larsen, owner of Brookdale Square and Mr. Chris Galle, his associate, regarding possible changes and an addition to the Brookdale Square shopping center. Mr. Larsen has recently purchased the Cinema I, II, III, IV, property that lies directly east of the shopping center. It is his intention to combine the two parcels together to provide access between the parcels and also access for Brookdale Square to the east on John Martin Drive. He also wants to add approximately 25,000 to 30,000 sq. ft. of retail space to the shopping center to orient the center to the John Martin Drive area to the east. Available parking for the combined sites becomes the critical issue as to whether or not Larsen could expand. Currently, there is no surplus or excess parking at Brookdale Square, which includes the strip shopping center, T. Wright Is and the UA Theatre. There is approximately a 125 car parking surplus on the Cinema property. The surplus between the two sites is not enough to accomplish the expansion proposed by Larsen. The question of adequate parking for all of the uses was discussed extensively and it was noted that there certainly appears to be a surplus of parking to accommodate the proposed expansion if the sites were combined and better access provided. We have noted that there is no inclination on the part of the City to revise its retail parking formula, so we looked at the adequacy of other parking formulas used on these sites. It is also believed that the restaurant parking formula is also • appropriate. We then reviewed the theatre parking formula for its adequacy. SUMMARY EXPLANATION continued • Gary Shallcross researched and prepared an analysis regarding appropriate theatre parking (attached). The results of the research was a recommendation to the c assembly parking requirement of one parking Planning Commission that the publi as emb y p g q P g n stall Y for ever three seats, . which is used for theatres such as the Cinema and UA out hampering adequate parking Theatres, could be reduced with p g eq p g when such a use was located in a retail shopping center complex primarily due to the peaks and demands of the various uses. The City Council's attention is directed to the Planner's report, a very tentative layout of the combined area and the minutes of the Planning Commission's May 26 and June 16, 1988 meetings. RECOMMENDATION It is recommended that the City Council hold a first reading on the proposed Zoning Ordinance amendment to allow the parking requirement for places of public assembly in a retail shopping center complex to be reduced from its current one parking space f or ever kin space for ever four seats. This amendment Y three seats to one parking a P g P Y would only affect such uses in a shopping center. In other situations such as freestanding theatres, churches, etc., the requirement would still be one parking space for every three seats. I MEMORANDUM TO: Ronald A. Warren, Director of Planning and Inspection FROM: Gary Shallcross, Planner SUBJECT: Brookdale Square Development Possibilities DATE: May 9, 1988 This memo is in response to an informal development proposal by Bob Larson of Commercial Partners to expand the Brookdale Square Shopping Center by 25,000 to 30,000 square feet. The addition would primarily be one large tenant at the east end of the Brookdale Square shopping center. Mr. Larson also now owns the General Cinema property to the east. The concept plan submitted provides for opening up the two sites so that the entire area would function as one large development and would have access to both Shingle Creek Parkway and John Martin Drive. Parking The primary issue raised by the concept plan is over parking. The proposed addition would eliminate virtually all of the parking to the east of the existing shopping center building. There is a surplus of approximately 125 stalls on the General Cinema site which partially makes up for this loss, but the provision of a driveway through the north end of the site does also reduce available parking. In addition, of course, the parking requirement for the shopping center would increase. The parking provided and required, existing and proposed is as follows: Existing Proposed Spaces Spaces Establishment Parking Factor Required Parking Factor Required T. Wright's 500 seats 18 emps. 259 500 seats 18 emps. 259 Brookdale Square 88,326 sq. ft. 532 118,226 sq. ft. 698 U A Theatre 2,045 seats 682 2,045 seats 682 General Cinema 1,479 seats 493 1,479 seats 493 Total 1,966 2,132 Between the two sites there are presently 2,091 parking stalls, or an excess of 125. The proposed development plan shows 1,932 spaces or a deficiency of precisely 200 spaces for the proposed plan. The City has considered a revision to its retail parking formula which would help alleviate this deficiency by about 100 stalls. However, that formula revision failed to gather sufficient support for passage and is not likely to be resurrected. Alternately, we have discussed with Mr. Larson the possibility of an ordinance amendment relating to the theatre parking formula. Theatre Parking Formula I have drawn on three sources of information in evaluating the current theatre parking formula: a phone survey of 16 municipalities, a study of parking at shopping centers by the Urban Land Institute and a study entitled Parking Generation by the Institute of Transportation Engineers. The findings of these sources are reviewed below: -1- a) Survey of Suburban Cities. I surveyed sixteen suburban municipalities as o their parking requirements for theatres. Of these, seven required one space per three seats; five required one space per four seats; and three required one space per five seats. One city required only one space per 100 sq, ft. of gross floor area. The average of requirements based on seating comes to 1 space per 3.73 seats. Applying this result to the 3,524 seats in the two theatres in this area would result in a parking requirement of 945 spaces, a reduction of 230 spaces. b) Urban Land Institute. The Urban Land Institute's study of parking generation at shopping centers includes a brief recommendation on cinemas within retail center complexes. For a center with less than 100,000 square feet of gross leasable area (GLA), the study recommends only "three additional parking spaces for every 100 cinema seats for cinemas occupying up to 10% of the total center GLA." (The existing United Artists Theatre occupies approximately 22% of the gross floor area between the theatre and shopping center combined. Applying the ULI formula to Brookdale Square would reduce the parking requirement for the theatre from 682 spaces to 399 spaces or a reduction of 283 spaces. If the proposed expansion were factored into the parking calculation, the reduction would be from 1,175 spaces to 769 spaces, or a reduction of 406 spaces overall (counting both theatres). c) ITE Study on Parkin Generation. T e Institute of Traffic Engineers has performed parking studies on numerous land uses. For each land use, the number of parking spaces occupied (the dependent variable) is plotted against some independent variable. In the case of theatres, the independent variable is seats. Each study plots "data points" on a graph and develops a least squares regression line to best "fit" the data. In the case of theatres, there are only nine data points for Saturday occurances and the regression equation is P = 0.50 (x) - 322.0. For a 2,045 seat theatre, the regression equation comes out to 700.5 spaces, or about one space per three seats. For a 1,479 seat theatre, the regression equation comes out to only 417.5, or only about one space per 3.5 seats. If the ITE study is applied to our two theatres, the regression equation would require 18 more spaces for the UA Theatre, but 76 fewer spaces for the General Cinema Theatre, for a balance of 58 fewer spaces. The regression equation for weekday theatre parking is P = 0.32 (x ) - 174.0. This works out to a parking demand of 480 spaces for the UA Theatre and 299 spaces for the General Cinema. This comes to 779 spaces overall, very close to the 769 spaces envisioned under the ULI formula (see b above). The weekday peak periods are much closer for the theatre use and shopping center use. So, even though the theatre parking demand is less, the possbilities of shared parking also diminish. -2- Recommendation There is probably some difference in the peak parking demand times between shopping centers and theatres on weekends. The shopping center is likely to peak earlier in the afternoon while theatres will peak at 7 -9 p.m. in the evening. There may, therefore, be justification for a lesser parking requirement for theatres when they are associated with a retail shopping center. (In this case, the retail expansion would make the General Cinema a part of the Brookdale Square complex and, therefore, eligible for a lesser parking requirement). I do not think we would experience any problems if we lowered the theatre parking requirement to one space per 3.5 seats when the theatre is associated with a retail complex. Even one ace r 4 seats P P per might be considered. Outcome The outcome of such an amendment in this case would be a parking requirement for the 3,524 total theatre seats of 1,007 parking spaces at one space per 3.5 seats or 881 spaces at one space per 4 seats. The resulting parking requirement for the entire combined development would be either 1,798 (at 1 per 3.5 seats) or 1,672 spaces (at 1 per 4 seats) for the existing development. For the proposed development, the total parking requirement would be 1,964 spaces (at 1 per 3.5 seats) or 1,838 spaces (at 1 per 4 seats). The concept plan submitted with 29,900 sq. ft. of additional retail space provides for 1,932 spaces, less than required if the formula is changed to 1 space per 3.5 seats, but more than enough if the formula is changed to 1 space per 4 seats. The proposed development, or some variation of it, is deemed to be a positive change for this area. It would, probably boost traffic to the shopping center by adding another anchor tenant and would facilitate traffic movements to and from the theatres by opening up access to John Martin Drive for the UA Theatre thereby relieving some of the traffic presently dumping out onto Shingle Creek Parkway. If the City can facilitate this development by safely reducing its ordinance requirements, there would be some positive benefits to users of the Brookdale Square complex. -3- • I I I / I W N 1 AOORETAIC..,900 Sq. Ft.l Y� NEW. RETAIL q F x,000 Sq. /e. I i O 7. / 0 T9999 �RfT ,W9 ?2 fT Exs. FG>V GGFE7lUAN j I .- I !I , I . I 1 r I � i :oHaNe SU MIT WA e< fT Fr I 'J 10 w Fu Site Plan I 4 1' � _=� i Cinemas • A center with less than 100.000 Food S Peak parking demands at freestanding quare feet of GLA requires a nomi g nal three additional parking spaces Food service tenants include both full or attached cinemas incorporated for every 100 cinema seats for cine- service and fast food restaurants with within shopping centers do not coin- mas occupying up to 10 percent of or without liquor service, as well as 1 cide either seasonally, or by time of day the total center GLA. specialty stores such as doughnut with overall design hour shopping cen- shops or ice cream parlors. These ten- ter demands. Cinema patrons at shop- Centers having 100.000 to 200.000 ping centers can make dual use of square feet of GLA can accommo- ants attract patrons whose parking de- parking spaces provided primarily to date up to 450 cinema seats without mands coincide with peak center serve retail patrons, but available dur- providing additional parking. For parking demands. Shoppers whose ing nonpeak hour retail periods. In ad- every 100 seats above the initial 450 trips to the center include a stop at a dition, one vehicle may serve 3.0 to 4.0 seats, a nominal 3.0 additional restaurant have been observed to have cinema patrons, while, typically, the spaces per 100 seats are required, parking durations longer than shoppers who do not visit food service tenants. same vehicle would only serve 1.5 to • A shopping center with over The contribution that this retail function 2.5 shoppers. Thus, the parking de- 200,000 square feet of GLA can ac- makes to parking demand was found to mand associated with movie trips is re- commodate up to 750 seats,without vary with center size. At smaller centers duced proportionately: providing additional parking with a total GLA of 200,000 square feet spaces. For every 100 seats above or less, many of the peak period vehicle the initial 750 seats, a nominal three trips generated by restaurants and fast additional spaces are required. food outlets, for example, are in addi- These standards for additional spaces tion to and independent of the trips for cinemas are only applicable when applied in conjunction with the basic indices recommended by this study. 17 MOVIE THEATER 443 Peak Parking Spaces Occupied vs: SEATS On a: SATURDAY PARKING GENERATION RATES Average Range of Standard Number of Average Number of Rate Rates Deviation Studies Seats 0.26 0.11 -0.42 0.11 9 1562 DATA PLOT AND EQUATION 1,500 1,400 �w 1,300 ° CL 1,200 1,100 cn 1,000 w Q 900 w 800 z 700- ° -- - cc 600 ° a 500 w 400 _ ._ 13 u 300 200 ° ° 100 0 0 1,000 2,000 3,000 X = NUMBER OF SEATS El ACTUAL DATA POINTS FITTED CURVE Fitted Curve Equation: P = 0.50(X) - 322.0 R = 0.837 Parking Generation, August 1987 /Institute of Transportation Engineers 61 MOVIE THEATER (443) Peak Parking Spaces Occupied vs: SEATS On a: WEEKDAY C PARKING GENERATION RATES Average Range of Standard Number of Average Number of C Rate Rates Deviation Studies Seats 0.19 0.06 -0.46 0.11 11 1646 C DATA PLOT AND EQUATION CAUTION —USE CAREFULLY —LOW R 2 . 1,100 Ll p 1,000 w 900 U 800 U) U 700 a< 600 ° E: Z 500 Y a 400 ° w 300 a ❑ II 200 CL 100 ° ❑ ° 0 800 1,200 1,600 2,000 2,400 2,800 3,200 X = NUMBER OF SEATS 0 ACTUAL DATA POINTS FITTED CURVE Fitted Curve Equation: P = 0.32(X) - 174.0 R = 0.475 Parking Generation, August 1987 /Institute of Transportation Engineers 60 MINUTES OF THE PROCEEDINGS OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF BROOKLYN CENTER IN THE COUNTY OF HENNEPIN AND THE STATE OF MINNESOTA STUDY SESSION MAY 26, 1987 CITY HALL CALL TO ORDER The Planning Commission met in study session and was called to order by Chairman George Lucht at 7:30 p.m. ROLL CALL Chairman George Lucht, Commissioners Molly Malecki, Bertil Johnson, and Wallace Bernards. Also present were Director of Planning and Inspection Ronald Warren, Planner Gary Shallcross and Recording Secretary Mary Lou Larsen. Chairman Lucht stated that Commissioners Mike Nelson, Ann Wallerstedt and Lowell Ainas had called indicating that they would not be able to attend this evening's meeting and were excused. APPROVAL OF MINUTES - APRIL 14, 1988 Motion by Commissioner Bernards seconded by Commissioner Malecki to approve the minutes of the April 14, 1988 Planning Commission meeting as submitted. Voting in favor: Chairman Lucht, Commissioners Malecki and Bernards. Voting against: none. Not voting: Commissioner Johnson as he did not attend that meeting. The motion passed. DISCUSSION ITEMS a) Brookdale Square Development Possibilities The Secretary reviewed a memo from Planner Gary Shallcross regarding Brookdale Square shopping center development possibilities. He explained that Commercial Partners, the developer for the site, had undergone difficulties when planning the layout of the shopping center which resulted in several reviews and tabling before construction could get underway. He noted the access from Shingle Creek Parkway had been a major concern, with the City favoring a public street at that time and that it is still a problem. The City wanted to eliminate a traffic problem by creating an access as far away from County Road 10 as possible. He added that Commercial Partners has now acquired the Cinema property to the east and would like to expand the shopping center by 25,000 to 30,000 square feet and open an access between the two sites, thus allowing access to John Martin Drive for the shopping center and access to Shingle Creek Parkway for Cinema I, II, III, IV. Further discussion ensued regarding alternate accesses to the center after the expansion. The Secretary explained an access to the center could be made near the Perkins restaurant on John Martin Drive which would eliminate a lot of congestion with traffic entering the center from Shingle Creek Parkway. Planner Gary Shallcross explained the similarity of the theatre and shopping center weekday peak parking periods. He suggested that it might be more appropriate to reduce the parking requirement to one space for four seats when a theatre is in a shopping center complex. He noted that studies by the Urban Land Institute and the Institute of Transportation Engineers would require a similar number of stalls for 5 -26 -88 _1_ 4 weekday parking demand when there could be little or no "shared parking" between the theatres and the shopping center. He explained that the higher weekend demand for the theatres could be compensated for by the lower parking demand from the retail center, thus allowing for some "shared parking" when the theatres were at peak parking demand. Commissioner Bernards agreed that this would be a better formula. Chairman Lucht inquired if both theatres would continue to operate. The Secretary stated that they would as the Cinema theatre has a lease that cannot be broken. He stated the United Artist Theatre does a good business and sometimes creates a parking problem for the Yen Ching Restaurant when theatre patrons park to the north of the theater on certain nights. He noted at other times some of the parking spaces are never used. Commissioner Johnson stated he feels trying to exit the center onto Shingle Creek Parkway is a hazard. The Secretary explained that at the time of development the City favored a roadway through the center to prevent traffic congestion at County Road 10. He added that it may now be the time to consider installing another traffic signal on Shingle Creek Parkway. Commissioner Bernards asked if there is a drive - through proposed near the theater. The Secretary stated a good location might be near Perkins on John Martin Drive. Commissioner Malecki inquired if there had ever been a traffic count on Tuesday nights when a discount price is offered at the theater. The Secretary responded in the negative. The Secretary stated there may be a better place to construct the addition, such as excess property owned by Northwestern Bell. He added that at the time of construction of Brookdale Square it was suggested to face the shopping center in the opposite direction away from Brookdale Ford in order to have a better view. Chairman Lucht asked if the whole property would have to be replatted. The Secretary answered that it would or provide cross access agreements. Commissioner Bernards asked if any other area in the City is available for retail development. The Secretary stated the Lynbrook Bowl area is a possibility. He explained most developers are more interested in locating in the Brookdale area. b) Uses Permitted in the I -1 Zoning District The Secretary stated draft ordinance amendments regarding permitted uses in the I -1 zoning district distributed at this evening's meeting are for the Commission's consideration to be discussed at a later date. He stated a proposal for a fast food restaurant, hotel and office building had been submitted for the 5 acre I -1 zoned parcel on the corner of Freeway Boulevard and Shingle Creek Parkway. The Secretary explained this is not a good location for a fast food restaurant, but developers are willing to pay a considerable amount of money to locate there. He added that the City has favored a major development for that area. He stated staff has had meetings with Al Beisner of Richardson and Sons to discuss proposals for this I -1 zoned parcel. The Secretary explained the Master Plan does not address fast food restaurants. Commissioner Johnson asked about day are in the I -1 zoning district and what the Y g definition of day care is. The Secretary explained an example would be the Learning 5 -26 -88 -2- Tree. He stated day care is not a permitted use in the I -1 zone at the present time, but possibly some property could be rezoned to C2 which does allow day care centers by special use permit. Commissioner Bernards asked if The Earle Brown Commons is in the I -1 zone. The Secretary responded that it is zoned R7. The Secretary stated that a Planned Unit Development Ordinance (PUD) would be coming before the Commission sometime in the future. ADJOURNMENT Motion by Commissioner Johnson seconded by Commissioner Malecki to adjourn the meeting of the Planning Commission. Voting in favor: Chairman Lucht, Commissioners Malecki, Johnson, and Bernards. Voting against: none. The Planning Commission adjourned at 8:35 p.m. Chairman 5 -26 -88 -3- s CITY OF BROOKLYN CENTER Notice is hereby given that a public hearing will be held on the day of , 1988 at p.m. at the City Hall, 6301 Shingle Creek Parkway, to consider an amendment to the Zoning Ordinance regarding the parking requirements for places of public assembly. Auxiliary aids for handicapped persons are available upon request at least 96 hours in advance. Please contact the Personnel Coordinator at 561 -5440 to make arrangements. ORDINANCE NO. AN ORDINANCE AMENDING CHAPTER 35 REGARDING THE PARKING REQUIREMENT FOR PLACES OF PUBLIC ASSEMBLY THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF BROOKLYN CENTER DOES ORDAIN AS FOLLOWS: Section 1. Chapter 35 of the City Ordinances of the City of Brooklyn Center is hereby amended in the following manner: Section 35 -704. MINIMUM PARKING SPACES REQUIRED. 4. Miscellaneous a. Places of public assembly such as churches, theatres, auditoriums (other than school auditoriums) mortuaries, stadiums, arenas, dance halls: • One space for every three seats. Places of public assembly located in a retail shopping center complex shall have one space for every four seats. Section 2. This ordinance shall become effective after adoption and upon thirty (30) days following its legal publication. Adopted this day of , 1988. Mayor ATTEST: Clerk Date of Publication Effective Date (Brackets indicate matter to be deleted, underline indicates new matter). CITY OF BROOKLYN CENTER Council Meeting Date June 27, 1988 Agenda Item Number REQUEST FOR COUNCIL CONSIDERATION ITEM DESCRIPTION: AN ORDINANCE AMENDING CHAPTER 6 OF THE CITY ORDINANCES REGARDING ADMINISTRATIVE CODE DEPT. APPROVAL: Personnel Coordinator Signatufe - title MANAGER'S REVIEW /RECOMMENDATION: No comments to supplement this report Comments below /attached SUMMARY EXPLANATION: (supplemental sheets attached X ) Attached is an ordinance amendment to chapter 6 regarding the City's administrative code. The • memorandum to the city manager dated May 24, 1988, outlines the housekeeping changes made to the code. The only other change not mentioned in the memo is the ordinance - has been made gender neutral; that is, there are no longer masculine pronouns used. RECOMMENDED CITY COUNCIL ACTION Pass for a first reading an ordinance amending chapter 6 of the City ordinances regarding administrative code and set a date for a public hearing on it. MEMORANDUM TO: Gerald G. Splinter, City Manager FROM: Geralyn R. Barone, Personnel Coordinator DATE: May 24, 1988 SUBJECT: An Ordinance Amending Chapter 6 of the City Ordinances City Clerk Darlene Weeks asked me to review and update chapter 6 of the City ordinances related to the administrative code. Attached is a proposed ordinance amendment, and following is a list of recommended housekeeping changes. 1. The City treasurer's office is deleted as a separate office and incorporated with the department of finance. 2. The director of parks and recreation is changed to director of recreation. 3. Liquor store manager is changed to liquor stores manager. 4. The organization of the public works department is amended by adding the parks maintenance and government buildings divisions. In addition, the street superintendent is changed to the superintendent of public works. The position responsible for the public utilities division is changed from public utilities superintendent to superintendent of public works. 5. An added responsibility for the director of recreation is the management and operation of the golf course. g Please review these amendments. If you feel it is necessary, I will also have the city attorney review the changes. If possible, I would like to see this as an agenda item for the June 13, 1988, city council meeting. CITY OF BROOKLYN CENTER Notice is hereby given that a public hearing will be held on the day of , 1987 at p.m. at the City Hall, 6301 Shingle Creek Parkway, to consider an amendment to Chapter 6 Regarding Administrative Code. Auxiliary aids for handicapped persons are available upon request at least 96 hours in advance. Please contact the Personnel Coordinator at 561 -5440 to make arrangements. ORDINANCE NO. AN ORDINANCE AMENDING CHAPTER 6 OF THE CITY ORDINANCES REGARDING ADMINISTRATIVE CODE THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF BROOKLYN CENTER DOES ORDAIN AS FOLLOWS: Section 1. Chapter 6 of the City Ordinances of the City of Brooklyn Center is hereby amended in the following manner: Section 6 -102. ADMINISTRATIVE ORGANIZATION. The administrative services of the City shall be divided into the following departments and offices and heads thereof, and said departments, offices and positions are hereby created: City Manager's Office ...................City Manager Deputy City Manager City Clerk's Office .....................City Clerk Deputy City Clerk [City Treasurer's Office .................City Treasurer] [Deputy City Treasurer] City Assessor's Office........ City Assessor Deputy City Assessor Department of Finance /City Treasurer's ensurer s •ffice ................Director of Finance City Treasurer Deputy City Treasurer Department of Public Works ..............Director of Public Works Department of Police ....................Chief of Police Department of Planning and Inspection... Director of Planning and Inspection Department of Parks and Recreation ...... Director of [Parks and] Recreation Fire Department .........................Fire Chief Municipal Liquor Facility ...............Liquor Stores Manager [Assistant Liquor Store Manager] Section 6 -103, AUTHORITY, DUTIES, AND RESPONSIBILITIES OF THE CITY MANAGER. The city manager shall be the head of the administrative branch of the City government and shall be responsible to the city council for the proper administration of all affairs relating to the City. The city manager shall have the authorities, duties, and responsibilities conferred upon [him] the city manager by law, the City Charter and City Ordinance not inconsistent with the City Charter. ORDINANCE NO. Section 6 -105. FUNCTIONS, DUTIES, AND RESPONSIBILITIES OF THE OFFICE OF THE CITY CLERK. The office of the city clerk shall be administered by the city clerk who shall be responsible to and appointed by the city manager. The city clerk or [his deputy] the city clerk's desi nee shall act as secretary of the city council. The city clerk shall have duties and responsibilities in connection with the keeping and maintaining of the City records and such other duties and responsibilities as may be assigned by the city manager and the provisions of the City Charter. [ Section 6 -107. FUNCTIONS, DUTIES, AND RESPONSIBILITIES OF THE OFFICE OF THE CITY TREASURER. The office of city treasurer shall be administered by the city treasurer who shall be responsible to and appointed by the city manager. The city treasurer shall have duties and responsibilities in connection with the disbursement and custody of public funds and such other duties as may be assigned by the city manager and the provisions of the City Charter.] [ Section 6 -108. DUTIES AND APPOINTMENT OF DEPUTY CITY TREASURER.] [6- 108.10. Duties. The deputy city treasurer shall, in the absence of the treasurer, perform all duties normally performed by the city treasurer.] [6- 108.20. Appointment. The deputy city treasurer shall be appointed by the city manager.] Section 6 -111. FUNCTIONS OF THE DEPARTMENT OF FINANCE /OFFICE OF THE CITY TREASURER Section 6 -112 DUTIES, APPOINTMENT, AND RESPONSIBILITIES OF THE DIRECTOR OF FINANCE /CITY TREASURER AND DEPUTY CITY TREASURER 6- 112.10. Responsible to City Manager The director of finance /cit treasurer shall be appointed by the city manager and shall be responsible to, and under the supervision of, the city manager for the management and administration of the department of finance and city treasurer's office 6- 112.20. [ Financial Advisor .1 Duties. The director /treasurer shall be financial advisor[y] to the city manager, and shall assist the city manager in the preparation and presentation of the annual budget. The director /treasurer shall have duties and responsibilities in connection with the disbursement and custody of public funds 6- 112.30. Financial Procedures The director /treasurer shall be responsible for the application of approved financial and accounting procedures and methods employed within the department, and shall recommend to the city manager accounting procedures to be adopted by all administrative departments. 6- 112.40. Reports. The director /treasurer shall prepare, or supervise the preparation of_, all reports requested of [him] the director /treasurer by the city manager[,] or that are required by law. ORDINANCE NO. 6- 112.50. Additional Duties The director treasurer shall perform any additional duties that may be assigned from time to time by the city manager and by the provisions of the city charter 6- 112.60. Duties and Appointment of Deputy City Treasurer. The deputy city treasurer shall in the absence of the treasurer, perform all duties normally performed by the city treasurer. The deputy, city treasurer shall be appoin by the city manager_ Section 6 -113 ORGANIZATION AND FUNCTIONS OF THE DEPARTMENT OF PUBLIC WORKS. 6- 113.10. Organization The department of public works shall be composed of a director of public works and the following divisions and division heads: Engineering Division .......................City Engineer Street Division ... ........................[Street Superintendent] •••••... ........ Superintendent of Public Works Public Utilities Division .................[Public Utilities Sup't.] Superintendent of Public Works Parks Maintenance Division .................Superintendent of Public Works Government Buildings Division Maintenance Supervisor 6- 113.20. Function. The primary function of the department of public works shall be the planning, coordination, and supervision of all public works projects[,] and maintenance and operation of existing public works facilities[,] within the City. ' 6- 113.60. Parks Maintenance Division The parks maintenance division shall be responsible for the maintenance of the City parks system 6- 113.70. Government Buildings Division The government buildings division shall be responsible for the maintenance and o eration of existing Cit buildings and grounds in the Cites [6- 113.60.] 6- 113.80. Reports and Records The department of public works shall prepare such reports as may be requested by the city manager and shall maintain the special assessment record in accordance with procedures recommended by the director of finance. Section 6 -114. DUTIES, APPOINTMENT, AND RESPONSIBILITIES OF THE DIRECTOR OF PUBLIC WORKS AND DIVISION HEADS. 6- 114.10. Responsible to City Manager The director of public works shall be appointed by the city manager and shall be responsible to, and under the supervision of. the city manager for the management and operation of the department of public works. 6- 114.20. Engineering Advisor The director shall be the engineering advisor to the city manager[,] and shall advise the city manager on all matters pertaining to public works. [He] The director shall advise and assist the city manager in preparation of the public works portion of the annual budget. ORDINANCE NO. 6- 114.30. Representative. The director shall attend meetings g [,] and represent the City at official or semi - official functions, as may be assigned or directed by the city manager. 6- 114.50. Division Heads. The city engineer, the [street] superintendent of public works and the [public utilities superintendent,] maintenance supervisor shall be under the supervision of[,] and responsible to[,] the director of public works[,] and shall perform such tasks as the director may from time to time assign. Section 6 -116. DUTIES, APPOINTMENT, AND RESPONSIBILITIES OF THE CHIEF OF POLICE. 6- 116.20. Personnel. The chief of police shall be responsible for the training of police personnel. [He] The chief shall directly supervise and be responsible for the operations of the department. Section 6 -118. DUTIES, APPOINTMENT, AND RESPONSIBILITIES OF THE DIRECTOR OF PLANNING AND INSPECTION. 6- 118.10. Duties. The director of planning and inspection shall be appointed by the city manager and shall be responsible to, and under the supervision of the city manager for the administration, supervision, and operation of the department of planning and inspection. Section 6 -119. FUNCTIONS OF THE DEPARTMENT OF PARKS AND RECREATION. The department of parks and recreation shall supervise the acquisition and development[, and provide for the maintenance] of all public park property within the City, and shall develop and implement a public recreation program. Section 6 -120 DUTIES, APPOINTMENT, AND RESPONSIBILITIES OF THE DIRECTOR OF [PARKS AND] RECREATION. 6- 120.10. Responsible to City Manager The director of [parks and] recreation shall be appointed by the city manager and shall be responsible to, and under the supervision of, the city manager for the management and operation of the department of parks and recreation and the golf course 6- 120.20. Parks and Recreation Advisor The director shall be the parks and recreation advisor to the city manager[,] and shall advise the city manager on all matters pertaining to park development [and management] and the program of public recreation conducted by the department. [He] The director shall also, as assigned, advise relevant City advisory commissions on matters relating to the parks and recreation function. 6- 120.30. Budget. The director shall assist the city manager in the preparation of that portion of the annual budget pertaining to [parks and] recreation. Section FUNCTION AND OPERATION OF THE MUNICIPAL LIQUOR FACILITY. The function and operation of the municipal liquor facility shall be as set out in Chapter 11, Section 201 through [207] 205 of the City Ordinances. ORDINANCE NO. Section 6 -123. DUTIES, APPOINTMENT, AND RESPONSIBILITIES OF LIQUOR STORES MANAGER. 6- 123 -, -10. Responsible to Citv Manager The liquor stores manager shall be appointed by the city manager and shall be responsible to, and under the supervision of, the city manager for the management and operation of the municipal liquor operation. [He] The liquor stores manager shall be responsible for the supervision and training of liquor store personnel. 6- 123.20. Advisor. The liquor stores manager shall advise the city manager in regard to the operation of the municipal liquor operation and recommend policy in regard to such operation. 6- 123.30. Additional Duties. The liquor stores manager shall perform any additional duties that may be assigned from time to time by the city manager. Section 6 -124 ADMINISTRATIVE POLICY. 6- 124.10. General Duties of Officers Each officer listed in Section 6- 102 of this code shall perform all duties required of his or her office by State law, City Ordinances, City Charter, and the city manager. Section 2. This ordinance shall become effective adoption and upon thirty (30) days following its legal publication. Adopted this __day of 1987. Mayor ATTEST: City Clerk Date of Publication Effective Date (Underline indicates new matter, brackets indicate matter to be deleted.) MINUTES OF THE PROCEEDINGS OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF BROOKLYN CENTER IN THE COUNTY OF r HENNEPIN -AND THE STATE OF MINNESOTA REGULAR SESSION JUNE 16, 1988 CITY HALL CALL TO ORDER The Planning Commission met in regular session and was called to order by Chairman Pro tem Mike Nelson at 7:31 p.m. ROLL CALL Chairman Pro tem Mike Nelson, Commissioners Molly Malecki, Wallace Bernards, Ann Wallerstedt and Bertil Johnson. Also present were Director of Planning and Inspection Ronald Warren, City Engineer Bo Spurrier and Recording Secretary Mary Lou Larsen. Chairman George Lucht and Commissioner Lowell Ainas were unable to attend this evening's meeting and were excused. APPROVAL OF MINUTES - May 26, 1988 Motion by Commissioner Malecki seconded by Commissioner Bernards to approve the minutes of the May 26, 1988 Planning Commission meeting as submitted. Voting in favor: Commissioners Malecki, Bernards, and Johnson. Voting against: none. Not voting: Chairman Pro tem Nelson and Commissioner Wallerstedt. The motion passed. APPLICATION NO. 88004 (Steve and Debra Houghton) Following the Chairman Pro tem's explanation, the Secretary introduced the first item of business, a request for a special use permit to operate a carpet cleaning service with one nonresident employee as a home occupation at 2818 Mumford Road. He reviewed the staff report (see Planning Commission Information Sheet for Application No. 88004 attached). The Secretary noted that the vans used in the business are not commercially licensed, but should be parked off the premises from where the home occupation is conducted. The applicants agreed because of security reasons. The Secretary pointed out that the Building Official had been unable to make an inspection to review code matters as yet. Chairman Pro tem Nelson stated a public hearing is required and the appropriate notices have been sent to neighboring property owners. Commissioner Bernards asked if the applicants use flammable cleaning agents. The Secretary responded that they do to some extent and the conditions of approval should indicate provision for the proper fire extinguishers to be located on the premises. Commissioner Bernards asked if there would be signs on the property. The Secretary stated that there would be no signs. Commissioner Johnson inquired about restrictions on the type of materials to be stored on the property and possibly add a condition to reference the type of materials that will be used. Chairman Pro tem Nelson asked the applicants if they wished to speak regarding the application. Steve Houghton, the applicant, explained that solutions used in the cleaning business have been tested for safety. He stated that his drivers carry a five gallon pail of solution in their vans each day. He pointed out the vans are 6 -16 -88 _1_ repaired away from the premises and taken home by his employees each night to avoid a parking problem and nuisance to his neighbors. He stated that the business had previously been conducted from a warehouse, but due to family reasons he and his wife wished to keep the business as low -key as possible and a home occupation seems to be the most feasible way. The Secretary asked the applicant if there would be other employees than the one requested in this permit. Mr. Houghton stated he has other employees who serve as a carpet cleaners and that the carpet cleaning is done in customers' homes. Mr. Houghton noted that these employees would not be on the premises. The Secretary stated he would like a clarification made that the special use permit authorizes one nonresident employee only on the premises and that other employees are not permitted to work on the premises. PUBLIC HEARING Chairman Pro tem Nelson then opened the meeting for a public hearing and recognized Jerry Parsons, of 2819 Mumford Road. Mr. Parsons stated he has talked with the applicant and has been assured there will not be an on- street parking problem or vans 'docking his driveway, therefore, he has no objection to the home occupation. Chairman Pro tem Nelson asked if anyone else wished to speak regarding the application. Hearing no one, he called for a motion to close the public hearing. Commissioner Bernards asked if there is any change in the home occupation will it be referred back to the Planning Commission. The Secretary responded in the affirmative. CLOSE PUBLIC HEARING Motion by Commissioner Malecki seconded by Commissioner Wallerstedt to close the public hearing. Voting in favor: Chairman Pro tem Nelson, Commissioners Malecki, . Bernards, Wallerstedt and Johnson. Voting against: none. The motion passed. ACTION RECOMMENDING APPROVAL OF APPLICATION NO. 88004 (Steve and Debra Houghton) Motion by Commissioner Wallerstedt seconded by Commissioner Malecki to recommend approval of Application No. 88004 subject to the following conditions: 1. The special use permit is subject to all applicable codes, ordinances and regulations, and any violation thereof shall be grounds for revocation. 2. The special use permit is issued to the applicant and is nontransferable. 3. All parking associated with the home occupation shall be off - street on improved space provided by the applicant. 4. Special use permit approval acknowledges the employment on the premises of not more than one nonresident employee. 5. The premises shall be inspected and improved in accordance with the requirements set forth by the Building Official with respect to the home occupation office space prior to the issuance of the special use permit. 6. No more than one commercial vehicle consistent with the limitations imposed by City Ordinances, may be kept on the property. 6 -16 -88 -2- Voting in favor: Chairman Pro tem Nelson, Commissioners Malecki, Bernards, Wallerstedt and Johnson. Voting against: none. The motion passed. APPLICATION NO. 88005 (Bernard Herman Architects) The Secretary introduced the next item of business, a request for site and building plan approval to construct a solarium addition to the south side of the office building at 1915 57th Avenue North. The Secretary reviewed the the staff report (see Planning Commission Information Sheet for Application No. 88005 attached). Commissioner Johnson asked if there would be an increase in traffic generation caused by the addition to the office building. He also stated that he is concerned with traffic trying to make turns into the office building parking lot from 57th Avenue North. The Secretary explained he does not foresee any major traffic problem due to the expansion of the building. He noted that there had been discussion some years ago when the Northbrook Shopping Center had been constructed regarding the possibility of extending the median down to Logan Avenue North thereby eliminating median breaks. He stated that this is a County road, therefore, the County would have to make the changes. Commissioner Bernards questioned if there is approximately 50' to the rear property line as indicated on the plan. The Secretary answered that the depth of the lot is 200' which may seem confusing because the Superamerica station next door is not nearly that deep. Commissioner Bernards asked if the property has enough existing screening from the neighboring residential properties. The Secretary responded that there are several trees and shrubs to the rear that provide adequate screening. Chairman Pro tem Nelson called on the applicant to speak. Bernard Herman, of Bernard Herman Architects, explained the office building will be a law office for Milavetz and Associates. He stated there are five Milavetz law firms in the Metro area. He explained the project consists of two parts; a solarium addition and construction of wall partitions within the building. He noted the solarium addition will not have full time people working in it, but will be used as an employee lunch room and meeting room. Mr. Herman asked for clarification of the site performance condition (Condition No. 3) and the trailway easement condition (Condition No.8). The Secretary explained that the site performance agreement is a standard condition required for all site and building plan approvals to assure completion of outside improvements. He noted there are no real outside improvements with this plan and the condition could possibly be eliminated in this case. City Engineer Bo Spurrier explained that the City's access across the property enables the City to locate sanitary and storm sewers out of 57th Avenue North so that no damage is done to 57th Avenue North. He explained the utility easement parking setback, is the northern 10' of property. He stated that the City is willing to pay the appraised value of the easement for the bike /pedestrian trailway which connects to the Regional park facility near the NSP power line to the Mississipi River and also to the City's other trailway system along Shingle Creek Parkway. Further discussion ensued regarding the trailway system and placement of a sign. City Engineer Bo Spurrier asked where the sign would be located from the curb. Mr. Herman stated they would like to locate the sign as close as possible to 57th Avenue North with landscaping. The City Engineer stated the sign would have to be placed so that it would not interfere with the trailway easement being sought. He noted 5 -16 -88 -3- that it appeared he would only need about a 5' easement for the trailway and that he believed the matter could be worked out so that the sign could be properly placed. The Secretary suggested eliminating Condition No. 3 regarding the performance agreement and modifying Condition No. 7 to allow for Mr. Herman's concern for the sign. He stated the architect and the City Engineer can work out the specific distance for the easement before the consideration by the City Council. ACTION RECOMMENDING APPROVAL OF APPLICATION N0. 88005 (Bernard Herman, Architects Motion by Commissioner Johnson seconded by Commissioner Malecki to approve Application No. 88005 subject to the following conditions: 1. Building plans are subject to review and approval by the Building Official with respect to applicable codes prior to the issuance of permits. 2. Grading, drainage, utility and berming plans are subject to review and approval by the City Engineer, prior to the issuance of permits. 3. Any outside trash disposal facilities and rooftop mechanical equipment shall be appropriately screened from view. 4. The building is to be equipped with an automatic fire extinguishing system to meet NFPA standards and shall be connected to a central monitoring device in accordance with Chapter 5 of the City Ordinances. 5. Plan approval is exclusive of all signery which is subject to Chapter 34 of the City Ordinances. 6. Straight B6 curb shall be provided around all parking and driving areas. 7. The owner of the property shall enter into easement agreements for utilities and drainage and for a trailway not more than 5' in width, across the property prior to the issuance of permits. Voting in favor: Chairman Pro tem Nelson, Commissioners Malecki, Bernards, Wallerstedt and Johnson. Voting against: none. The motion passed. APPLICATION NO. 88006 (Robert J. Regan) The Secretary introduced the next item of business, a request for site and building plan and special use permit approval to construct a 50' x 172' addition to the school bus garage at 4435 68th Avenue North. The Secretary reviewed the staff report (see Planning Commission Information Sheet for Application No. 88006 attached). He referred to an ordinance amendment in 1980 at the time of the original construction of the bus garage to allow the bus garage as a special use in the C2 zoning district. He stated there is a public hearing required and the appropriate notices have been sent to the neighboring property owners. Chairman Pro tern Nelson asked the applicant if he wished to speak regarding the application. Robert Regan, the owner and applicant for the bus garage, explained his company has been in business for 25 years and the time has come for expansion of the building to allow storage for an additional 16 buses. He stated Brooklyn Center High School has applied for a contract to house their school buses. 6 -16 -88 -4- Commissioner.. Bernards asked when the project would be completed. Mr. Regan stated they hoped to be ready for the fall school term. Commissioner Johnson asked if this application has any bearing on paving the vacant property next to the bus garage. The Secretary explained it does not, but that if car dealerships wish to continue to use this vacant parcel to store cars, a special use permit would have to be obtained and a paved and improved parking lot built. The Secretary asked if the addition would be sufficient to store the additional buses so that they would no longer be outside the building. Mr. Regan responded that they may already be underbuilt, but they will not store buses outside. PUBLIC HEARING Chairman Nelson then opened the meeting for a public hearing and asked if anyone present wished to speak regarding the application. Hearing no one, he called for a motion to close the public hearing. The Secretary stated that Lowell Zitzloff, owner of a neighboring property, had called to say he had no objection to the application. CLOSE PUBLIC HEARING Motion by Commissioner Wallerstedt seconded by Commissioner Malecki to close the public hearing. Voting in favor: Chairman Pro tem Nelson, Commissioners Malecki, Bernards, Wallerstedt and Johnson. Voting against: none. The motion passed. ACTION RECOMMENDING APPROVAL OF APPLICATION NO. 88006 (Robert J. Regan) Motion by Commissioner Bernards seconded by Commissioner Wallerstedt to approve Application No. 88006, subject to the following conditions: 1. Building plans are sub" approval b the Building g p subject to review and appro y e g Official with respect to applicable codes prior to the issuance of permits. 2. Grading, drainage, utility and bearing plans are subject to review and approval by the City Engineer, prior to the issuance of permits. 3. A site performance agreement and supporting financial guarantee (in an amount to be determined by the City Manager) shall be submitted prior to the issuance of permits. 4. Any outside trash disposal facilities and rooftop mechanical equipment shall be appropriately screened from view. 5. The building is to be equipped with an automatic fire extinguishing system to meet NFPA standards and shall be connected to a central monitoring device in accordance with Chapter 5 of the City Ordinances. 6. An underground irrigation system shall be installed in all landscaped areas to facilitate site maintenance. 7. Plan approval is exclusive of all signery which is subject to Chapter 34 of the City Ordinances. 8. B612 curb and gutter shall be provided around all parking and drivin g areas. 6 -16 -88 _5_ 9. The plans shall be modified prior to consideration by the City Council to indicate a parking delineator (B612 curb and gutter) at the east end of the row of parking along the north side of the lot (in the newly paved area). 10. The special use permit is subject to all applicable codes, ordinances and regulations and any violation thereof shall be grounds for revocation. 11. Parking of cars on the north portion of the property by off -site auto dealerships is strictly prohibited unless and until a separate special use permit is granted for such use. 12. The conveyance of additional runoff from the expanded parking lot to the I -694 right -of -way is subject to approval by MN /DOT. Voting in favor: Chairman Pro tem Mike Nelson, Commissioners Malecki, Bernards, Wallerstedt and Johnson. Voting against: none. The motion passed. APPLICATION NO. 88007 (Robert Zappa) The Secretary introduced the next item of business, a request for site and building plan approval for a 12 unit apartment building at approximately 6637 Humboldt Avenue North. The Secretary reviewed the staff report (see Planning Commission Information Sheet for Application No. 88007 attached). He stated there is a problem with the plan showing 11 three bedroom units due to the fact that the ordinance requires 250 sq. ft. of additional land area for each unit with over two bedrooms and limits such units to 10 of the units in an multiple dwelling. Based % Y P g on this requirement. he stated, only one three bedroom unit would be allowed. Commissioner Johnson asked why there is a restriction placed on number of three bedroom units. The Secretary responded that he assumed the reason for these limitations was a method of controlling density in mult- family zoning districts. He added that there is the potential for more occupants in complexes with three bedroom units and possibly more traffic and other activity associated with multiple- family use of property. He further added that the ordinance also reduces the density of an apartment by 250 sq. ft. per unit for efficiency units and limits these to no more than 10% of the total also. He pointed out that the ordinance was probably designed to provide a mix of units with mostly one and two bedrooms and to avoid over concentrations of efficiency and three bedroom units. Chairman Pro tem Nelson asked the applicant if he had anything to add. Robert Zappa, owner and developer of the property, stated he had contacted the Metropolitan HRA and was informed there is a shortage of apartment buildings with three bedroom units and that he was encouraged to provide such units. He stated he would rent to low income families and is attempting to provide units that fill a void in the area. He also stated that the correct number of garages to be built should be 17. Commissioner Johnson asked if the number of occupants in an apartment can legally be limited. Mr. Zappa stated that he thought it could and would be willing to limit the number of occupants if that was a concern to the City. In response to an inquiry by Commissioner Bernards, Mr. Zappa stated that he has had no problems renting to low income, large families in other buildings that he owns. He stated he intends to install a fence to avoid problems with surrounding neighbors. He added the color of the new apartment building would be the same as the blue /gray combination proposed for the existing building. The Secretary pointed out that he did not believe the City could impose any special occupancy 6 -16 -88 -6- i restrictions other than those already contained n Maintenance and aim in the Housing e a Y g Occupancy Ordinance. He also recommended that decision not be made on whether or not the apartment is to be for low income people. The Secretary stated there are three options: an ordinance amendment, the applicant has the right to seek a variance, or it can be left alone. He stated tabling may be appropriate in order to give staff time to research for background information. Chairman Pro tem Nelson polled the Commissioners for their opinions. Commissioner Bernards stated he considered the 250 sq. ft. density an important factor. Commissioner Malecki asked for clarification of the basis for the 10% figure. Commissioner Bernards added a play area is needed. Commissioner Wallerstedt stated she was also in favor of providing a play area. Chairman Pro tem Nelson stated he was in favor of an ordinance amendment and further research. He asked how much land is available in the R4 and R5 districts. The Secretary responded vacant land is scare in Brooklyn Center. ACTION TABLING APPLICATION NO. 88007 (Robert Zappa) Motion by Commissioner Bernards seconded by Commissioner Malecki to table Application No. 88007 to allow staff to research background information. Voting in favor: Chairman Pro tem Nelson, Commissioners Malecki, Bernards, Wallerstedt, and Johnson. Voting against: none. The motion passed. DISCUSSION ITEM a) Theatre Parking Ordinance Amendment This ordinance amendment provides a change from one space for three seats to one space for four seats in the parking requirement for theatres located in a shopping center. ACTION APPROVING ORDINANCE AMENDMENT Motion by Commissioner Bernards seconded by Commissioner Malecki to recommend approval of the draft ordinance amendment as submitted. Voting in favor: Chairman Pro tem Nelson, Commissioners Malecki, Bernards, Wallerstedt and Johnson. Voting against: none. The motion passed. ADJOURNMENT Motion by Commissioner Wallerstedt seconded by Commissioner Malecki to adjourn the meeting of the Planning Commission. Voting in favor: Chairman Pro tem Nelson, Commissioners Malecki, Bernards, Wallerstedt and Johnson. The motion passed. The Planning Commission adjourned at 10:05 p.m. Chairman 6-16-88 -7- I Planning Commission Information Sheet Application No. 88004 Applicant: Steve and Debra Houghton Location: 2818 Mumford Road Request: Special Use Permit /Home Occupation The applicant requests special use permit approval to run a carpet cleaning business with one non - resident employee out of the home at 2818 Mumford Road. The property in question is zoned Rl and is bounded on the south by Mumford Road, and on the west, north, and east by single - family homes. A home occupation involving the employment on the premises of a nonresident is a special use under section 35 -406 of the Zoning Ordinance (attached). The applicant has submitted a letter (attached) in which she briefly explains the proposed home occupation. In it she explains that the business office would be an approximate 15' x 20' area in the basement. The main use of the office area would be order taking via telephone. Customers would not come to the house. During daytime hours there would be a person in the office answering phones. The business is in operation Monday through Friday and occasionally Saturday. No signs are proposed. The only equipment to be used in the home would be the phone. Two or three vans will be parked in the driveway overnight. A fire extinguisher would be located in the basement office. The cleaning agents would be stored, for the most part, in the vans. A large supply will not be on hand at the house. It should be noted that the Zoning Ordinance currently limits to one the number of commercial vehicles that can be parked on residentially zoned property. This vehicle cannot exceed 25' in length and is to be used to go to and from work. The Council is now considering a limitation on parking commercial vehicles on residential property to ones that are leas than 12,000 lbs. gross weight. If the vehicles are licensed as commercial vehicles, only one can be kept on the property. The only aspect that puts this home occupation in the special use category is the presence of a nonresident employee in the home answering phones to take business orders. As long as this employee is instructed to park on the applicant's driveway and not on- street, we see no concern that would affect neighboring property owners. We have also attempted to make contact with the applicant to set up an inspection for building code compliance, but have been unable to reach the applicant. We would expect that an egress window from the basement may well be required. Altogether, the proposed home occupation appears to live within the restrictions of section 35 -406 and approval of the special use permit is recommended, subject to at least the following conditions: 1. The special use permit is subject to all applicable codes, ordinances and regulations, and any violation thereof shall be grounds for revocation. 2. The ,special use permit is issued to the applicant and is nontransferable. 3. All parking associated with the home occupation shall be off- street on improved space provided by the applicant. 6 -16 -88 -1- Application No. PP 88 004 continued 4. Special use permit approval acknowledges the employment on the premises of not more than one nonresident employee. 5. The premises shall be inspected and improved in accordance with the requirements set forth by the Building Official with respect to the home occupation office space prior to the issuance of the special use permit. 6. No more than one commercial vehicle, consistent with the limitations imposed by City Ordinances, may be kept on the property. 6 -16 -88 -2- Planning Commission Information Sheet Application No. 88005 • Applicant: Bernard Herman Architects (for Milavetz & Associates) Location: 1915 57th Avenue North Request: Site and Building Plan Location /Zoning The applicant requests site and building plan approval to construct a solarium addition to the south side of the office building at 1915 57th Avenue North. The property in question is zoned C2 and is bounded on the north by 57th Avenue North, on the east by Superamerica service station, on the south by single- family homes, and on the west by a vacant C2 zoned lot (Warner Hardware is the next building to the west) . (There is a vacant portion of the property to the east of the building which will most likely be subdivided off in the future) . Office buildings are a permitted use in the C2 zone. Access /Parking The site is served by two accesses onto 57th Avenue North. From inside of curb to inside of curb, the accesses are 44 apart. This is substandard in the C2 zoning district. However, it is an existing condition and it appears there is no way of meeting the 50' separation requirement without destroying the parking layout on the site. We, therefore, recommend no change at this time. With the new addition and basement remodeling, there will be 4,021 sq. ft. of office space within the building which requires 20 parking stalls. The remaining area -1,983 sq. ft. - is to be used for storage and mechanical rooms. At one space per 800 sq. ft., this requires an additional 2.4 stalls. The site plan calls for 23 stalls total to meet both requirements. Landscaping Existing landscaping on the site is rather generous. There are 25 existing Ash and Locust trees (250 points), seven decorative trees (10.5 points) and seven coniferous trees (42 points) . The total point value of the existing trees exceeds the point requirement for the entire site (125 points), including the vacant area to the east. No additional landscaping has been proposed. Grading /Drainage /Utilities The site presently drains to the street (57th Avenue North) with no on -site storm sewer. Anew storm sewer is to be constructed in the 57th Avenue North right -of -way in conjunction with a road reconstruction project for Logan Avenue North to handle drainage on 57th Avenue North that affects Logan. The parking lot is bounded by B6 straight curb with no gutter. A slight modification is required at the southwest corner of the lot to provide for s sixth parking stall on the west side of the lot. Straight B6 curb should be used to replace the existing curb at that location. Building The solarium addition is to be a glass enclosure along the middle 44' 8" of the south wall. There is to be an open waiting room and a conference room at the upper floor level of the building. Stairs leading down to a central courtyard will descend from both ends of the solarium. New windows on the south side in the lower level of the building will be installed, providing daylight to a bookkeeping room in the lower level. The base of the waiting and conference areas is to be painted rock face block. The existing building is brick. 6 -16 -88 -1- Application No. 88005 continued The upper level (main floor) of the existing building is not fire sprinklered at this . time, though the lower level is fire sprinklered. Fire sprinkling of both the upper level and the solarium addition will be required as part of the new construction project to bring the entire building into conformance with the City's fire code. Lighting /Trash There are two existing light poles near the front entrance to the building which provide illumination of the front parking lot. No additional outside lighting is proposed. There are no outside trash containers either and none are proposed. Recommendation Altogether, the plans appear to be in order and approval is recommended, subject to at least the following conditions: 1. Building plans are subject to review and approval b the Building PP Y g Official with respect to applicable codes prior to the issuance of permits. 2. Grading, drainage, utility and berming plans are subject to review and approval by the City Engineer, prior to the issuance of permits. 3. A site performance agreement and supporting financial guarantee (in an amount to be determined by the City Manager) shall be submitted prior to the issuance of permits. 4. Any outside trash disposal facilities and rooftop mechanical equipment shall be appropriately screened from view. 5. The building is to be equipped with an automatic fire extinguishing system to meet NFPA standards and shall be connected to a central monitoring device in accordance with Chapter 5 of the City Ordinances. 6. Plan approval is exclusive of all signery which is subject to Chapter 34 of the City Ordinances. 7. Straight B6 curb shall be provided around all parking and driving areas. 8. The owner of the property shall enter into easement agreements for utilities and drainage and for a trailway across the property prior to the issuance of permits. i i 6 -16 -88 -2- Planning Commission Information Sheet Application No. 88006 Applicant: Robert J. Regan Location: 4435 68th Avenue North Request: Site and Building Plan /Special Use Location /Zoning The applicant requests site and building plan and special use permit approval to construct a 50' x 172' addition to the school bus garage at 4435 68th Avenue North. The property in question is zoned C2 and is bounded on the north by 68th Avenue North, on the east by Pacific Pool and Patio and Iten Chevrolet, by I -694 on the south, and by the NSP service center on the west. A school bus garage is a special use in the C2 zoning district provided all storage, including vehicles and minor servicing and repair, shall be conducted wholly within an enclosed building and further provided that the use does not abut any residential zoning district. Access /Parking The site is served by a single access off 68th Avenue North. No additional accesses or changes to this access are planned. The site presently has 42 parking spaces south of the building, adjacent to the freeway. The proposed plan calls for additional blacktop south of an existing chain link fence in the middle of the site. This area will allow for 23 additional parking stalls for a total of 65 stalls, approximately one per bus capable of being stored in the garage. Landscaping The area of the entire site is 4.76 acres. However, the area occupied by the bus garage and its attendant parking and entrance drive is approximately 3.25 acres. Using the light industrial landscape point requirement, the site requires 225 points. Existing landscaping has a value of 147.5 points. The proposed plan calls for five (5) new Black Hills Spruce, four (4) new Marshall's Seedless Ash, and seven (7) Canada Red Cherries for a total of 80.5 additional points. This brings total landscaping into line with the landscape point system. Grading, Drainage, Utilities The only change to the site on balance is the addition of the blacktopped area north of the existing paved area north of the building. The applicant proposes to drain this area into an existing catch basin north of the building. This catch basin drains via storm sewer to a drainage swale along the west side of the site which, in turn, drains into the I -694 right -of -way. The existing culvert under the freeway is already undersized relative to the drainage pouring into it. If MN /DOT does not permit the additional drainage, the applicant will either have to pond water on the site or connect to City storm sewer in 68th Avenue North. Building The existing building exterior is brick and the proposed addition will also be brick to match. The north elevation will have eight 11' 4 high x 20' insulated overhead doors. The addition is 50' x 172' and covers four of five bays across the back of the building. The easterly most 40' bay containing the wash stall will not be covered. There is a lighted fuel island about 60' north of the proposed addition which will not be moved. There will be four wall mounted lights (250 watt high pressure sodium) on the north wall of the new addition. 6 -16 -88 -1- Application No. 88006 continued Other Items It should be noted that the northerly portion of this property, which is vacant, has been used periodically over the past two years for overflow car storage by auto dealerships in the area. This use has been acknowledged by City staff for temporary periods of time. However, the car storage operation has sometimes continued for months at a time. This is not an acceptable use of the property on a regular basis without the granting of a special use permit. The granting of a special use permit for such car storage would be contingent on the paving of the north portion of the lot up to the standards of the Zoning Ordinance, including the provision of curb and gutter and proper drainage facilities along with proper landscaping of the site. Recommendation Altogether, the plans appear to be in order for the proposed project and approval is recommended, subject to at least the following conditions: 1. Building plans are subject to review and approval by the Building Official with respect to applicable codes prior to the issuance of permits. 2. Grading, drainage, utility and berming plans are subject to review and approval by the City Engineer, prior to the issuance of permits. 3. A site performance agreement and supporting financial guarantee (in an amount to be determined by the City Manager) shall be submitted prior to the issuance of permits. 4. Any outside trash disposal facilities and rooftop mechanical equipment shall be appropriately screened from view. 5. The building is to be equipped with an automatic fire extinguishing system to meet NFPA standards and shall be connected to a central monitoring device in accordance with Chapter 5 of the City Ordinances. 6. An underground irrigation system shall be installed in all landscaped areas to facilitate site maintenance. 7. Plan approval is exclusive of all signery which is subject to Chapter 34 of the City Ordinances. 8. B612 curb and gutter shall be provided around all parking and driving areas. 9. The plans shall be modified prior to consideration by the City Council to indicate a parking delineator (B612 curb and gutter) at the east end of the row of parking along the north side of the lot (in the newly paved area). 10. The special use permit is subject to all applicable codes, ordinances and regulations and any violation thereof shall be grounds for revocation. 6 -16 -88 -2- Application No. 88006 continued 11. Parking of cars on the north ortion of the property b off -site P P P Y Y auto dealerships is strictly prohibited unless and until a separate special use permit is granted for such use. 12. The conveyance of additional runoff from the expanded parking lot to the I -694 right -of -way is subject to approval by MN /DOT. 6 -16 -88 _3_ r Planning Commission Information Sheet Application No. 88007 Applicant: Robert Zappa Location: 6637 Humboldt Avenue North Request: Site and Building Plan Location /Zoning The applicant requests site and building plan approval for a 12 unit apartment building at approximately 6637 Humboldt Avenue North. The property in question is zoned R5 and is bounded on the north by a collection of 4 four - plexes, on the east by Humboldt Avenue North, on the south by the Berean Evangelical Free Church and parsonage, and on the west by the Spec. 7 industrial building. The apartment building is to be three stories. Three - storey apartment buildings are permitted uses in the R5 zoning district. There is an existing two - storey four -plex already on the property. Under the Zoning Ordinance, two - storey apartment buildings are also permitted in the R5 zone, but at the R4 density of 12 units per acre (or 1 unit per 3,600 sq. ft.). The existing four -plex, therefore, requires 14,400 sq. ft. of land area. This leaves 34,308 sq. ft. for the three - storey building. At 2,700 sq. ft. per unit (the R5 density), 12.7 additional units could be allowed. Therefore, 12 additional units can be built on the site. The proposed plans call for 11 three - bedroom units and one two - bedroom handicapped unit. This collection of units, however, is not permitted under Section 35 -400 of the Zoning Ordinance. Footnote lc of that section requires 250 sq. ft. of additional land area for each unit with over two bedrooms and limits such units to 10% of the units in any multiple dwelling. This provision limits the number of three - bedroom units to only one of the 12 proposed. We have informed the developer of this problem and he has asked for a review by the Planning Commission, though no variance has yet been submitted. Staff would oppose a variance and recommend that the plans be tabled until revised plans are submitted without the excess number of three - bedroom units. Access /Parking The site gains access off Humboldt Avenue North via an existing 24' wide driveway along the south side of the site. The proposed building will be located where much of the existing parking is. The plan calls for 16 surface parking stalls, nine at 90D adjacent to the new building and seven parallel stalls along the south side of the lot. A 15' wide buffer strip along the south side of the property is provided as required adjacent to Rl zoned property. The plan also calls for 18 garage stalls in two buildings on the west end of the site. Between garage parking and surface parking, therefore, the parking requirement of two stalls per unit is met. Landscaping The landscape plan calls for the preservation of numerous trees on the site, especially a number of large existing Elms. The policy of the City has been to disregard Elms as meeting any landscape requirements. Since there will be a total of 16 dwelling nits on the site section - r e quires a minimum of three 6 5 410 g � 3 q diameter trees on the site. This requirement is met by three large existing Willows, two large existing Cottonwoods and a large existing Ash. The plan proposes six Black Hills Spruce, north of the proposed building in the setback area off the north lot line. Four Russian Olives are proposed in the open area west of the proposed building and east of the proposed sever. -stall parking garage. 6 -16-88 -1- Application No. 88007 continued Potentillas and Globe and Pyramidal Arborvitae are proposed for foundation plantings along the south side of the new building. Four Junipers and two Pyramidal Arborvitae are scheduled in front of the existing building. The total point value of the non -Elm landscaping is 122.5 points. The site is required to have 102 points based on the landscape point system. Therefore, the proposed landscape plan is sufficient, provided that existing non -Elm trees are counted. Areas to be disturbed by construction are to be sodded. As to screening from the R1 property to the south, the applicant has indicated a desire to fence the property on the north, west, and south sides, but this fence is not shown on the plans. A chain link fence already exists around the church parsonage. Grading, Drainage, Utilities The grading plan calls for one new catch basin south of the easterly garage which will take drainage from the surface parking area and the paved area between the two proposed garages. Also, the lawn area west of the proposed apartment building and east of the easterly garage will drain over a flattened curb at the southeast corner of the easterly garage. The plan does not actually call for B612 curb and gutter, but the architect has indicated orally that curb and gutter is planned around all parking and driving areas. The plan also calls for a 2 water service (which will provide minimum pressure) and a 6 sanitary sewer service. The location of these services is very close to a row of large existing Elms which the landscape plan calls for preserving. The precise location of these service lines may, therefore, need to be revised somewhat northward. Building As mentioned earlier, the plans call for 11 three- bedroom units in the proposed apartment building. This is 10 more than permitted under the Zoning Ordinance and, without a variance, we cannot recommend approval of the plans as submitted. The proposed exterior treatment would be 8 wide horizontal exposure wood, with vertical ribbed exterior plywood above the third floor level. Each unit is to have either a patio ( first floor) or deck ( 2nd and 3rd floors) with sliding glass doors. An exterior light is proposed in all of these deck /patio areas. The roof is a gable roof running north /south along the length of the building. The existing building has a brick front and 8" horizontal boned siding on the other three sides. It is presently being painted a light blue. It has a hip roof. The Commission may wish to discuss with the applicant the aesthetic compatibility of the two structures. It is certainly a valid question. Lighting /Trash In addition to exterior lights on the building, three sets of 75 watt flood lights are proposed on the garages, two sets on the larger 10 stall garage and one on the smaller seven stall garage. Also, a 200 watt incandescent lamp is proposed on a 10' high pole at the southwest corner of the new building. A dumpster with an enclosure is proposed at the southeast corner of the smaller, easterly garage. Conclusion Again, staff recommend tabling the application at this time because of the number of three- bedroom units in the proposed building. The Planning Commission may wish to discuss with the applicant the merits, if there are any, for a variance to allow more three- bedroom units. None occur to us at the writing of this report. (Note: Three - bedroom units require 250 sq. ft. of additional land under Section 35 -400. Based on this requirement, only i c ould be three - bedroom even if the 10 ca eq , y 8 un its o � p were lifted. 6 -16 -88 -2- r� CITY OF BROOKLYN CENTER Notice is hereby given that a public hearing will be held on the day of , 1988 at p.m. at the City Hall, 6301 Shingle Creek Parkway, to consider an amendment to the Zoning Ordinance regarding the parking requirements for places of public assembly. Auxiliary aids for handicapped persons are available upon request at least 96 hours in advance. Please contact the Personnel Coordinator at 561 -5440 to make arrangements. ORDINANCE NO. AN ORDINANCE AMENDING CHAPTER 35 REGARDING THE PARKING REQUIREMENT FOR PLACES OF PUBLIC ASSEMBLY THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF BROOKLYN CENTER DOES ORDAIN AS F0LLOWS: Section 1. Chapter 35 of the City Ordinances of the City of Brooklyn Center is hereby amended in the following manner: Section 35 -704. MINIMUM PARKING SPACES REQUIRED. 4. Miscellaneous a. Places of public assembly such as churches, theatres, auditoriums (other than school auditoriums) mortuaries, stadiums, arenas, dance halls: One space for every three seats. Places of public assembly located in a retail shopping center complex shall have one space for every four seats. Section 2. This ordinance shall become effective after adoption and upon thirty (30) days following its legal publication. Adopted this day of 1988. Mayor ATTEST: Clerk Date of Publication Effective Date (Brackets indicate matter to be deleted, underline indicates new matter). p N r � ,W, • m� ■� EARLE 1 • 4 ME �� �■ mm - � ;� � ■��t ■� �� iii �� =� � �� Ea ■ MESS i52.1,u� I i I I `748 i I { I� i X3.33' " � I I• I I N AL a 1, I �• u^' t , t 10' R o'e to'e '' . Ar'�EP �F c7FFt✓GS 4D'L -{ = /cOO ' ?.0 Go.R9 . AF1EA OF 6,'JRPf rt MOH . X19 '>' Soo 61ACS. 'N kAg 1 �� 'L24 GARS REO 3 GARS PKovtflt� _ 3 �► � E P LA N ` t,, ��, o. �,.�..,N� 11r� ■ 111 1 1 � � oil Pow EdIGR ES P 0 � see mom mom N }I 68 T 4V E M O � I' ��X) ' u MA —� CErt 1 Sr• ) TT x 41 Z n X j H A. to E•NST. ) x ZENST�• )�'' _ S15-0+ P Z � �IGI)} E•XrsT: H `CAIN LrN� �Er�G6 �,�1M�� !�` X N NEW 3!012 � � .S P�� �Nf= K•iFil�. �.�:.:,�..,,: t `)' 3'�� o � D � wCIT. 2 -io�w µ -V1= L, �. 15 "vIPE ar ISi�ND N > u 3 Q Pf�r�SEn A--cv i w L4 -� -- - - -+ i _ • N E- -7IN6I BVILjD 1 1.1 f F 10�Go(, 37- 'L Z -o 5�0 (EpTL�' �1t G PAVINd� • �..�.. -. �. r -�. , .....ter- . �(/�� CITY OF BROOKLYN CENTER council Meeting Date Et2 B Agenda Item Number �(/L REQUEST FOR COUNCIL CONSIDERATION ITEM DESCRIPTION: DISCUSSION ITEM WATER USE RESTRICTIONS - UPDATE DEPT. APPROVAL: SY KNAPP DJCTOR OF PUBLIC WORKS MANAGER'S REVIEW /RECOMMENDATION: No comments to supplement this report Comments below /attached SUMMARY EXPLANATION: (supplemental sheets attached YES , The following information is provided for review and discussion: • 1. an update on daily water usage through June 22nd; 2. a copy of the summary of water use restrictions imposed by cities within the metro area, as published by the Star Tribune on June 21, 1988; 3. Contacts have been made with several cities which use the "odd- even" sprinkling system. Most indicate that "this system works for us" but have not been able to furnish detailed daily flow charts. Several of these cities noted that their total water usage was not reduced (some reported increases) after the odd -even restrictions were imposed but that their peak flows were somewhat reduced. Only one city (St. Louis Park) which uses the odd -even system is larger than Brooklyn Center, and that city reports that since they just imposed the restrictions last week it is too early to tell what results it will have. However, to -date their total daily consumption is higher than it was before those restrictions were imposed. RECOMMENDATION: Make no changes at this time. Staff will continue to gather and analyze additional information on this matter and provide further updates to the City Council. DAILY WATER USAGE JUNE (in gallons) I JUNE II 1988 1 1987 1 1986 1 11 I I I I If I I I II I I I 1 II 10,471,000 I 6,172,000 I 6,503,000 I I 2 II 9,117,000 ( 7,312,000 1 7,446,000 I I 3 II 7,846,000 1 7,199,000 1 9,171,000 1 I 4 II 10,959,000 1 9,495,000 1 5,334,000 I I 5 lI 11,938,000 1 11,544,000 I 9,242,000 1 I 6 II 11,127,000 ( 11,521,000 1 7,358,000 1 7 II 10,642,000 1 10,901,000 1 7,555,000 1 I 8 II 8,397,000 1 10,153,000 1 8,628,000 1 I 9 lI 8,900,000 ) 10,469,000 1 10,608,000 1 1 10 lI 10,927,000 1 3,770,000 1 7,321,000 1 1 11 if 11,054,000 1 5,350,800 1 3,995,000 12 11 651 000 8,590,800 5 689 000 I II I I i f I 13 II 10,845,000 I 8,908,800 I 7,591,000 f 14 II 10,742,000 ( 12,000,500 I 8,030,000 15 II 11,553,000 ( 11,597,900 i 6,623,000 1 16 11 10,529,000 1 10,875,300 I 8,913,000 I I 17 II 10,512,000 I 4,017,000 ( 7,224,000 1 18 I1 10,777,000 1 6,138,400 1 4,960,000 1 19 II 8,900,000 1 8,336,300 1 9,249,000 i 1 20 11 11,391,000 I 6,183,500 I 6,879,000 I 1 21 II 9,753,000 1 9,049,500 J 4,429,000 1 I 22 II 9,989,000 1 9,311,300 i 4,113,000 1 I II i I i ISUBTOTALII I I I IFOR JUNE11228,020,000 1188,896,100 1156,861,000 1 I II I i I TOTALS II I I I i NAY 1 11 I I I I THRU 11425,253,000 1358,563,100 1273,981,000 1 IJUNE 22 11 1 1 1 EXHIBIT A DAILY WATSB USAGE (in gallons) ( MAY II 1988 I 1987 I 1986 I 11 I I I I 1 II 5,923,000 I 2,980,000 1 3,798,000 I I 2 1I 6,373,000 I 3,810,000 I 3,411,000 I I 3 II 1,794,000 ( 5,260,000 I 3,176,000 I I 4 II 8,458,000 ( 5,749,000 I 3,275,000 I I 5 1I 9,075,000 ( 6,180,000 I 3,491,000 I I 6 II 6,792,000 ( 7,073,000 ( 3,288,000 i I 7 II 6,097,000 ( 8,061,000 I 3,222,000 i ( 8 it 3,458,000 ( 9,293,000 ( 2,875,000 1 9 (i 3,207,000 J 12,016,000 ( 3,346,000 I 10 II 3,884,000 I 7,076,000 I 3,072,000 I 11 ii 4,319,000 ( 5,208,000 ( 2,899,000 I i 12 II 4,293,000 ( 5,523,000 i 3,117,000 I I 13 I( 4,703,000 1 4,339,000 i 3,085,000 J ( 14 (( 4,079,000 ( 4,843,000 ( 3,066,000 1 15 II 3,872,000 ( 6,531,000 ( 3,144,000 I 16 11 3,908,000 ] 10,004,000 J 3,127,000 I 17 II 5,370,000 ( 9,423,000 ( 3,172,000 1 ( 18 (( 5,767,000 I 3,085,000 ( 3,274,000 1 ( 19 (I 4,747,000 I 3,490,000 1 3,558,000 I i 20 () 6,862,000 I 4,241,000 I 3,971,000 ( 21 I( 7,891,000 ( 3,721,000 I 4,367,000 I ( 22 (( 6,078,000 ( 3,228,000 ( 5,103,000 ( 23 II 10,083,000 ( 4,260,000 i 4,106,000 ( 24 (( 9,619,000 ( 3,444,000 ( 3,511,000 I ( 25 (( 8,741,000 ( 3,719,000 ( 2,549,000 ( 26 Ii 10,030,000 ( 4,206,000 I 3,524,000 I 27 (( 5,385,000 J 4,734,000 ( 3,901,000 I ( 28 (( 8,001,000 ( 4,340,000 ( 4,545,000 I 29 II 7,886,000 I 3,764,000 ( 5,895,000 I i 30 (( 10,097,000 ( 4,475,000 i 5,929,000 I ( 31 (( 10,441,000 1 5,591,000 ( 8,323,000 i I1 1 (SUBTOTAL(( I I i IFOR MAY 11197,233,000 1169,667,000 1117,120,000 I i II ( JUNE (( 1988 ( 1987 ( 1986 I II I I 1 I II I I I I fl I I I I 1 (i 10,471,000 ( 6,172,000 I 6,503,000 1 2 11 9,117,000 I 7,312,000 J 7,446,000 ( 3 (J 7,846,000 ( 7,199,000 I 9,171,000 J ( 4 IJ 10,959,000 I 9,495,000 I 5,334,000 i ( 5 II 11,938,000 ( 11,544,000 ( 9,242,000 J 1 6 IJ 11,127,000 ( 11,521,000 I 7,358,000 7 II 10,642,000 ( 10,901,000 1 7,555,000 J 8 II 8,397,000 i 10,153,000 ( 8,628,000 ( 9 iJ 8,900,000 J I I 1 10 IJ 10,927,000 ( 11 JI 11,054,000 I 12 IJ 11,651,000 ( I I ( 13 IJ 10,845,000 ( J J I 14 Ji 10,742,000 ( I J ( 15 JI 11,553,000 ( I I I 16 iJ 10,529,000 I I I ( 17 (( 10,512,000 ( J 1 ( 18 (( 10,777,000 I I I J 19 JI 8,900,000 ( I J ( 20 iJ 11,391,000 ( I I 1 21 IJ 9,753,000 I I I ( 22 Ji 9,989,000 I ll I I I ISUBTOTAL11 I I I IFOR JUNE11228,020,000 I I I 1-1 1 1 I I I TOTALS 11 1 I i I MAY 1 11 1 I I I THRU f1425,253,000 1 J J IJUNE 22 11 1 PUBLISHED IN THE STAR TRIBUNE JUNE 21, 1988 Sprinkling restrictions follow r, odd -even days in many cities Here are area sprinkling restric- Minnetonka — Ban from 2 to 8 p.m.; tions compiled by WCCO radio otherwise odd -even. and the Star Tribune staff. Under Minnetonka Beach — Total ban. the odd -even system, residents whose home addresses end with Mounds View — Odd -even. even numbers can water on even- numbered days; those with odd New Brighton —Ban from 4 to 10 p.m.; numbers on odd - numbered days otherwise odd even. New Prague — Total ban. Anoka — Ban from noon to 10 p.m.; otherwise odd -even. ` North St Paul — Odd -even (includes por- tion of Maplewood.) Apple Valley — Ban from 7 a.m. to 7 p.m «. Plymouth — Ban from noon to 9 p.m.; Bayport — Ban from 3 to 8 p.m.; other- otherwise odd -even. No exemptions, wise odd -even. $100 fine. i Big Lake — Ban from 10 a.m. to 10 p.m. Prior Lake — Odd -even. Blaine — Ban from 3 to 9 p.m.; otherwise Robbinsdale — Odd -even. odd -even; new sod and landscaping ex ' empt for first two weeks after planting. Savage — Odd -even, sprinkling allowed from 4 a.m. to 9 a.m. :urnsville rooklyn Center —Ban from 3 to 9 p.m. i' —Ban from noon to midnight Shoreview — Odd -even. Champlin —Ban from noon to 10 p.m., Shorewood — Odd -even. 1 new sod exempt; otherwise odd -even. Spring Lake Park — Ban from 9 a.m. to 9 p.m.; otherwise odd -even. Chanhassen -- Total ban. ", : " Coon Rapids —Ban on lawn sprinkling St Francis — Odd -even, from 8 a.m. to 8 p.m.; otherwise odd- SL Louis Park — Odd -even, new sod and + even. landscaping exempt. ti Cottage Grove — Odd -even. C St Paul Park —Odd -even, new sod ex- Eagan — Odd-even. empt Tonka Bay — Watering between 7 a.m. y Eden Prairie — Total ban noon to 6 p.m.; and 11 a.m. only. y otherwise odd -even. Vadnais Heights — Odd -even. - - Edina — - Ban from 9 a.m. to 9 p.m.; e otherwise odd -even. Waconie — Ban from 7 a.m. to 7 p.m. S Farmington — Ban from 4 to 8 p.m.; Wayzata — Total ban. I otherwise odd -even. White Bear Township — Odd -even, wa- Hastings — Odd -even. tering allowed from 6 a.m. to 10 a.m. and 6 p.m. to 10 p.m. Lakeville — Odd -even north of 192nd St. Lexington —Odd -even. Woodbury — Odd -even. Maplewood -- Odd -even for the portion of the city served by North St. Paul water system. Maple Plain — Ban from 7 a.m. to 7 p.m. Mendota Heights — Odd -even. CITY OF BROOKLYN CENTER Council Meeting Date l /_/ Agenda Item Number 1 REQUEST FOR COUNCIL CONSIDERATION ITEM DESCRIPTION: MANAGEMENT PLANS FOR SHINGLE CREEK WATERSHED AND FOR WEST MISSISSIPPI WATERSHED DEPT. APPROVAL MANAGER'S REVIEW /RECOMMENDATION: No comments to supplement this report Comments below /attached SUMMARY EXPLANATION: (supplemental sheets attached Yes Explanation The Shingle Creek Watershed Management Commission (SCWMC) and the West • Mississippi Watershed Management Commission (WMWMC) were formed by Joint Powers Agreements in 1984 to meet the requirements of the Metropolitan Surface [,later Management Act(M.S. 473.875 to 473.883). Both Commissions will hold public hearings on these plans on August 11, 1988. Copies of the "Executive Summaries" as well as bound copies of the detailed plans are provided for members of the City Council. A representative of E.A. Hickok and Associates, Inc., engineers for the Commission, will attend the June 27, 1988 City Council meeting to present and discuss the plan. Recommendation Following discussion of the plan, the City Council should consider adoption of the attached resolution. • /v A Member introduced the following resolution and moved its adoption: RESOLUTION NO. RESOLUTION APPROVING DRAFT MANAGEMENT PLAN FOR THE SHINGLE CREEK WATERSHED WHEREAS, the Shingle Creek Watershed Management Commission has prepared a draft of the Shingle Creek Watershed Management Plan and will conduct a public hering thereon on August 11, 1988; and WHEREAS, the Brooklyn Center City Council has reviewed and discussed the draft plan and hereby finds and determines thta said plan is in substantial compliance with the Comprehensive Plan for the City of Brooklyn Center and with the Floodplain Management Ordinance for the City of Brooklyn Center, and that said plan provides an effective basis to assure the preservation and use of natural water storage and retention systems. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED BY THE CITY COUNCIL of the City of Brooklyn Center, Minnesota, that the draft plan is hereby recommended for approval. Date Mayor ATTEST: Clerk The motion for the adoption of the foregoing resolution was duly seconded by member and upon vote being taken thereon, the following voted in favor thereof: and the following voted against the same: whereupon said resolution was declared duly passed and adopted. Member Celia Scott introduced the following resolution and moved its adoption: RESOLUTION NO. 88 -113 RESOLUTION APPROVING DRAFT MANAGEMENT PLAN FOR THE WEST MISSISSIPPI WATERSHED WHEREAS, the West Mississippi Watershed Management Commission has prepared a draft of the West Mississippi Watershed Management Plan and will conduct a public hearing thereon on August 11, 1988; and WHEREAS, the Brooklyn Center City Council has reviewed and discussed the draft plan and hereby finds and determines that said plan is in substantial compliance with the Comprehensive Plan for the City of Brooklyn Center and with the Floodplain Management Ordinance for the City of Brooklyn Center, and that said plan provides an effective basis to assure the preservation and use of natural water storage and retention systems. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED BY THE CITY COUNCIL of the City of Brooklyn Center, Minnesota, that the draft plan is hereby recommended for approval. June 2 7, 19 Date May ATTEST: Clerk The motion for the adoption of the foregoing resolution was duly seconded by member Rich Theis , and upon vote being taken thereon, the following voted in favor thereof: Dean Nyquist, Gene Lhotka, Celia Scott, Bill Hawes, and Rich Theis; and the following voted against the same: none, whereupon said resolution was declared duly passed and adopted. i i SHINGLE CREEK WATERSHED MANAGEMENT COMMISSION 3030 Harbor Lane • Plymouth, MN 55441 (612) 553 -1144 NOTICE OF HEARING Shingle Creek Watershed Management Plan On August 11, 1988 at 2:00 o'clock p.m. at the Edinburgh USA, Saint Andrews Club, 8700 Edinbrook Crossing, Brooklyn Park, Minnesota, the Shingle Creek Watershed Management Commission will conduct a public hearing pursuant to Article VI, Subdi- vision 5, of the Joint Powers Agreement. The Commission will hear representatives of any member muni- cipalities who wish to comment on the proposed Watershed Man- agement Plan which was submitted to the member cities by a communication dated June 1, 1988. Comments may be made orally or in writing. The Shingle Creek Watershed Management Commis- sion will then be submitting the proposed watershed plan to other county, metropolitan and state agencies as required by law. 4� Neil Johnson, Chairman Shingle Creek Watershed Dated - June 9, 1988 Management Commission WEST MISSISSIPPI WATERSHED MANAGEMENT COMMISSION 3030 Harbor Lane • Plymouth, MN 55441 (612) 553 -1144 NOTICE OF HEARING West Mississippi Watershed Management Plan On August 11, 1988 at 2:00 o'clock p.m. at the Edinburgh USA, Saint Andrews Club, 8700 Edinbrook Crossing, Brooklyn Park, Minnesota, the West Mississippi Watershed Management Commis- sion will conduct a public hearing pursuant to Article VI, Subdivision 5, of the Joint Powers Agreement. The Commission will hear representatives of any member muni- cipalities who wish to comment on the proposed Watershed Man- agement Plan which was submitted to the member cities by a communication dated June 1, 1988. Comments may be made orally or in writing. The West Mississippi Watershed Management Com- mission will then be submitting the proposed watershed plan to other county, metropolitan and state agencies as required by law. 4'_ Neil Johnson, Chairman West Mississippi Watershed Dated - June 9, 1988 Commission SHINGLE CREEK WATERSHED MANAGEMENT PLAN 6/23/88 EXECUTIVE SUMMARY INTRODUCTION The 1982 Minnesota Legislature adopted the Metropolitan Surface Water Management Act (Statutes 473.875 to 473.883) mandating that all watersheds within the seven county metropolitan area be governed by a watershed management organization. In 1984, the nine cities who have land in the Shingle Creek Watershed, namely, Brooklyn Center, Brooklyn Park, Crystal, Maple Grove, Minneapolis, New Hope, Osseo, Plymouth, and Robbinsdale, entered into a Joint Powers Agreement and formed the Shingle Creek Watershed Management Commission to plan, control, and provide for the development of the Shingle Creek Watershed. This organization has since embarked on its duties and responsibilities as mandated by the Minnesota Legislature to prepare this watershed management plan focusing on the preservation and use of natural water storage and retention systems. In 1987, the legislature amended the act to include specific responsibilities for groundwater management and the act was retitled the "Metropolitan Water Management Act." Under the authority of the Metropolitan Water Management Act and the Joint Powers Agreement, the Commission will administer the regulatory functions of this watershed management plan through providing the framework for local water management plan content and regulatory functions. The Commission has elected to initiate programs and promote participation in areas where an effort at the watershed level would most appropriately and cost effectively be implemented. The administering agencies for the regulations contained in the local plans will be the local governmental units. Specific zoning and land use planning as well as plan implementation responsibilities remain with the individual cities. The Commission will be responsible for insuring that the municipalities r rl n p o g ha e properly y a d consistently implement their local management plans. Where issues concerning more than one municipality cannot be resolved through efforts at the local level the Commission will, upon request of the municipalities, act to settle such issues. Local Water Management Plans The Act further requires that after adoption of the watershed management plan, local government units having land use planning and regulatory authority for territory within the watershed shall prepare a local water management plan, capital improvement program and official controls as necessary to bring local water management into conformance with the watershed management plan. Although no time period is specifically prescribed for completion of the local water management plan, the Commission is suggesting that local water management plans be completed within 3 years of the adoption of the Shingle Creek Watershed Management Plan. Local government units must also prepare amendments to the local comprehensive plan required to bring official controls in conformance with the watershed management plan. After completion, local water management plans shall be submitted to the Commission for approval. WATERSHED DESCRIPTION The Shingle Creek Watershed covers an area of 43.5 square miles in east - central Hennepin County. This kidney- shaped watershed extends approximately 10 miles from Plymouth and Maple Grove in the west to Minneapolis in the east. Shingle Creek begins at the junction of Bass Creek and Eagle Creek in Brooklyn Park, flows easterly, then southerly for a total of 11.3 miles before discharging into the Mississippi River at Minneapolis. There are a number of lakes and wetlands within the Shingle Creek Watershed. Major recreational lakes include Bass lake, Crystal Lake, Eagle /Pike Lake, and Twin Lakes. In the eastern three - quarters of the watershed, the land is predominantly urban in nature and in the western one - quarter of the watershed, it is now mostly rural, but rapidly developing. PLAN CONTENTS This watershed management plan provides a detailed inventory of the physical and hydrologic characteristics of the watershed. The TR -20 and HEC -2 computer models were used to assist in the hydrologic evaluation. The plan also establishes objectives and policies for water management, identifies management issues and strategies, and proposes an implementation program to accomplish these strategies. MANAGEMENT ISSUES AND STRATEGIES Eight important management issues have been identified in Chapter V of the plan. They include: 1. Runoff Management 2. Floodplain Management 3. Shoreland Management 4. Water Quality Monitoring 5. Erosion and Sedimentation Control 6. Stormwater Treatment 7. Wetlands Management 8. Groundwater Protection Strategies have been developed to address each issue while meeting the objectives and policies set forth by the Commission. Procedures are identified for implementing the strategies in the form of projects, plans and programs. The responsibility and level of participation of each governmental unit and the Commission are also identified. Below is a brief summary of the management strategies developed by the Commission and the action chosen to address each issue. Runoff management is necessary to resolve current flooding problems and accommodate future land use changes. The lower portion of the watershed is fully developed and the flooding of residences that now occurs will increase with further upstream urbanization unless the pressures on the drainage system can be reduced. The Commission has established allowable peak outflow rates for runoff management sectors. The runoff management sectors are composed of aggregates of subwatersheds. The Commission will ensure that the drainage system's conveyance and storage capacities are adequate to prevent the allowable rates from being exceeded. Key storage components will be preserved, improvements affecting storage capacities will be regulated, and drainageway capacities will be maintained and monitored. These strategies will be accomplished primarily through local watershed management plans. -2- Floodplain management is necessary to maintain sufficient flood storage capacity to minimize ood -re ated property damages. Encroachment within the floodplain results in higher flood elevations and increased velocities. Runoff management issues in this watershed indicate critical need for sound floodplain management. The strategy of the Commission is to prohibit encroachment within the 100 -year floodplain except where actions that mitigate adverse impacts have been taken. The Commission will administer the floodplain management program and review all projects proposed within the 100 -year floodplain. Floodplain management strategies shall be incorporated into the local water management plans. Shoreland management is necessary to ensure future water quality. It is proposed to be achieved through the adoption of local shoreland protection ordinances that are consistent with Minnesota Department of Natural Resources' regulations. Water quality monitoring will be performed in accordance with a long -term plan to enti y - problems and protect the quality of the lakes and streams. Limited water quality data currently exists for the watershed, and data that is available is insufficient to properly analyze overall water quality at the level of detail necessary for watershed management. Stream and lake monitoring programs will be developed to establish baseline information and to initiate programs to maintain or improve water quality. A treatment program may be considered if data indicates it is warranted. Erosion and sedimentation from agricultural or urban land development can degrade water quality, obstruct flow, and reduce the depth of downstream waterbodies in the watershed. The Commission will support the efforts of the Hennepin Conservation District and the U.S. Department of Agriculture, Soil Conservation Service in addressing soil stabilization within the watershed. The Commission requires that members adopt erosion and sedimentation control measures that meet Management Standards. A review program must be established for all land development construction site work as a part of the local plan. Stormwater treatment is necessary to reduce water quality problems in the system and protect waters that recharge groundwater supplies. This would primarily include reducing the amount of sediments and nutrients that enter streams via a stormwater system. Each municipality shall prepare a local water management plan in conformance with Shingle Creek Watershed Management Commission requirements. These plans must demonstrate that treatment is provided for stormwater runoff prior to its discharge into any public water. Existing development is required to provide treatment as part of a redevelopment or as designated by the Commission or local plan. Wetland management will preserve "protected waters" and ensure a long -term role for wetlands in stormwater treatment. The Commission will consider the water storage and nutrient assimilative ability of wetlands not under DNR jurisdiction and assist municipalities in determining their proper use. Protected waters and wetlands as defined in the Public Waters and Wetland Inventory of Hennepin County will be managed through coordination with DNR programs and used for runoff management as outlined in Section 6, Stormwater Treatment. -3- Wetland development guidelines will be established to preserve treatment characteristics of wetlands not under DNR jurisdiction. To assure compliance with development guidelines, the Shingle Creek Watershed Management Commission may also require local water management plans to include a program to manage certain wetlands not included in the DNR's protected waters and wetlands inventory and enforce compliance. Groundwater protection is an important concern in the watershed. Of the nine communities in the watershed, three rely partially or entirely on drift wells, two use both bedrock aquifer and drift wells, and four rely entirely on bedrock aquifers. The Commission will establish a procedure to review and comment on development that may affect groundwater quality and quantity. Procedures will be adopted by local governmental units level to control development that may affect groundwater resources. SUPPLEMENTAL STUDIES Three supplemental studies have been proposed to better define allowable peak outflow rates and storage requirements. They include: Twin Lakes /Ryan Lake Outlet Modification -Final Evaluation, Eagle Lake Outlet Channel Capacity Analysis, and Crystal Lake Outlet Feasibility Study. These studies are currently being completed or scheduled for completion in 1989 and will likely result in capital improvements. FUNDING Capital improvements will be funded under the provisions of Section VII and VIII of the "JOINT AND COOPERATIVE AGREEMENT FOR THE ESTABLISHMENT OF A SHINGLE CREEK WATERSHED MANAGEMENT COMMISSION ". General funds of the Commission are to be used for administrative purposes including local plan review, amendments to local plans and audits of municipal records. PLAN OVERVIEW This plan is a dynamic document which reflects public concerns. It is intended to be a guide and working tool to member units of government in managing the water resources of the Shingle Creek Watershed. This plan is subject to review and will be updated as the needs and accomplishments of the Shingle Creek Watershed Management Commission dictate. -4- WEST MISSISSIPPI WATERSHED MANAGEMENT PLAN 6/23/88 EXECUTIVE SUMMARY INTRODUCTION The 1982 Minnesota Legislature adopted the Metropolitan Surface Water Management Act (Statutes 473.875 to 473.883) mandating that all watersheds within the seven county metropolitan area be governed by a watershed management organization. In 1984, the five cities who have land in the West Mississippi Watershed, namely, Brooklyn Center, Brooklyn Park, Champlin, Maple Grove, and Osseo, entered into a Joint Powers Agreement and formed the West Mississippi Watershed Management Commission to plan, control, and provide for the development of the West Mississippi Watershed. This organization has since embarked on its duties and responsibilities as mandated by the Minnesota Legislature to prepare this watershed management plan focusing on the preservation and use of natural water storage and retention systems. In 1987, the legislature amended the act to include specific responsibilities for groundwater management and the act was retitled the "Metropolitan Water Management Act." Under the authority of the Surface Water Management Act and the Joint Powers Agreement, the Commission will administer the regulatory functions of this watershed management plan through providing the framework for local water management plan content and regulatory functions. The Commission has elected to initiate programs and promote participation in areas where an effort at the watershed level would most appropriately and cost effectively be implemented. The administering agencies for the regulations contained in the local plans will be the local governmental units. Specific zoning and land use planning as well as plan implementation responsibilities remain with the individual cities. The Commission will be responsible for insuring that the municipalities properly and consistently implement their local management plans. Where issues concerning more than one municipality cannot be resolved through efforts at the local level the Commission will, upon request of the municipalities, act to settle such issues. Local Water Management Plans The Act further requires that after adoption of the watershed management plan, local government units having land use planning and regulatory authority for territory within the watershed shall prepare a local water management plan, capital improvement program and official controls as necessary to bring local water management into conformance with the watershed management plan. Although no time period is specifically prescribed for completion of the local water management plan, the Commission is suggesting that local water management plans be completed within 3 years of the adoption of the West Mississippi Watershed Management Plan. Local government units must also prepare amendments to the local comprehensive plan required to bring official controls in conformance with the watershed management plan. After completion, local water management plans shall be submitted to the Commission for approval. WATERSHED DESCRIPTION The West Mississippi Watershed covers an area of 23.5 square miles in northeastern Hennepin County. The watershed consists of two areas; a triangular area north of 85th Avenue and T.H. 152, east of T.H. 52/169, and bounded on the north by the Mississippi River; and a rectangular area extending south along the Mississippi River from 85th Avenue to 53rd Avenue. The triangular area is largely rural with pockets of urban development while the lower section of the watershed is predominantly urbanized. Much of the watershed drains directly to the Mississippi River. Portions of the watershed are drained by Oxbow Creek and Edinbrook as well as a trunk storm sewer system in southern Champlin, all of which outlet to the Mississippi River. There are no recreational lakes within the watershed, however, there are a number of wetland areas located in Brooklyn Park and Champlin. PLAN CONTENTS This watershed management plan provides a detailed inventory of the physical and hydrologic characteristics of the watershed. The TR -20 computer model was used to assist in the hydrologic evaluation. The plan also establishes objectives and policies for water management, identifies management issues and strategies, and proposes an implementation program to accomplish these strategies. MANAGEMENT ISSUES AND STRATEGIES Eight important management issues have been identified in Chapter V of the plan. They include: 1. Runoff Management 2. Floodplain Management 3. Shoreland Management 4. Water Quality Monitoring 5. Erosion and Sedimentation Control 6. Stormwater Treatment 7. Wetlands Management 8. Groundwater Protection Strategies have been developed to address each issue while meeting the objectives and policies set forth by the Commission. Procedures are identified for implementing the strategies in the form of projects, plans and programs. The responsibility and level of participation of each governmental unit and the Commission are also identified. Below is a brief summary of the management strategies developed by the Commission and the action chosen to address each issue. Runoff management is necessary to resolve current flooding problems and accommodate future land use changes. Stormwater surcharges occur at several locations following a significant rainfall and indicates that existing stormwater management is not adequate and modifications may be necessary. The Commission has established allowable peak outflow rates from runoff management sectors draining to Oxbow Creek, Edinbrook and the trunk storm sewer system in Champlin. Runoff management sectors are composed of aggregates of subwatersheds. Peak flows were determined for those subwatersheds draining directly to the Mississippi River. Overflow routes shall be designated to accommodate excess runoff where peak outflow rates exceed flow capacity at the outlet. The Commission will ensure that the drainage system's conveyance and storage capacities are adequate to prevent the allowable rates from being exceeded. Key storage components will be preserved, improvements affecting storage capacities will be regulated, and drainageway capacities will be maintained and monitored. These strategies will be accomplished primarily through local watershed management plans. -2- Floodplain management is necessary to maintain sufficient flood storage capacity CO minimize flood-related property damages. Encroachment within the floodplain results in higher flood elevations and increased velocities. Runoff management issues in this watershed indicate critical need for sound floodplain management. The strategy of the Commission is to prohibit encroachment within the 100 -year floodplain except where actions that mitigate adverse impacts have been taken. The Commission will administer the floodplain management program and review all projects proposed within the 100 -year floodplain. Floodplain management strategies shall be incorporated into the local water management plans. Shoreland management is necessary to ensure future water quality. It is proposed to be achieved through the adoption of local shoreland protection ordinances that are consistent with Minnesota Department of Natural Resources' regulations. Water quality monitoring will be performed in accordance with a long -term plan to identify problems and protect the quality of the waterbodies within the watershed. A water quality monitoring program will be developed to establish baseline information and to initiate programs to maintain or improve water quality. A treatment program may be considered if data indicates it is warranted. Erosion and sedimentation from agricultural or urban land development can degrade water quality, obstruct flow, and reduce the depth of downstream waterbodies in the watershed. The Commission will support the efforts of the Hennepin Conservation District and the U.S. Department of Agriculture, Soil Conservation Service in addressing soil stabilization within the watershed. The Commission requires that members adopt erosion and sedimentation control measures that meet Management Standards. A review program must be established for all land development construction site work as a part of the local plan. Stormwater treatment is necessary to reduce water quality problems in the system and protect waters that recharge groundwater supplies. This would primarily include reducing the amount of sediments and nutrients that enter streams via a stormwater system. Each municipality shall prepare a local water management plan in conformance with West Mississippi Watershed Management Commission requirements. These plans must demonstrate that treatment is provided for stormwater runoff prior to its discharge into any public water. Existing development is required to provide treatment as part of a redevelopment or as designated by the Commission or local plan. Wetland management will preserve "protected waters" and ensure a long -term role for wetlands in stormwater treatment. The Commission will consider the water storage and nutrient assimilative ability of wetlands not under DNR jurisdiction and help assist municipalities in determining their proper use. Protected waters and wetlands as defined in the Public Waters and Wetland Inventory of Hennepin County will be managed through coordination with DNR programs and used for runoff management as outlined in Section 6, Stormwater Treatment. Wetland development guidelines will be established to preserve treatment characteristics of wetlands not under DNR jurisdiction. To assure compliance with development guidelines, the West Mississippi Watershed Management Commission may also require local water management plans to include a program to manage certain wetlands not included in the DNR's protected waters and wetlands inventory and enforce compliance. -3- Groundwater protection is an important concern in the watershed. Of the five communities in the watershed, one relies entirely on drift wells, two use both aquifer and drift wells, and two rely entirely on bedrock aquifers. The Commission will establish a procedure to review and comment on development that may affect groundwater quality and quantity. Procedures will be adopted by local governmental units level to control development that may affect groundwater resources. SUPPLEMENTAL STUDIES Two supplemental studies have been proposed to determine 100 -year flood profiles along Edinbrook and Oxbow Creek. Floodplain areas will also be identified which need to be available for future flood storage to maintain these flood profiles. The Edinbrook Floodplain Study and the Oxbow Creek Floodplain Study will be conducted at a time determined appropriate by the Commission. FUNDING Capital improvements will be funded under the provisions of Section VII and VIII of the "JOINT AND COOPERATIVE AGREEMENT FOR THE ESTABLISHMENT OF A WEST MISSISSIPPI WATERSHED MANAGEMENT COMMISSION ". General funds of the Commission are to be used for administrative purposes including local plan review, amendments to local plans and audits of municipal records. PLAN OVERVIEW This plan is a dynamic document which reflects public concerns. It is intended to be a guide and working tool to member units of government in managing the water resources of the West Mississippi Watershed. This plan is subject to review and will be updated as the needs and accomplishments of the West Mississippi Watershed Management Commission dictate. -4- /v U F % A. LAX— ag oc1at'on of metro ofitan muniC palifies June 15, 1988 TO: Mayors and Managers RE: CONSTITUTIONAL CHALLENGE TO 1988 OMNIBUS TAX BILL The Association of Metropolitan Municipalities' (AMM) Board of Directors would like your input and advice on a matter of some urgency and potential major city impact. The AMM Board of Directors is considering a request from the Municipal Legislative Commission (MLC) to participate in a legal challenge to a portion of the 1988 Omnibus Tax Bill. BACKGROUND: The MLC which is composed of 15 metropolitan suburbs has voted to pursue a legal challenge to the 'disparity reduction aid' provided as part of the 1988 Omnibus Tax Bill. The lawsuit will challenge the 'disparity aid' based on Minnesota Constitution Article X, Section I, which reads in part: 'Taxes shall be uniform upon the same class of subjects and shall be levied and collected for public purposes - -' (emphasis added) Article 4, Section 26, Subd. 3 of the 1988 Omnibus Tax Bill establishes a "disparity reduction aid" which has the effect of "buying down" local government mill rates to approximately 128 mills. The cost of this program is $63.2 million in 1989. If the combined mill rate of schools, counties and cities exceeds 128 mills, the State will provide disparity aid to local units of government to be used to reduce the mill rate to 128. This policy is not in itself unconstitutional. However, the metnod the Legislature adopted to distribute disparity aid can create a nonuniform tax on the same class of subjects by the same taxing authority and therefore may be constitutionally flawed. A nonuniform tax result can occur because disparity aid is distributed to local units of government but the aid cannot be used to lower the tax rate citywide or countywide or throughout the school district but rather it can be used only to lower the tax rate within a portion of a city, county or school district. -1- 183 university avenue east, st. paul, minnesota 55101 (612) 227 -4008 For example, two taxpayers living in houses on different sides of a street with identical market values and receiving identical county services, could pay different county tax rates. This could happen because one house is in City A (where the combined total mill rate is over 128 mills) and one house is in City B (where the combined total mill rate is less than 128 mills). The disparity reduction aid received by the county can only be used to reduce the county tax rate in city A in this example. As you see, the county tax rate would not be uniform on the same class of subjects and would seem to raise a constitutional question. STATUS: The MLC expects to have the legal brief filed by June 22nd. or 23rd. and has selected - outside legal counsel to work on the case. It is their intention to file this suit on behalf of an 'individual taxpayer The suit if successful, could prevent the distribut on of the 'disparity reduction aid' and since the distribution of this aid would effect the levies that will be set by local units for payable 1989, it is hoped that the suit will be decided before cities certify their 1989 levies (final date is October 25). The MLC asked the AMM and others to participate in this legal challenge. The AMM Board considered this matter on short notice at the June board meeting and after a lengthy discussion, decided to defer a final decision to the July 7th. board meeting. The Board and Staff would like your advice and input on this matter to enable the Board to make a decision that will reflect the membership feelings on wheather or not to participate and if so, then to what extent and in what manner. NEXT STEPS: Please feel free to contact individual board members (roster enclosed) or AMM staff members: Roger Peterson /Vern Peterson (227 -4003) to discuss this matter in more detail. If your city would like to participate or consider participating directly in this matter, please feel free to contact Bob Renner at 893 -6650. Mr. Renner is the Legislative counsel for the MLC. WE WOULD LIKE TO HEAR FROM YOU! Sincerely, • Gary B AMM President Maplewood Councilmember -2- �1. `f MEMORANDUM TO: Gerald G. Splinter, City Manager FROM: Brad Hoffman, EDA Coordinator DATE: June 24, 1988 SUBJECT: 65th and Brooklyn Boulevard Recommendation The City Council asked staff to consider possible development recommendations for properties along Brooklyn Boulevard north of 65th Avenue North and south of I -694 including the undeveloped four (4) plus acres site. Currently, the property is zoned R -5, which provides for a density of sixteen (16) units per acre. The City's comprehensive plan suggests a mid - density (townhouse) development for this area. An amendment to the plan also gives approval for an office development. Either development would significantly reduce the impact on the abutting neighborhood. A number of development problems are associated with this area. First, the vacant property has significant soil problems which will most likely require a subsidy or high density development to make economic sense before anything will occur on the site. A number of proposals have been before the Council, approved, and yet nothing has happened. Second, access to the undeveloped site is limited making development of the property more difficult. Several discussions about this have been held. Improvement of the access point can be accomplished with the acquisition of properties (homes) along Brooklyn Boulevard to the south of the site. However, any access point along Brooklyn Boulevard may be less than desireable. The most appropriate access point would be along 65th Avenue North aDd would probably require the City to use it powers of eminent domain to make this possible. It seems the current zoning is inconsistent with the City's comprehensive plan and the desires of the neighborhood. A more appropriate zoning would be R -3 for townhouse development or C -1 for office development. A townhouse development would accommodate an access along 65th Avenue North, whereas a business fronting Brooklyn Boulevard will want its access point on Brooklyn Boulevard. While this is an area of development interest to the City and EDA, there are other areas of the City which will require our attention and should be given a higher priority. At the present time, development is not likely without a significant subsidy. A question has been posed to the City as to its interest in acquiring properties along that block of Brooklyn Boulevard. It would be my recommendation that the City /EDA take no action at this time, although you may want to consider having the Planning Commission consider a rezoning consistent with the comprehensive plan. I would suggest instead the City /EDA's position be to wait for a development of the type contemplated under the comprehensive plan and any subsidy considered be limited to the increment generated by the project. Further, if an increment is used that it be on a cash basis as opposed to a bonded indebtedness. I will be available Monday evening to discuss this matter in greater detail. CITY OF BROOKLYN CENTER council Meeting Date 6 /27 /8e Agenda Item Numbe REQUEST FOR COUNCIL CONSIDERATION ITEM DESCRIPTION: ANOKA COUNTY LRT STUDY DEPARTMENT APPROVAL: Signature - title MANAGER'S REVIEW /RECOMMENDATION: No comments to supplement this report Comments below /attached X SUMMARY EXPLANATION: (supplemental sheets attached ) Attached please find a copy of the SUMMARY OF ANOKA COUNTY LRT PHASE 1 SCOPING STUDY. 1 received this document at a Northern Mayors' Association Operating Committee meeting. If the study process in this document is approved, and that appears, likely, Brooklyn Center will have another opportunity to address its LRT needs and concerns. Hennepin County and Anoka County have developed a coordinated review of LRT along their shared boundary. The study process involves municipal representatives from both Hennepin and Anoka Counties. • RECOMMENDATION Motion to appoint Councilmember Lhotka and /or Manager Splinter to serve as Brooklyn Center's representatives on the proposed advisory committee, or committees, and support Hennepin and Anoka Counties' joint effort on this study. • Summary of ANOKA COUNTY LRT PHASE I SCOPING STUDY Prepared for: Anoka County Regional Railroad Authority Anoka County : Prepared b P Y BRW, Inc. 700 Third Street South Minneapolis, MN 55415 May 1988 LRT SCOPWG STUDY PRESENTATION OVERVIEW O History of LRT Planning in Anoka County • Why Light Rail Transit Is Being Considered in Anoka County ® Relationship of North Corridor to Metropolitan Council Draft Transportation Policy Plan ® LRT Planning Process Overview • Initial LRT Alternatives • Screening Criteria for Evaluation of Initial LRT Alternatives • Recommended Alternatives for Comprehensive LRT System Plan Study • Phase 2 Work Program Overview: Comprehensive LRT System Plan • Phase 2 Participation/Communication Pr p ocess HISTORY OF LRT PLANNING IN ANOKA. COUNTy 1980 State legislation enables counties to establish railroad authorities 1985 Board of Commissioners creates Anoka County Transportation Advisory Committee 1986 Metropolitan Council Long -Range Transit Analysis identifies North Corridor as feasible, potentially cost - effective for capital investment 1987 Board of Commissioners establishes Anoka County Regional Railroad Authority 1987 Legislature establishes g public hearing requirements, required development of Comprehensive LRT System Plan for Hennepin County, and sets allowable levy at 2 mills 1987/88 Anoka County coordinates LRT activities with other metro counties through Metropolitan Council Chair's LRT Advisory Committee 1988 JANUARY - Anoka County Transportation Advisory Committee completes Anoka County Transit Study MARCH - Anoka County Transportation, Overview completed APRIL - Legislature allocates $4.17 million for metro area LRT planning and development, to be administered by Mn /DOT MAY - Anoka County RRA completes LRT Scoping Study WHY LIGHT RAIL TRANSIT IS BEING CONSIDERED IN ANOKA, COUNTY Current Transportation Conditions: ® Current high bus transit use in County O Congestion on Central and University Avenues, East River Road, 1 -694, TH 10 and other north /south routes • Year 2010 projections: - 1,000,000 trips /day - 190% population rowth between 1970 and 2010 - 40,000 daily trips To downtown Minneapolis • No new north /south highways planned p I ® No major capacity improvements to Central or University planned LIGHT RAIL TRANSIT IS BEING CONSIDERED IN ANOKA CO (cont.) Potential Im ' Improvements with LRT: ® Capacity added to North Corridor ® Service to fully developed area of Anoka County and Northtown Transit Hub ® Service to major employment centers S Service to developing area with extensions to Riverdale /Anoka 0 Enhanced service to the transit- dependent • Improved travel time and image to attract new transit users rs • Cost - effective component of total transportations stem: roadways, buses Y y , and LRT • New urban freeways cost between $30 -$50 million /mile; LRT costs between $10 -$15 million /mile (1988$) • Regional access improved through connection to other planned 9 p a ned LRT routes RELATIONSHIP OF NORTH CORRIDOR TO MEM OPOLHAN COUNCIL DRAM' TRANSPORTATION POLICY PLAN Based on previous studies, the Metropolitan Council has determined that LRT is appropriate in the North Corridor for the following reasons: r • Meets dail ridership thresholds for railroa and arterial street alignments V 0 Favorable service to the transit dependent r - N rth Cgidor as Q tipea p b Metr dd o6tan coungil • Meets annual capital and operating cost k per passenger thresholds f J 7 • Serves Minneapolis and St. Paul Central Business Districts 7 , • Serves fuljy developed area � � ; -� iL -, � � '�` • ti �`�- �..�... of Anoka County • Positive impact on congestion levels 1� on Highways 65, 47, 10, and 1-694 M, ff l t' , aQ � �' • Currently in Polic y Plan - Alternative C. Six LRT Corridor System Alignment Yes Route Yes En ineerin Yes Studies Engineering - - Pans ring I Station Location Station Design Specifications Costs /Funding Feasibility Yards and Shops Feasibility Final Technical' Decision Decision Build/No Construction/ Analysis Financial Plan Operating Plan Build Operation Bidding/ Decision Preliminary Im lementation Draft Operating Procurement Analysis: Pr i Plan i i Alternatives Anoka County i Feeder Bus Plan Transportation No No No Plan Park - Ride Plan Dismiss Dismiss Dismiss Advisory Advisory Municipal Committees Committees Approval Regional Regional Regional Coordination Coordination Coordination L v ipal al Ph ase 1 Phase 2 Phase 3 Phase 4 Phase 5 Scoping Comprehensive LRT Preliminary Final Engineering Construction/ System Plan Engineering Construction Plans Operation and Specifications LRT Plannin nl g Process Overview Figure 11 INITIAL LRT ALTERNATIVES Central Avenue (Highway 65) University Avenue (Highway 47) � ' - - -�- Central- University /Soo Line /Marshall BN RR East River Road /Marshall Street I � CIRC E 7 ' __ p � i �. Soo Line RR Silver Lake Road 1D s 7 r Minnesota Commercial RR /TH 88 Minnesota Commercial RR /Midway Corridor 771 TH 10 ` �.. BN RR (East Side of River) , M t N t� h I l 5 q�' a r�l.eto Coon Rapids Boulevard " a TH 610/252/TH 100 /BN RR (West) TH 169/CR 18 Corridor /BN RR (West) 1- 694/TH 100 /BN RR West ( ) SCREENING CRITERIA TOR EVALUATION OF INITIAL LRT ALTERNATIVES ® Service to fully developed area of Anoka County O Service to key employment centers within the County O Service to Minneapolis and St. Paul Central Business Districts O Service to the O Right -of -way availability O Consistency with regional planning completed by the Metropolitan Council and Regional Transit Board 1 RECOMMENDED A ERNATIVES FOR COMPREHENSIVE LRT SYSTEM PLAN STUDY r • Central Study Area North /South Corridors: Central Avenue - -�- University Avenue r BN RR rth : t East River Road /Marshall Street Central /Minnesota Commercial/ _ _.. TH 88 r _ est r,_ East /West Transition Corridors: <'.: ✓ TH 610 TH 10 Minnesota Commercial RR 1 -694 i; r t ;, Soo Line t ' ' • North Study Area �n ra TH 10 BN RR Coon Rapids Boulevard M I N N I. 40 I I ti �. ° N E xt e nsion I . TH 169/CR 18 Corridor to BN � • North Central Extension 1- 694/TH 100 to BN TH 610/252/TH 100 to BN Metropolitan Patronage Analysis Council Policies Funding Alignment Studies Sources Scoping Station Locations Study Financial Alternatives Feeder Bus LRT Comprehensive ► System Yes LRT ' System Feasibility System Plan Standards — Park - Ride Staging ► Options ' 'No Costs i Fxistin and _ gg -- - - - - - - - - - - - - I Planned Roadway Roadway System System Interface Phase 2 Work Program Overview: Comprehensive LRT System Plan Figure 9 Hennepin Co. State Anoka County Reg�tonal is lature _ _ _ _ _ Re onal Rail road Railroad Authority Authority Ramsey Co. Regiona road l Rail Authority Cities Metropolitan RTB Intergovernmental Co noco Advisory Committee General Corridor Technical Public Advisory Advisory Forums Conunnttee Coni n ittee Phase 2 Participation/ Communication Process . * Figure 10 Licenses to be approved by the City Council on June 27, 1988: r AMUSEMENT DEVICES - OPERATOR Brookdale East Cinema 5801 John Martin Dr. Brooklyn Center Community Center 6301 Shingle Creek Pkwy. Chuck Wagon Inn 5720 Morgan Ave. N. Davanni's 5937 Summit Drive Days Inn 1501 Freeway Boulevard Earle Brown Bowl 6445 James Circle Green Mill Inn, Inc. 5540 Brooklyn Blvd. Ground Round, Inc. 2545 County Road 10 Holiday Inn 2200 Freeway Boulevard Lynbrook Bowl 6357 North Lilac Drive Metropolitan Transit Commission 6845 Shingle Creek Pkwy. Snyder Brothers Drug 1296 Brookdale Center T. Wright's 5800 Shingle Creek Pkwy. U.A. Movies at Brookdale 5810 Shingle Creek Pkwy. Chief of Police AMUSEMENT DEVICES - VENDOR American Amusement Arcades 850 Decatur Avenue Theisen Vending Co. 3804 Nicollet Ave. N. City Clerk FOOD ESTABLISHMENT Denny's Restaurant 3901 Lakebreeze Ave. N. A, 1 - - ?L 1 , L L Y� Sanitarian ITINERANT FOOD ESTABLISHMENT �( Brooklyn Center Parks & Rec Dept. Central Park - Sanitarian MECHANICAL SYSTEMS Cronstrom's Heating & A/C 4410 Excelsior Blvd. Green Mechanical, Inc. 8811 E. Research Ctr. Rd. Fred Vogt & Co. 3260 Gorham Avenue � - Building Official RENTAL DWELLINGS Initial: Fatih Bey 3617 Admiral Lane Keith L. Nordby 5960 Brooklyn Blvd. Brian & Dorothy Follese 6933 Brooklyn Blvd. John C. Meyers 1133 63rd Lane North Renewal: Dave or Mary Huang 6400 Girard Ave. N. Martha Lahti 5316 Knox Ave. N. Martha Lahti 5322 Knox Ave. N. J. G. Strand 5329 Penn Ave. N. ROI Properties, Inc. 7109 -7113 Unity Ave. N. Richard & Sharon Krawiecki 5209 Xerxes Ave. N. Frances M. Lunacek 5211 Xerxes Ave. N. //����� Tracy Rice 5836 Xerxes Ave. N. (Aid /L(�� Director of Planning and Inspection TAXICAB Suburban Taxi Corporation 9614 Humboldt Ave. S. < Fief of Police lJz GENERAL APPROVAL: D. K. Weeks, City Clerk WAGE ANn RENIF;T !MPROVEMUNTS IN POLICE OFFICER CONTRACTS FOR K88 fN STANTON GROUP V CITIES WARY !NSURANCE PT&P App.1 (-.- Valley $2V92 (4.0) M Additional week vacatiolt after 11 years. Bloomington 2783 (4.25) 232 (10.00) Extra holiday at double-- time. Brooklyn Park 2757 (3.5) 175 (10.00) Edina 2791 (40) 170 Single employees receive! $60/mo. for insurance or deferred comp. (improvement of $20500) Fridley 2757 (30) 186 (10.00) Employees opting for no insurance for Hasp. can receive $100 cash, other Wur./mo. or 10 holidays. inver Grove Hgts 2760 (3.5) 200 (15.00) Yncreased severence from 30% to 40% of sick loave Lakeville 2785 (4.0) 244 (40.00) Increase court time minimum Lo 2 1/2 hours. Officer 0 charge of 5% of salary. Maplewood 2743 (3.0) 150 (20,00) Increase paramedic differ­ ential from $100 to 5% of salary, other assignments to 4% of salary, 3 hours court. time minimum. New Brighton 2771 (4.0) 190 (S.00) 27M (4.0) 2Z8 (15.00) Wages and 03urance reopened only. St. Louis Park 2793 (3.3) L70 (10.00) Additional holiday at time and one half, 48 hour notification for court can - cellation or minimum paid. White Bear Lake 2763 (3.7) IBS**(10.00) Additional holiday at ti wt - and one half. Eagan 2717 M5) 212-25* (24.40) Nuundsview 2744 (3.0) 485 jlKoo) 3 additiobal premium holidays at time and ope half. Investig4tors pay $160 to $135. crysta''i 2784 14M 185 hawney 2744 (3.75) Anoka 2760 (2.5) 1989 (3.S) K SK puul 2763 (3,7) 195 champlin 2744 (2.0) 27f; City will provide LTD ja6ur. funded from sick feave accrued. Coon Rapids So. h Paul 2822 (30! 209 Senior officer Sergeants raised extra ?5% to 12,5% of Top Patroi cost of towest package, incroase as of jujy jst WATERSHED MANAGEMENT PLAN PREPARED FOR THE SHINGLE CREEK WATERSHED MANAGEMENT COMMISSION MAY 12, 1988 PREPARED BY E. A. HICKOK AND ASSOCIATES 545 INDIAN MOUND WAYZATA, MINNESOTA 55391 ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS This plan was prepared under the guidance of the Shingle Creek Watershed Management Commissioners and their alternates. Members are: Commissioner Alternate City of Brooklyn Center Sy Knapp Bo Spurrier City of Brooklyn Park Neil Johnson Charles Lenthe City of Crystal William Monk Betty Herbes City of Maple Grove Gerry Butcher Donald Ramstad City of Minneapolis Marvin A. Hoshaw Milton R. Christensen City of New Hope Mark Hanson Roger Paulson City of Osseo Eugene Hakanson Ralph Leyendecker City of Plymouth Fred Moore John Sweeney City of Robbinsdale Lee Gustafson William Deblon Special appreciation is expressed for the contributions of William Sherburne as the first Treasurer of the Shingle Creek Watershed Management Commission and as an active participant in the formulation of this plan. He lives within our memory as a dedicated worker as well as a good friend. The Commissioners also wish to acknowledge the efforts of the community liaisons who provided the vital communication link with the various member municipalities. The community liaisons are: City of Brooklyn Center Gerald Splinter City of Brooklyn Park Richard Henneberger City of Crystal Jack Irving City of Maple Grove Douglas Reeder City of Minneapolis Lyall Schwarzkopf City of New Hope Dan Donahue City of Osseo Richard Setzler City of Plymouth James Willis City of Robbinsdale Walter Fehst • The Commission wishes to extend a special thanks to Curt Pearson of Wurst, Pearson, Larson, Underwood and Mertz for his valuable help as legal counsel and Judie Anderson of Judie Anderson Secretarial Services for her professional services. TABLE OF CONTENTS Page I. INTRODUCTION I -1 II. INVENTORY OF EXISTING AND FUTURE CONDITIONS II -1 JURISDICTION II -1 PHYSICAL ENVIRONMENT II -3 BIOLOGICAL ENVIRONMENT II -4 HUMAN ENVIRONMENT II -13 III. INVENTORY OF HYDROLOGIC SYSTEMS III -1 HYDROLOGIC SYSTEM III -1 HYDROLOGIC MODEL III -5 GROUNDWATER III -8 • IV. OBJECTIVES AND POLICIES IV -1 BACKGROUND IV -1 OBJECTIVES AND POLICIES IV -1 V. MANAGEMENT PLAN V -1 INTRODUCTION V -1 GOVERNMENTAL RESPONSIBILITIES V -1 SURFACE WATER AND WETLAND CLASSIFICATION V -3 WATER MANAGEMENT ISSUES AND STRATEGIES V -5 1. Runoff Management V -6 2. Flood Plain Management V -20 3. Shoreland Management V -29 4. Water Quality Monitoring and Improvement V -31 5. Erosion and Sedimentation Control V -34 6. Stormwater Treatment V -37 7. Wetland Management V -40 8. Groundwater Protection V -42 i TABLE OF CONTENTS (continued) Page VI. IMPLEMENTATION PROGRAM VI -1 CAPITAL IMPROVEMENTS PROGRAM VI -1 LOCAL COMPREHENSIVE PLAN AMENDMENTS VI -1 LOCAL WATER MANAGEMENT PLANS VI -3 VII. WATERSHED MANAGEMENT PLAN AMENDMENT PROCESS VII -1 i LIST OF TABLES Page 1 - SOIL LANDSCAPE INTERPRETATION II -6 2 - OAK SAVANNA COMMUNITY II -9 3 - UPLAND PRAIRIE COMMUNITY II -10 4 - MAPLE - BASSWOOD FOREST COMMUNITY II -il 5 - AQUATIC COMMUNITIES - WETLANDS II -12 6 - LAKE CHARACTERISTICS III -4 7 - GEOLOGIC UNITS AND THEIR WATER- BEARING III -10 CHARACTERISTICS 8 - WATER BODY AND WETLAND CLASSIFICATION V -4 9 - DESCRIPTION OF RUNOFF MANAGEMENT SECTORS V -13 IN SHINGLE CREEK WATERSHED 10 - ALLOWABLE PEAK OUTFLOW RATES FROM MANAGEMENT V -14 SECTORS 11 - STORMWATER STORAGE AVAILABLE IN MANAGEMENT SECTORS V -15 12 - TREATMENT LEVELS FOR WATER BODIES AND WETLANDS V -39 13 - COST ESTIMATES FOR LOCAL PLAN REVIEWS AND ANNUAL VI -3 AUDITS LIST OF MAPS Page 1 - SHINGLE CREEK WATERSHED II -2 2 - SOIL LANDSCAPES II -5 3 - PRESETTLEMENT VEGETATION II -7 4 - LAND USE II -14 5 - METROPOLITAN SYSTEMS II -16 6 - SUBWATERSHED BOUNDARIES III -2 7 - PROTECTED WATERS AND WETLANDS III -6 8 - RUNOFF MANAGEMENT SECTORS V -7 iii LIST OF FIGURES Page 1 - SHINGLE CREEK 100 -YEAR FLOOD MANAGEMENT PROFILE - V -22 CITY OF MINNEAPOLIS 2 - SHINGLE CREEK 100 -YEAR FLOOD MANAGEMENT PROFILE - V -23 CITY OF BROOKLYN CENTER 3 - SHINGLE CREEK 100 -YEAR FLOOD MANAGEMENT PROFILE - V -24 CITY OF BROOKLYN CENTER 4 - SHINGLE CREEK 100 -YEAR FLOOD MANAGEMENT PROFILE - V -25 CITY OF BROOKLYN PARK 5 - SHINGLE CREEK /BASS CREEK 100 -YEAR FLOOD MANAGEMENT V -26 PROFILE - CITY OF BROOKLYN PARK /CITY OF NEW HOPE 6 - RYAN CREEK 100 -YEAR FLOOD MANAGEMENT PROFILE - V -27 CITY OF MINNEAPOLIS APPENDICES A - MANAGEMENT STANDARDS A -1 B - RAINFALL EVENTS AND DURATIONS B -1 C - SUGGESTED RETENTION AND TREATMENT POND C -1 DESIGN D - SHINGLE CREEK WATERSHED MANAGEMENT COMMISSION D -1 JOINT POWERS AGREEMENT E - HYDROLOGIC DATA E -1 iv Under the Metropolitan Surface Water Management Act (Minnesota Statutes • Section 473.875 to 473.883), requirements are set for preparing watershed management plans within the Twin Cities Metropolitan Area. The water management organization responsible for preparing this particular water management plan is the Shingle Creek Watershed Management Commission. This Commission, established in 1984, was created through a Joint Powers agreement among the nine communities within the Shingle Creek watershed. According to the law, the Shingle Creek plan must focus on the preservation and use of natural water storage and retention systems. The primary objectives of this law are: - To reduce, to the greatest extent, the public expenditures necessary to control excessive volumes and rates of runoff. - To improve water quality. - To promote groundwater recharge. - To protect and enhance fish and wildlife habitat and water recreation facilities. To insure that these objectives are realized, the Metropolitan Surface Water act delineates further specifications regarding the basic contents of the watershed management plan. These requirements are: - To describe existing land use and proposed development in the watershed as well as the physical environment. - To present information on the hydrogeologic system and its components and to outline all existing and potential problems related to the system. I -1 - To state objectives and policies related to managing the watershed's water quality and protecting its natural characteristics, and to delineate means by which these policies can be altered and modified. - To set forth a management plan that includes the hydrologic and water quality conditions that will be sought, and to cite significant opportunities for improvement. - To describe conflicts between the watershed plan and existing plans of local 9 overnmental units. - To set forth an implmentation program that will bring about conformance with t watershed atersned plan, including a capital improvement system and schedules for amending the directives of local government. - To create a procedure for amending the watershed plan itself. To best meet the above stated specifications, this water management plan is divided into five major subsections. These include: - Inventory of existing and future conditions. - Inventory of hydrologic systems. - Determination of objectives and policies. Management strategy development. - Implementation program. The plan's inventory of existing and future conditions includes a brief profile of the physical environment. Included are descriptions of the area's geomorphology, surface geology, soils and biological communities. Current land use, metropolitan systems and projected growth areas are also discussed. I -2 The inventory of the hydrologic systems includes subwatershed delineation, meteorological data, and listings of wetlands, drainage systems, lakes, water quality and groundwater characteristics. The existing and future inventories and the hydrologic systems inventory will be used in the planning process to develop implementation strategies and actual programs. The subsection on determining objectives, policies and management strategies outlines a consensus- development method for developing and evaluating the plan's various functions. The management subsection divides the major geographic areas of concern into those that are developed and those that are developing. Strategies are presented for individual areas to control runoff, reduce flooding, increase water quality, protect wildlife and enhance recreational resources. The Implementation Program subsection lays out various implementation programs. Capital improvement programs, suggested regulatory programs and a procedure for plan amendment are discussed. The philosophy throughout the planning process emphasizes input from all levels P Y 9 P 9 P P P of government, especially the local entities. A second priority is to create a document that will be flexible enough to implement ;pater resources policy into the 21st century. I -3 I This section of the Water Management Plan is an inventory of existing conditions and future development. It is divided into four subsections: Jurisdiction, Physical Environment, Biological Environment, and Human Environment. The subsection on Jurisdiction identifies the watershed area characteristics and the included minor civil divisions. The Physical Environment subsection will be a description of the watershed's geomorphology, surficial geology and soils. The Biological Environment subsection summarizes the major biological communities and inventories the important plant and animal species. The Human Environment subsection will describe land use, growth patterns, and metropolitan systems. Information contained in this section will be used throughout the planning process as components of the TR -20 model. JURISDICTION i� The Shingle Creek Watershed Management Commission's jurisdiction covers an area ! of 43.5 square miles in east - central Hennepin County. The nine municipalities included within the watershed are Brooklyn Center, Brooklyn Park, Crystal, Maple Grove, Minneapolis, New Hope, Osseo, Plymouth, and Robbinsdale. Their locations are shown on Map 1. The Shingle Creek watershed is a kidney- shaped watershed extending from Plymouth in the west to Minneapolis in the southeast, where Shingle Creek joins the Mississippi River. In the eastern three - quarters of the watershed, the land is predominantly urban in nature and in the western one - quarter of the watershed, it is predominantly rural and undeveloped. II -1 WATERSHED MANAGEMENT PLAN SHINGLE CREEK - - - - - - WATERSHED MANAGEMENT COMMISSION OSSEO O i I I Shin9 I MAPLE GROVE O 69U BROOKLYN PARK Palmer Loxe �� , / Ledar � / ��_ � ✓�J � JJ /slonC � ✓q? � Loke rJ �� Eagle C' \ i . BROOKLYN CENTER 1 .,. \ 1 � Ea9 /e Loke I j M19ea 4 \ 0 ` - co,� \ ease rax v \ \ ® PLYMOUTH NEW ROPE Lake CRYSTAL 111 II pYan YY v Ras Laxe _ J I l ROBBINSOALE MINNEAPOLIS I - -- — I ! �\ 1 I KFO Wo \ 1 MAP 1 1/2 0 2 Flow • 1 1/4 1 Fu Scale in Miles NORTH E. A. HICKOK AND ASSOCIATES WAYZATA, MINNESOTA The Shingle Creek Watershed Management Commission will be the focal point for development and implementation of the watershed management plan for Minneapolis and eight suburbs in Hennepin County. Since its inception, the Shingle Creek Watershed Management Commission has been active in preparing the watershed plan and developing a planning process for the management of water resources. PHYSICAL ENVIRONMENT The physical environment is generally considered to be the geomorphology, soils, and water resources of a particular area. Water resources, because of the focus and extent of information, will be described in a separate section. Therefore, the topics of this subsection are geomorphology and soils. The Shingle Creek watershed may be divided into two geomorphic areas: the Mississippi Valley outwash area and the Emmons - Faribault moraine area. The eastern portion of the watershed is considered to be a part of the Mississippi Valley outwash geomorphic area. The outwash area is nearly level. In some locations, terraces may be noted along the Mississippi River. In general, the regional groundwater flow is towards the Mississippi River. Outwash soils within this area commonly have sandy or gravely textured subsurface horizons. Surface soil textures range from silty to loamy. One of the predominant soils in this area is the Hubbard series. Hubbard soils are characterized as being nearly flat sandy soils which are well drained and have dependable bearing strengths over a wide range of soil moisture conditions. The western portion of the watershed is within the Emmons - Faribault moraine. This morainic area is characterized by a rolling topography with a relief of 20 to 30 feet. There are several lakes within this geomorphic area. • II -3 The lower level areas have normally been drained except for deeply inset depressions. These depressions are dead lakes generally filled with peat. The water table beneath knolls is more than 10 feet deep, while the water table in lower areas is approximately 6 feet below the surface. Map 2 shows the five basic soil landscape units within the Shingle Creek watershed. These soil landscape units were first described in a publication entitled, "Soil Landscapes and Geomorphic Regions of the Twin Cities Metropolitan Area," by the Agriculture Experiment Station of the University of Minnesota in 1975. Mapped soil units are denoted by a series of letters that describe the topsoil, subsoil, drainage characteristics, and color of the particular soil unit. Table 1 offers interpretations of the five soil landscape units. This table includes the soil landscape unit, hydrologic group, depth to water table, dominant slope, and potential for hazard of sheet erosion. This • soils information will be included in the TR -20 hydrologic model. BIOLOGICAL ENVIRONMENT The biological environment is considered to include biological communities and important plant and animal species. Each biological community will be discussed in terms of trees, shrubs, herbs, mammals, and fish. The watershed's important species, including those plants and animals that are rare and endangered, will be listed and described as well. The presettlement vegetation is shown on Map 3. This map shows the general location of the oak savannah community (oak openings and barrens), the prairie communities, the maple - basswood community (big woods), and the wet prairies. Since the area has been used for urban development and agriculture, there are only a few remnants of the presettlement vegetation remaining. • II -4 WATERSHED MANAGEMENT PLAN • SHINGLE CREEK - - - - - - WATERSHED MANAGEMENT COMMISSION OSSEO SOIL LANDSCAPES Bw ,. 1 Loam over Loam MgPLE GROVE Sand over Sand WD BROOKLYN PAR. Sand over Sand PD Organic Soil 1 j Po/mx Lake Marsh Soil yROOKLYN CENTER ��a.e Lo4e j F CRYSTAL O MINNEAPOLIS - - -� ROBBINSDgLE i _ _ j O \ C7 `'LOte' �\ _ iy, MAP 2 I SOURCE: UNIVERSITY of MINNESOTA, DEPARTMENT of SOIL SCIENCE 1/ 2 0 2 • 1 1/4 1 Scale In Miles NORTH E. A. HICKOK AND ASSOCIATES WAYZATA, MINNESOTA n TABLE 1 SOIL LANDSCAPE INTERPRETATION Depth Soil to High Dominant Hazard a Landscape Hydrologic Water Table Slope of Sheet Unit Description Group* (ft) W Erosion SSWD Sandy over sandy, A >6 0 -6 Slight well - drained, dark- colored SSPD Sandy over sandy, A/D 0 -3 0 -2 Slight poorly drained, dark - colored LLWL Deep silty or loamy, B >6 2 -12 Moderate well- drained, tight - colored P Organic soils A/D 0 -1 0 -2 Slight M Marsh D 0 -1 0 -2 Slight *A. Soils with a low runoff potential because of infiltration rates. They are deep, well- to excessively- drained sands or gravels. These soils also have a high rate of water transmission. B. Soils with a moderate infiltration and transmission rate when thoroughly wetted and consisting chiefly of moderately deep to deep, moderately well - to well- drained soils with moderately fine to moderately coarse textures. D. Group D consists of soils with high runoff potential. (Soils having very slow infiltration rates.) These soils have a slow infiltration rate because of clay content, high water table, or claypan or clay layer at or near the surface. These soils have a very slow rate of water transmission. • II -6 WATERSHED MANAGEMENT PLAN i SHINGLE CREEK _ WATERSHED MANAGEMENT COMMISSION 0 -- : PRESETTLEMENT VEGETATION 5 Oak Openings & Barrens MAPLE GROVE - \� Prairies 1 ., c� BROOKLYN PARK Wet Prairies, Marshes & Sloughs Pom1 Lurr - g Woods / ✓J C. / V CENTER Eo9�e Lo.Yr / �0 L \ D PLYMOUTH NEW HOP Sin C —A j1 M S ; Lowe Pi l � A Nya� Lor �- go.r � �v a - MINNEAPOLIS F0BBINSOALE i � r Q 1i I MAP 3 1/2 0 2 1 1/a 1 Scale in Miles NORTH E. A. HICKOK AND ASSOCIATES WAYZATA, MINNESOTA The oak savannah community is characterized by isolated oak trees surrounded by areas of low shrubs and grassy expanses. Table 2 lists the species characteristic of this community. The prairie community is dominated by a combination of grasses interspersed with low shrubs. Table 3 shows the dominant plant and animal species within the community. The maple- basswood forest community is characterized by a dense forest environment with a mixture of several deciduous tree species, including sugar maples and basswoods. Below the tree canopy, there is a relatively dense shrub understory. In areas that are considerably shaded, there are numerous herbs replacing the shrubs. Table 4 shows plant and animal species typical of this community. The aquatic wetlands community within the wet prairie is the most complex natural vegetation community, as wetlands can represent a continuum of water regimes from lakes (Type V wetlands) to areas that are periodically flooded (Type I wetlands). Associated vegetation types include floating or submerged and littoral plants to plants such as cattails and trees that emerge along wetland boundaries. Table 5 is a list of some plant and animal species found in the wetland aquatic communities. Wetlands will be further discussed in Section III, Hydrologic Systems. The Minnesota Department of Natural Resources Natural Heritage Program was consulted to determine areas where species of special concern were located. Water willows, Decodon verticillatus have been sited along the boundaries of Twin Lakes and Ryan Lake. Spotted skunks ( Spilogule putorius have also been sited within the watershed, although it is not known if this particular skunk species still occurs within the watershed. II -8 TABLE 2 OAK SAVANNA COMMUNITY (OAK OPENINGS AND BARRENS) TREES MAMMALS Bur Oak Cottontail Rabbit White Oak Gopner Northern Pin Oak Red Fox Aspen Thirteen -lined Ground Squirrel SHRUBS BIRDS Hazelnut Crow Dogwood Western Meadowlark Wildrose Brewer's Blackbird Prickly Ash Goldfinch Indigo Bunting Lark Sparrow HERBS Ring -neck Pheasant Meadow Rue Goldenrod Burdock Yarrow Meadowgrass Sweet Clover Big Bluestem Little Bluestem Porcupine Grass Hoary Puccoon New Jersey Tea SOURCE Hickok, 1977. II -9 TABLE 3 UPLAND PRAIRIE COMMUNITY (PRAIRIES) DOMINANT TREE SPECIES MAMMALS None Thirteen -lined Ground Squirrel Pocket Gopher DOMINANT SHRUBS AND HERBS Badger Red Fox Little Bluestem Spotted Skunk June Grass Big Bluestem BIRDS Switch Grass Grama Grass Western Meadowlark Sedge Horned Lark Porcupine Grass Pheasant Sand Grass Savanna Sparrow Dogwood Bluebell Paint Brush Thistle Draba Prairie Smoke Sunflower Prairie Phlox Rose Indian Grass Wolfberry Lead Plant SOURCE; Hickok, 1977. II -10 TABLE 4 MAPLE - BASSWOOD FOREST COMMUNITY (BIG WOODS) TREES MAMMALS Sugar Maple Vole Basswood Chipmunk Ironwood Squirrel American Elm Cottontail Rabbit Slipperly Elm Red Fox SHRUBS REPTILES AND AMPHIBIANS Hazelnut Frog Chokecherry Garter Snake Juneberry American Elder BIRDS HERBS Woodpeckers Black- capped Chickadee Hepatica House Wren Violet American Redstart Virginia Creeper Least Flycatcher Climbing Bittersweet Ovenbird Sweet Cicely Rose- breasted Grosbeak Large - flowered Bellwort SOURCE: Hickok, 19770 II -11 TABLE 5 AQUATIC COMMUNITIES - WETLANDS (WET PRAIRIES) SUBMERGED PLANTS TREES MAMMALS Sago Pondweed Black Spruce Muskrat Clasping Pondweed Paper Birch Mink Floating Leaf Pondweed Trembling Aspen Bushy Pondweed Willow Wild Celery Tamarack BIRDS Canada Waterweed Coontail Ducks SHRUBS Redwinged Blackbird Marsh Hawk FLOATING PLANTS Alder Cranes Dogwood Coot Water Lily Willow Common Snipe Duckweed Bog Laurel Swamp Sparrow Bog Birch EMERGENT PLANTS REPTILES AND HERBS AMPHIBIANS Common Cattail Giant Burreed Sedges Turtle Hardstem Bulrush Horsetail Newt River Bulrush Cattail Salamander Sphagnum Moss Frog FISH German Carp SOURCE: Hickok, 1977. iI -12 HUMAN ENVIRONMENT This section of the inventory describes the land use, metropolitan service systems, and the potential growth areas within the watershed. Land Use The land use within the Shingle Creek watershed has been influenced by five basic location mechanisms: proximity to Minneapolis, transportation systems, lakes, wastewater transport systems, and local controls. Map 4 shows the land use within the watershed. It can be seen that most urbanized areas are in the southeastern portions of the watershed. Land use types are fairly typical of suburban areas. The bulk of the development within the watershed is in single family housing -- typical of a suburban setting. The proximity to Minneapolis and the presence of lakes and main transportation routes have been influential factors orientating development. Water resources, predominantly lakes, have attracted many people who desire to be nearby water- oriented recreation facilities. There has been considerable local control over development within the watershed in the form of zoning ordinances and other controls such as bonding mechanisms. Under the Metropolitan Land Planning Act, communities are required to prepare land use plans through the year 2000. Communities within the watershed completed these plans in the late 1970s and early 1980s. Map 4 is a compilation of the land use information from these plans and the projected growth information from comprehensive plans. The map indicates that in the next 15 years, there will be a decline in open space in the western portion of the watershed, with particular growth in the Plymouth -Maple Grove area. The western portion of the watershed is less developed than the eastern portion. The Metropolitan Waste Control Commission and the Metropolitan Council control the development within the watershed through the location of wastewater II -13 WATERSHED MANAGEMENT PLAN SHINGLE CREEK -- - WATERSHED MANAGEMENT COMMISSION LAND USE Single Family Housing M° °LE °R c w [ _� Multi - Family Housing P Commercial /Retail Service J� - Industrial /Manufacturing Green Space • �. BROOIL \N CENT Projected Growth Mao 0 Open Space • — J F MeoOo- NEW HOPE Pl Y l - MINNEAPOLIS - P09BINSO4LE ' Awo l \ 1 I I MAP 4 SOURCE: CITY PLANS 1/ 2 0 2 1 TA 1 Scale in Miles NORTH E. A. HICKOK AND ASSOCIATES WAYZATA, MINNESOTA transport systems. These are shown on Map 5. There are no wastewater treatment plants within the watershed. Map 5 also shows the Metropolitan Waste Control Commission's interceptors and boundaries as well as the Metropolitan Urban Service Area (MUSA). II -15 WATERSHED MANAGEMENT PLAN • SHINGLE CREEK -- -- - - WATERSHED MANAGEMENT COMMISSION -_ i OSSEO METROPOLITAN SYSTEMS 1990 MUSA Boundary MAPLE GROVE - 0- ...... • Existing Interceptors ................................... ... ........... BROOKLYN PARK -011-N CENTLP .............. PLYMOUTH 7 1 1 ....... NEW HOPE r CRYSTAL ............. R­001 MINNEAPOLIS ROBBINSDALE R- .................................. C '4- 'y"' MAP 5 1/2 0 2 1A 1 Scale in Miles NORTH E. A. HICKOK AND ASSOCIATES WAYZATA, MINNESOTA n".-/\ INTRODUCTION This section is an inventory of existing data basic to the understanding of the Shingle Creek Watershed hydrologic system. The information collected for this section is the basis for subwatershed delineations and hydrologic modeling. Presented first is an overview of the Watershed's drainage pattern. The hydrologic model is then discussed in terms of capability, underlying assumptions, input variables and results. HYDROLOGIC SYSTEM The drainage pattern of the Watershed is typical of a glaciated area with moraines and outwash plains. The drainage system is composed of few streams and a relatively small number of lakes and wetlands. The natural drainage system is supplemented with several man -made ditches. Map 6 shows the Watershed drainage pattern. Shingle Creek is the major stream ® within the watershed and runs along the northern and eastern borders. From its origin near the junction of two tributary streams (Bass and Eagle), Shingle Creek flows easterly, then southerly for a total of 11.3 miles before discharging into the Mississippi River. The creek drops approximately 66 feet from its source to its mouth. Palmer Lake is the only lake directly associated with Shingle Creek. The upper portion of the Watershed is drained by Eagle and Bass Creeks. The extreme southwestern portion of the Watershed drains via intermittent streams and ditches to Bass Lake. The drainage continues eastward to Bass Creek which flows easterly and then north for a total of approximately 2.4 miles to its confluence with Eagle Creek. Eagle and Pike Lakes drain to Eagle Creek which then combines with the Bass Creek drainage to form Shingle Creek. • III -1 I WATERSHED MANAGEMENT PLAN SHINGLE CREEK c _ WATERSHED MANAGEMENT COMMISSION OSSEO MSC 8 \ — MSC 5a MSC 7 MSC ea I I MSc 2a 1 SUBWATERSHED BOUNDARIES MSC 5 1 5e,.9.e C-1 \ /� MSC 2 ( MAPL�GROVE / �� / \ 19 USC 4 Q i� Ms�e \ MSC 4 — �. / Legal Watershed Boundary \ HK l sc I I Subwatershed Boundary Subwatershed Outlet/ MSC 3 / = = Outlet Control Structure y �I° E° 12 Lakes, Wetlands and other USC 3 / , ( use 1 / s Stormwater Storage Areas �' Enp /r Lore Lower Shingle Creek LSC 5 \ LSC Subwatersheds US 2 TL 5 J J v �: �_ I MSC Middle Shingle Creek USC 5 I Subwatersheds Upper Shingle Creek _20 USC Subwatersheds 5 SOY ® use s I LSC 4 usc9 USC TL e, ;� 21 TL Twin Lake Subwatersheds (\ use Iz use 10 NEW OPE �' \ ,- �`_ LSC 3 „ - ! CRYSTAL r USC 7 TL 3 y / \ J USC I I � / � �l - C� LSc 1 TL 12 (� MINNEAPOLIS .+ ROHNINS—E \� I LSC 2 NO OUTLET MAP 6 1/ 2 0 2 1 1 A 1 t Scale in Miles NORTH E. A. HICKOK AND ASSOCIATES WAYZATA, MINNESOTA V 1 The southeastern portion of the Watershed drains southerly through Twin Lakes to i Ryan Lake. Ryan Creek completes the Twin Lake portion of drainage by flowing into Shingle Creek approximately 1.2 miles upstream of the Mississippi River. There are numerous judicial and county ditches within the watershed. These ditches are the smallest conveyance components and function intermittently. Judicial and county ditches are shown on Map 6. One subwatershed, LSC2, has no outlet. Table 6 summarizes the major characteristics of the lakes within the watershed. The table includes a "Management Ranking Value" assigned to each lake by the Minnesota Pollution Control Agency (see the MPCA publication entitled, "Phase I - Lake Classification and Management Ranking Project). The higher a lake's number, on a scale of 0 to 100, the greater is its perceived water quality problem and the more likely is the public to benefit from a restoration program. The trophic state index values for secchi disc depth are also presented and are based on a Carlson Trophic State Index. The greater the value, the less secchi disc depth. In general, a TSIS value from 0 -40 indicates an oligotrophic lake and a value from 50 -100 indicates a lake that may exhibit characteristics of eutrophication. Very little information regarding water quality is available for the watershed. The best indicator at this time is the trophic state index which is provided for three lakes within the watershed. A comprehensive monitoring program is necessary to quantitatively characterize the water quality within the watershed. The protected waters and wetlands have been identified by the Minnesota Department of Natural Resources. This classification includes all Class 3, 4 and 5 wetlands (as defined by the Department of Interior) which are 10 or more III -3 TABLE 6 LAKE CHARACTERISTICS Maximum Median 100 -Year Management Trophic Area Depth Depth OHW HWL Management Ranking State Index Public Lake DNR ID it Subwatershed (acres) (feet) (feet) (NGVD) (NGVD) Class Value (secchi disk) Access Bass 27 -0098 USC 9 175 31 9 906.1 906.2* Centrarchid -- 67.4 Cedar 27 -0119 USC 4 88 -- -- 902.4 904.2 ** -- -- -- Island Crystal 27 -0034 LSC 2 78 39 -- 847.5 855.0 Warm -water gamefish Eagle /Pike 27 -0111 USC 3 470 37 -- 873.8 874.9 *, ** Centrarchid 80.7 56.6 Yes Magda 27 -0065 USC 2 15 -- -- 885.9 887.0 -- -- -- H Meadow 27 -0057 USC 5 11 -- -- -- -- -- -- -- Palmer 27 -0059 MSC 1 325 4 2 842.8 846.0 -- -- -- Pomerleau 27 -0100 USC 12 50 26 9 -- 937.0* Centrarchid -- -- Ryan 27 -0058 LSC 3 32 -- -- 850.5 856.1 -- 46.3 50 -59 Twin 27 -0042 TL 1 /TL 4 201 45 -- 853.1 856.1 Centrarchid -- -- Yes Schmidt 27 -0102 USC 10 -- -- -- 925.0 926.0* -- -- -- "--" Information not available. * 100 -year high water levels obtained from Plymouth Storm Drainage Plan, prepared by Bonestroo, Rosene, Anderlik b Associates, Inc., dated November 1980. ** 100 -year high water levels obtained from Maple Grove Storm Drainage Plan, prepared by Bonestroo, Rosene, Anderlik b Associates, Inc., dated November 1974. SOURCES: The Minnesota Department of Natural Resources, Minnesota Pollution Control Agency, Metropolitan Council. acres in size in unincorporated areas or 2.5 acres or more in incorporated areas and those waterbodies identified as public waters through the process identified in Minnesota statutes. Data on these waters and wetlands have been collected and used in the modeling of surface water runoff. The listing and location of these waters and wetlands is available through Hennepin County. Map 7 shows the protected waters and wetlands. i The Federal Flood Insurance Program has delineated flood plains within the watershed and floodway and flood fringe areas that would be inundated as a result of a 100 -year flood. The purpose of these maps is to show the flood plain boundary for flood insurance purposes. Flood insurance studies and resultant maps are on file at the Minnesota Department of Natural Resources and are available from the Federal Emergency Management Agency. HYDROLOGIC MODEL The TR -20 computer model was selected to assist in the hydrologic evaluation. This widely used model was developed by the Hydrology Branch of the Soil Conservation Service. The ro ram is a single event model which computes p 9 9 P direct runoff resulting from any synthetic or natural rainstorm. The model develops flood hydrographs from runoff then routes the flow through stream and storage areas on a tributary basis. The program can be used to combine routed hydrographs to compute peak discharges, times of occurrence, and peak water surface elevations at any desired cross - section or structure. The TR -20 model has the capacity to: 1. Route flow through 99 structures and an unlimited number of variations for each structure. I I 2. Route flow through up to 2UO stream reaches and an unlimited number of channel modifications for each reach. III -5 WATERSHED MANAGEMENT PLAN • SHINGLE CREEK WATERSHED MANAGEMENT COMMISSION OSSEO PROTECTED WATER o and WETLANDS MAPLE GROVE Protected Water BROOKLYN PARK and Wetlands Other Wetlands BROOKLYN CEN R 0 0. J dk e HOPE C'— 9e VV CRIST- MINNEAPOLIS MAP 7 1/2 0 2 1 A 1 Scale in Miles NORTH E. A. HICKOK AND ASSOCIATES WAYZATA, MINNESOTA N-/N 3. Compute up to 300 coordinates of a hydrograph within the watershed and provide discharges and elevations for each. 4. Make an unlimited number of routings through a watershed. 5. Develop and route runoff from up to nine different rainfall distributions over the watershed. 6. Combine hydrographs from an unlimited number of tributaries and reaches. The TR -20 model has been available since 1965 and has received widespread use as a hydrologic model. Federal Flood Insurance Studies have used this model to generate runoff hydrographs from subwatersheds. The program uses accepted engineering methods as outlined in the National Engineering Handbook (NEH -4). For analysis purposes the Watershed was divided into subwatersheds to better define hydrologic effects. These effects are influenced by the entrance of tributaries, general watershed shape, valley slope changes, homogeneity of the runoff curve number (a number that represents runoff based on physical features, land use and hydrologic condition) and existing water impoundment structures. Hypothetical cumulative rainfall distributions were used in the model. A runoff mass curve is developed for each subwatershed by supplying the curve number, rainfall volume and rainfall distribution to the program. An incremental unit hydrograph is then determined for each subwatershed which is calculated as a function of the time of concentration. Coordinates of the incremental unit hydrograph and runoff volume are also determined for each III -7 time unit. The composite flood hydrograph, computed by summing the incremental • hydrographs, is routed through a reservoir using stage- storage- discharge parameters. The 100 -year storm was modeled for existing land use and projected land use to the year 2000. Existing and future land use patterns were developed from community comprehensive land management plans. Runoff modeling for projected land use assumed that land use projections will be realized and that all present storage and drainage systems will be in operation in the year 2000. This information will be instrumental in determining watershed management strategies in Section V of this plan. GROUNDWATER SURFICIAL AQUIFERS The surficial geology of the Shingle Creek Watershed is composed of primarily sand and gravel outwash and glacial till. These glacial deposits vary in both permeability and thickness to bedrock. Within these deposits are unconfined (water table) aquifers of sufficient waterbearing capacity to provide municipal -and private water. These water table aquifers are vulnerable to contamination since they are relatively close to the land surface. Contaminants have a relatively direct access to these aquifers through minimal infiltration. Recharge areas for drift aquifers are those locations where water can reach the water table through percolation of water through soil and drift materials. Critical recharge areas are those areas where the drift material is relatively thin, transmissivity is high and water table depth is minimal. Areas with these characteristics have a greater potential to transport contaminants to the drift aquifers than other areas. III -8 Recharge can also occur from surface water bodies. Wetlands and flood plains can function as recharge, discharge, or flow- through areas depending on the level of the water within the wetland or flood plain relative to the water table. Discharge can occur naturally through springs, seeps, and directly into streams and lakes. Percolation into underlying aquifers is also a form of discharge from drift aquifers. The configuration of these subsurface aquifers and the position of the water table are highly variable and complex. Available information does not allow a detailed evaluation and delineation of these aquifers or identification of recharge areas. Site - specific information in the form of well logs does give some indication of aquifer depth and characteristics of the surficial material. Water quality information is collected on a municipal level to determine treatment needs. Brooklyn Park, Maple Grove and Osseo currently use drift wells for all or part of their municipal water supplies. BEDROCK AQUIFERS The geologic units and their water bearing characteristics are provided in Table 7. The southern portion of the Watershed is underlain by the Prairie du Chien /Jordan aquifer. The uppermost bedrock aquifer in the northern half is the Franconia- Ironton - Galesville aquifer. These aquifers are sources of quality water and have sufficient yields for future growth. Most of the municipalities in the Watershed draw their water from either of these aquifers or the deeper Mt. Simon - Hinckley aquifer. III -9 TABLE 7 GEOLOGIC UNITS AND THEIR WATER - BEARING CHARACTERISTICS Approximate range in thickness System Geologic Unit (feet) Description Water- Bearing Characteristics Hydrogeologic Unit Quaternary Undifferentiated 0 -400 Till, outwash and valley -train sand and gravel, lake Distribution of aquifers and confining Drift. glacial drift deposits and alluvium; vertical and horizontal beds within drift is poorly known. distribution of units is complex. Stratified well- sorted deposits of sand and gravel yield moderate to large supplies of water to wells (240 to 2,000 gal /min). Decorah Shale 0 -95 Shale, bluish -green to bluish -gray; blocky. Confining bed. Platteville 0-35 Dolomitic limestone and dolomite, dark gray, hard, Fractures and solution cavities in Decorah-Platteville- Limestone thin- bedded to medium- bedded. rock generally yield small supplies to Glenwood confining wells (less than 20 gal /min). Not unit. considered to be an important source of water in metropolitan area. Glenvwd Shale 0-16 Shale, bluish -gray to bluish - green; generally soft Confining bed; locally some springs but becomes dolcmitic and harder to the east, issue from the Glenwood- Platteville C) contact in the river bluffs. Ordovician St. Peter 0 -150 Sandstone, .,bite, fine- to medium- grained, Most wells completed in the sandstone St. Peter aquifer. Sandstone well - sorted, quartzose; 50 -50 feet of siltstone are of Small diameter and used for and shale near bottom of formation. domestic supply. They yield 9 to 100 gal /min. Water occurs under both confined and unconfined conditions. Confining bed near bottom of formation seems extensive and hydraulically separates sandstone from underlying Prairie du Chien - Jordan aquifer. Not Basal St. Peter considered to be an important source confining unit. for public supplies in area of study. Prairie du Chien 0 -250 Dolomite, sandstone, sandy dolomite; light brown, Prairie du Chien: Permeability is due Group buff, gray; thinly to thickly bedded. to fractures, joints, and solution cavities in the rock. Yields small to large supplies of water to wells. Pumping rates of up to 1,800 gal /min have been obtained. TABLE 7 (continued) GEq_OGIC UNITS PiND THEIR WATER- BEARING CHARACTERISTICS Approximate range in thickness System Geologic Unit (feet) Description Water- Bearing Characteristics Hydrogeologic Unit Prairie du Chien - Jordan aquifer. Cambrian Jordan Sandstone 0 -100 Sandstone, white to yellowish, fine- to coarse- Jordan: Permeability is mostly grained, massive to bedded, cross - bedded in intergranular but may be due to joint places, s , qu Y artzose• loosely to well cemented. partings in cemented parts. Main source of water for public supply in metropolitan area. Recorded yields are fran 36 to 2,400 gal /min. Prairie du Chien- Jordan aquifer: Supplies about 75 percent of ground water pumped in the metropolitan area. Yields from 85 to 2,755 gal /min. St. Lawrence 0-65 Dolomitic siltstone and fine - grained dolomite Confined unit regionally. May yield St. Lawrence - Formation sandstone, gray to greenish, glauconitic. small quantities to danestic wells Franconia locally. confining unit. Franconia 0 -200 Sandstone, gray to greenish, glauconitic, very fine Confining unit regionally. May yield Sandstone grained; sawn interbedded micaceous shale and small quantities to dm estic wells dolomitic sandstone. locally. Ironton Sandstone, yellow to white- medium- to coarse - Sandstone grained, poorly cemented. An important aquifer beyond the limits Ironton-Galesville- of the Prairie du Chien- Jordan aquifer. aquifer. 0-80 _ - Yields of wells range from 40 to 400 gal /min. Galesville Sandstone, yellow to white, medium- to coarse - Sandstone grained, poorly cemented. Eau Claire 0 -150 Sandstone, siltstone and shale, gray to Confining unit regionally. May yield Eau Claire Sandstone reddish - brown, fossiliferous. small quantities to domestic wells confining unit. locally. Mount Simon As much Sandstone, gray to pink, median- to coarse - grained. Sandstone as 200 Some pebble zones and thin shaley beds. A secondary major aquifer that supplies Mount Simon- about 10 percent of ground water Hinckley aquifer. - pumped in the metropolitan area. Recorded yields range fran 125 to Precambrian Hinckley As much Sandstone, buff to red, medium- to coarse - grained; 2,000 gal /min. Sandstone as 200 well sorted and cemented. Recharge of bedrock aquifers is a complex process. Among the variables affecting recharge are depth to the aquifer, location and permeability of the various formations, ground water movement and pumping. Of particular concern is the presence of buried bedrock valleys. These valleys, filled with glacial drift, can act as conduits for recharge to one or more aquifers. Studies are being conducted to further define these valleys and their relationship to the various aquifers. Pumping, a form of discharge, can induce aquifer recharge under certain conditions. For example, where wells are pumping from an aquifer near a hydraulic connection to a stream and drawing the water level of the aquifer below that of the stream, induced recharge occurs. Pumping may also cause water from overlying sediments to be induced into the aquifer by reversal in head differences. These flow reversals (from discharge to recharge) are gradual occurrence where groundwater discharge is first lessened -- affecting stream base flow -- before actual flow reversal occurs. Discharge from bedrock aquifers occurs through springs and seeps along valley walls. Discharge may also occur as subsurface flow out of the area and as flow into streams following upward flow into buried valley deposits. Until site - specific data are collected to fully understand critical areas of ground water recharge, the entire watershed area has the potential, to some degree, to recharge bedrock aquifers. Several agencies are currently studying the surficial and bedrock geology, water movement and water quality of the entire Twin Cities area. As information becomes available, the understanding of the complexities of ground water III -12 recharge and discharge will be furthered. Agencies coordinating special studies or on -going data collection efforts are: Minnesota Geological Survey, Minnesota Department of Natural Resources, Minnesota Pollution Control Agency, Minnesota Department of Health, Metropolitan Council. III -13 This section of the plan discusses the objectives and policies that will provide the framework for creating the management strategies of the Shingle Creek Watershed Plan through the year 2000. The purpose of this section is to present the objectives and identify associated policies to meet these objectives. BACKGROUND The Metropolitan Surface Water Management Act (MSWMA) sets forth the purpose and the basis for the Watershed Management Plan. Following is the purpose as set by Minnesota Statutes: 473.875 SURFACE WATER MANAGEMENT PROGRAM: PURPOSE The purpose of the surface water management programs required by Sections 473.875 to 473.883 is to preserve and use natural water storage and retention systems in order to (a) reduce to the greatest practical extent the public capital expenditures necessary to control excessive volumes and rates of runoff, (b) improve water quality, (c) prevent flooding and erosion from surface flows, (d) promote groundwater recharge, (e) protect and enhance fish and wildlife habitat and water recreational facilities, and (f) secure the other benefits associated with the proper management of surface water. Mindful of the purpose set forth by the MSWMA the Watershed Management Commission has developed water management objectives for the watershed. These are presented in the following subsection. OBJECTIVES AND POLICIES Following are the water management objectives of the watershed. These objectives incorporate the purpose set forth in the Minnesota Statute and reflect the diversity of the watershed. One or more policies are stated after each and provide a context in which to meet the objective. IV -1 OBJECTIVE A To develop hydrologic systems along with a water- related land use planning process to accommodate existing and adopted land use plans within municipalities. Discussion This objective insures that all local governments are both aware of and involved in the watershed planning process. A watershed -wide plan, to be realistic and implementable, must address the existing and future plans of the municipalities. Coordination will insure that all land use plan elements are considered and duplications of effort minimized. Policy Al: Solicit the cooperation of the municipalities within the watershed. A2: Develop a water resources management plan that accommodates the land use plans of the municipalities. A3: Develop a water resources management plan that is flexible in incorporating future municipal plans. OBJECTIVE B To preserve and use natural storage and retention areas to maintain and improve the hydrologic systems within the watershed. Discussion The key element in this objective is the preservation of the storage capacity of lakes, ponds, and wetlands for an efficient and effective water management plan. Since storage areas, particularly in the lower portion of the watershed, are few because of urban development, further elimination of storage areas cannot be afforded. The upper watershed, where urban development is projected to IV -2 continue, must expand its present storage capacity to accommodate this increase in development. Also, storage areas throughout the watershed that currently may not be used to their full potential should be considered for enhancement. The Commission will coordinate the effort necessary among the government agencies to properly and efficiently manage the entire system. Flooding of residences occurs at several locations after significant rainfall within the watershed. This indicates that the existing condition is not adequate and remedial measures are necessary. When projected to the year 2000, the peak discharge rate out of each subwatershed will, in most cases, exceed the present rates. A policy to manage the effects of new development is warranted. Though differences in the need for future storage between the upper and lower portions of the watershed are acknowledged the Commission proposes to limit the effects of any new development to that subwatershed in which the development occurs. For each subwatershed peak outflow rates will not be allowed to exceed the projected management plan rates, which may require capital works of improvement. There will be instances where exceptions may be allowed and are discussed in the management plan section of this report. Policy B1: Preserve the present storage capacities of protected waters and wetlands and natural watercourses. B2: Coordinate the preservation and enhancement of storage areas with state, county, P 9 and municipal agencies. ® B3: Limit developed runoff rate to the projected management plan rate for each subwatershed. IV -3 B4: Provide for additional storage either on -site or within the subwatershed where necessary to comply with the management plan. B5: Consider other forms of runoff volume and rate control where necessary to comply with the management plan. OBJECTIVE C To reduce, to the greatest extent practical, the public capital and maintenance expenditures necessary to control excessive volumes and rates of runoff. Discussion This is a straightforward directive from the Minnesota Statute. Water management must be done in an efficient manner to minimize public expenditures. Project planning and agency coordination must be effective in minimizing unnecessary and marginal project components and eliminate duplication of effort. The operations and maintenance program and capital improvement program must be effectively designed and implemented to insure efficiency. Policy Cl: The management plan adopted shall provide the most efficient and effective methods to limit public costs. OBJECTIVE D To maintain or improve both surface water and groundwater quality. Discussion The purpose of this objective is to maintain or improve the quality or surface water and groundwater. Fish and wildlife habitats will benefit from the improved quality of lakes, streams and wetlands. Most significant is the prevention of pollutants, especially nutrient and sediment loadings, from entering lakes and streams. IV -4 The treatment and control of runoff and the use of wetlands as a natural treatment method have both proven effective in improving water quality. Water quality monitoring efforts should be implemented to enable identification of potential problems and to establish water resource strategies. Groundwater, a valuable source of drinking water, must be protected from contaminants. The protection of surface water quality is important since groundwater aquifers are recharged from surface water. The Shingle Creek Watershed Management Commission will strive to protect groundwater recharge areas from potential contamination sources (see Objective G). Policy D1: Promote the treatment and /or control of runoff to enhance water quality in order to reverse the upward trends in pollutants, especially nutrient and sediment loadings. D2: Preserve and protect wetlands which provide natural treatment for runoff where necessary to comply with the plan. D3: Establish a water quality monitoring system for identifying changing conditions and potential problems. D4: Protect groundwater recharge areas from potential sources of contamination. D5: Promote or establish a program to reduce discharge of substances contributing to water quality degradation. IV -5 OBJECTIVE E To prevent and control flooding damage. Discussion The Commission will ban any encroachment upon the floodway fringe as defined in the management plan that will reduce flood storage capacity and thus increase flood flows except as provided herein. Development changes (structures and fill) will be allowed in the floodway fringe only if they have been protected from high water and compensatory storage is provided equal in volume to the encroachment. Also, encroachments may not create hazardous velocities. Policy E1: Prohibit encroachment without acceptable mitigating action that will reduce the storage capacity of floodplains. E2: Allow only structures in the floodway fringe that have been flood - proofed ® or will not be subject to excessive damage. This recognizes that there are existing non - conforming uses within the floodway fringe. OBJECTIVE F To control erosion and sedimentation. Discussion Runoff velocities must be minimized and natural cover enhanced, on a watershed -wide basis, to preserve valuable soil resources and protect water quality. At construction sites, where significant soil disruption may occur, on -site sediment containment and erosion control will be required. IV -6 Policy F1: Minimize runoff velocities and maximize natural cover to reduce erosion. F2: Require all measures necessary to effectively control sediment and erosion within construction sites. OBJECTIVE G To promote groundwater recharge. Discussion Portions of the Shingle Creek Watershed are identified as groundwater recharge areas. The MSWMA encourages the protection of surface water that recharges groundwater aquifers. The Commission will encourage protection of recharge areas from potential sources of contamination. A major area for groundwater recharge is in the area of floodplains. • Management policy will control development within the floodplains that are in the recharge areas of the Prairie du Chien - Jordan aquifer or surficial aquifers. Policy G1: Evaluate and control development over groundwater recharge areas. OBJECTIVE H To protect and enhance water- related fish and wildlife habitats. Discussion The Commission will promote and encourage coordination with the Minnesota Department of Natural Resources whose primary responsibility is to protect and enhance water - related fish and wildlife habitats and to protect rare and endangered species. IV -7 The Commission will promote wetland preservation which provides a habitat for . game fish spawning and wildlife. Policy H1: Promote the adoption of those aspects of local shoreland regulations that enhance fish and wildlife habitat. H2: Preserve protected waters and wetlands that provide habitat for game fish spawning and wildlife. H3: Coordinate with the Department of Natural Resources to enhance fish and wildlife habitats. H4: Coordinate with the Department of Natural Resources to protect rare and endangered species. OBJECTIVE J To protect and enhance opportunities for water recreation. Discussion The Commission does not directly manage water -based recreation within the watershed. However, it is policy of the Commission to coordinate with the State, counties, and municipalities to enhance their ongoing recreational programs which may be affected by water resource management activities. Policy J1: Coordinate with the State, counties, and municipalities to enhance water -based recreation. OBJECTIVE K To coordinate and communicate the relationships between municipalities, S agencies and citizens which affect water management within the watershed. IV -8 Discussion The purpose of this objective is twofold. First, it is important to have a particular agency or group responsible for overseeing plans and activities that may affect water resources. This adds both consistency of approach and provides a central focus point for agencies and citizens. Second, where several governmental units are involved in problems and solutions that cross political boundaries a separate agency or group charged with overseeing the entire area is imperative in accomplishing ccomplishing established goals and objectives in an orderly fashion. The Commission will function as coordinator in the water management efforts of the municipalities. Policy K1: Coordinate activities of municipalities and citizens relating to water management. IV -9 INTRODUCTION This section of the plan addresses the management issues of concern within the I Shingle Creek watershed. These issues have been identified through analysis of 1) TR -20 model results, 2) physical and hydrologic inventories and 3) input from member communities. The TR -20 model was used to assess existing and future stormwater runoff and storage scenarios on a subwatershed basis. Analysis of the physical and hydrologic inventories provide information on environmental issues that are not direct model components. Input was solicited from member communities to identify needs and concerns from a municipal perspective. This section describes the role of the Commission in implementing water management strategies then discusses these strategies on an issue - specific basis. The responsibilities and level of involvement of local governmental units and the Shingle Creek Watershed Management Commission are identified. GOVERNMENTAL RESPONSIBILITIES Under the authority of the Surface Water Management Act and the Joint Powers Agreement, the Shingle Creek Watershed Management Commission shall administer the regulatory functions of this watershed management plan through providing the framework for local water management plan content and regulatory functions. The administering agencies for the regulations contained in the local plans will be the local governmental units. Upon request by a municipality, the Commission will provide project reviews of all significant (as identified in this plan) local developments associated with the following issues: runoff management, flood plain management, erosion and sedimentation control, stormwater treatment, wetland management. These issues are discussed in greater detail under their respective topic areas in the following subsection. The management standards to be used by the Commission for project reviews and an example of the application are presented in Appendix A. V -1 The Commission may become a permitting agency under the Surface Water Management Act if: 1) the local unit does not implement its plan, 2) the proposed action requires an amendment to or variance from the local plan or 3) the local unit requests the Shingle Creek Watershed Management Commission to require permits within its jurisdiction. V -2 SURFACE WATER AND WETLAND CLASSIFICATION The surface waters and wetlands of Shingle Creek watershed are classified for management purposes based on water quantity and quality considerations. This classification will enable management for the appropriate purpose of each waterbody and wetland to meet the objectives of this plan. The classification categories are: recreational, aesthetic, runoff management, and special purpose. Following is a description of each category and the level of treatment necessary for water flowing into the waterbodies and wetlands. Recreational: Suitable for all recreation and for propagation and maintenance of fish. These waters are managed such that Minnesota Pollution Control Agency's Water Quality Standard "H" ranking (suitable for cool or warm water fish and suitable for water recreation) is maintained and flow and water elevations are controlled. Treatment will consist of best management practices and will include removal of fine sands and sediment, skimming of oil and floatable materials and nutrient removal. Aesthetic: Suitable for management as an attractive resource for the purposes of aesthetics and property value enhancement. Management measures assure visual quality is maintained. Treatment will consist of best management practices and will include removal of fine sands and sediment and the skimming of oil and floatable materials. These waters may be used for runoff management but flow and elevations will be controlled to avoid water elevations which may P ermanently affect the character of the resource. Runoff Management: Managed solely as storm water storage, treatment and conveyance components, at the option of the municipality. V -3 Special Purpose: Suitable for use related to a unique characteristic based on quality, biological, physical or geographical characteristics. This designation will be used by the Shingle Creek Watershed Management Commission as needed. Treatment will be appropriate to maintain the characteristics necessary to support the special purpose. Using these four categories the Shingle Creek watershed waterbodies and wetlands are classified in Table 8. There are currently no special purpose areas. TABLE 8 WATERBODY AND WETLAND CLASSIFICATION RECREATIONAL AESTHETIC RUNOFF MANAGEMENT Bass Lake Magda Lake Judicial ditches Cedar Island Lake Meadow Lake County ditches Crystal Lake Palmer Lake All wetlands including DNR Eagle /Pike Lake All other DNR Protected Waters Protected Wetlands and other Pomerleau Lake Streams or ditches tributary waterbodies. to recreational or aesthetic Ryan Lake waters Twin Lake Schmidt Lake Shingle Creek Eagle Creek Bass Creek V -4 WATER MANAGEMENT ISSUES AND STRATEGIES The following issues have been identified for the Shingle Creek watershed: 1. Runoff management 2. Flood plain management 3. Shoreland management 4. Water quality monitoring 5. Erosion and sedimentation control 6. Stormwater treatment 7. Wetlands management 8. Ground water protection Strategies are developed to address each issue while meeting the objectives and policies set forth by the Commission. These management strategies describe the course of action the Commission has chosen to address the management issues. Presented next is the procedure for implementing the strategies. Projects, plans and programs are presented. The responsibility and level of participation of each governmental unit and the Shingle Creek Watershed Management Commission are identified. Specific tasks to be done by the Commission, roles of the local governments and coordination among government agencies are resented. Lass a P 9 9 t i 9 9 . discussion of costs and a schedule of completion by year. The projects and programs listed are those in which the Commission will have a participatory role. V -5 1. RUNOFF MANAGEMENT Introduction Stormwater runoff management in the Shingle Creek watershed is necessary to resolve current flooding problems and accommodate future land use changes. The lower portion of the watershed is fully developed and little additional storage is available. Also, flooding of residences occurs at several locations following a significant rainfall. This indicates that existing stormwater management is not adequate and modifications are necessary. The upper portion of the watershed is less developed and additional storage is available. Urban development is projected to continue in the upper portion through the year 2000. Future water management must prevent downstream flooding caused by new development. Management Strategy Flooding presently occurs at several locations in the watershed following significant rainfall. Also, when runoff was projected to the fully developed • condition the peak discharge rate out of each subwatershed exceeded the existing rates. Runoff management sectors (subwatershed aggregates) are used to assess the needs of projected development (Map 8). The management sectors are based on identified flooding problems, available storage, runoff control locations and municipal boundaries. This approach simplifies the determination of acceptable runoff rates by reducing the numbers of analysis units (from subwatersheds to management sectors) while accomplishing the overall water management objectives. Runoff analysis is based on the TR -2U model peak outflow rates for 100 -year critical duration storms and identified peculiarities of each subwatershed. Model results suggest peak outflow rates for each subwatershed to minimize flooding n the lower portion f w identify bw r d w" r e 0 0 o the watershed d nd su ate she s where 9 p e a e e a additional controls may be necessary. Model results are then analyzed in aggregate yielding specific allowable peak outflow rates for each runoff management sector. V -6 WATERSHED MANAGEMENT PLAN SHINGLE CREEK WATERSHED MANAGEMENT COMMISSION ' CO. / MSC B �`- MSC RUNOFF MANAGEMENT SECTORS _\ MSC -4 32 1 /MSC 5a -A MSF B0 I I MSC7 ( \ MSc A MSC 5 �\ Msc 1-4 53aw � 4 ' WC ; ( 4 \ Legal Watershed Boundary MAPL GROVE l � MSC6 — IS \ Subwatershed Boundary 3 USC 4 f MSC 4 6 \ 4 o 6POORLYN�pRN - / — Runoff Management Boundary U 4 Host _� Lakes, Wetlands and other S C I -564W I f r� C 11 -5166 MSC 6. P „m� °rr Stormwater Storage Areas \ M5c 6- 3W MS 3 C 15 u5c -111 / S MSc I -35W 7” � t o MSC .3 <, ,� �• .,.. �d ,9 � Subwatershed Outlet/ 7 1 �y`r•TE 6 Outlet Control Structure ( s\ USC 3 ; E°9ir c °rr � Runoff Management Sector Designation USC 2 -65 USi5 -565W LSC5 Subwatershed Designation TL 5 � J , � " osC 5 638 '44 A Stormwater Storage Area Designation � w e TL r34w �o' tOt Q USC 6 I L SC 4 USC 9 \ e °rr �i ti TL 4 \ �� ®�USCB o ?' P � \ \ ® LY MOUT /_ _ _- —•-- n USC /0 f a �, NE OPE TL -42P LSC3 ` I $rhm- P Lowe Cu YSIAL \1t TL I -59P `,� py�� cireM \ 3 USC 7 Tl -640 USC TL 3 �s 1 `.c - s6P LSC l TL T 1-641 AGCl7BIfv42w I MINNEAPOLIS 1 L 2 � OBtliN50ALE n� LSC 2 -341 V LSC 2 MAP 8 v2 D 2 • 1 1 i Scale in Miles NORTH E. A. HICKOK AND ASSOCIATES WAYZATA, MINNESOTA V 1 Preservation and maintenance of the existing drainage system components are necessary to insure the system will continue to function as designed. Control over drainage system components and any modifications is required to prevent reduction of the drainageway retention capacity. Preservation of the existing storage capacity and capacity necessary to accommodate future (planned) storage needs is necessary. Protected waters and wetlands and natural watercourses (as defined by the DNR) are key system storage components that require preservation. To insure proper grater conveyance, drainageway components must be kept free of obstructions. The accumulations of natural and man -made debris can inhibit flow and cause localized flooding. Ice blockages are a particular problem of this type and have occurred on occasion in the lower portion of the watershed. These blockages inhibit flow and can cause property damage if not properly controlled. Runoff and storage monitoring systems are a necessary part of a comprehensive • stormwater management plan. Once storage area volumes and drainageway capacities have been defined a monitoring system is needed to insure the system components are functioning as intended. A monitoring system will also identify deviations that may result from changes in land use. The Commission has identified several additional areas of concern with respect to runoff management that are beyond the scope of this plan. These are evaluations for specific water bodies and relate to outlet modifications and channel capacities that may have impacts on the storage volumes and flow rates for water management identified in this plan. The Commission will identify these study efforts and address their implementation. The following strategies are adopted with respect to runoff management: V -8 1.1. Maximum allowable peak discharge rates are established at the discharge point for each runoff management sector. i.2. Public easements will be required or other methods of control implemented to preserve wetlands, drainageways, flood plains and open water bodies used for stormwater storage to meet plan requirements. 1.3. Improvements that ;rill modify the storage capacity of existing drainageways will be regulated. 1.4. The drainageway system will be maintained by completing necessary repairs to control structures and removing debris that inhibits runoff capacities. i.5. A watershed monitoring system will be established to record storage area elevations, stream flow and precipitation. 1.6 Studies will be conducted to determine the effects of modifying features of certain water bodies on the management strategies identified in this plan. Implementation The main implementation mechanism to accomplish the runoff management strategies is adoption and implementation of a local water management plan by each municipality. These plans must define how municipalities will implement local grater planning and management activities that are required under the SWMA and this plan. In addition to content requirements identified in this plan, local plans must include the following information pertaining to runoff management to meet the SWMA requirements: - Subwatershed delineations. - Existing and proposed physical environment and land use. - Determination of the runout, 1 -year, and 100 -year rainfall event water elevations and corresponding discharge rates for all designated stormwater storage areas in the existing and year 2000 development conditions. - Storage volume determinations and allocation of storage. - Measures to be employed to protect wetlands, ditches, drainageways and stormwater storage areas. V -9 Municipalities are encouraged to use information generated as part of this plan • to assist in the preparation of the runoff rate analysis sections of the local water management plan. Appendix B of this plan defines rainfall events and durations to be used in the local plans for consistency in approach throughout the watershed. Local plans must demonstrate that for a 100 -year return frequency rainfall event of critical duration the outflow from a particular runoff management sector does not exceed the rate identified by the Commission. Tables 9, 10 and 11 identify for each management sector allowable outflow rates and the location and amount of stormwater storage provided. For reference, the peak runoff rates from the management sectors under fully developed conditions as well as those identified by the Flood Insurance Studies are provided. The allowable outflow rates were generally agreed upon by members of the Shingle Creek Watershed Management Commission. When all outflow rates are met stormwater runoff for the 100 -year storm for the fully developed condition will be effectively managed. The runoff modeling used to determine allowable peak outflow rates included utilizing stormwater storage in all protected waters and wetlands. Where possible within the scope of this effort existing flooding problems were minimized. However, some specific problem areas remain and will require additional studies in order to develop the most cost - effective solutions to these problems. The Shingle Creek Watershed Management Commission may elect to conduct separate studies as efforts in addition to this report. If a runoff management sector is comprised of two or more municipalities, the two municipalities must agree on their respective responsibilities for providing stormwater storage within the management sector and outline these responsibilities in their local water management plans. • V -10 If an agreement cannot be reached, the matter will be turned over to an ad hoc committee composed of: - The Shingle Creek Watershed Management Commission engineer (without vote). - A representative of the community for which the plan was prepared. - Two representatives appointed by the Commission. This ad hoc committee will review the municipal plan in the context of the entire runoff management sector and investigate methods by which the established rate can be obtained. Investigation may include a determination of whether rate control can be provided in downstream stormwater storage areas outside the municipality's boundary and if downstream drainage facilities can accommodate the increased runoff rate. Upon completion of their investigation the committee P P 9 shall present the findings to the Commission and make a recommendation. The Commission will review the information and take action, and if necessary, amend this management plan. The costs for implementing the stormwater management features outlined in the Shingle Creek Watershed Management Plan and ultimately in the municipalities' local plans shall be borne by each respective community except cases where the work effort is clearly intended to benefit not only the local municipality but also upstream or downstream municipalities. The Commission may share in the cost of the work effort based on provisions of the Joint Powers Agreement and a formula that will fairly distribute the costs of the project to the areas benefited. This formula shall be developed at the time the Engineer's Report for the project is prepared and may include credits for lands acquired as well as cost distribution for new facilities. V -11 At this time, the Commission has identified a number of existing and proposed stormwater storage areas that may be eligible for Commission cost -share funding. These areas are identified by an asterisk in the storage area designation column of Table 11. The Commission may provide technical and financial assistance in monitoring the flow and storage capabilities of system components. The Commission may also provide a water quantity monitoring system to include a lake elevation monitoring program, a flow measurement system and a precipitation monitoring system. V -12 TABLE 9 DESCRIPTION OF RUNOFF MANAGEMENT SECTORS IN SHINGLE CREEK WATERSHED Subwatershed at Outlet of Outlet Runoff Management Sector Subwatersheds within Management Structure Municipalities Number Name Management Sector Sector Number in Sector — i Minneapolis LSC i LSC 1 -- Minneapolis 2 Twin Lakes LSC 3, TL 1, TL 2, LSC 3 26 Brooklyn Center TL 3, TL 4, TL 5 Brooklyn Park Crystal Minneapolis New Hope Robbinsdale 2a Crystal Lake LSC 2 -- -- Robbinsdale 3 Brooklyn Center LSC 4, LSC 5 LSC 4 21 Brooklyn Center 4 Palmer Lake MSC 1, MSC 2, MSC 1 19 Brooklyn Center MSC 3 Brooklyn Park 5 Brooklyn Park MSC 4, MSC 5, MSC 4 16 Brooklyn Park MSC 6, MSC 7 Maple Grove MSC 8 Osseo 6 I -94 USC 1, USC 2, USC 5 USC i 12 Brooklyn Park Maple Grove New Hope 7 Maple Grove USC 3, USC 4 USC 3 10 Maple Grove Plymouth 8 Plymouth USC 6, USC 7, USC 6 7 Maple Grove USC 8, USC 9, New Hope USC 10, USC 11, Plymouth USC 12 V -13 TABLE 10 ALLOWABLE PEAK OUTFLOW RATES FROM MANAGEW SECTORS Subwatershed Existing Peak Outflow Peak Outflow at Outlet of Outflow Rate from Allowable Rate Identified Runoff Management Sector Management Rates Management Peak Outflow in Flood Insurance NwEF Name Sector (cfs) Sector (cfs)* Rates (cfs)** Study (cfs) 1 Minneapolis LSC 1 1280 1310 1310 880 2 Twin Lakes LSC 3 100 100 90 51 2a Crystal Lake LSC 2 -- -- -- -- 3 Brooklyn Center LSC 4 780 820 820 830 4 Palmer Lake MSC 1 675 745 745 650 5 Brooklyn Park MSC 4 800 855 855 560 6 I -94 USC 1 285 310 308 250 7 Maple Grove USC 3 55 58 58 Not identified in this study. 8 Plymouth USC 6 350 320 320 Not identified in this study. *Assumes watershed is fully developed, no volurm reduction will be allowed in Shingle Creek floodplain, and stormwater storage provided in locations shown on Map 8 and amounts identified in Table 11. **These allowable peak outflow rates were established by the Camrissioners of the Shingle Creek Watershed Management Camri ssi on . V -14 TABLE 11 STORMWATER STORAGE AVAILABLE IN MANAGEMENT SECTORS Description of Stormwater Outlet Storage Runoff Management Sector Storage Areas in Storage Area Structure Amount Number Name Management Sectors Designation I.D. No. (acre -feet) 1 Minneapolis No major stormwater storage areas None identified -- 0 designated. 2 Twin Lakes Protected Wetland 639W TL 5 -639W 22 77 Reservoir south of railroad and *TL 3 -A 23 11 west of Highway 52 Protected Wetlands 641W, 642W, TL 2 -641W 24 370 and 643W TL 2 -642W TL 2 -643W Twin Lakes (42P), Ryan Lake TL 1 -42P 25 1496 (58P) and Protected Wetland TL 1 -58P Cn 640W TL 1 -640W Ryan Lake (58P) LSC 3 -58P 26 239 2a Crystal Lake Crystal Lake (34P) LSC 2 -34P. -- -- 3 Brooklyn Center Protected Wetland 638W LSC 5 -638W 20 173 4 Palmer Lake Lake Success - Protected MSC 2a -634W 28 34 Wetland 635W MSC 1 -635W Palmer Lake (59P), Protected MSC 1 -59P 19 1115 Wetland 635W MSC 1 -635W Island Ponds Area *MSC 3 -A 17 152 Upstream of Brooklyn Blvd. TABLE 11 (continued) STORMWATER STORAGE AVAILABLE IN MANAGEMENT SECTORS Description of Stormwater Outlet Storage Runoff Management Sector Storage Areas in Storage Area Structure Amount Number Name Management Sectors Designation I.D. No. (acre -feet) 5 Brooklyn Park Drainage channel along *MSC 8a -A 13 104 Burlington Northern Railroad tracks and south of 85th Avenue. Protected Wetlands 560W, MSC 6 -56OW 14 640 562W, and 563W MSC 6 -562W MSC 6 -563W Brooklyn Park Pond *MSC 5a -A 29 29 (82nd and Wyoming) C 6 I -94 Protected Wetland 565W USC 5 -565W 8 146 Magda Lake (65P) USC 2 -65P 11 24 Protected Wetlands 565W USC 1 -564W 12 256 and 566W 7 Maple Grove Cedar Island Lake (119P) USC 4 -119P 9 320 Eagle Lake /Pike Lake (111P) USC 3 -111P 10 77 8 Plymouth That storage identified in None specifically 7 1430 the Plymouth Comprehensive identified in Stormwater Management Plan Shingle Creek Water Management Plan NOTE: The stormwater storage areas outlined in the table exclude stormwater storage present within the floodplain of Shingle Creek. *Eligible for Commission cost -share funding if downstream benefit can be established. Supplemental Studies Studies will be conducted by the Commission where necssary to refine the allowable peak outflow rates and storage requirements of this management plan as identified in Tables 9, 10 and 11. Three studies have been identified and will be conducted as appropriate. A summary of each study is described below and include the name, goal, description and cost. 1. Twin Lakes /Ryan Lake Outlet Modification - Final Evaluation Goal Increase low flow capacity of Twin Lakes and lower the 100 -year flood levels of the Twin Lakes /Ryan Lake Basin. Description This study determines which combination of structure modifications to both the Twin Lakes outlet at France Avenue and the Ryan Lake outlet under the railroad tracks will result in the most desirable alternative to increase the low flow capacity of Twin Lakes and reduce 100 -year flood elevations in Ryan Lake. The resulting increase in peak discharges will be analyzed downstream in Ryan Creek to determine if there is adequate capacity to handle increased flows resulting from structure modifications upstream. Should flooding occur in Ryan Creek, measures to increase downstream capacity such as channel improvements, larger storm sewer, etc. will be considered. Cost $23,750.00 V -17 2. Eagle Lake Outlet Channel Capacity Analysis Goal Assure adequate outlet for Maple Grove sector. Description This analysis involves determining the actual capacity of Eagle Creek from Eagle Lake downstream to its outlet at Shingle Creek, taking into consideration any downstream backwater effect. The purpose of this analysis is to determine if the 58 cfs discharge rate at the 100 -year flood elevation of Eagle Lake does occur or if channel restrictions create a tailwater condition at the outlet, thereby restricting the flow to less than the allowable discharge rate. Also included in this study is a determination of minimum building opening elevations along with elevations of low -lying structures on both Eagle Lake and Pike Lake. Cost $14,680.00 3. Crystal Lake Outlet Feasibility Study Goal Provide an adequate outlet for Crystal Lake. Description This study will review alternatives available to provide an outlet for Crystal Lake, identify the benefits and impacts associated with a number of different outlet alternatives, and evaluate the downstream impacts of these outlet alternatives. Cost $17,080 V-18 Schedule and Costs Costs associated i review f 1 Co assoc ate with this plan component relate to cal water o 0 management plans (see Table 12) for compliance with this plan. The Commission may elect to institute monitoring at runoff management sector outlets at additional costs. The capital improvement program of this plan may contain projects related to runoff management. Such projects and their funding mechanisms are addressed in the Implementation Program of this plan. The three supplemental studies identified will be conducted at a time determined appropriate by the Commission, V -19 2. FLOOD PLAIN MANAGEMENT Introduction Flood plain management is necessary to maintain sufficient floodway capacity for the 100 -year flood and to minimize flood - related property damage. To ensure effective flood plain management the Commission must establish requirements for development in or adjacent to the designated 100 -year flood plain. The 100 -year flood plain boundaries were defined using runoff rates generated by the SCS TR -20 model and incorporating this data into the HEC -2 computer model to determine 100 -year flood profiles. Flood Insurance Studies performed under the provisions of the National Flood Insurance Act of 1968 and the Flood Disaster Protection Act of 1973 have defined the floodway limits within each community. The boundaries of floods that have a recurrence interval of 100 -years (commonly referred to as the 100 -year flood) have been defined on maps of these communities. A significant problem exists in the usage of this data to determine the 100 -year flood plains within the watershed. The data provided in the Flood Insurance Studies are based upon existing development. Future development can significantly alter the delineation of the 100 -year flood plain and the elevation of the 100 -year flood profile within these communities. Therefore, sole use of information from Flood Insurance Studies may result in a flood plain management program that will not meet the intent of this plan. Changes to local community flood plain ordinances may be necessary. The Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA) imposes a 1 -foot surcharge limit for the 100 -year flood. Flood plain encroachment may riot raise the elevation of the 100 -year flood over 1 foot (i.e., 1 foot surcharge) above the 100 -year flood plain elevation before encroachment, provided hazardous velocities are not produced. In Minnesota flood plain encroachment is limited to that which would result in a 0.6 -foot surcharge. V -20 Management Strategy Modeling results for the fully developed land use condition indicate that stream elevations will exceed desirable levels. Further encroachment within the flood plain will reduce flood flow capacity and increase velocities. The strategy of the Commission is to restrict development of the flood plain except in cases where actions have been included to mitigate adverse impacts. Profiles have been determined for the fully developed condition and are presented in Figures 1 through 6. However, it will be necessary to initiate additional effort to establish the associated flood plain boundary. It is the responsibility of the municipalities to delineate flood plain boundaries as part of their local water management plan. The following strategies have been adopted with respect to flood plain management: 2.1. Encroachment upon the floodway area of the 100 -year flood will not be permitted. 2.2. Encroachment shall be allowed in the flood fringe area of the 100 -year flood plain only if: - compensatory storage is provided in the 100 -year flood plain of equal or greater volume than the encroachment upon the flood fringe, and - encroachment does not create a surcharge, and - encroachment does not create hazardous velocities. 2.3. New structures and facilities will be allowed within or adjacent to the 100 -year flood plain only if 1.0 feet of freeboard above the 100 -year profile is provided. 2.4. All site areas below the 100 -year flood plain elevation after approval of allowable encroachments shall be preserved and dedicated for flood storage by means of granting an appropriate easement to the respective municipality. 2.5. The flood fringe boundary for the fully developed condition will be established. V -21 ......: : ::::.... : : : ...... ......: EVi4 : : : :: :: : : : : : : :i: : :: : :. :: : : :: : : : :: ............... _....... FEET ..:........ °.........I _._ ..._ . T __........_ ..._.__.. I ..........._ . ........ __............_._.... } ._ ...................._.._._.... .._......._..............._._ ». ___. _........_ _. ._........._.._.__.._. _ _.............. ........... »--- -...._ m N` � .... O: CA __.. ....... _ ............ :................................... _........................ ............. ;......................... _ ............. _............. ................... ..... ................ _. ................... ' - - -- 3: AAa,iTH .:At .... .. < N `' . MiSSISSIPl?I : . �+ RIVER -. a ................ » ... _ ......_ .................. - _._ ............... _.. _........_........... .................... ... o ... INTE RSTAT E ' 94 ..•••......» _. » .... ... ..... _ .............. _» ...... _................ __............ 1 ...... ..,... , -- •LXNDALE. AV €: :I` OOTB R I .G�E 0 t : 1 1 E : SOO. 'L INE .... ......... RR B4 IDG ............................ ................._................... ............................... ` ................ ................... . ....... ...... . .............. ... ................. __ ............ .......................... .. ............................... .. ........--- ••- ................. ' _......... :45TH - AVIE. :. . D..... :.............................. ............. .. ................ ..... .. ....... ......... »....: .. .................................. ...... .._ .......... _ :_. :-1 ::. ::::: ::::::::: :::::::: FO'.OTBJR t GE �,,; Di......... -{ ...?. .... z .............. ......... ............................ ..................... __. ........ .. _... . rn . HUMBOLD! .. 'n ....... : . . Am ......... ....... r ...... .'......... ...... :: :`:::: m 0 ................. ...... . ......... ......... I _...... ..- ...................................;..... ............................... _ .. ............................... .............................. ....... ............................... _.... ............ _......................... ........... _ .................. _ ..... ......... 49 :TH 'AVE.:. . ...................................................................................................... ............................... ........ ..................................... _............... ......................... ....._............................... __................_............ ;... » »...___ ...... ....... ......... ......... FOOTSRI G'E : .............. o ...:........ :...:.. :.:..: :. �.�...:... :...: ............ .._......................................,.............................................. ............................... ... _...................... .........:..... . cn ::o ........ ...... : : : : : : ::: FOOT BR f [AGE ........................... ................ ...................................................................... ......................... .............. :......... ..... ............... ............................... ..................... .. ............................... ....--- -• -... ' ......... .. ..... ....... .........:.... o ......... ... o .. : ............................................ ............................... :................... ................. ....................................... ... .. ... ...................... .. ............................... ». _. .... _._.. - .............52..N :p..:..A .E-,__ o. r ..................................................................... ............................... ..........................................................................................................................................................................................._...... ................._............. :... CORPORA E... MINNEAPOLIS.:. :: ::::::: 5 3 R d AVE . BOt1NDARY :::::BROOKLYN CENTER ......... ::::.....:.:.......:. ..... . .. ... : . .. ; i SHINGLE CREEK WATERSHED MANAGEMENT COMMISSION EA. HICI(O( i 3 NOV, 1987 SHINGLE CREEK 100 -YEAR FLOOD PROFILE NVOROI.OMM El K RS CITY OF MINNEAPOLIS, MN MWEAPMIS MMESOTA HENNEPIN CCO ELEVATION- IN FEET `(NGVD): - ..................__..:----------•-..................._-...;...........---.......................:.... ............................... ..... ............................... ...._........_........._.. .------ ..._.....---- ........._ ...... - -- _ __.._. »_ .._.._.__..................... ............ ......... ...._. AD 40 m. 'cb U O °U O ; i0 . i i o CORPORATE........... M PL S. ::: .............._............ .. ................�..�.. . ....--- ........................ ........... ............------ ....... - - - -- - 53 r •�AYENI�E NORTF� B ......... "DARY BROOKLYN , . . CENTER ° ::::: ::::::: r z ; :_ ........... ............. ......... ....... - .............. ............ ..... - .................. .... ... ...... ............. _.............. _........ _ ......................... _ .. M LA STATE HIGHWAY 100:... . _ .......... ......... _..... ............... -- .......... ........ .. ... ........ .......... _ ......... .............. ........_..........................:.......:...:.......: ... .... .... _.._ ......................... ................... O. :........ :::: . 0 COUNTY HIGHWAY :10 _ .. ............................... ............... ...... ...... . .. .......... . i _... ........................... .. ............................... . .........._.................... _......... :O ............. ............................... D .... .:: p .......::f :� 0 :::::::::.:::: :. p ................... ............................... ............. ... _ ..... .... _.. _. ........ .. . - -. _ -_.. ............ ......................... . ............................... ........._.. m - r 7 rn o v m m .........•.... ......�. _ :...:...:...:............... :.... ......_ ........ . ..._ ... ... .............. _.....: .. ..............................: .._ ................ __........: :._ ----- - ..,� ........ ................. ........... _... _..... _...... ...:....... rn 1=94::: :::: Ln ....... :...:...:...:...:. m . ` FREEWAY HOU�EVARQ.. . ...... ............................... ............................................ ............................... . ............................... .._ ..... _ 0 ..... .... ... . ............................... ... .. ............................... ... .. ............................... .........................:. ... . . . . . . . . . . . . . ....... ........ ......... .... 69t _ h :AVENUE :NORTF .... ... w . .p, ... ..... ........ . . ................= 0.............................................................. ............................... : �...... _......... AD.... ... s... ....._ O . ............. ......:::' : : :: m ... ......... ......... ......... SHINGLE CREEK WATERSHED MANAGEMENT COMMISSION EA. HKXW i AiSOC1 NOV. 1987 SHINGLE CREEK 100 -YEAR FLOOD PROFILE HYDIRMOGTB -EW EM CITY OF BROOKLYN CENTER, MN APOLIS 2 (HENNEPIN CO.) :: ::: :: ....... EiJEVAT10N : IN FEET ( :::::: : :: _ ::::::::: ..... ...... ......... ._........_ .. ...__. «_._.................__:. _« ............ .............--- ............... ........................... ..................... «.__ .... .................... « __.. «_... «. «...« .... «._ .._._ « ___............_..... _ :p ° ' A� ............ . o . ............ ...................... . ......................... _ ... ........ ;....... ....................... ........... ....................... ........ ;...... . ............... .._................-........... ........................... «. «. ..._. _.............................. BROO l.Y.. �CT "E BOUNDA KLYN : PK. 3 - . ......... . _ ...... ... ......................... _..... - -- - •---- ........._...............: .... : «. :_...................... ...:...:.... V ...;.... .. .. ... ...................... ......_ .. ._... ... ................ _._ .....y .. _.......... ... ....... ..... ..... .... . _ ...... .... ......... ..... ....... ...... ..._.. ...................... _ ... .... :... XERXES: AVE. ................. . ............................: .. ..............................: . ......... D ............. ` ..... ............................... ' .... ' N to _ v ( j 0 ._ ............................ ..............................I ... ......--------.................. ............................... .............................. ....... - - -... .......... .. .............................................. .......................... .. ............................... .............._ .......... ------ I .... ........ _.. : ... .......i.... ° o 2< ............. .......... j............. .......................... ................ .................... .. j....................................... ,......................... . . ........... ._.... ._ ....... «... : rn . . : . .... v r - ......... ......... ......... .... .0 o :.::::::: ... _.... ...... . ............. ...........................................:....................................................... ......:........................ ......... ............... .. ............................... .. ............................... . ............................ «.. _ .. ... v j ... {... ...j... . ... ::::::::: :::: :..... ..............:.:.............. ..._ .::.. .....................- ......... .._............................ .. ............................... .._................ «_......... . .....« 3 .............. .... :DAM ................. ................................................................................ ............................... .............. ......... .......... ................ .. ............................... .. ............................... .. ............................... :NOBLE: AVE: `GOR PORAT:....... BIOOKLY�i : pK: ........:.. C `BOUNDARY:....:::.: BROOKLY R. i : . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . f i i i ^................. :........................ ...............i....._......... �.................� . .. . .�� .•. . . BLVD ::0::: . : :.:. ............. i CORPORATE ::::::: BRG.OKLY ACT. m D ::BOUNDAR:Y ::::::::.:BROOKLYN : Pl<. v ......AME::: :........ ...........:................... ................ ............................... O. ............... ............................... ......... ....... ......... «._.._« p.,........ ... ..........I.... ....�J OAT.4. ..;.._ p:... ......... Z: .........:... ......... ......... T H::AV : « N ORTH- SHINGLE CREEK WATERSHED MANAGEMENT COMMISSION EA. HKXM i ASSOCIATES NOV. 1987 SHINGLE CREEK 100 -YEAR FLOOD PROFILE HV 40LOCIM •ENGSEERS CITY OF BROOKLYN PARK, MN MF4WAPOIIS M0WSOTA 3 (HENNEPIN CO.) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . i . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . ................ « «.« ....._..«««.«..........«..-»... f.......... .. »......................... .. ...........................-... .................... «..». »» ........... _ ........ .......... ».. » ...«...».»...«.....«»...;...«......... �..«.«.«..«.«.....{...««.-...««.-.....................:...--....-.._«. .._...... » «.««..._..... «.. «. ».« :74 TH AVEL .».........«: ................................................... ...........................:... ..... - - -.. .. «.... :_:...:...:........... :....... _:...:...:...:. «�......:.. .. _ :...:...- . .. :DAM r i . »..... «.»....... .. ......... ......_.. . .. r ......................_. ........«... {...«....... «...... .... .. ... ............. ............................. «. ...... ........... ......... ............ ................ ... .. ............ m ."" a+ c rn -- 'BRUNSWICK: AVE NORTH: . .......... ................... . .................._ . .......................... ....................... .... ...'_ ._ - -- ........_ ..................... ............ WQOKt -YN .. _ ................ ......pA: .. ........ .. C.77 ?H /E.)...... U . /.� l m l � ... .D .. ............ ._......................... « ............ .... ....--- ........................ .............._ _............ ............... ......... .. ............................... _... . ............................... _.... ... ..... ............................... D .. z n ............. .. .......... ............................... i....................................... ...... « ...................... ..........:............... . ............... :.............. . .............:.........-.... .........................;..... ....... ........................:...... ....................... .............- ».........._. _ «...1............... Z S HAAMD<W m AVE. m m :FOOTBRIDGE D E D ........................................................ _................ ° D ;.......... ...... _ _ ... ....................... ........... :.......... ................ .............. ................_........ .._....... . Im r .0 8 h'1 : { ..:. «:....... CANDLE .............. ~� ...... _ _ ... ..... . ......... : DRIVE .:....;... '�VVE - ST - -- . : . 3 BROADWAY .. ....... .. _ ..........................................................€.. ............................... ................ ... _ ..... ......... _ ........... ............. ................. .................. ....... . ............................... .. ............ ......................... ..... «......... A f Y ... 0 .:........ ......... .................................... . .........:.... . ............ «... .................... .. TH o ... . j . ................ ... ............. ..... .................. .......................................... ................... ...... .............. .. ....... .................. ....... .. .................. ....................................... ;.................. ................................................... ..... i..... ................................. «. «...... ......... RIE ...... ..............:................ __....... ....... :.................... .................. :............... _........ ............. :............. _ . _._.:..... __... ................ :........... ............................ :................... .................... j ........................................ ............................... . ..... :............ «..._ SHINGLE CREEK WATERSHED MANAGEMENT COMMISSION E.A. HICKOK & ASSOCIATES NOV. 1987 SHINGLE CREEK 100 -YEAR FLOOD PROFILE HYDiJOLOGISTS- ENGINEERS CITY OF BROOKLYN PARK; MN III�EAPOLIS- MNdNESOTA 4 (HENNEPI N CO.) ......... ...... .. ..... . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . I . . . . . . . . . . . S . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . I . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . t . . . . . . . . . . . . . . i S I I I . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . ............. . . .................. ......... .. ............ ...... ..... ................................ . ..... ................................ . .... . ............. . ... . .... . . . ..................... . ..... . .... . ...... . . ... ............ . . ...... . ......... .... - - ------- - - ------------- - - ........ . .................. ... ......... ......... ......... ......... ......... ........ ... ......... ...... ......... ....... .......... ....... ......... ......... . .. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . ......... ......... ......... ......... ..... SHINGLE' CRE E K ...... BASS 'C REEK ....... ......... ...... ......... Ek ...... ......... ......... z ......... ......... ......... ......... ......... ......... ......... ...... ......... ......... ......... ........ i i ...... ......... ............. ......... ......... ......... ......... ........ ......... ......... ......... ......... ..... ... ........ ...... . ...... ......... ....... . .... .. ..................... .... ....... . . .................................. ......... ............................. .......... ........................... ............ ........................ ...................................... ....................... . .............. . ........................ ........ ........... ..... .................... ....................... .............. ... ...... ....... w ............... ........................... ..................... ................ ...................................... ...... ................... ... . ..... . ....... . ..... ...... . ...... ...... ......... w ......... ......... ......... . ....... ...... .. ..... ... .. ...... .. . ..... ......... ......... .......... > ... ....... ........ ......... w .... ......... ... Lij .... ......... ... . .... .. ... ....... .... ... : . I : . I � W- -OD Q . ... Z. ...... ... ... ........ .... ............. w ...................................... ............... ........... : ....................................... ...< ............ cr .... y ......... i > .............. ............ W z . ....... ...... .............................. .......................... ........................... ........... ... ... .................. ............................ x ...... C13 :ld 0 ......... ....... ......... .......... 0 ......... :0 A/ ..... .. O. ....... ... w 0 .... ......... c)) U LL: ­ :U .0 . ................ . .... .. ....................... ...... ........... ............... ................. ...... ........... . ......................... ...... ........... . ............... ......... ................. ................. .......... ........................... ......................... . ............. .. ... ... . ........... ....................................... ............................. ........ ....................................... ...................................... ..................................... . P015c :::::: sc I ..... u5c 7. .14 ..... 12 ...... A I . :SC 5: . ...... 1 i s .... ... -(At - 39,100) ...... 20 cfs) z (310 - cfs) - (260 cfs) ......... ...... . . .......... ............................... ....................................... ............. ............ ..... . ..... . ...................................... ................................ . ..... ... ... . . ............. . . . .. . . . .... . . . .................. .... .. ....... ............ . ............ ............ ....................................... ....................................... ....................... ............... - a ................... 0 cn w 0 > i'880 ......... .. . ............... ................. ...... ...... ........................ ........ .... ....... ............... ................ ..................... . .......... ..................... .............. . ............... .... . ....... ............... . ...... ....... ................... ........ . ............................. ............................... ............... ..................... ...... .... .. ................ . . . . . . . . . . a. z z 100+-YEAR FLOW PROFILE w 0 w 0 W _j (D U_ Q. 875 . . . . ...... .............. ......... ....... ...... . .................. --------- ..................... . ............... ....................... ................ .............. ........... .. .......... ....... ...................... ....................................... ..................... . . . ......... 0 ................. .... .. .......... ......... .. ...... 0 ir z ol w . . . . . . . . . 0 w w 0 0 z Xz W - ......... ......... 0 M LLJ Ld 87 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . w ........... .... .. ... ...... ............ .. ....... ......... .. . ..... .................. . ............ ............. ........... ........................... ........... . .................. . . ................................... ............................. ....................................... . ...................................... ...... . ...... ..... ..... ...................... ................. ....................................... .. . .................................. ............ . ......................... ......... ............... �lc 0 LL w ......... .. GREENHAVEN.. ........ ... .... PARK I SHINGLE : :CREEK PARK . . . . . . . . . . . . w .... ... STREAM Kl): ...... ........ W W ........ .... ..... ... .. .. ......... ......... : i(-DNR - WET�_ -8 -563W): _j . .. .... ......... ........ ......... ......... . . ......... ...... ......... ....... . ........ I ... 1865 ..... . . .. . ........... ........................... .................. ...... ... .......... . ....... ........ ............... I ............................... . ..... . ............................... . .................................. ................. ..................... ............ . ......................... ................................ . ....... ............................ ... ........... ......... ......... 860 ............................... ....................................... ....................................... W Z ...... .. .... .... ul z ........ ......... ......... ......... ......... ......... ......... .. . ..... ....... . ......... ............. ................ . ..... .................... ...... ........... ..................................... ........ . ........................ .......... .............. .......................... ........ ............................... .................. ................... ....................................................................... .......... ............................. 3:2"000: 34,(Poo: 0 ...... z6 38,000 ....... 24,(00. 26,000 - 28000 ..... 30,0 0 ....... ............ ......... ........ A STREAM - DISTANCE- iN FEET- MOVE -CORPORATE LIMITS ........... ............... ................... ......... ....... .......... . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . ......... ......... ..... .. ELE4�10N* IN FE�T (NGVD) . . . I . ... .. I ................. ........ ...... . . .. ................. . ..... ......... ............ ... «_........ «_.._ _ _...... »_ ......... . ..__ ... . .................. _7 . . . 7 OD . . . . . . . CD OD I OD . . . . . . . OD . . . . . . . . ol . . . . . . . o . . . . . . . . CD ..... . IN- 0. ....... ......... ......... .... ......... .... ....... ..... ......... ...... .... »....1 ». ».................. ........... .... .... ............... ». «........ • .... . ................................ ...... .................... »....._. ------------------------ .... . . . ............................. ..... . ................ . . ........... . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . SHINGLE - CREEK . . . . . . . . . . _..«.__.. 3 ..._......_.....« .................. ........... . . ........... .. . .............................. .............. .......................... ... ....... . DRIVEWAY! IN LINE WITH ........................ ................. .................... ....... . . ........ ..................... .......... ... ... ME - l". TH-. . . ... ...................... ..... . . . ...... . ................ ..... ..................... ............... ................. . JONF-S-AV I DRIVE WAY IN LINE W., ITH AVENUES . .... .... ........ ..... . ............ . . . . ......... . . . .................. . ... ...... ............. .. . ... . .... ....................... .... . ..... ..... .... ... ............................ ... .. ............. .. . .. ..... ... ... . . . ..... ... ................ . . ............................. . .................. . .................................... . . ........ . . . ................. .... . ol ...... ................... . ...... ...... ........ is ............ ......... .... ......... .... ..... . .................. . ........... . ..... . ............................... . .................... ....... ..................... .. ....... ..... . ........... ................... ..... . ................ . . ............ ..... . ................................................................. .............. . ....................... . ......... ... ....... ....... 0 m .. . ..... ....... 0 0 .... ...... 0 . 'DRIVEWAY, BETWEEN VORTON 4 , > AND NEWTON AVENUE - N rn .......... ...................................... ................... . . .............. ... .............. . ........................... It .. .......... .... .4 UW WtT - - - - - ---------- 0 ......... rn. 0 NEWTON AVENIJIE'NOR 0 ,: . . ............ ...................................... ........ ........ . ................. m .......... 3. ......... ........ ......... .........I.... ......... ........ V) ......... ... ..... ......... ......... .... X ......... .... M ...... .... > .................... ... ....... . .. ......... ...........° .... . ..... ............ . ....................... .. ........................... ... ....... ..... ... ........ . ml ...... ................ ....................................... ...... ................. . ...... ........ . . ...... ..... . ....................... . ........... . ..... . ....... ......... ......... C13 .............. .............. 0 ......... .............. ........ ....... ..... ... ........... ............................................................................... ....................................... .. . ..... ........ .. .... .......... .... . .......... ........ ............ . ..................... . ........ ..... . . . ............................. .. . ................. ..... .... . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . ...... ......... ........ ......... 10RIVEWAYIN LINE VITH .. :RUSSEL' AV.ENUE'NORTH' ..... ... ......... .... ......... .... ......... .... .................... ....................................... ................................. ..................... ........ ....... : ........................................... ....... ................... .... ............ . ............... . . . ..... ....................................... ........... . ...................... ............. ..... ..... ......... ......... .. . .... ... ... .... .... ...... ....... ........ ........ ......... ......... .... .... ...... ......... ..... ... ......... .... ...... . ............ ...................................... ....................................... ..... . ................................ ................................... ...................... . ........ ... ................... . ............ ... . . ............................... . .... .................................. .................. . .. « «. «.. «... ......... ....... ......... ......... .... ......... .... ......... .... ................................................... ................................... .... ................................ r ............. «..._._.........« ...................................... ......... «........ «.... «.. «.... ... » »...... .... ......... .. ... . . ... ......... .... ...................... . ................ ... .............. . .... . .... ................................... ......... ......... ......... .... 0 : ......... .... ......... .... .........I.... ......... .... ......... .... ......... .... ... ........ . ...... .... . . . .......... ......... ... '': ... . ....................................... ............... ....................... .................................. ........................ ................... .. ............................ .... ............................... . . r .-H 152 .................. . ............................. . ............. ......... .... ......... .... ......... .... ......... .... ......... ......... ......... .... ......... .. ......... .... ......... . . ......... ......... ......... ......... ......... .......... a) : ........ ................. ....................................... ................ ...................... ....................................... ..................... ......... ....................................... ............................... ............................................................................... r ............................ . . ..... ......... . ......... ......... ..... ... .. ..... ......... ::RYAN*LAK . . . . . . . . . . . E­'­ ................... ................ ......... ......... ... ........ ....... ........ ......... ...... . ...... ......... ................... ......... ...... ........ ........ I.........:......... .. SHINGLE CREEK WATERSHED MANAGEMENT COMMISSION L& woft S JUNE 1987 'Am & RYAN CREEK 100-YEAR FLOOD PROFILE CITY OF. MINNEAPOLIS, MN 6 (HENNEPIN CO.) ��APCIW-MNOIEWTA The Commission recognizes that these policies will result in existing non- conforming uses. These existing uses will be exempt from providing mitigative actions. However, any redevelopment that will increase encroachment beyond that of the existing condition must meet the above - stated flood plain development requirements. Implementation The Commission will administer the flood plain management program and review all projects proposed within the 100 -year flood plain. Developments and redevelopments within the flood plain are to be reviewed by the Commission as identified in the Management Standards (Appendix A). Flood plain management strategies shall be incorporated into the local water management plans. Enforcement of flood plain development policies will be the responsibility of the municipality in which the development is to occur. Where variances to the local plans are requested the Commission will review and determine whether the action can be accommodated within the policies and provisions of this plan. Schedule and Costs The Commission will review all local projects where development is proposed within the 100 -year flood plain. This is one of several items identified for review by the Commission. An estimated cost for all reviews is presented under Subsection 6, "Stormwater Treatment" of this Section. • V -28 3. SHORELAND MANAGEMENT Introduction It is important that shoreland r n ri r b p around watershed lakes, streams and rivers e developed in a manner consistent with environmental protection standards in order to preserve and enhance the quality of surface waters within the Watershed. The Minnesota Department of Natural Resources has been charged with administering a shoreland management program. Management Strategy It is the general management strategy of the Commission to encourage municipalities to adopt and implement local shoreland ordinances. Maple Grove, Plymouth and Robbinsdale currently have shoreland management ordinances. The following strategy has been adopted with respect to shoreland management: 3.1. Encourage municipalities to adopt shoreland protection ordinances. Implementation The Commission encourages local units of government to adopt and implement ordinances for the protection of shoreland. These shoreland ordinances shall address the control of shoreland development per requirements identified in Minnesota Rule 1983, Part 6120.27. In conjunction with local units of government and the Department of Natural Resources, the Shingle Creek Watershed Management Commission will encourage the adoption and implementation of shoreland management regulations to be in compliance with Minnesota Regulations (MR 6120). Administration and enforcement of shoreland management regulations is the responsibility of the municipalities. V -29 Schedule and Costs No costs or schedules are anticipated with this plan component beyond those associated with review of local water management plan for compliance with this watershed management plan. • • V -30 4. WATER QUALITY MONITORING AND IMPROVEMENT Introduction Lakes and streams.within the Shingle Creek watershed are important to the residents of the Twin City metropolitan area. They provide water -based recreational opportunities for residents, provide significant storage for flood waters within the watershed, provide a low cost conduit that is available to convey stormwater runoff from the watershed, and furthermore, provide valuable habitat for fish and wildlife. If the quality of these waters is impaired due to the presence of physical or chemical impurities, or excessive biological activity, the previously mentioned attributes could be adversely affected. For these reasons, water quality protection in these lakes and streams is of vital importance. To provide the Commission with water quality information that will enable them to identify problems and water quality trends a water quality monitoring program has been included in this plan. Limited water quality data exists for the watershed. The Minnesota Pollution Control Agency, Metropolitan Council and the Minnesota Department of Natural Resources have programs that monitor water quality for selected lakes. The water bodies included and the parameters measured vary from program to program and year to year. Several of the large lakes within the watershed have been included on these efforts at one time or another but data is insufficient to properly monitor water quality at the level necessary for watershed management. The Commission will institute a monitoring program to collect data in a consistent fashion and on a regular basis to assess the existing conditions and observe changes over a period of time. V -31 Management Strategy a The Commission will design and implement a water quality monitoring program. It will include, but not be limited to, monitoring of 1) the quality of water in selected lakes within the watershed, 2) the flow rate and quality of water discharged from each subwatershed and 3) a special projects monitoring program to allow a detailed analysis of water quality in areas in which problems are observed or thought to exist. The monitoring program will be coordinated with other water quality monitoring programs where appropriate to avoid duplication of effort. The Commission may consider a water treatment program should data suggest that treatment may be beneficial. The following strategies have been adopted with respect to water quality monitoring: 4.1. A eater quality monitoring program will be established to identify existing and changing conditions and potential problems. 4.2. Data collection and analysis will be coordinated with agencies involved in water quality monitoring. 4.3. A treatment program will be considered, if warranted, based on data generated through the monitoring program. Implementation The Commission will design and implement a long -term water quality monitoring program for water bodies within the watershed. Efforts will be made to coordinate this monitoring with other programs to avoid duplicative efforts. A sampling framework will be established to yield results for significant water bodies and for outflow from selected subwatersheds. The program will include monitoring in selected areas where water quality problems are suspected and further evaluation is necessary. These selected areas will be identified by the Commission on a year -to -year basis. Precipitation monitoring will be included as part of the program. V -32 Data from the monitoring program will be entered on the Minnesota Pollution Control Agency's computerized water quality data management system, STORET, and will be made available on a request basis. An annual report will be prepared containing information from the monitoring program. Schedule and Costs The monitoring program will commence after this plan has been adopted. It is essential to begin monitoring to establish base line information and identify potential problem areas where special monitoring may be warranted. Water quality monitoring costs are based on the aggressiveness of the program and will be available once the program has been designed. V -33 5. EROSION AND SEDIMENTATION CONTROL • I ntroduction Erosion and sedimentation occurs from primarily two sources -- agriculture and land development. In the Shingle Creek Watershed agricultural areas are few and land use is comprised mainly of residential, commercial, industrial and open space uses. Existing agricultural areas will continue to be urbanized as development continues to the year 2000. Erosion can dramatically decrease agricultural potential. Agricultural areas are susceptible to wind and runoff erosion. Careful farming practices such as reduced tillage, contour plowing and wind break establishment reduce erosion and preserve valuable topsoil. Control of agricultural runoff will also reduce the transport of pesticides and unwanted nutrients that may cause fish kills and accelerate eutrophication of lakes and streams. As land development construction continues in response to the growth needs of each community, it is usually accompanied by an associated loss of soil material due to erosion. Sediment removed from areas stripped of vegetative cover can be carried off -site into downstream drainageways and water bodies. Once present in the downstream areas, the eroded sediment materials can degrade the water quality, obstruct flow, and reduce the depth of downstream water bodies. These and other problems associated with construction site soil erosion require that this issue be addressed. Management Strategy The Commission will support the efforts of the U.S. Department of Agriculture, Soil Conservation Service and the Hennepin Conservation District in addressing soil stabilization within the watershed. Cooperative efforts with these agencies • will be explored to inform farmers of judicious farming practices to preserve valuable soil resources and reduce sediment, pesticide and nutrient loadings. V -34 The Commission will require sediment containment and erosion control at land development and construction sites. A permit program will be established to increase awareness of the issue and to ensure conformance. The following strategies have been adopted with respect to erosion and sediment control: 5.1. Coordinate with the various governmental agencies responsible for control of agricultural soil erosion and sedimentation. 5.2. A review program will be established for all land development and construction site work to insure every effort will be made to minimize sediment transport. Implementation Strategy Local governmental units will be responsible for enforcing erosion and sedimentation control plans for all development and redevelopment sites. The Commission will review all proposed single family, detached residential developments of 15 or greater acres and 5 or greater acres for all other land uses and submit its recommendations to local governmental unit for implementation. As part of their local plan, municipalities must identify acceptable erosion control and sedimentation control measures to meet the requirements of the Management Standards (Appendix A). The Commission requires that the n prepare q e ow er of land to be developed to p epa e a sediment- erosion control plan for all construction activities in which existing protective vegetative cover is removed or disturbed. The approval of said plan by the municipality must be obtained prior to any construction activity. The plan must address sediment containment by either structural or non - structural means. The re- establishment of permanent vegetative cover immediately upon completion of the construction activity will also be required. V -35 The sediment - erosion control plan must, at a minimum, include information outlining the direction of all site runoff and the location of erosion control measures. Structural methods for erosion control may include, but are not limited to, silt fences, hay bale barriers, diversion dikes and sedimentation basins. Installation of structural measures shall be in accordance with the manufacturer's specifications and accepted Soil Conservation Service and li engineering practices. Non - structural methods include, but are not limited to, natural vegetative barriers, phased development practices and grading practices that minimize slopes. These methods will also be implemented in accordance with accepted Soil Conservation Service and engineering practices. The erosion control plan must address cover establishment, both temporary and permanent. Cover establishment practices include, but are not limited to, seeding, mulching, and sodding. All structural and non- structural erosion control measures must remain in -place and be properly maintained until permanent vegetative cover is established. It is recommended that local units of government give consideration to obtaining a surety to provide adequate safeguards to insure the plan is carried out by the developer. Schedule and Costs The Commission will review plans with specified characteristics as described above. This is an ongoing effort as plans are continually submitted for review. Cost estimates for review of development plans are included in the following discussion of stormwater treatment. _V -36 6. STORMWATER TREATMENT Introduction • Stormwater treatment is necessary to reduce water quality problems in the system and protect waters that recharge groundwater supplies. This would primarily include reducing the amount of sediments and nutrients that enter streams via a stormwater system. Management Strategy Each municipality shall prepare a local water management plan in conformance with Shingle Creek Watershed Management Commission requirements. These plans must demonstrate that treatment for new development and redevelopment is provided for Stormwater runoff prior to its discharge into any public water. Existing development is required to provide treatment as part of a redevelopment or as designated by the Commission or local plan. The following strategies have been adopted with respect to stormwater treatment: 6.1. Establish an education program on the judicious use of contaminating substances that may enter the stormwater system. 6.2. Require the construction of stormwater treatment facilities to reduce the quality degradation impact on public waters. 6.3. Encourage communities to use centralized stormwater treatment facilities to provide the most cost - effective and efficient means of treatment. 6.4. Encourage communities to incorporate treatment in their local plans for existing development. Implementation Stormwater treatment strategies shall be part of the local water management plan for each municipality. Treatment of stormwater can be broken down into three parts: Sedimentation - The removal of sediment from stormwater runoff from a 2 -inch rainfall event which is equivalent to a 1 -year frequency, 12 -hour duration storm. Skimming - The skimming, removal, and suitable disposal of oil and floatable materials from stormwater runoff for a 2 -inch rainfall event. Nutrient Removal - The removal of nutrients from stormwater runoff to the maximum practical extent. V -37 The use of ponding areas for sedimentation is identified in the Management Standards found in Appendix A. For stormwater treatment purposes, a ponding area shall be of a size sufficient to store runoff from a 2 -inch rainfall event for the fully developed condition. Discharge shall be limited to that required for the pond to empty no sooner than 6 hours after the rainfall event. Appendix C contains information necessary to size treatment ponds and an example illustration of a pond sizing calculation. Skimming shall be considered adequate if a baffle structure extends at least 4 inches below the normal water surface and the velocity of water passing under the baffle does not exceed 0.5 feet per second during peak discharge. Sedimentation, skimming and nutrient removal shall be provided for stormwater runoff from new developments and redevelopments prior to discharging it into any public waters as defined by the Minnesota Department of Natural Resources. Public waters and wetlands shall not be used for temporary erosion and sediment control purposes. Wetlands under the control of a municipality designated in the local water management plan as available for treatment may be used for sedimentation and skimming. Existing developments are not required to provide stormwater treatment. Good housekeeping procedures offer a means of treatment and control available to existing facilities. The Commission encourages centralized stormwater treatment facilities to be included in local water management plans. Centralized treatment ponds shall be sized to store the collective runoff of all contributory areas for the 2 -inch rainfall event. Centralized treatment ponds, which reduce the number of smaller individual treatment ponds, can also provide areas for wildlife habitat, recreation and ground water recharge, and will also result in lower maintenance costs and less land areas required than if ponds were constructed for each land development. V -38 Measures to remove nutrients include, but may not be limited to, the use of wetland treatment systems, the establishment of good housekeeping practices such as street sweeping and leaf removal, the placement of controls on the use of fertilizers and the implementation of sediment and soil erosion control projects. The level of treatment required will be determined by the classification of the receiving water body or wetland. The following table shows the treatment levels necessary for each type of receiving water classification. (The classification is provided on page V -4.) TABLE 12 TREATMENT LEVELS FOR WATER BODIES AND WETLANDS Classification Sedimentation Skimming Nutrient Removal Recreation X X X Aesthetics X X None Runoff Management None None None Special Purpose X* X X *As appropriate to special purpose. Schedule and Costs The Commission will review development and redevelopment plans which involve stormwater treatment and meet the criteria for review as identified in the Management Standards (Appendix A). The Commission will also review plans involving flood plain encroachment and erosion and sedimentation control (Appendix A). Plan review is a continual process and as development and redevelopment plans are submitted to the municipalities and provided to the Commission for review. The cost for plan reviews is estimated at $14,000 annually (1987 index). V -39 7. WETLAND MANAGEMENT Introduction Wetlands are an extremely valuable resource in the Shingle Creek Watershed. They are instrumental in providing habitat for fish and wildlife, serve as groundwater recharge areas and provide for the storage of stormwater runoff. Wetlands have also been identified as areas that have the ability to remove iiutrients, solids, and other pollutants from stormwater runoff. These reasons justify the Commission's interest in protecting these wetland areas. Management Strategy The Minnesota Department of Natural Resources (DNR) currently has authority to preserve Protected waters and wetlands. The wetlands under this jurisdiction include all Types 3, 4 and 5 wetlands, as defined in the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Circular No. 39. A permit from the DNR is necessary for the alteration of a protected water or wetland. A policy of the Single Creek Watershed Management Commission addresses the preservation of habitats for game fish and wildlife in conjunction with storage and water quality purposes. For these wetlands under state jurisdiction, the Commission will coordinate with the ONR in preserving waters and wetlands. The Commission also acknowledges the value of wetlands not under the DNR jurisdiction. Most significant is the ability of these wetlands to assimilate the nutrients washed from the surrounding watershed and to provide a natural means of temporary runoff storage. It is necessary to balance these attributes with the need for urban growth and development necessary to maintain a viable community. The Commission realizes a need to establish a strategy that will consider the water storage and nutrient assimilative ability of wetlands not under DNR jurisdiction and help determine whether encroachment or damage of these wetlands can be tolerated. V -40 The following management strategies are adopted with respect to wetland management: • 7.1. Protected waters and wetlands as defined by the Public Waters and Wetland inventory of Hennepin County will be managed through coordination with DNR programs and used for runoff management as outlined in Section 6, Stormwater Treatment. 7.2. Wetland a reserve development guidelines will be established to P 9 P treatment characteristics of wetlands not under DNR jurisdiction. Implementation To assure compliance with development guidelines the Shingle Creek Watershed Management Commission may also require local water management plans to include a program to manage certain wetlands not included in the DNR's protected waters and wetlands inventory. Local governmental units will enforce compliance with the program. Schedule and Costs No costs or schedules are anticipated with this plan component beyond those associated with review of local water management plans for compliance with this watershed management plan. i V -41 8. GROUND WATER PROTECTION Introduction The protection of water supplies is an important concern in the watershed. As stated in the physical inventory, municipalities within the watershed obtain water from bedrock aquifers, drift aquifers and the Mississippi River. Of the nine communities in the watershed, three use the Mississippi River, three rely partially or entirely on drift wells, two use both bedrock aquifer and drift wells and four rely entirely on bedrock aquifers. In all, four bedrock aquifers are used and several wells draw from more than one aquifer. Of the three water sources the most susceptible to contamination are the drift aquifers. The high permeability of drift material allows for rapid downward movement of contaminants. The extent of these surficial and buried aquifers is largely unknown because of extreme variability in their occurence. Bedrock aquifers also recharge through percolation. Since bedrock formations are usually deeper than drift aquifers water generally infiltrates farther and has more opportunity for purification. However, there are locations where this bedrock is relatively close to the surface or surficial materials of high porosity overlay the aquifers. In these instances runoff water can reach bedrock aquifers relatively easily. A comprehensive discussion of ground water recharge must take into account numerous other factors beyond the scope of this discussion. Slope, soil characteristics, depth to water table, effects of drawdown, lateral groundwater flow, precipitation, and location and effect of confining layers all affect the ability of areas to recharge ground water. V -42 To compound the issue the Twin Cities Area is geologically complex. The United States Geological Survey (USGS) work on the regional ground water model has verified the extremely complex nature of recharge in the Twin Cities area. Generally, precipitation falling any where in the region can potentially recharge the groundwater system. Currently there is only a very approximate delineation of ground water recharge areas in the Tvjin Cities area. These are based on existing information for only a few of the components affecting ground water recharge. Within the watershed information does exist from test borings and well logs and can give some information of local usefulness. The Hennepin Conservation District, in conjunction with the Minnesota Geological Survey, has recently initiated a study of ground water resources and movement. This effort will greatly further the understanding of ground water characteristics in the watershed. Management Strategies The Commission supports the efforts to further the understanding of ground water in the County. Adequate information is essential to provide the proper management of groundwater resources through land use planning, permitted development and water allocation. The Commission will assume a review and comment role on all MPCA and MDNR requests that may effect ground water within the watershed. The Commission will also require local governmental units to develop zoning and building regulations as part of their local water management plans to protect ground water resources. i V -43 The following strategies have been adopted with respect to ground water protection: 8.1. A procedure will be established to review and comment on development that may affect ground water quality and quantity in conformance with the requirements of Chapter 207, Laws of 1987, redefining the purpose of the Metropolitan Surface Water Management Act. 8.2. Procedures will be adopted by local governmental units level to control development that may affect ground water resources. Implementation The Commission will take an advocacy role towards better ground water management. The Commission will support efforts to provide essential ground water information on which to base management decisions. Support from other watershed management organizations will be sought to demonstrate the need for such an effort. As part of local water management plans land use controls shall be ® developed to protect groundwater resources. Schedule and Costs No costs or schedules are anticipated with this plan component beyond those associated with review of local water management plan for compliance with this watershed management plan. Should the Commission elect to participate in groundwater study efforts, additional costs will be incurred. V -44 CAPITAL IMPROVEMENTS PROGRAM Three supplemental studies have been identified in Section V of this plan. It is anticipated that the completion of the supplemental studies will result in specific capital improvements which will proceed and be funded under the provisions of Section VII and VIII of the "JOINT AND COOPERATIVE AGREEMENT FOR THE ESTABLISHMENT OF A SHINGLE CREEK WATERSHED MANAGEMENT COMMISSION ". As supplemental studies are completed and capital improvements specifically identified, the Commission will keep its members and other appropriate agencies advised of proposed capital improvements. The capital improvements program shall be subject to at least a biennial review at which time the Commission will advise its members and other agencies of changes in the capital improvements program. LOCAL COMPREHENSIVE PLAN AMENDMENTS This management plan includes three regulatory components that are in conflict with local plans and ordinances. These components will necessitate actions by local governmental units to resolve these conflicts and bring about conformance with this plan. The three components are: 1. Modification of the 100 -year flood plain. Where the flood plain delineation as defined in this plan differs from that established by the Flood Insurance Studies of the municipalities the flood plain may be extended to include more area. Properties currently not in the FIS 100 -year flood plain may be included in the flood plain as modified in this plan. These properties may ro erties have land uses not in conformance with Y flood lain zoning p g VI -1 2. Compensatory storage required for flood fringe encroachment. Current Flood Insurance Studies allow encroachment in the flood fringe without compensatory storage. This plan also allows flood fringe encroachment but only if compensatory storage is provided that is of equal or greater volume than the encroachment. 3. Elevation of Pike Lake. The runoff analysis for this plan used the elevation of Pike Lake provided by the City of Plymouth for planning purposes but is in conflict with the Flood Insurance Study elevation. The Shingle Creek Watershed Management Commission will monitor the progress towards resolving these conflicts to insure that all necessary local comprehensive plans and /or official controls to insure all local plan modifications are completed in a timely fashion. VI -2 LOCAL WATER MANAGEMENT PLANS Commission's Role Following approval of this watershed management plan, local municipalities are required under the Surface Water Management Act to complete local water management plans. These local plans must meet the statutory requirements of the Surface Water Management Act and the content requirements identified in this plan. The Commission must then review these plans within 60 days of submittal for conformance with this water management plan. Once in effect, any changes to these local plans must be reviewed by the Commission. This will be a continual process as municipalities determine changes are necessary to meet land use policy changes, ordinance revisions and as yet unforeseen situations. The Commission has also elected to annually review municipal records for compliance with local water management plans and compliance with this plan. An audit of municipal activities will be conducted each year following approval of its plan. Cost Estimates Table 12 shows the estimated annual costs associated with each role defined above. TABLE 13 COST ESTIMATES FOR LOCAL PLAN REVIEWS AND ANNUAL AUDITS Beyond 1992 Task 1988 1989 1990 1991 1992 (Annual value) Local Plan Review -- 7,000 7,000 7,000 7,000 -O- Amendments to Local -- 1,000 1,000 1,000 1,000 1,000 Plans Audits of Municipal -- 6,000 6,000 6,000 6,000 6,000 Records VI -3 Section 473.878 of the Minnesota Statutes establishes the requirements for the Watershed Management plan and outlines a review process for plan approval. The review process is long and complicated. Subdivision 9 of said section requires that all amendments to the adopted plan be referred to cities, counties and other agencies in the same manner as is required for initial approval of the plan. The 100 -year flood profile has been established to closely approximate the existing FIS 100 -year flood profile. The Plan recognizes that concerns exist at the present time regarding this profile. In order to evaluate these concerns and to propose changes based on a cost - benefit analysis, the following studies and other further detailed work may need to be undertaken by the Commission: 1. Twin Lakes /Ryan Lake Outlet Modification. 2. Eagle Lake Outlet Channel Capacity Analysis. 3. Crystal Lake Outlet Feasibility Study. 4. Identification of all other flood -prone structures not identified in above works. The Commission believes that these studies and other engineering, planning, zoning, building and miscellaneous studies and details can and will affect portions of the plan and will help establish more definite management standards. The Commission does hereby find and determine that significant amendments to this Watershed Management Plan shall be processed and approved in accordance with Minnesota Statutes, Section 473.878, Subdivision 9. The Commission further finds and determines that this plan along with detailed studies outlined herein and other insignificant changes or changes which are required for more refined VII -1 data shall not be considered amendments to the plan and will not be processed through the entire review process. It is the intent of the Commission to keep its members and all other agencies advised of significant plan changes but not to incur additional engineering, legal or other expenses to process work contemplated by this plan as supplemental, or auxiliary to support and clarifying findings set forth in this plan. The Commission desires to be open, efficient, and effective in establishing and implementing the plan and does not wish to use its time and financial resources to process paperwork or minor changes which do not have a significant effect on the members or on other governmental agencies. VII -2 s APPENDIX A • MANAGEMENT STANDARDS • SHINGLE CREEK WATERSHED MANAGEMENT COMMISSION The Shingle Creek Watershed Management Commission requires that the following types of matters be reviewed: 1. Plans of any land development* or individual site development adjacent to or within a lake, wetland, or a natural or altered natural watercourse as listed in the final inventory of Protected Waters and Wetlands for Hennepin County, as prepared by the State of Minnesota Department of Natural Resources. 2. Plans for any land development or site development within the 100 -year floodplain as defined in this P lan. 3. Plans of any land development or site development of 15 acres or larger for lands zoned for single family detached housing and 5 acres or larger for all 9 Y 9 9 other land uses. 4. Plans f n o a land development or site Bevel ment re regardless of size if Y o e P 9 such review is requested by a member municipality. 5. Land use amendments to a municipality's comprehensive plan. *Land development is also defined to include redevelopment of exiting lands. MANAGEMENT STANDARDS � Development Adjacent to or Within a Protected Water or Wetland 1. There shall be no area encroachment upon a Protected Water or Wetland or rough grading below the ordinary high water mark without approval of the Commission and the Minnesota Department of Natural Resources. 2. Design of encroachments, when permitted, shall provde compensatory volumes of equal or greater volume than that removed by the encroachment and compensatory areas to offset the elimination of vegetation provding biological treatment of stormwater runoff and wildlife habitat. 3. Development plans for properties adjacent to a Protected Water or Wetland shall contain provisions for temporary erosion and sediment control that will prevent deposition of se imed�nt into the Protected Water or Wetland during the development process. 4. Development plans for properties of 2.5 acres or greater, not including individual residential lots, shall contain permanent provisions for treatment of the stormwater runoff. Such treatment shall consist of providing a ponding area adequate in size to store runoff from a 2 -inch rainfall event based upon a fully developed site. In lieu of individual treatment ponds, a central retention pond may be used if sized to store the collective runoff of all contributory areas for the 2 -inch rainfall event. Pond discharge shall be limited to that required for the pond to empty no sooner than 6 hours after the rainfall event. In addition, a means of retaining oils and floatable debris shall be provided in a manner acceptable to the Commission (see Appendix C). A -1 5. All site areas used for the purpose of flood storage or treatment of stormwater runoff shall be preserved and dedicated for that use by means of granting an appropriate easement to the respective municipality, including areas required for access to maintain the easement. Floodplain Development 1. There shall be no encroachment upon the floodway area of the 100 -year floodplain as defined in this plan. Alterations of the floodway may be proposed subject to approval of the Commission and the Minnesota Department of Natural Resources. 2. Encroachment shall be allowed in the floodway fringe area of the 100 -year floodplain (as defined in the Shingle Creek Watershed Management Plan) only if both of the following conditions are met: a. Compensatory storage is provided in the 100 -year floodplain of equal or greater volume than that removed by the encroachment upon the floodway fringe. b. The encroachment does not create hazardous velocities. 3. Buildings within or adjacent to the 100 -year floodplain shall be constructed so that the elevation of the top of the lowest floor is a minimum of 1.0 feet above the 100 -year flood elevation as defined in this plan. The 1.0 feet of required freeboard is intended to allow for the increase of flood elevations as a result of future development and to provide a factor of safety for wind and wave action. 4. All site areas below the 100 -year floodplain elevation after approval of allowable encroachments shall be preserved and dedicated for flood storage by means of granting an appropriate easement to the respective municipality. Development of 15 Acres or Larger for Lands Zoned Single Family Detached Housing and 5 Acres or Larger for Other Lan Uses 1. Development plans shall contain permanent provisions for treatment of the stormwater runoff. Such treatment shall consist of providing a ponding area adequate in size to store runoff from a 2 -inch rainfall event based upon a fully developed site. In lieu of individual treatment ponds, a central retention pond may be used if sized to store the collective runoff of all contributory areas for the 2 -inch rainfall event. Pond discharge shall be limited to that required for the pond to empty no sooner than 6 hours after the rainfall event. In addition, a means of retaining oils and floatable debris shall be provided in a manner acceptable to the Commission (see Appendix C). A -2 2. Development plans shall contain provisions for temporary erosion and sediment control that will prevent soil particles from being transported off the site using the Hennepin Conservation District erosion and sediment control standard as a guide. 3. All site areas used for the purpose of flood storage or treatment of stormwater runoff shall be preserved and dedicated for that use by means of granting an appropriate easement to the respective municipality, including areas required for access to maintain the easement. A -3 APPENDIX B RAINFALL EVENTS AND DURATIONS OS • RAINFALL IN MINNEAPOLIS -ST. PAUL METROPOLITAN AREA FOR DURATIONS FROM 30 MINUTES TO 24 HOURS AND RETURN PERIODS FROM 1 TO 100 YEARS Data Taken from U.S. Department of Commerce - Weather Bureau Technical Paper No. 40 - Dated May 1961 Return Frequency 24 -Hour 12 -Hour 6 -Hour 3 -Hour 2 -Hour I -Hour 30 Minute 15 Minute 1 -Year 2.3 2.0 1.7 1.5 1.4 1.2 0.9 0.6 2 -Year 2.8 2.4 2.1 1.7 1.7 1:4 1.1 0.7 5 -Year 3.6 3.1 2.7 2.3 2.2 1.8 1.4 1.0 iO -Year 4.2 3.7 3.1 2.6 2.5 2.1 1.7 1.3 25 -Year 4.6 4.2 3.5 3.0 2.8 2.3 1.9 1.4 50 -Year 5.3 4.6 4.0 3.4 3.1 2.7 2.1 1.5 100 -Year 5.9 5.0 4.4 3.8 3.5 2.9 2.4 1.7 Maximum probable 6 -hour precipitation for 10 square mile area = 24 inches. • B -1 APPENDIX C • SUGGESTED RETENTION AND TREATMENT POND DESIGN SUGGESTED RETENTION AND TREATMENT POND DESIGN To minimize potential downstream flooding P and improve the quality of stormwater runoff, ponding areas will be required for certain developments as specified in the Management Standards (Appendix A). Ponds shall be designed to store the amount of runoff generated by 2.0 inches of rainfall which is equivalent to the rainfall produced by a 1 -year frequency, 12 -hour duration rainfall event. The procedure recommended by the Shingle Creek Watershed Management Commission ( SCWMC) for determining runoff volume is the Soil Conservation Service (SCS) Method found in Hydrology Guide for Minnesota U.S. Department of Agriculture, Soil Conservation Service, St. Paul, Minnesota. The SCS has determined that the amount of runoff generated by a certain rainfall is directly related to the land use drainage characteristics of soil groups present. Figure C -1 describes the drainage characteristics of these soil types. The hydraulic curve number (CN) can be obtained from Figure C -2 given information on soil cover and land use. Once the CN has been determined, the runoff generated for 2.0 inches of rainfall can be found in Table C -1 and the appropriate pond size can be determined. An example pond size calculation has been provided in Figure C -3. The rate of discharge at the pond outlet shall allow sufficient time for suspended material to settle out while also minimizing the possible vegetative damage that may occur as the water is ponded over a period of time. The SCWMC has determined that the pond outlets shall be designed to allow a detention time for the total runoff generated by the 2.0 -inch rainfall to be a period not less than 6 hours nor greater than 48 hours except where the necessary outlet design to meet this rate requires an orifice of less than 2.0 inches in diameter. In such cases, a 2.0 -inch diameter orifice shall be used. C -1 A detention time of 6 hours was found to remove approximately 70 percent of sediment resent in urban stormwater runoff. This was based on a typical urban P Yp runoff sediment composition of 20 percent fine sand (0.05 mm -1.0 mm), 40 percent silt (0.005 mm to 0.05 mm) and 40 percent clay ( <0.005 mm) as derived from National Urban Runoff Program (NURP) analysis. As a final treatment measure, a means of retaining oils and floatable materials shall be provided at the pond outlet prior to discharge. The SCWMC recommends the "above grade" type of skimmer to enhance the frequency and quality of maintenance while promoting maximum exposure of trapped oils to sunlight. A typical baffled weir detail has been provided in Figures C -4 and C -5. The exit velocity at the skimmer shall be limited to a maximum of 0.5 feet per second during peak discharge. I C -2 FIGURE.0 -1 HYDROLOGIC SOIL GROUP • Soil properties influence the process of generating runoff from rainfall and they must be considered in estimating runoff. Site soils must be identified and their associated hydrologic soil group determined based on information in the Soil Survey of Hennepin County, Minnesota. The hydrologic parameter in determining runoff from an individual storm is the minimum rate of infiltration obtained for a bare soil after prolonged wetting. The influences of both the surface and the horizons of a soil are therefore considered. For definition purposes the infiltration rate is the rate at which water enters the soil at the surface and which is contro ed by surface conditions, and the transmission rate(1) is the rate at which the water moves in the soil and which is controlled y the internal properties. The hydrologic soil groups for Minnesota are defined as follows: Group A (Low runoff potential) - Soils having high infiltration rates even when thoroughly wetted, consisting chiefly of deep, well to excessively drained sands and /or gravel. These soils have a high rate of water transmission and would result in a low runoff potential. (Minimum infiltration rate: 0.30 to 0.45 inch per hour.) Group B - Soils having moderate infiltration rates when thoroughly wetted, consisting chiefly of moderately deep to deep, moderately well to well drained soils with moderately fine to moderately coarse textures. These soils have a moderate rate of water transmission. (Minimum infiltration rate: 0.15 to 0.30 inch per hour.) Group C - Soils having slow infiltration rates when thoroughly wetted, consisting chiefly of (1) soils with a layer that impedes the downward movement of water, or (2) soils with moderately fine to fine texture and a slow infiltration rate. These soils have a slow rate of water transmission. (Minimum infiltration rate: 0.05 to 0.15 inch per hour.) Group D (High runoff potential) - Soils having very slow infiltration rates w en t oroughly wetted, consisting chiefly of (1) clay soils with a high swelling potential, (2) soils with a high permanent water table, (3) soils with claypan or clay layer at or near the surface, and (4) shallow soils over nearly impervious materials. These soils have a very slow rate of water transmission. (Minimum infiltration rate: 0 to 0.05 inch per hour.) (1) Similar to hydraulic conductivity and permeability rate. C -3 FIGURE C -2 HYDROLOGIC CURVE NUMBER COMPUTATION SHEET LAND USE FOR URBAN AREAS Watershed Site D.A. Acres Computed by Date Checked by Date Curve Numbers Acres Moisture Condition II LAND USE DESCRIPTION Per A I B C D Practice Soils Soils Soils Soils Product Cultivated Land. without conservation treatment 72 81 88 91 with conservation treatment 62 71 78 81 Pasture or range land: poor condition 68 79 86 89 good condition 3c) 61 74 80 Meadow: good condition 30 58 71 78 Wood or Forest land: thin stand, poor cover, 66 77 83 no mulch 45 good cover 25 55 70 77 Open Spaces, lawns, parks, golf courses, ceme- teries, etc. good condition: grass cover on 75% or more of the area 39 61 74 80 fair condition: grass cover on 50% to 75% of the area 49 6c) 79 84 Commercial and business areas (85% impervious) 89 92 94 ° 95 Industrial districts (72% impervious) 81 88 91 93 Residential: Average lot size Average % Impervious 1 acre or less 65 77 85 90 92 1/4 acre 38 61 75 83 87 1/3 acre 30 57 72 81 86 1/2 acre 25 54 70 80 85 1 acre 20 51 68 79 84 Paved parking lots, roofs, driveways, etc. 98 98 98 98 Streets and roads: paved with curbs and storm sewers 98 98 98 98 gravel 76 85 89 91 dirt 72 82 87 89 Marsh 85 85 85 85 Other Total Acres Product Total Weighted Runoff Curve No. Product Total Total Acres • C -4 FIGURE C -3 EXAMPLE - Pond Size Calculation Given: The development of a 40 acre site is proposed with soils of hydrologic group B. Thirty acres will be developed single family residential with 1/4 acre lot sizes and the remaining 10 acres will be developed commercial. Determine: The runoff from a 2.0 -inch rainfall (equivalent to a 1 -year frequency, 12 -hour duration storm) using the SCS method. Solution: Use Figure C -2 to compute the weighted runoff curve number (CN). Land Use Acres Soil Curve Number Product Residential, 1/4 acre lots 30 B 75 2,250 Commercial 10 B 92 920 Total 40 3,170 Weighted CN = 3,170 = 79.3; use 79 Runoff Table C -1 is used to determine runoff for 2.0 inches of rainfall for a CN of 79. Runoff = 0.52 inches Volume Total runoff = 0.52 x 1 ft x 40 ac = 1.7 ac - ft and required 12 in - -- storage volume Discharge Allowable Peak = 1.7 ac -ft x 43,560 ft3 x 1 hr = 3.5 cfs Discharge Rate 6 hr 1 ac- t 3,60 spec NOTE: This guideline for determining runoff is suggested by the Shingle Creek Watershed Management Commission. Actual design may deviate from that outline herein due to individual design circumstances associated with a given project. C -5 TABLE C -1 RUNOFF FOR 2 INCHES OF RAINFALL Curve No. Runoff (inches) Curve No. Runoff (inches) *53 .01 77 .45 54 .01 78 .48 55 .02 79 .52 56 .02 80 .56 57 .03 81 .60 58 .04 82 .65 59 .04 83 .70 60 .06 84 .74 61 .07 85 .80 62 .09 86 .85 63 .10 87 .91 64 .11 88 .96 65 .13 89 1.03 66 .15 90 1.10 67 .18 91 1.17 68 .19 92 1.24 69 .22 93 1.32 70 .24 94 1.39 71 .26 95 1.48 72 .29 96 1.58 73 .32 97 1.68 74 .35 98 1.78 75 .38 76 .41 *There will be no runoff for Curve Numbers lower than 53 for 2 inches of rainfall. SOURCES: National Engineering Handbook Section 4. Hydrology Guide for Minnesota. C -6 DESIGN CRITERIA: MAXIMUM ALLOWABLE VELOCITY THROUGH THE BAFFLED WEIR IS 0.5 FEET PER SECOND FOR A 2 INCH RAINFALL EVENT. WEIR SHOULD BE DESIGNED SUCH THAT THE LENGTH OF THE WEIR AND OPENING THROUGH THE WEIR COMBINE TO MAINTAIN THE MAXIMUM ALLOWABLE VELOCITY OF 0.5 FEET PER SECOND. 4 MINIMUM OVERLAP POND LEVEL PRODUCED BY TREATED LUMBER PLANKS A 2 INCH RAINFALL EVENT TREATED LUMBER POSTS IMBED WEIR INTO AGGREGATE DIRECTION A MINIMUM OF 4" OF FLOW --�- POND BOTTOM OUTLET PIPE z TOE GEOTEXTILE iv I TO 1 1 /2 INCH FILTER AGGREGATE FABRIC INTO - SHALL BE A FREE DRAINING UNDISTURBED MINERAL PRODUCT EXCLUDING SOIL CRUSHED CARBONATE QUARRY •3' (MIN) 3" (MIN) ROCK, CRUSHED CONCRETE AND GEOTEXTILE FABRIC SALVAGED BITUMINOUS MIXTURE TO PREVENT SOIL EROSION SECTION A -A NOT TO SCALE TYPICAL BAFFLED WEIR DETAIL PLEASE NOTE- THIS IS A SUGGESTED DESIGN APPROACH FOR A TREATMENT POND THAT WILL DRAIN AND WHEN PROPERLY IMPLEMENTED WILL BE IN CONFORMANCE WITH THE MANAGEMENT STANDARDS. THIS IS NOT A REQUIRED DESIGN AND THIS DETAIL IS SUBMITTED FOR INFORMATIONAL PURPOSES ONLY. EUGENE A. HICKOK & ASSOCIATES 545 INDIAN MOUND WAYZATA, MN 53391 FIGURE C -4 MAO PHONE (612) 473- 4224 BURY ENDS OF WEIR INTO BANK A MINIMUM OF 2 FEET 7r - 4 SO THAT FLOW WILL NOT ENDS OF WEIR PASS AROUND II I II 1, 2 as III °� >- A co x A °o W 2 cc (D wW OUTLET PIPE W O (D u- O I— a_ s ac o l = 3v PLACE I TO. I V2 INCH FILTER AGGREGATE I ' IN THIS AREA. I I I I L VL\sL1 PLAN VIEW NOT TO SCALE TYPICAL BAFFLED WEIR DETAIL EUGENE A. HICKOK a ASSOCIATES 545 INDIAN MOUND WAYZATA, MN 55391 FIGURE C -5 PHONE (6'I2) 473 -4224 APPENDIX D SHINGLE CREEK WATERSHED MANAGEMENT COMMISSION JOINT POWERS AGREEMENT I JOINT AND COOPERATIVE AGREEMENT FOR THE ESTAB- LISHMENT OF A SHINGLE CREEK WATERSHED MANAGE- MENT COMMISSION TO PLAN, CONTROL AND PROVIDE FOR THE DEVELOPMENT OF THE SHINGLE CREEK WATERSHED PREFACE The Shingle Creek Watershed contains approximately 44 square miles and en- compasses parts of the following nine cities: Brooklyn Center, Brooklyn Park, Crystal, Maple Grove, Min- neapolis, New Hope, Osseo, Plymouth, R.obbinsdale. The Shingle Creek Watershed contains four creeks and thirteen lakes. Up to the present time, decisions regarding the water resources within the watershed have been made on an individual municipality basis. In 1974, a Water Resources Management Plan was prepared through a joint effort of the cities but that plan was never officially adopted and no contractual relationship has existed between all the cities. Minnesota Laws of 1982, Chapter 509, mandated that all watersheds within the seven county Metropolitan area must be governed by a watershed management organi- zation and that such an organization is to be in existence by December 31, 1983. The watershed is authorized to organize under a joint powers agreement pursuant to Minnesota Statutes, Section 471.59 or if such an organization is not created, Hennepin County shall petition for the establishment of a watershed district under Minnesota Statutes, Chapter 112. All the cities in the Shingle Creek Watershed have expressed a desire to proceed with a joint powers organization. The Shingle Creek Watershed is in some ways unique in that one portion has an abundance of surface water and requires storage and flood control measures to protect residents and property. In seeking solutions to the overall surface water problems whether they be too much water or too little water, the law mandates and the cities • D -1 within the watershed recognize that joint planning, joint cooperation, financial sharing and a contractual agreement are necessary. It has been determined by the cities involved in the Shingle Creek watershed that they desire to proceed under a Joint Powers Agreement rather than under Chapter 112 as a watershed district. Each party to this agreement has been fully advised that the Watershed Management Organization being created shall have the powers and responsibilities set forth in the Metropolitan Surface Water Management Act, Minnesota Statutes Sections 473.875 to 473.883, as amended by this Agreement. Each member further recognizes that this is a binding contract and failure to cooperate or to carry out a member's responsibilities will result in a breach of this contract. The purpose of this organization shall be to assist the nine member Shingle Creek Watershed cities to preserve and use natural water storage and retention systems to: 1. Reduce to the greatest practical extent the public capital expenditure necessary to control excessive volumes and rates of runoff. 2. To improve water quality within the watershed. 3. To prevent flooding and erosion from surface flows. 4. To promote ground water recharge. 5. To protect and enhance fish and wildlife habitat and water recreational facilities. 6. To secure other benefits associated with the proper management of surface water. 7. To promote and encourage cooperation among member cities in coordinating local surface water plans and to be aware of their neighbor's problems and to protect the public health, safety, and general welfare. • D -2 The purpose of this Preface is to clarify and establish for any court of review or any arbitrator or for the elected successors to the representatives who have entered into this agreement the reasons and purpose for this joint and cooperative venture. The parties to this Agreement realize that the success or failure of the Shingle Creek Watershed Organization created by this Agreement is dependent upon the sincere desire of each member City to cooperate in the exercise of a joint power to solve joint problems. Each party hereby agrees to be bound by this agreement and pledges its cooperation. D -3 • JOINT AND COOPERATIVE AGREEMENT The parties to this agreement are governmental units of the State of Minnesota, all of which have lands which drain surface water within the Shingle Creek Watershed and all of which have power and responsibility to construct, reconstruct, extend and maintain storm drainage facilities to improve water quality, to promote ground water recharge, and to protect, promote and preserve water resources within the Watersheds. This agreement is made pursuant to the authority conferred upon the parties by Minnesota Statutes 1982, Sections 471.59 and 473.875 to and including Section 473.883. NAME L The parties hereto create and establish the Shingle Creek Watershed Management Commission. GENERAL PURPOSE i EL The general purpose of this agreement is to provide an organization which can investigate, study, plan and control the construction of facilities to drain or pond storm waters, to alleviate damage by flood waters; to improve the creek channels for drainage; to assist in planning for land use; to repair, improve, relocate, modify, consolidate or abandon, in whole or in part, drainage systems within the watershed area; to do whatever is necessary to assist in water conservation and the abatement of water pollution and the improvement of water quality; to promote ground water recharge; and to protect and enhance fish and wildlife habitat and water recreational facilities. In addition to the aforestated purposes, the organization hereby created shall serve as the Watershed Management organization for the Shingle Creek Watershed and shall carry out all the duties and responsibilities outlined in Minnesota Statutes, Section 473.875 through 473.883, both inclusive. D -4 DEFINITIONS III. For the purposes of this agreement, the terms used herein shall have the meanings as defined in this article. Subdivision 1. "Commission" means the organization created by this agreement the full name of which is "Shingle Creek Watershed Management Commission ". It shall be a public agency of its members and a watershed management organization as defined in Minnesota Statutes, Section 473.877. Subdivision 2. "Board" means the board of commissioners of the Commission, consisting of one commissioner or one alternate commissioner from each of the governmental units which is a party to this agreement and which shall be the governing body of the Commission. Subdivision 3. "Council" means the governing body of a governmental unit which is a member of this Commission. Subdivision 4. "Governmental Unit" means any city, county or town. Subdivision 5. "Member" means a governmental unit which enters into this agreement. Subdivision 6. "Shingle Creek Watershed" means the area contained within a line drawn around the extremities of all terrain whose surface drainage is tributary to Shingle Creek and within the mapped areas delineated on the map filed with the Water Resources Board pursuant to Minnesota Statutes, 473.877 Subd. 2. MEMBERSHIP IV. The membership of the Commission shall consist of all of the following govern- mental units: D -5 City of Brooklyn Center City of Brooklyn Park City of Crystal City of Maple Grove City of Minneapolis City of New Hope City of Osseo City of Plymouth City of Robbinsdale (The foregoing list is intended to include all governmental units which are presently partially or entirely within the Shingle Creek Watershed to be controlled by this Agreement.) No change in governmental boundaries, structure or organizational status shall affect the eligibility of any governmental unit listed above to be represented on the Commission, so long as such governmental unit continues to exist as a separate political subdivision. BOARD OF COMMISSIONERS V. Subdivision 1. The governing body of the Commission shall be its Board. Each member shall be entitled to appoint one representative on the board, and one alternate who may sit when the representative is not in attendance and said representative or alternate representative shall be called a "Commissioner". Subdivision 2. The council of each member shall determine the eligibility or qualification of its representative on the Commission but the terms of each Com- missioner shall be as established by this agreement. D -6 Subdivision 3. The term of each Commissioner and Alternate Commissioner appointed by each member shall be three years and until their successors are selected and qualify and shall commence on February 1, except that the terms of the Com- missioners first appointed shall commence from the date of their appointment and shall PPo PP terminate as follows: a. The Commissioners appointed by the Cities of Brooklyn Center, Brooklyn Park and Crystal shall terminate on February 1, 1985. i b. The Commissioners appointed by the Cities of Maple p Grove, Minneapolis, p , and New Hope shall terminate on February 1, 1986. c. The Commissioners appointed by the Cities of Osseo, Plymouth, and Robbinsdale shall terminate on February 1, 1987. Any vacancy shall be filled for the unexpired term of any Commissioner by the council of the governmental unit of the member who appointed said Commissioner. Subdivision 4. The council of each member agrees that its representative commissioner will not be removed from the Board prior to the expiration of his term, unless said Commissioner consents in writing or unless said council has presented the Commissioner with charges in writing and has held a public hearing after reasonable notice to the Commissioner. A certified copy of the Council's Resolution removing said Commissioner shall be filed with the Secretary of the Board of Commissioners and shall show compliance with the terms of this section. Subdivision 5. Each member shall within 30 days of appointment file with the Secretary of the Board of Commissioners a record of the appointment of its Com- missioner and its Alternate Commissioner. Subdivision 6. Commissioners shall serve without compensation from the Com- mission, but this shall not prevent a governmental unit from providing compensation • D -7 for its Commissioner for serving on the board, if such compensation is authorized by such governmental unit and by law. Commission funds may be used to reimburse a Commissioner or Alternate Commissioner for expenses incurred in Commission business and authorized by the Board. Subdivision 7. At the first meeting of the Board and in February of each year thereafter, the Board shall elect from its Commissioners a Chair, a Vice Chair, a Secretary, a 'Measurer, and such other officers as it deems necessary to conduct its meetings and affairs. At the organizational meeting or as soon thereafter as it may be reasonably done, the Commission shall adopt rules and regulations governing its meetings. Such rules and regulations may be amended from time to time at either a regular or a special meeting of the Commission provided that a ten day prior notice of the proposed amendment has been furnished to each person to whom notice of the Board meetings is required to be sent; a majority vote of all eligible votes of the then existing members of the Commission shall be sufficient to adopt any proposed amendment to such rules and regulations. POWERS AND DUTIES OF THE BOARD VL Subdivision L The Commission, acting by its duly appointed Board of Com- missioners, shall as it relates to flood control, water quality, ground water recharge and water conservation and other duties as set forth in Chapter 509, Minnesota Laws of 1982 and construction of facilities of Shingle Creek, have the powers and duties set out in this article. Subdivision 2. It may employ such persons as it deems necessary to accomplish its duties and powers. Any employee may be on a full time, part time or consulting basis as the Board determines and shall be considered Commission staff. • D -8 ® Subdivision 3. It may contract for space and for material and supplies to carry on its activities either with a member or elsewhere. Subdivision 4. It may acquire necessary personal property to carry out its powers and its duties. Subdivision 5. It shall develop an overall plan containing a capital improvement program within a reasonable time after qualifying, and said plan shall meet all of the requirements as established in Minnesota Statutes, Section 473.878. Said overall plan shall establish a comprehensive goal for the development of Shingle Creek and shall establish a proposed procedure for accomplishing the purposes of the organization as set forth in Article H. In preparing the overall plan, the board may consult with the engineering and planning staff of each member governmental unit. It may consult with the Metropolitan Council and other public and private bodies to obtain and consider projections of land use, population growth, and other factors which are relevant to the improvement and development of the Shingle Creek Watershed. Said overall plan shall include the location and adequacy of the outlet or outfall of said Shingle Creek. The plan shall include the quantity of storage facilities and the sizing of an adequate outlet for all subtrunk, subdistrict and branch lateral storm sewers. Upon completion of the overall plan, each member shall be supplied with a copy of the proposed plan and the plan shall be submitted for review and comment to Hennepin County and the Hennepin Soil and Water Conservation District. All govern- mental units which expect that substantial amendment of its local comprehensive plan Will be necessary in order to bring their local water management into conformance with the Commission's watershed plan shall describe as specifically as possible, the amendments to the local plan which it expects will be necessary. The Commission D -9 shall hold a public hearing after 60 days mailed notice to the clerk of each member governmental unit. The mailed notice of the hearing shall be sent at the same time the plan is submitted to the members and to other governmental agencies. After such public hearing, the board shall prescribe the overall plan which shall be the outline for future action by the Commission. The Commission shall then submit the plan, any comments received and any appropriate amendments to the plan to the Board of Commissioners of Hennepin County. The County shall approve or disapprove projects in the capital improvement programs which may require the provision of county funds pursuant to Minnesota Statutes Section 112.60 Subd. 2 or Section 473.883. The County shall have 60 days to complete its review. If the County fails to complete its review within 60 days the plan and capital improvement programs shall be deemed approved. After completion of the review by Hennepin County, the plan and capital improvement programs shall be submitted to the Metropolitan Council for its review. After completion of the review by the Metropolitan Council pursuant to Minnesota Statutes, Section 473.175, the Commission shall submit the plan to the Minnesota Commissioner of Natural Resources and the Minnesota Pollution Control Agency for review and comment on the consistency of the plan with state laws and rules relating to water and related land resources and to the Minnesota Water Resources Board for review as provided in Minnesota Statutes, Section 112.46. After return of the plan, a copy of the plan shall be submitted to each of the members together with all comments of the reviewing authorities. The Commission shall wait for at least 30 days for comments from its members. The Commission shall adopt the overall plan within 120 days after approval of the plan by the Minnesota Water Resources Board. The Commission shall then implement the approved plan and approved capital improvement program by resolution of the D -10 Commission as hereinafter set forth. The adoption of said overall plan shall be only upon a favorable vote of 2 /3rds of all eligible votes of the then existing members of the Commission for Shingle Creek. - A copy of the adopted plan shall be filed with the Clerk of each member government unit. Upon notice and hearing, as provided for in adopting Board on its own the overall plan, said plan may be amended b the oar P� P� P Y Y initiative or on the petition of any member governmental unit. The review provisions set forth in this section are those required by Minnesota Statutes, Section 473.878. If the law is amended, approvals shall be as required by .law and the provisions contained in this section shall be amended accordingly. Subdivision 6. It shall make necessary surveys or utilize other reliable surveys and data and develop projects to accomplish the purposes for which the Commission is organized. Subdivision 7. It may cooperate or contract with the State of Minnesota or any subdivision thereof or federal agency or private or public organization to accomplish the purposes for which it is organized. Subdivision 8. It may any member governmental unit or units to construct Y g clean, repair, alter, abandon, consolidate, reclaim or change the course or terminus of any ditch, drain, storm sewer, water course, natural or artificial, within the Shingle Creek Watershed. Subdivision 9. It may order any member governmental unit or units to acquire, operate, construct or maintain dams, dikes, reservoirs and appurtenant works or other improvements necessary to implement the overall plan. Subdivision 10. It shall regulate, conserve and control the use of storm and surface water within the Watershed. Subdivision 11. It may contract for or purchase such insurance as the board deems necessary for the protection of the Commission. D -11 • Subdivision 12. It may establish and maintain devices for acquiring and recording hydrological and water quality data within the Watershed. Subdivision 13. It may enter_ upon lands within or without the watershed to make surveys and investigations to accomplish the purposes of the Commission. The Commission shall be liable for actual damages resulting therefrom but every person who claims damages shall serve the Chair or Secretary of the Board of Commissioners with a Notice of Claim as required by Chapter 466.05 of the Minnesota Statutes. Subdivision 14. It shall provide any member governmental unit with technical data or any other information of which the Commission has knowledge which will assist the governmental unit in preparing land use classifications or local water management plans within the watershed. Subdivision 15. It may provide legal and technical assistance in connection with litigation or other proceedings between one or more of its members and any other political subdivision, commission, board or agency relating to the planning or construction of facilities to drain or pond storm waters or relating to water quality within the Watersheds. The use of commission funds for litigation shall be only upon a favorable vote of a majority of the eligible votes of the then existing members of the Commission. Subdivision 16. It may accumulate reserve funds for the purposes herein mentioned and may invest funds of the Commission not currently needed for its operations, in the manner and subject to the laws of Minnesota applicable to statutory cities. Subdivision 17. It may collect monies, subject to the provisions of this agreement, from its members, Hennepin County and from any other source approved by a majority of its board. Subdivision 18. It may make contracts, incur expenses and make expenditures necessary and incidental to the effectuation of these purposes and powers and may disburse therefor in the manner hereinafter P rovided. D -12 Subdivision 19. It shall cause to be made an annual audit of the books and accounts of the commission and shall make and file a report to its members at least -once each year including the following information: a. the financial condition of the commission; b. the status of all commission projects and work within the watershed; C. the business transacted by the commission and other matters which affect the interests of the commission. Copies of said report shall be transmitted to the clerk of each member governmental unit. Subdivision 20. Its books, reports and records shall be available for and open to inspection by its members at all reasonable times. Subdivision 21. It may recommend changes in this agreement to its members. Subdivision 22. It may exercise all other powers necessary and incidental to the implementation of the purposes and powers set forth herein and as outlined and authorized by Minnesota Statutes, Sections 473.875 through 473.883. Subdivision 23. It shall cooperate with the State of Minnesota, the Commissioner of Natural Resources and the Director of the Division of Waters, Soils and Minerals of the Department of Natural Resources in complying with the requirements of Chapter 105 of the Minnesota Statutes. Subdivision 24. Each member reserves the right to conduct separate or concurrent studies on any matter under study by the Commission. Subdivision 25. It may define and designate subtrunk and subdistricts within the watershed and shall have authority to separate the watershed into different subtrunk and subdistricts and to allocate capital improvement costs to a subtrunk or subdistrict area if that district is the only area that benefits from the capital improvement. D -13 METHOD OF PROCEEDING VII. Subdivision 1. The procedures to be followed by the board in carrying out the powers and duties set forth in Article VI, Subdivisions 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, and 10, shall be as set forth in this article. Subdivision 2. The Board shall immediately proceed to prepare the overall plan as set forth in Article VI, Subdivision 5. Upon adoption of said overall plan, the Board shall proceed to implement said plan, and this implementation may be ordered by stages. Subdivision 3. The location and adequacy of the outlet for Shingle Creek shall be determined and the Commission shall then prepare plans which will provide capacity to outlet the surface waters which will be collected within the Shingle Creek watershed. In determining the necessary capacity for said outlet, the Commission shall take into consideration the quantity of land within the watershed which each member governmental unit has to pond or act as a reservoir for surface waters. It shall consider only lands which are under public ownership or under public control and that will be perpetually dedicated to acting as a reservoir for surface waters. The commission may require from each member governmental unit a commitment in writing of the lands which shall be so dedicated, including a legal description of the gross area and the capacity in acre feet of water storage. No project which will channel or divert additional waters to Shingle Creek shall be commenced by any member governmental unit prior to approval of the board of the design of an adequate outlet or of adequate storage facilities. The adequacy of said outlet shall be determined by the board after consultations with its professional engineers. Subdivision 4. All construction, reconstruction, extension or maintenance of Shingle Creek, including outlets, lift stations, dams, reservoirs, or other appurtenances D -14 • of a surface water or storm sewer system which involve construction by or assessment against any member governmental unit or against privately or publicly owned land within the watershed shall follow the statutory procedures outlines in Chapter 429 of the Minnesota Statutes except as herein modified. The Board shall secure from its engineers or some other competent person a report advising it in a preliminary way as to whether the proposed improvement is feasible and as to whether it shall best be made as proposed or in connection with some other improvement and the estimated cost of the improvement as recommended and the proposed allocation of costs. The Commission shall have authority to separate the watershed into subtrunks or subdistricts if the capital improvement project and costs only benefit a subtrunk or subdistrict area. If the Commission determines that a capital improvement and capital cost benefits only a subtrunk or subdistrict area it may so designate that said area shall be responsible for said costs and may allocate the costs to said area or areas rather than to the entire watershed. The Board shall then hold a public hearing on the proposed improvement after mailed notice to the clerk of each member governmental unit within the Watershed. The Commission shall not be required to mail or publish notice except by said notice to the clerk. Said notice shall be mailed not less than 45 days before the hearing, shall state the time and place of the hearing, the general nature of the improvement, the estimated total cost and the estimated cost to each member governmental unit. The board may adjourn said hearing to obtain further information, may continue said hearing pending action of the member governmental units or may take such other action as it deems necessary to ' carry out the purposes of this Commission. To order the improvement, in accordance with the powers and duties established in Article VI, Subdivisions 7, 8 and 9, a resolution setting forth the order shall require a favorable vote by two -thirds of all eligible votes of the then existing board of the D -15 • Commission. The order shall describe the improvement, shall allocate in percentages the cost allocation between the member governmental units, shall designate the engineers to prepare - plans and specifications, and shall designate the member who will contract for the i f improvement in accordance with Subdivision 7 o this Ar ticle P After the board has ordered an improvement it shall forward to all member governmental units an estimated time schedule for the construction of said improvement. The board shall allow an adequate amount of time, and in no event less than 45 days, for each member governmental unit to conduct hearings, in accordance with the provisions of the aforestated Chapter 429 or the charter requirements of any city, or to ascertain the method of financing which said member governmental unit will utilize to pay its proportionate share of the costs of the improvement. Each member governmental unit shall ascertain within a period of 90 days the method it shall use to pay its proportionate share of the costs. If the Commission proposes to utilize Hennepin County's bonding authority as set forth in Minnesota Statutes, Section 473.883, or if the Commission proposes to certify all or any part of a capital improvement to Hennepin County for payment, then and in that event all proceedings shall be carried out in accordance with the provisions set forth in said Section 473.883. Subdivision 5. The board shall not order and no engineer shall be authorized by the board to prepare plans and specifications before the board has adopted a resolution ordering the improvement. The board may order the advertising for bids upon receipt of notice from each member governmental unit who will be assessed that it has completed its hearing or determined its method of payment or upon expiration of 90 days after the mailing of the preliminary report to the members. Subdivision 6. Any member governmental unit being aggrieved by the determi- nation of the board as to the allocation of the costs of said improvement shall have 30 days after the commission resolution ordering the improvement to appeal said D -16 s determination. Said appeal shall be in writing and shall be addressed to the board asking for arbitration. The determination of the member's appeal shall be referred to a Board of Arbitration. The Board of Arbitration shall consist of three persons; one to be appointed by the Board of Commissioners, one to be appointed by the appealing member governmental unit, and the third to be appointed by the two so selected. In the event the two persons so selected do not appoint the third person within 15 days after their appointment, then the Chief Judge of the District Court of Hennepin County shall have jurisdiction to appoint, upon application of either or both of the two earlier selected, the third person to the board. The third person selected shall not be a resident of any member governmental unit and if appointed by the Chief Judge said person shall be a registered professional engineer. The arbitrators' expenses and fees, together with the other expenses, not including counsel fees, incurred in the conduct of the arbitration shall be divided equally between the Commission and the appealing member. Arbitration shall be conducted in accordance with the Uniform Arbitration Act, Chapter 572 of the Minnesota Statutes. Subdivision 7. Contracts for Improvements. All contracts which are to be let as a result of the board's order to construct, clean, repair, alter, reclaim or change the course or terminus of any ditch, drain, storm sewer, watercourse, or to acquire, operate, construct or maintain dams, dikes, reservoirs or their appurtenances or to carry out any of the other provisions of the plan as authorized by Minnesota Statutes, Section 473.879, and for which two or more member governmental units shall be responsible for the costs shall be let in accordance with the provisions of Section sP � 429.041 of the Minnesota Statutes. The bidding and contracting of said work shall be let by any one of the member governmental units, as ordered by the Board of Commissioners, after compliance with the statutes. All contracts and bidding procedures shall comply with all the requirements of law applicable to contracts let by a statutory city in the State of Minnesota. D -17 • The Commission shall not have the authority to contract in its own name for an improvement work for which a special assessment will be levied against an private Y P sP � Y P or public property under the provisions of Chapter 429 or under the provisions of any City charter. This section shall not preclude the Commission from proceeding under Minnesota Statutes, Section 473.883. Subdivision 8. Contracts with Other Governmental Bodies. The Commission may exercise the powers set forth in Article VI, Subdivision 7, but said contracts shall require a favorable vote of two - thirds majority of the eligible votes of the then existing members of the Commission. Subdivision 9. Supervision. All improvement contracts awarded under the provisions of Subdivision 7 of this Article shall be supervised by the member govern - mental unit awarding said contract or said member governmental unit may contract or appoint any qualified staff member or members of the i,^,ommission to carry out said supervision, but each member agrees that the staff of this Commission shall be authorized to observe and review the work in progress and the members agree to cooperate with the Commission staff in accomplishing the purposes of this Commission. Representatives of the Commission shall have the right to enter upon the place or places where the improvement work is in progress for the purpose of making reasonable tests and inspections. The staff of this Commission shall report, advise and recommend to the board on the progress of said work. Subdivision 10. Land Acquisition. The Commission shall not have the power of eminent domain. The member governmental units agree that any and all easements or interest in land which are necessary will be negotiated or condemned in accordance with Chapter 117 of the Minnesota Statutes by the unit wherein said lands are located, and each member agrees to acquire the necessary easements or right of way or partial or complete interest in land upon order of the Board of Commissioners to accomplish D -18 the purposes of this agreement. All reasonable costs of said acquisition shall be considered as a cost of the improvement. If a member governmental unit determines it is in the best interests of that member to acquire additional lands, in conjunction with the taking of lands for storm and surface drainage or storage, for some other purposes, the costs of said acquisition will not be included in the improvement costs of the ordered project. The board in determining the amount of the improvement costs to be assessed to each member governmental unit may take into consideration the land use for which said additional lands are being acquired and may credit the acquiring municipality for said land acquisition to the extent that it benefits the other members of this agreement. Any credits may be applied to the cost allocation of the improvement project under construction or the board if feasible and necessary may defer said credits to a future project. If any member unit refuses to negotiate or condemn lands as ordered by the board, any other member may negotiate or condemn outside its corporate limits in accordance with the aforesaid Chapter 117. All members agree that they will not condemn or negotiate for land acquisition to pond or drain storm and surface waters within the corporate boundaries of another member within the Shingle Creek Watershed P g except upon order of the board of this Commission. The Commission shall have authority to establish land acquisition policies as a part of the overall plan. The policies shall be designed to equalize costs of land throughout the watershed. Subdivision 11. Pollution Control And Water Quality. The Commission shall have the authority and responsibility to protect and improve water quality in the watershed as this is one of the main purposes set forth in the Surface Water Management Act. All member governmental units agree that they will refuse to allow the drainage of sanitary sewage or industrial wastes into any watercourse or storm sewer draining into Shingle Creek. The board may investigate on its own initiative and shall investigate D-19 • upon petition of any member all. complaints relating to pollution of Shingle Creek or its tributaries. Upon a finding that the creek or surface waters are being polluted, the board shall order the member governmental unit to abate this nuisance and each member agrees that it will take all reasonable action available to it under the law to i alleviate the pollution and to assist in protecting and improving the water quality of surface water in ' the watershed. Subdivision 12. Local Water Management Plans. The Commission shall have power and authority to review the members' local water management plans, capital improvement programs and official controls required by Minnesota Statutes 473.879. The members also understand that the overall plan and capital improvement program required for the entire watershed must consist of the local parts in the plan and therefore every effort shall be made by the Commission to coordinate the local plans with the watershed's overall plan. The members further understand and agree that • upon completion and approval of the overall plan required by Minnesota Statutes 473.878, each member will be required to present their local management plan to the Commission as required by Minnesota Statutes, Section 473.879. It is therefore important that each member provide the Commission with their best effort to coordinate and plan for the individual member's local P lan at the same time the watershed overall plan is being assembled. FINANCES VIb Subdivision 1. The Commission funds may be expended by the board in accordance with this agreement and in accordance with the procedures as established by law and in the manner as may be determined by the board. The board shall designate one or more national or state bank or trust companies, authorized by Chapters 118 and 427 • of the Minnesota Statutes to receive deposits of public moneys and to act as depositories D -20 for the Commission funds. In no event shall there be a disbursement of Commission funds without the signature of at least two board members, one of whom shall be the Treasurer or his Authorized Deputy 'Measurer. The Treasurer shall be required to file with the Secretary of the board a bond in the sum of at least $10,000 or such higher amount as shall be determined by the board. The Commission shall pay the premium on said bond. Subdivision 2. Each member agrees to contribute each year to a general fund, said fund to be used for general administration purposes including, but not limited to: salaries, rent, supplies, development of an overall plan, engineering and legal expenses, insurance, bonds, and to purchase and maintain devices to measure hydrological and water quality data. Said funds may also be used for normal maintenance of the facilities, but any extraordinary maintenance or repair expense shall be treated as an improvement cost and processed in accordance with Subdivision 3 of this Article. The annual contribution by each member shall be based fifty percent (50 %) on the assessed valuation of all property within the Watershed and fifty percent (50 %) on the basis of the total area of each member within the boundaries of the watershed each year to the total area in the Shingle Creek Watershed. In no event shall any assessment require a contribution for general fund purposes to exceed one-half of a mill on each dollar of assessed valuation within the watershed. Subdivision 3. (a) An improvement fund shall be established for each improvement project instituted under Article VII, Subdivision 4. Each member agrees to contribute to said funds its proportionate share of the engineering, legal and administrative costs as determined by the Commission as the amount to be assessed against each member as a cost of the improvement. The board shall submit in writing a statement to each ® member, setting forth in detail the expenses incurred by the Commission for each project. D -21 Each member further agrees to pay to or contract with the member governmental unit awarding said contract for the improvement, its proportionate share of the cost of the improvement in accordance with the determination of the board under Article VII, Subdivision 4. The member awarding the contract shall submit in writing copies of the engineer's certificate authorizing payment during construction and the member being billed agrees to pay its proportionate share of said improvement costs within 30 days after receipt of the statement. The member awarding the contract shall advise other contributing members of the tentative time schedule of the work and the estimated times when the contributions shall be necessary. (b) Notwithstanding the provisions of paragraph (a) of this subdivision, the Commission may by a vote of 2 /3rds of all eligible votes of the then existing members of the Commission decide to proceed to fund all or any part of the cost of a capital improvement contained in the capital improvement program of the plan pursuant to • the authority and subject to the provisions set forth in Minnesota Statutes, Section 473.883. It is expressed as a goal of this Agreement that cost sharing of capital improvement costs be assigned and agreed to by members pursuant to Article VIII, Subdivision 5, Subsection 1 of this Agreement. Without such agreement, all improve- ments will be constructed pursuant to Minnesota Statutes, Section 473.883. The Commission and Hennepin County may establish a maintenance fund to be used for normal and routine maintenance of an improvement constructed in whole or in part with money provided by Hennepin County pursuant to Minnesota Statutes, Section 473.883. The levy and collection of an ad valorem tax levy for maintenance shall be by Hennepin Count based on a tax le resolution adopted b a 2 /3rds vote of all P Y upon levy P Y eligible members of the Commission and remitted to the County on or before October 10th of each year. If it is determined to levy for maintenance, the Commission shall be required to follow the hearing process established by Minnesota Statutes, Section D -22 112.611 and acts amendatory thereof and in addition thereto. Mailed notice shall be sent to the Clerk of each member municipality at least 30 days prior to the hearing. Subdivision 4. On or before July 1 of each year, the Board shall adopt a detailed budget for the ensuing year and decide upon the total amount necessary for the general fund. Budget approval shall require a favorable vote by two - thirds of all eligible votes of then existing members of the Board. The secretary of the Board shall certify the budget on or before July 1 to the clerk of each member governmental unit together with a statement of the proportion of the budget to be provided by each member. The Council of each member agrees it will review the budget, and the Board shall upon notice from any member received prior to August 1, hear objections to the budget, and may, upon notice to all members and after a hearing, modify or amend the budget, and then give notice to the members of any and all modifications or amendments. Each member rees to provide the funds required b the budget and said � P q Y � determination shall be conclusive if no member enters objections in writing on or before August 1. If no objections are submitted to the Board, each member agrees to provide the funds approved by the Board, after the Board has conducted the aforementioned hearing. Modifications or amendments to the original budget require a favorable vote by a majority of all eligible voters of then existing members of the Board. The budget shall not in any event require any member to contribute in excess of one -half of a mill on each dollar of assessed valuation of all taxable property within the watershed and within said members corporate boundaries. The schedule of payments by the members shall be determined by the board in such a manner as to provide for an orderly collection of the funds needed. D -23 Upon notice and hearing, the board by a favorable vote of three fourths of all eligible votes of then existing members may adopt a supplemental budget requiring additional payments by the members within 60 days of its adoption but in no event shall the budget require any member to contribute in excess of one -half of a mill on each dollar of assessed valuation of all taxable property within the watershed or within any member's corporate boundaries in any one calendar year. Members' attention is drawn to Minnesota Statutes, Section 473.882, which authorized a Watershed Management Tax District to be created within each member City to pay the costs of planning and for the purpose of paying capital costs and /or normal and routine maintenance of facilities. Subdivision 5. Cost Allocation. The Commission shall apportion all capital costs to the respective members on either (1) or (2) of the following bases: (1) (a) Fifty percent of all capital costs or the financing thereof shall be ® apportioned to each member on the basis of the real property valuation of each member within the boundaries of the watershed to the total real property valuation in the Shingle Creek Watershed. (b) Fifty percent of all capital costs or the financing thereof shall be apportioned to each member on the basis of the total area of each member within the boundaries of the watershed to the total area in the Shingle Creek Watershed. (c) Capital costs allocated under the 50% area /50% assessed valuation formula herein set forth may be varied by the Commission by a 7 /9ths vote if: (1) any member community receives a direct benefit from the capital improvement which benefit can be defined as a lateral as well as a trunk benefit, or D -24 (2) the capital improvement provides a direct benefit to one or more members which benefit is so disproportionate as to require in a sense of fairness a modification in the 50/50 formula. (d) Credits to any member for lands acquired by said member to pond or store storm and surface water shall be allowed against costs set forth in Subsections (a), (b) and (c) of this Section. (2) If agreement is not reached to proceed as set forth in Subsection 1 of this Subdivision and if the project is constructed and financed pursuant to Minnesota Statutes, Section 473.883, the members understand and agree that said costs will be levied on all taxable property in the watershed as set forth in the statute. Subdivision 6. The members agree to contribute a total of $30,000 as the organizational expense fund and to provide for the operating budget in the calendar year 1984. Each member governmental unit shall contribute its proportionate share based fifty percent (50 %) on the assessed valuation of all property within the watershed and fifty percent (50 %) on the basis of the total area of each member within the boundaries of the watershed. MISCELLANEOUS PROVISIONS IS. Subdivision 1. The Commission shall not have the power to issue certificates, warrants or bonds. Subdivision 2. The Commission shall not have the power of eminent domain and shall not own any interest in real property. All interests in lands shall be held in the name of the corporate member wherein said lands are located. Subdivision 3. The Commission shall not have the power to levy a special assessment upon any privately or publicly owned land. All such assessments shall be D -25 levied by the member wherein said lands are located. It shall have the P ower to require any member to contribute the costs allocated or assessed according to the other provisions of this agreement. Subdivision 4. Each member agrees that it will not directly or indirectly collect or divert any additional surface water to Shingle Creek or its tributaries without a permit from the Board of Commissioners. Permits may be granted by the board for a member to proceed with the construction or reconstruction of improvements within the individual corporate members' boundaries and at its sole cost upon a finding: (a) that there is an adequate outlet; (b) that said construction is in conformance with the overall plan; and (c) that the construction will not adversely affect other members of this agreement. Subdivision 5. Any member who is more than 60 days in default in contributing its share to the general fund shall have the vote of its board member suspended pending the payment of its proportionate share. Anv member who is more than 60 days in default in contributing its proportionate share of the cost of any improvement to = ^e contracting member shall upon application of the contracting member have the vote of its board member suspended, pending the payment of its proportionate share. Any board member whose vote is under suspension shall not be considered as an eligible member as such membership affects the number of votes required to proceed on any matter under consideration by the board. Subdivision 6. Enforcement. Members agree to be bound by the determination of the Commission and agree to use their best efforts to carry out directives from the Commission; failure to respond may result in a legal action by the Commission to require the member to act under a court order. D -26 DURATION X. Subdivision 1. Each member agrees to be bound by the terms of this agreement until January 1, 2005, and it may option of the parties. es. may be continued thereafter at p Subdivision 2. This agreement may be terminated prior to January 1, 2005, by the unanimous consent of the members. Subdivision 3. In addition to the manner provided in Subdivision 2 for termination, any member may petition the board to dissolve the agreement. Upon 30 days notice in writing to the clerk of each member governmental unit, the board shall hold a hearing and upon a favorable vote by three - fourths of all eligible votes of then existing board members, the board may by Resolution recommend that the Commission be dissolved. Said Resolution shall be submitted to each member governmental unit and if ratified by three - fourths of the councils of all eligible members within 60 days, said board shall dissolve the Commission allowing a reasonable time to complete work in progress and to dispose of personal property owned by the Commission. DISSOLUTION XL Upon dissolution of the Commission, all property of the Commission shall be sold and the proceeds thereof, together with monies on hand, shall be distributed to the eligible members of the Commission. Such distribution of Commission assets shall be made in proportion to the total contribution to the Commission as required by the last annual budget. EFFECTIVE DATE XIL This agreement shall be in full force and effect upon the filing of a certified copy of the resolution approving said agreement by all nine members for Shingle Creek D -27 O Watershed. Said resolution shall be filed with the City Manager of the City of Brooklyn Center, who shall notify all members in writing of its effective date and set a date for the board's first meeting. Said first meeting shall take place at Brooklyn Center City Hall within 30 days after the effective date and shall be called by the Brooklyn Center City Manager. IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the undersigned governmental units, by action of their governing bodies, have caused this agreement to be executed in accordance with the authority of Minnesota Statutes 471.59. s D -28 Approved by the City Council CITY OF MINNEAPOLIS , 1984. By Mayor. Approved as to legality: By Attest Assistant City Attorney City Clerk Countersigned City Comptroller-Treasurer Approved by the City Council CITY OF BROOKLYN CENTER 1984. By Attest Approved by the City Council CITY OF BROOKLYN PARK 1984. By Attest Approved by the City Council CITY OF CRYSTAL 1984. By Attest Approved by the City Council CITY OF MAPLE GROVE 1984. By Attes Approved by the City Council CITY OF NEW HOPE 1984. By Attest Approved by the City Council CITY OF OSSEO 1984. By Attest Approved by the City Council CITY OF PLYMOUTH 1984. By Attest Approved by the City Council CITY OF ROBBINSDALE 1984. By Attest D -29 • APPENDIX E HYDROLOGIC DATA • r GsC 4f 4 C' G i, o s s Q s Im ® ® ® a] M ® ® m la 11 M I I 03 J�1 06 09 K U 41 m 1 I z r� i LSC 2 (NO OUTLET) T 5 LE'C�ND C�+ ---`— stwucTURE No. I CRM-SEcnam 110 i 001 UT DOWNSTREAM END OF REACH) —` INTERVENING AREA SHINGLE CREEK WMO F AIM & "BOCIATES FEB. 19ET WATERSHED FLAW ROUTING HYI]ROLC MM- I�EAPOLIS - MNNESOTA i i • SHINGLE 0M W TERM MWG'f14;?dT PLAN HYDROLOGIC DATA Existing Land Use Dist.() Time Reservoir Details fo are and se ist. ' Caposite of Conc. LVS y toga- forage Esc Water- Total Curare No. Existing/ Invert Invert Overflav Relationshi shed Area Existing/ Future Outlet Structure Elev. Elev. panel Elev, tai ge storage Uischarge No. (ac) SF MF C/R I/M PW GS PG Future (hrs) Location Type_ Size (ft NG1D) (ft NGYD) Location (ft NG O) (ft WM) (ac -ft) (cfs) cmmmts LSCI 1562 62 0 0 17 0 21 0 74/74 1.4/1.4 1 -94 Bridge No parading available. LSC2 1206 77 1 8 0 6 8 0 76!16 0.4/0.4 No outlet Crystal Lake Lii& = 847.5. LSC3 290 72 0 0 11 15 2 0 80/8D 0.4/0.4 Soo Line RCP 36" 849.0 845.5 W Lake 858.8 849.0 0 0 72 0 0 11 15 FS 860.5 2 10 851.0 5 19 852.0 a) 34 853.0 60 48 854.0 100 58 855.0 140 7D 856.0 180 85 857.0 220 95 M LSC4 660 58 5 l8 3 0 16 0 76/76 1.3/1.3 Queen Ave. Bridge 834.7 Ceiterbrook 834.7 0 0 Storage is in (Downstream Calf Course 838.0 0 160 floodplain area. N of Brooklyn and flood- 839.0 9 313 Center City plain in 840.0 ffi 482 limits) Mimeapolis 841.0 54 690 upstream of 842.0 86 960 Queen Ave. 843.0 125 1500 bridge 844.0 182 2360 LSCS 1560 45 2 15 7 3 9 19 73/80 1.6/1.6 Co Rd 10 Weir 100' 838.9 Between 838.9 0 0 ,Just Co Rd 10 839.0 1 22 downstream and I -94 840.0 17 327 of bridge 841.0 48 478 842.0 94 611 843.0 188 657 844.0 282 780 845.0 3B5 930 846.0 494 1180 NOTE: SF = Single Famly M= = Miltiple Family C/R = Comemial /Retail I/M = Industrial /Manufacturing PW = Public Waters/Wetland GS = Greenspace PG - Potential Growth SHINGLE OM WATERSHED MANMlENT PLAN HYDROLOGIC DATA Existing Land Use Oist.M Time Reservoir Details Future Land Use Dist. 7 Coiposite of Conc. WS 0 Emergency Stage-Storage-Discharge Water- Total Curare No. Existing/ Invert ' Invert Overflow Relation she! Area Existing/ Future Outlet Structure Elev. Elev. Pond Elev. ta3eSt Discharge No. (ac) SF W C/R IM PW GS PG Future (hrs) Location Ty Size (ft NGVD) (ft NGVD) Location (ft NGVD) (ft NGVD) (ac -ft) (cfs) fanients R1 820 72 0 4 9 12 3 0 79179 1.711.7 France RCP 48■ 851.4 851.3 Twin Lakes 651.4 0 0 853.0 100 15 854.0 300 37 855.0 650 62 856.0 950 8B 857.0 1320 105 858.0 1600 122 11.2 670 77 3 4 7 1 8 0 76/76 1.6/1.6 40th and Puap 2 -900 Pulp 3 in Crystal Total storage = Adair 9pm start near Douglas 100 ac -ft. eleva- Ave and Total pond area = tion Rockford Rd 9 acres. varies 2 in New Hope Total storage = near 42nd 22 ac -ft. Ave No. and Total pond area ■ m Winnetka Ave 6 acres. 1 W 11.3 860 58 1 0 27 0 14 0 75/75 1.0/1.0 Wy 52 and RCP 84" 856.0 South of 856.0 0 0 Soo Line RR PR and 868.0 1 40 west of 860.0 2 120 Wy 52 862.0 4 240 864.0 5 330 866.0 7 440 868.0 9 500 870.0 12 530 71.4 1330 67 4 9 4 10 6 0 70/70 1.0/1.0 Soo Line Bridge Twin All basins of RR Lakes Twin lakes function as one pond with control at France Ave. NOTE: SF = Single Fanily MF = Miltiple Famly C/R - Comercial/Retail IM- Industrial/Manufacturing PW = Public Waters/Wetland GS = Greenspace PG = Potential Growth SHINGLE CREEK WATERS O MPN GD WT R.M HYDROLOGIC DATA Existing Land Use Dist.( %) Time Reservoir Details u ture List. Cmposite of Conc. y Stage-Storage-Discharg Water- Total Curve No. Existing/ Invert Invert Overflow Relationship shed Area Existing/ Future Outlet Structure Elev. Elev. Pax! Elev, Stage Storage isc No. (ac) SF M= C/R I/M PW GS PG Future (hrs) Location Type Size (ft NGVD) (ft NGVD) Location (ft NGVD) (ft NGVD) (ac -ft) (cfs) Caments 11-5 1560 52 13 0 5 0 30 0 71171 2.2/2.2 SBth Ave. Box 4.1' 851.41 851.3 Upstream of 851.41 0 0 No designatea No. Culvert x 10' Co Rd 10 852.0 U 2J ponding area. 853.0 0 6i Storage area is 854.0 10 125 floodplain. 855.0 30 27U 856.0 50 280 857.0 65 350 858.0 83 410 MSC1 1220 55 6 5 0 22 12 0 6B/6B 3.5/3.5 69th Ave. Box V 840.5 840.0 Palmer Lake 852.0 840.5 0 0 No. Culvert x 10' 841.0 U 25 842.0 110 100 843.0 245 200 844.0 420 290 845.0 635 433 846.0 890 617 847.0 1215 820 848.0 1600 1040 m 849.0 2070 1300 850.0 2600 1540 MSC2 1160 46 16 3 0 1 25 9 72/74 6.3/6.3 Xerxes RCP 2- 840.2 839.8 Along Shingle 847.9 840.2 0 0 No designated Ave. No. Arch 72° x Creek between 842.0 1 126 ponding area. 115" Noble Ave 843.0 3 aA Storage is in and Xerxes 844.0 6 348 floodplain. Ave 845.0 11 392 846.0 16 408 847.0 26 423 848.0 41 496 849.0 64 790 h6C2a 245 97 0 0 0 3 0 0 72/72 .25/.25 81st Ave. RCP 27" 845.48 Lake Success 845.48 0 0 No. PW 847.0 12 8 848.0 21 17 849.0 3D 15 850.0 39 32 851.0 48 34 852.0 58 . 36 853.0 67 3B 854.0 78 40 NOTE: SF = Single Family W = Wtiple Family C/R = Camercial /Retail I/M = Industrial/Manufacturin 9 PW = Public Waters/Wetland GS = Greenspace PG = Potential Growth SHINGLE CREW WATERSHED K409KNT PLAN HYDROLOGIC DATA Existing Land Use DistA) Time Reservoir Details - Future�st -(',) - Carposite of Cone. rgency tage torage nscharge Water- Total Curve No. Existing/ Invert Invert Overflow Relationship shed Area Existing/ Future Outlet Structure Elev. Elev. Paid Elev. 3ta t"age barge No. (ac) SF W C/R I/M PW GS PG future (hrs) Location Type _ Size (ft NGYO) (ft NGVD) Location (ft NGW) (ft NGVD) (ac -ft) (cfs) Laments MSC3 680 75 3 0 0 0 13 9 64/66 2.3/2.3 Brooklyn RCP 3- 847.2 846.3 upstream of 860.9 847.2 0 0 Storage area Blvd. 72" Brooklyn 849.0 1 78 includes Island Blvd. to 850.D 2 173 Ponds Area in 73rd Ave. 851.0 4 279 NW corner of 852.0 6 362 Brooklyn Center, 853.0 13 409 854.0 25 426 855.0 42 476 8%.0 64 557 857.0 109 633 858.0 127 680 859.0 174 790 860.0 232 945 MSC4 530 41 26 15 0 0 3 15 66/73 1.0/1.0 Zane Ave. RCP 2- 854.2 854.3 Zane Ave. 863.9 854.3 0 0 No designated M 41 26 30 0 0 3 72" upstream to 855.0 0 23 pending area. I Brooklyn, 856.0 0 6B Storage is in cln Blvd. (77th) 857.0 0 108 floodplain. 858.0 1 183 859.0 2 273 860. 4 313 861.0 6 330 862.0 9 42B 863.0 13 520 864.0 19 570 KC5 1107 50 11 7 8 0 12 12 67170 3.2/2.0 Brooklyn 50' long weir 861.0 855.8 Upstream 866.3 861.0 0 0 No designated Blvd. and 24W' box weir box of Brooklyn 861.5 2 11 ponding areas. (77th) culverts crest culvert Blvd. (77th) 862.0 5 82 Storage is in inlet 863.0 9 2B7 floodplain. 864.0 14 42B 865.0 21 625 866.0 28 756 867.0 36 867 868.0 49 1018 NOTE: SF = Single Family W = Multiple Family CA = Camemial/Retail I/M = Industrial/Manufacturing PW = Public Waters/Wetland GS = Greenspace PG = Potential Gruith SHINGLE CREEK WATMED MWWW PLAN HYDROLOGIC DATA ExistingLard Use Dist.($) Time Reservoir Details —uMe L se r Unposite of Corn. y Stage- tors sc rge Water- Total Curve No. Existing/ Ynvert Invert Overflow Relatianshi shed Area Existing/ Future Outlet Structure Elev. Elev. Pond Elev. ta��toror• No. (ac) SF M= C/R I/M Pd GS PG Future (hrs) Location Tye — Size (ft NGVD) (ft NGYD) Location (ft %W) (ft NGVD) (ac -ft) (cfs) Caiments M5C5a 435 46 16 27 0 0 5 6 68/70 1.0/3 82nd Ave. RCP 54" 864.0 82nd Ave. 854.0 0 0 52 16 27 0 0 No. No. and 865.0 3 1 *Wng 866.0 7 23 867.0 10 42 868.0 13 5B 869.0 17 70 870.0 3) 80 871.0 25 89 872.0 29 95 873.0 34 100 874.0 39 110 875.0 44 12D I MSC6 1710 10 2 12 32 14 6 24 80/82 4.6/2.7 T.H. 169 Box 8' x 866.4 866.2 ONR 876.8 866.4 0 0 Culvert 6.2 wetlands 868.0 1 44 west of 869.0 12 82 r*1 T.H. 169 870.0 44 136 r 871.0 105 370 rn 872.0 236 272 873.0 411 344 874.0 552 432 875.0 675 490 876.0 788 600 MSC7 IOBD 0 0 0 0 0 0 100 61/65 —/2.0 85th Ave. Ponding to No. west of be provided Co Rd 18 in Maple Grove gavel mining area. NOTE: *Includes rural and agricultural areas. SF = Single Family M= = Multiple Family C/R = Canmercial/Retail I/M - Industrial /Manufacturirg PW = Public Waters/Wetland GS = Greenspace PG = Potential Growth 0 SHINGLE fl2FF7C WATERSHED PiMIAGDW PLAN HYDROLOGIC DATA Existing Land Use Dist. Time Reservoir Details — Future Cared U I� Composite of Conc. y Stage forage ikMr Water- Total Curve No. Existing/ Invert Invert Overflow Relationship shed Area Existing/ Future Outlet Structure Elev. Elev. Pond Elev. Tt Le ge 6isch r9e No. (ac) SF W C/R I/M PW GS PG Future (hrs) Location Tye Size (ft NGVD) (ft NGVD) Location (ft NGVD) (ft NGVD) (ac -ft) (cfs) Comments MSCB 670 10 0 6 29 0 2 53 67/83 2.8/1.3 85th Ave. Box 8x6 873.0 872.86 2 in Osseo No. culvert north of 85th Ave. in T.H. 152 median and 1 future pond in Maple Grove MM 283 10 0 6 29 0 2 53 67183 .85/.50 Greenhavun RCP 36° 870.5 Between RR 893.0 870.5 0 0 Drive tracks 872.0 1 12 and at 873.0 3 3D intersection 874.0 6 47 of T.H. 169 875.0 13 8) and Co Rd 18 876.0 2D 72 877.0 27 82 m 878.0 35 90 879.0 44 97 m 1 880.0 54 107 882.0 74 115 883.0 L10 1000 USC1 490 3B 2 18 13 7 22 0 79/79 2.4/2.2 I -94 RCP 3- 84" Along Eagle 870.0 0 44 Creek and 871.0 0 73 Bass Creek 872.0 18 107 to Magda Or 873.0 4U 146 and 874.0 72 192 Waterworics 875.0 150 240 Rd 876.0 245 297 877.0 320 365 878.0 410 455 879.0 520 56U 880.0 630 69U NOTE: SF = Single Family W = Multiple Family C/R = Cammercial /Retail I/M = Industrial /Manufacturing PW = Public Waters/Wetland GS = Greenspace PG = Potential Gravth SHINGLE CREEK ATERSIfD MVVBDENT PLAN HYDRO`OGIC D4TA Existi Lard Use Dist.( %) Time Reservoir Details uture Lard Use UISt.W Canposite of Cone. rgoncy Stage torage- ischarge Water- Total Curve Ni). Existing/ Invert Invert Overflow Relationshi shed Area Existing/ Future Outlet Structure Elev. Elev. Pond Elev. tape forage is large No. (ac) SF If C/R I/M PW GS PG Future (hrs) Location Typ Size (ft NGVD) (ft NGVD) Location (ft NGVD) (ft NGVD) (ac -ft) (cfs) Caments USC2 90 68 0 12 0 14 6 0 79/19 0.5/0.5 Storm sewer RCP 15" 8B5.0 Magda Lake 887.2 885.0 0 0 on west and Pond 886.0 12 3.7 side of west of 887.0 24 4.2 Co Rd 18 Co Rd 18 888.0 36 4.5 889.0 48 4.8 890.0 60 5.2 USC3 2410 32 2 3 2 26 4 31 79/83 2.1/1/3 Magda Drive Weir and 6' x 873.57 Eagle/Pike 873.57 0 0 box 1.5' Lakes 874.0 132 5 culvert box 875.0 500 29 culvert 876.0 912 54 877.0 1400 66 878.0 1890 75 879.0 2450 80 880.0 3012 88 USCG 810 25 10 0 0 11 0 54 71/15 3.4/1.3 East side Pump 2700 Rm Cedar Island 901.5 0 0 M of Cedar gpm invert Lake 902.0 40 6 r Island 901.5 903.0 120 6 Lake 904.0 200 6 905.0 280 6 USCS 440 82 3 1 0 8 6 0 76/76 1.4/1.4 Waterworks RCP 2- 872.5 871.4 Between 885.0 872.5 0 0 No designated Rd. 48" and and Waterworks 874.0 0 40 pondumg area. 873.4 872.5 Rd and 876.0 0 64 Storage is in 63rd Ave 877.0 2 % floodplain. 878.0 11 127 879.0 25 159 880.0 50 195 881.0 83 228 882.0 126 253 883.0 196 274 884.0 299 298 885.0 427 340 886.0 586 570 NOTE: *Includes rural and agricultural areas. SF - Single Family W - Multiple Family C/R - Commereial/Retail [ - Industrial /Manufacturing /M /Nano ng PW - Public Waters/Wetland GS - Greenspace PG - Potential Growth SHINGLE (REEK WATERSHED MANAMENT PLAN HYMOLOGIC DATA Ex__i__s__t__inrg Land �_Use Dist°( %) Time Reservoir Details future Land Uist.W Canposite of Cont. U agency Stage-Storage-Discharge Water- Total Curve No. Existing/ Invert Invert Overflow Relation shed Area Existing/ Future Outlet Structure Elev. Elev. Panel Elev. ta��torage Discharge No. (ac) SF W C/R I M PW GS PG Future (hrs) Location Tie_ Size (ft NGVD) (ft NGVD) Location (ft NGVD) (ft NGVD) (ac -ft) (cfs) Caments 115C6 610 16 3 10 39 4 1 25 80/81 1.9/1.9 Co Rd 18 RCP arch 3-73" 876.9 876.6 Norttwkst of 876.9 0 0 18 3 28 46 x 44" Co Rd 18 and 878.0 0 40 Bass Lake Rd 879.0 0 120 880.0 0 214 881.0 20 340 882.0 40 40D 883.0 150 460 884.0 260 520 USC7 610 35 0 1 32 14 2 16 81/82 1.3/0.8 Soo Line W RCP 35" 886.23 South of 886.23 0 0 RR tracks 887.0 0 0 8BB.0 18 15 889.0 35 30 890.0 54 48 891.0 120 58 892.0 180 65 893.0 250 82 m (1508 340 34 0 0 4 27 3 32 79/84 3.8/2.9 Private CAP 35" 889.5 Between Bass 889.5 0 0 No designated crossing Lake and 902.0 30 28 ponding area. private 904.0 63 48 Storage is in crossing 906.0 183 65 floodplain. 908.0 321 200 910.0 476 640 912.0 639 2240 USC9 1210 47 0 3 1 19 0 30 76/81 4.1/4.1 East side RCP 5- 904.6 904.7 Bass Lake 906.7 904.6 0 0 65 12 3 1 of Bass 16" 906.0 0 25 Lake 907.0 196 60 908 °0 429 150 909.0 685 380 910.0 950 920 NDTE: SF Single Family W Multiple Family CA . Camprcial/Retail IM - Industrial/Manufacturing PW a Public Waters/Wetland GS a Greenspace PG - Potential Growth SHINGLE 04R WATERSHED MANAGDW PLAN WEROLOGIC DATA Existing Lard Use Dist.W Time Reservoir Details future Land Use Dist.W Carposite of Cant. Emergency Stage-Storage-Discharge Water- Total Curve No. Existing/ Invert Invert Overflow Relationshi shed Area Existing/ Future Outlet Structure Elev. Elev. Pond Elev. taje S aD'scfiarW No. (ac) SF W C/R IM PW GS PG Future Ors) Location T2e _ Size (ft PGVD) (ft WVD) Location (ft NGW) (ft HGW) (ac -ft) (cfs) Caments USC10 190 77 0 0 0 23 0 0 83/83 0.3/0.3 North end RCP 12" 923.5 SdWdt 923.5 0 4 of Sdmidt Lake 924.0 10 4 Lake 925.0 47 4 926.0 88 4 927.0 132 4 USC11 550 0 0 0 0 15 0 85 10/86 2.5/2.3 Just west Proposed 36" 923.5 lb-th and 923.5 0 0 of Pineview RCP south of RR 924.0 1 5 on Pot 925.0 14 12 tracks 926.0 30 26 927.0 56 40 928.0 141 55 USC12 1140 0 0 0 0 4 0 96 66/88 2.8/2.5 1-494 and RCP 84" 927.3 925.0 Parerleau 936.0 927.3 0 0 87 * 9 0 0 4 0 0 Soo Line Lake and 928.0 0 20 RR wetlands 929.0 0 40 930.0 0 70 m 931.0 0 100 n 932.0 0 150 ►— 933.0 0 200 c� 934.0 0 260 935.0 0 330 936.0 15 380 937.0 45 430 NOTE: *Includes rural and agricultural areas. SF = Single Family MF - Miltiple Family C/R - Cam ercial /Retail IM - Industrial /Manufacturing PW - Public Waters/Wetland GS - Greenspace PG - Potential Growth WATERSHED MANAGEMENT PLAN I I PREPARED FOR THE WEST MISSISSIPPI WATERSHED MANAGEMENT COMMISSION MAY 12, 1988 PREPARED BY E. A. HICKOK AND ASSOCIATES 545 INDIAN MOUND WAYZATA, MINNESOTA 55391 II ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS This plan was prepared under the guidance of the West Mississippi Watershed Management Commission and their alternates. Members are: Commissioner Alternate City of Brooklyn Center Sy Knapp Bo Spurrier City of Brooklyn Park Neil Johnson Charles Lenthe City of Champlin Jack Bittle Dean Rick City of Maple Grove Gerry Butcher Donald Ramstad City of Osseo Eugene Hakanson Ralph Leyendecker The Commissioners wish to acknowledge the efforts of the community liaisons who provided the vital communication link with the various member municipalities. The community liaisons are: City of Brooklyn Center Gerald Splinter • City of Brooklyn Park Richard Henneberger City of Champlin Scott Martin City of Maple Grove Douglas Reeder City of Osseo Richard Setzler The Commission wishes to extend a special thanks to Curt Pearson of Wurst, Pearson, Hamilton, Larson and Underwood for his valuable help as legal counsel and Judie Anderson of Judie Anderson Secretarial Services for her professional services. • TABLE OF CONTENTS Page I. INTRODUCTION I -1 II. INVENTORY OF EXISTING AND FUTURE CONDITIONS II -1 JURISDICTION II -1 PHYSICAL ENVIRONMENT II -3 BIOLOGICAL ENVIRONMENT II -4 HUMAN ENVIRONMENT II -10 III. INVENTORY OF HYDROLOGIC SYSTEMS III -1 HYDROLOGIC SYSTEM III -1 HYDROLOGIC MODEL III -3 GROUNDWATER III -7 • IV. OBJECTIVES AND POLICIES IV -1 BACKGROUND IV -1 OBJECTIVES AND POLICIES IV -1 V. MANAGEMENT PLAN V -1 INTRODUCTION V -1 GOVERNMENTAL RESPONSIBILITIES V -1 SURFACE WATER AND WETLAND CLASSIFICATION V -3 WATER MANAGEMENT ISSUES AND STRATEGIES V -5 1. Runoff Management V -6 2. Flood Plain Management V -15 3. Shoreland Management V -18 4. Water Quality Monitoring and Improvement V -20 5. Erosion and Sedimentation Control V -23 6. Storm Water Treatment V -26 7. Wetland Management V -29 8. Groundwater Protection V -31 i TABLE OF CONTENTS (continued) Page VI. IMPLEMENTATION PROGRAM VI -1 CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT PROGRAM VI -1 LOCAL COMPREHENSIVE PLAN AMENDMENTS VI -1 LOCAL WATER MANAGEMENT PLANS VI -1 VII. AMENDMENT PROCESS VII -1 • i, i LIST OF TABLES • Page 1 - SOIL LANDSCAPE INTERPRETATION II -6 2 - OAK SAVANNA COMMUNITY II -8 3 - UPLAND PRAIRIE COMMUNITY II -9 4 - GEOLOGIC UNITS AND THEIR WATER- BEARING III -8 CHARACTERISTICS 5 - WATERBODY AND WETLAND CLASSIFICATION V -4 6 - DESCRIPTION OF RUNOFF MANAGEMENT SECTORS IN V -8 WEST MISSISSIPPI WATERSHED 7 - FLOW CAPACITIES AND PEAK OUTFLOW RATES FOR RUNOFF V -12 MANAGEMENT SECTORS 1, 4, 7, AND 8 8 — ALLOWABLE PEAK OUTFLOW RATES AND STORMWATER STORAGE V -13 REQUIRED FOR RUNOFF MANAGEMENT SECTORS 2, 3, 5, AND 6 9 - TREATMENT LEVELS FOR WATER BODIES AND WETLANDS V -28 LIST OF MAPS Page 1 - WEST MISSISSIPPI WATERSHED II -2 2 - SOIL LANDSCAPES II -5 3 - PRESETTLEMENT VEGETATION II -7 4 - LAND USE II -11 5 - METROPOLITAN SYSTEMS II -13 6 - SUBWATERSHED BOUNDARIES III -2 7 - PROTECTED WATERS AND WETLANDS III -4 8 - RUNOFF MANAGEMENT SECTORS V -7 iii APPENDICES • Page A - MANAGEMENT STANDARDS A -1 B - RAINFALL EVENTS AND DURATIONS B -1 C - SUGGESTED RETENTION AND TREATMENT POND C -1 DESIGN D - WEST MISSISSIPPI WATERSHED MANAGEMENT COMMISSION D -1 JOINT POWERS AGREEMENT E - HYDROLOGIC DATA E -1 F - CHARACTERISTICS OF PROTECTED WATERS AND WETLANDS F -1 • iv I. INTRODUCTION Under the Metropolitan Surface Water Management Act (Minnesota Statutes Section 473.875 to 473.883), requirements are set for preparing watershed management plans within the Twin Cities Metropolitan Area. The .later management organization responsible for preparing this particular water management plan is the West Mississippi Watershed Management Commission. This Commission, established in 1984, etas created through a Joint Powers agreement among the five communities within the West Mississippi watershed. According to the law, the West Mississippi plan must focus on the preservation and use of natural water storage and retention systems. The primary objectives of this law are: - To reduce, to the greatest extent, the public expenditures necessary to control excessive volumes and rates of runoff. • - To improve water quality. - To promote groundwater recharge. - To protect and enhance fish and wildlife habitat and water recreation facilities. To insure that these objectives are realized, the Metropolitan Surface Water act delineates further specifications regarding the basic contents of the watershed management plan. These requirements are: - To describe existing land use and proposed development in the watershed as well as the physical environment. - To present information on the hydrogeologic system and its components and to outline all existing and potential problems related to the system. I -1 To state objectives and policies related to managing the watershed's water quality and rotectin its natural r P g characteristics, and to delineate means by which these policies can be altered and modified. - To set forth a management plan that includes the hydrologic and water quality conditions that will be sought, and to cite significant opportunities for improvement. - To describe conflicts between the watershed plan and existing plans of local governmental units. - To set forth an implementation program that will bring about conformance with the watershed plan, including a capital improvement system and schedules for amending the directives of local government. - To create a procedure for amending the watershed plan itself. To best meet the above stated specifications, this water management plan is divided into five major subsections. These include: - Inventory of existing and future conditions. - Inventory of hydrologic systems. - Determination of objectives and policies. - Management strategy development. - Implementation program. The plan's inventory of existing and future conditions includes a brief profile of the physical environment. Included are descriptions of the area's geomorphology, surface geology, soils and biological communities. Current land use, metropolitan systems and projected growth areas are also discussed. I -2 The inventory of the hydrologic systems includes subwatershed delineation, a meteorological data, and listings of wetlands, drainage systems, lakes, water quality and groundwater characteristics. The existing and future inventories and the hydrologic systems inventory will be used in the planning process to develop implementation strategies and actual programs. IC I The subsection on determining objectives, policies and management strategies outlines a consensus - development method for developing and evaluating the plan's various functions. The management subsection divides the major geographic areas of concerti into those that are developed and those that are developing. Strategies I ies are I I o S ate P 9• 9 presented for individual areas to control runoff, reduce flooding, increase water quality, protect wildlife and enhance recreational resources. The Implementation Program subsection lays out various implementation programs. Capital improvement programs, suggested regulatory programs and a procedure for plan amendment are discussed. The philosophy throughout the planning process emphasizes input from all levels of government, especially the local entities. A second priority is to create a document that will be flexible enough to implement water resources policy into the 21st century. • I -3 II. INVENTORY OF EXISTING AND FUTURE CONDITIONS This section of the Water Management Plan is an inventory of existing conditions and future development. It is divided into four subsections: Jurisdiction, Physical Environment, Biological Environment, and Human Environment. The subsection on Jurisdiction identifies the watershed area characteristics and the included minor civil divisions. The Physical Environment subsection will be a description of the watershed's geomorphology, surficial geology and soils. The Biological Environment subsection summarizes the major biological communities and inventories the important plant and animal species. The Human Environment subsection will describe land use, growth patterns and metropolitan systems. Information contained in this section will be used throughout the planning process as components of the TR -20 model. JURISDICTION The West Mississippi Watershed Management Commission's jurisdiction covers an area of 23.5 square miles in northeastern Hennepin County. The five municipalities included within the watershed are Brooklyn Center, Brooklyn Park, Champlin, Maple Grove and Osseo. Their locations are shown on Map 1. The West Mississippi watershed is a triangular area north of Highway 152, east of Highway 52/169, and bounded on the north by the Mississippi River. A tail of the watershed extends south of 85th Avenue along the Mississippi River. The tail is predominantly urbanized. The main body is largely rural with pockets of urban development primarily along Highway 52/169 and between 101st and 93rd Avenues. The West Mississippi Watershed Management Commission will be the focal point for ® development and implementation of the management plan for the watershed. Since its inception, the West Mississippi Watershed Management Commission has been II -1 WATERSHED MANAGEMENT PLAN WATERSHED MANAGEMENT COMMISSION CHAMPLIN ----------- --- - - BROOK- PARK MAPLE GROVE N�- E, El- c- Ila, rIONI -- ------------- BROOKLYN CENTER CHAMPLIN MAP 1 1/2 0 2 1 1/4 1 AL Scale in Miles NORTH I I E. A. HICKOK AND ASSOCIATES WAYZATA, MINNESOTA active in preparing the watershed plan and developing a planning process for the management of water resources. PHYSICAL ENVIRONMENT The physical environment is generally considered to be the geomorphology, soils and water resources of a particular area. In this plan, water resources will be described in a separate section. Therefore, the topics of this subsection are geomorphology and soils. The West Mississippi watershed may be divided into two geomorphic areas: the Mississippi Valley outwash area and the Emmons - Faribault moraine area. The eastern portion of the watershed is considered to be a part of the Mississippi Valley outwash geomorphic area. The outwash area is nearly level. In some locations, terraces may be noted along the Mississippi River. In general, the regional groundwater flow is towards the Mississippi River. Outwash soils within this area commonly have sandy or gravely textured subsurface horizons. Surface soil textures range from silty to loamy. One of the predominant soils in this area is the Hubbard series. Hubbard soils are characterized as being nearly flat sandy soils which are well drained and have dependable bearing strengths over a wide range of soil moisture conditions. The western portion of the watershed is within the Emmons - Faribault moraine. This morainic area is characterized by a rolling topography with a relief of 20 to 30 feet. There are several lakes within this geomorphic area. The lower level areas have normally been drained except for deeply inset depressions. These depressions are dead lakes generally filled with peat. the water table beneath knolls is more than 10 feet deep, while the water table in lower areas is approximately 6 feet below the surface. II -3 Map 2 shows the three basic soil landscape units within the West Mississippi Watershed. These soil landscape units were first described in a publication entitled, "Soil Landscapes and Geomorphic Regions of the Twin Cities Metropolitan Area," by the Agriculture Experiment Station of the University of Minnesota in 1975. Mapped soil units are denoted by a series of letters that describe the topsoil, subsoil, arainage characteristics and color of the particular soil unit. Table 1 offers interpretations of the three soil landscape units. This table includes the soil landscape unit, hydrologic group, depth to water table, dominant slope and potential for hazard of sheet erosion. This soils information will be included in the TR -20 hydrologic model. BIOLOGICAL ENVIRONMENT The biological environment is considered to include biological communities and important plant and animal species. Each biological community will be discussed in terms of trees, shrubs, herbs, mammals and fish. The watershed's important species, including those plants and animals that are rare and endangered, Will be listed and described as well. The presettlement vegetation is shown on Map 3. This map shows the general location of the aspen -oak, oak openings and barrons (oak savannah community), and prairie communities. Tables 2 and 3 list the species typical of these communities. Since the area has been used for urban development and agriculture, there are only a few remnants of the presettlement vegetation remaining. The Minnesota Department of Natural Resources Natural Heritage Program was consulted to determine areas where species of special concern were located. No species of special concern were identified within the watershed. II -4 WATERSHED MANAGEMENT PLAN • WEST MISSISSIPPI WATERSHED MANAGEMENT COMMISSION IIAMPLIN SOIL LANDSCAPES Loam over Loam Sand over Sand WD Sand over Sand PD BROOKLYN PARK APLE GROVE OSSEO Ei � - -- it MAP 2 SOURCE: UNIVERSITY of MINNESOTA, DEPARTMENT of SOIL SCIENCE 1/2 M 0 2 • MMMM%M�� 1 1,4 1 Scale in Miles NORTH E. A. HICKOK AND ASSOCIATES �10 WAYZATA, MINNESOTA TABLE 1 SOIL LANDSCAPE INTERPRETATION Depth Soil to High Dominant Hazard Landscape Hydrologic Water Table Slope of Sheet Unit Description Group* (ft) M Erosion SSWD Sandy over sandy, A >6 0 -6 Slight well- drained, dark- colored SSPD Sandy over sandy, A/D 0-3 0 -2 Slight poorly drained, dark - colored LLWL Deep silty or loamy, B >6 2 -12 Moderate well- drained, light- colored *A. Soils with a low runoff potential because of infiltration rates. Trey are deep, well- to excessively - drained sands or gravels. These soils also have a high rate of water transmission. B. Soils with a moderate infiltration and transmission rate when thoroughly wetted and consisting chiefly of moderately deep to deep, moderately well- to well- drained soils with moderately fine to moderately coarse textures. D. Group D consists of soils with high runoff potential. (Soils having very slow infiltration rates.) These soils have a slow infiltration rate because of clay content, high water table, or claypan or clay layer at or near the surface. These soils have a very slow rate of water transmission. II -6 WATERSHED MANAGEMENT PLAN WEST MISSISSIPPI WATERSHED MANAGEMENT COMMISSION \= PRESETTLEMENT VEGETATION - - - - -- , - Oak Openings & Barrens Prairies k1f ' Aspen -Oak Land J BROOKLYN n PARK I L vE —E. - �` - -- WE Eeiiwrmy \', Covnr D�.rn I No 3 IlOrmtrpn� V a \ wM 1 1 BROOKLYN CENTER l o/ 9 r:: C NP MAP 3 1/ 2 _D 2 O 1 1/4 1 Scale in Miles NORTH II E. A. HICKOK AND ASSOCIATES WAYZATA, MINNESOTA V�` TABLE 2 OAK SAVANNA COMMUNITY (OAK OPENINGS AND BARRENS) TREES MAMMALS Bur Oak Cottontail Rabbit White Oak Gopher Northern Pin Oak Red Fox Aspen Thirteen -lined Ground Squirrel SHRUBS BIRDS Hazelnut Crow Dogwood Western Meadowlark Wildrose Brewer's Blackbird Prickly Ash Goldfinch Indigo Bunting Lark Sparrow HERBS Ring -neck Pheasant Meadow Rue Goldenrod Burdock Yarrow Meadowgrass Sweet Clover Big Bluestem Little Bluestem Porcupine Grass Hoary Puccoon New Jersey Tea SOURCE: Hickok, 1977. i II -8 TABLE 3 • UPLAND PRAIRIE COMMUNITY (PRAIRIES) DOMINANT TREE SPECIES MAMMALS None Thirteen -lined Ground Squirrel Pocket Gopher DOMINANT SHRUBS AND HERBS Badger Red Fox Little Bluestem Spotted Skunk June Grass Big Bluestem BIRDS Switch Grass Grama Grass Western Meadowlark Sedge Horned Lark Porcupine Grass Pheasant .Sand Grass Savanna Sparrow Dogwood Bluebell Paint Brush Thistle Draba Prairie Smoke Sunflower Prairie Phlox Rose Indian Grass Wolfberry Lead Plant SOURCE Hickok, 1977. II -9 HUMAN ENVIRONMENT • This section of the inventory describes the land use, metropolitan service systems, and the potential growth areas within the watershed. Land Use The land use within the West Mississippi watershed has been influenced by five basic location mechanisms: proximity to Minneapolis, transportation systems, lakes, wastewater transport systems, and local controls. Map 4 shows the land use within the watershed. It can be seen that most urbanized area is the southeastern portion of the watershed. Land use types are fairly typical of suburban areas. This growth is predominantly the result of urban expansion. Land use types in other portions of the watershed are fairly typical of developing suburban areas. The bulk of the development within the watershed is in single family housing -- typical of a suburban setting. The proximity to Minneapolis and main transportation routes have been influential factors orientating development. There has been considerable local control over development within the watershed in the form of zoning ordinances and other controls such as bonding mechanisms. Under the Metropolitan Land Planning Act, communities are required to prepare land use plans through the year 2000. Communities within the watershed completed these plans in the late 1970s and early 1980s. Map 4 is a compilation of the land use information from these plans and the projected growth information from comprehensive plans. The rnap indicates that in the next 15 years, there will be a decline in open space in the western portion of the watershed, with particular growth in the Champlin area. s II -10 WATERSHED MANAGEMENT PLAN � WEST MISSISSIPPI WATERSHED MANAGEMENT COMMISSION `9 LAND USE Single Family Housing j Multi - Family Housing Commercial /Retail Service Industrial /Manufacturing Green Space Projected Growth i �a 7' i a fl MAP 4 aE SOURCE: CITY PLANS - 1/2 0 Z n Scale in Miles NORTH E. A. HICKOK AND ASSOCIATES WAYZATA, MINNESOTA The western portion of the watershed is less developed than the eastern portion. • The Metropolitan Waste Control Commission and the Metropolitan Council control the development within the watershed through the location of wastewater transport systems. These are shown on Map 5. There are no wastewater treatment plants within the watershed. Map 5 also shows the Metropolitan Waste Control Commissions interceptors and boundaries as well as the Metropolitan Urban Service Area (MUSA). • II -12 WATERSHED MANAGEMENT PLAN 5E I WEST MISSISSIPPI WATERSHED MANAGEMENT COMMISSION :CH—PLIN METROPOLITAN SYSTEMS .. . ....... N.. ........ % Service Area Boundary 1990 MUSA Boundary ....................... Existing Interceptors Proposed Interceptors aRoO—N PARK • ....... MAPLE GROVE • 'Y' .... ........... .. .... .............. . RROOnLVN IENIIP C. .1 �,N MAP 5 1/2 0 2 1 1/4 1 Scale in Miles NORTH E. A. HICKOK AND ASSOCIATES WAYZATA, MINNESOTA III. INVENTORY OF HYDROLOGIC SYSTEMS INTRODUCTION This section is an inventory of existing data basic to the understanding of the West Mississippi watershed hydrologic system. The information collected for this section is the basis for subwatershed delineations and hydrologic modeling. Presented first is an overview of the watershed's drainage pattern. Tile hydrologic model is then discussed in terms of capability, underlying assumptions, input variables and results. HYDROLOGIC SYSTEM The drainage pattern of the watershed is typical of a glaciated area with moraines and outwash plains. The drainage system is composed of few streams and a relatively small number of lakes and wetlands. The natural drainage system is supplemented with several man -made ditches. Much of the area drains directly to the Mississippi River. Map 6 shows the watershed drainage pattern. The eastern side of the watershed is bounded by the Mississippi River. Of the 34 subwatersheds 20 outlet directly into the river. The remaining subwatersheds (except for EB 7 which has no outlet) drain to two small creeks and a trunk storm sewer. There is one significant storage area in the watershed and many small ponds and wetlands. The southern portion of Champlin,consisting of subwatersheds UWM 11 and UWM 12, drain to a 48 -inch trunk storm sewer which begins at Winnetka Avenue and outlets directly to the Mississippi River. The central portion of the watershed is drained by intermittent streams tributary to Oxbow Creek. The creek flows in an easterly direction and then heads north eventually outletting to the Mississippi River. Two subwatersheds (UWM 10b and UWM 10c) presently outlet to the west of the watershed. Future outlets will direct the flow east in Subwatershed UWM 10a. III -1 WATERSHED MANAGEMENT PLAN • tr \ z� WEST MISSISSIPPI i Hr „ 26 UWM 15 Esr WATERSHED MANAGEMENT COMMISSION I , I J UWM 14 I UWM 13 zs '. CH4MPLiN I - UWM II UWM 12 l6° � _,�I SUBWATERSHED BOUNDARIES 23 1 � UWM 6a / I 22o UWM I \ v .., IQb ITUR 1 OUTLE I I UMW 9 I EziST�NG 21 zJ UWM 6b Legal Watershed Boundary OUTLET �— �., o /UWM5 2 ° 2 ' q °I / 'Wm 4 Subwatershed Boundary I UWM Oa `UWM 10c J— ._J .. .. � � � a z19 -f l � -; ► Subwatershed Outlet/ WM B r O Outlet Control Structure BR ”' 1 \ �. 1 EB7__ =', TLET 7 P ( �: `UWM 3 Areas Draining Directly - LWM 2 To Mississippi River s -a MAPLE f.Rn �noo5f_ _ _��' � y5^ nvc EB6b 12C ' = -- - EB dinbroo u wa ershe � E k s S b t d EB 6a �\ t «<� E85 v \ EB4 L - '� \ f NV LWM Lower West Mississippi EB3 �� 1 I E1 0 ��� Subwatersheds EB2` UWM Upper West Mississippi R v 'Al Subwatersheds —r `LWM �.. LWM6 LWM5 q L II LWM4 II a BROOKLYN CENTERI 1 UW 17 �s LWM3 Q MP 2P UWM MAP 6 LWM :` — - 1/2 0 2 LWM I � 1 1/4 1 Scale in Miles NORTH E. A. HICKOK AND ASSOCIATES WAYZATA, MINNESOTA \/ 1 The southern half of the upper portion is drained by the newly constructed Edinbrook. This area was previously drained by County Ditch 5 which was officially abandoned by County Board resolution ( #86 -3 -171) on March 11, 1986. Edinbrook has been completed from Mattson Brook to Noble Avenue and will eventually extend to Trunk Highway 169. The protected waters and wetlands have been identified by the Minnesota Department of Natural Resources. This classification includes all Class 3, 4 and 5 wetlands (as defined by the Department of Interior) which are 10 or more acres in size in unincorporated areas or 2.5 acres or more in incorporated P P areas and those waterbodies identified as public waters through the process identified in Minnesota statutes. Data on these waters and wetlands have been collected and used in the modeling of surface water runoff. The listing and location of these waters and wetlands is available through Hennepin County. ® Map 7 shows the protected waters and wetlands. Appendix F lists the characteristics of the P rotected waters and wetlands. The Federal Flood Insurance Program has delineated flood plains within the watershed and floodway and flood fringe areas that would be inundated as a results of a 100 -year flood. The purpose of these maps is to show the flood plain boundary for flood insurance purposes. Flood insurance studies and resultant maps are on file at the Minnesota Department of Natural Resources and 0 P are available from the Federal Emergency Management Agency. HYDROLOGIC MODEL The TR -20 computer model was selected to assist in the hydrologic evaluation. This widely used model was developed by the Hydrology branch of the Soil Conservation Service. The program is a single event model which computes direct runoff resulting from any synthetic or natural rainstorm. The model III -3 WATERSHED MANAGEMENT PLAN WEST MISSISSIPPI WATERSHED MANAGEMENT COMMISSION aMFLN 99 PROTECTED WATER and WETLANDS Protected Water and Wetlands Other Wetlands -PLE GROVE RROpnLYN CE k�E VIi I 4 L OSSEO J— v 11/2 0 2 1 1/4 1 Scale in Miles NORTH E. A. HICKOK AND ASSOCIATES WAYZATA, MINNESOTA fp develops flood hydrographs from runoff then routes the flow through stream and storage areas on a tributary basis. The program can be used to combine routed hydrographs to compute peak discharges, times of occurrence, and peak water surface elevations at any desired cross - section of structure. The TR -20 model has the capacity to: 1. Route flow through 99 structures and an unlimited number of variations for each structure. 2. Route flow through up to 20U stream reaches and an unlimited number of channel modifications for each reach. 3. Compute up to 300 coordinates of a hydrograph within the watershed and provide discharges and elevations for each. 4. Make an unlimited number of routings through a watershed. 5. Develop and route runoff from up to nine different rainfall distributions over the watershed. 6. Combine hydrographs from an unlimited number of tributaries and reaches. The TR -20 model has been available since 1965 and has received widespread use as a hydrologic model. Federal Flood Insurance Studies have used this model to generate runoff hydrographs from subwatersheds. The programs uses accepted engineering methods as outlined in the National Engineering Handbook (NEH -4). III -5 For analysis purposes the Watershed was divided into subwatersheds to better define hydrologic effects. These effects are influenced by the entrance of tributaries, general watershed shape, valley slope changes, homogeneity of the runoff curve number (a number that represents runoff based on physical features, land use and hydrologic condition) and existing water impoundment structures. Hypothetical cumulative rainfall distributions were used in the model. A runoff mass curve is developed for each subwatershed by supplying the curve number, rainfall volume and rainfall distribution to the program. An incremental unit hydrograph is then determined for each subwatershed which is calculated as a function of the time of concentration. Coordinates of the incremental unit hydrograph and runoff volume are also determined for each time unit. The composite flood hydrograph, computed by summing the increment hydrographs, is routed through a reservoir using stage- storage- discharge parameters. The 100 -year storm was modeled for existing land use and projected land use to the year 2000. Existing and future land use patterns were developed from community comprehensive land management plans. Runoff modeling for projected use assumed that land use ro'ections will be realized and that all resent p J p storage and drainage systems will be in operation in the year 2000. This information will be instrumental in determining watershed management strategies in Section V of this plan. Hydrologic data used in the TR -20 modeling effort is included as Appendix E. III -6 GROUNDWATER SURFICIAL AQUIFERS The surficial geology of the West Mississippi watershed is composed of primarily sand and gravel outwash and glacial till. These glacial deposits vary in both permeability and thickness to bedrock. Within these deposits are unconfined (water table) aquifers of sufficient waterbearing capacity to provide municipal and private water. These water table aquifers are vulnerable to contamination since they are relatively close to the land surface. Contaminants have a relatively direct access to these aquifers through minimal infiltration. Recharge areas for drift aquifers are those locations where water can reach the water table through percolation of water through soil and drift materials. Critical recharge areas are those areas where the drift material is relatively thin, transmissivity is high and water table depth is minimal. Areas with these characteristics have a greater potential to transport contaminants to the drift aquifers than other areas. Recharge can also occur from surface water bodies. Wetlands and flood plains can function as recharge, discharge, or flow through areas depending on the level of the water within the wetland or flood plain relative to the water table. Discharge can occur naturally through springs, seeps, and directly into streams and lakes. Percolation into underlying aquifers is also a form of discharge from drift aquifers. The configuration of these subsurface aquifers and the position of the water table are highly variable and complex. Available information does not allow a detailed evaluation and delineation of these aquifers or identification of recharge areas. Site- specific information in the form of well logs does give some indication of aquifer depth and characteristics of the surficial material. III -7 ® ! • TABLE 4 GEOLOGIC UNITS AND THEIR WATER - BEARING CHARACTERISTICS Approximate range in thickness System Geologic Unit (feet) Description Water- Bearing Characteristics Hydrogeologic Unit Quaternary Undifferentiated 0 -400 Till, outwash and valley -train sand and gravel, lake Distribution of aquifers and confining Drift. glacial drift deposits and alluvium; vertical and horizontal beds within drift is poorly known. distribution of units is complex. Stratified well- sorted deposits of sand and gravel yield moderate to large supplies of water to wells (240 to 2,000 gal /min). Decorah Shale 0 -95 Shale, bluish -green to bluish -gray; blocky. Confining bed. Platteville 0 -35 Dolomitic limestone and dolomite, dark gray, hard, Fractures and solution cavities in Decorah-Platteville- Limestone thin - bedded to medium - bedded, rock generally yield small supplies to Glenwood confining wells (less than 20 gal /min). Not unit. considered to be an important source of water in metropolitan area. Glenwood Shale 0 -18 Shale, bluish -gray to bluish - green; generally soft Confining bed; locally some springs H but becomes dolomitic and harder to the east. issue from the Glenwood - Platteville contact in the river bluffs. 00 Ordovician St. Peter 0 -150 Sandstone, white, fine- to medium - grained, Most wells completed in the sandstone St. Peter aquifer. Sandstone well - sorted, quartzose; 50 -50 feet of siltstone are of small diameter and used for and shale near bottom of formation. domestic supply. They yield 9 to 100 gal /min. Water occurs under both confined and unconfined conditions. Confining bed near bottom of formation seems-extensive and hydraulically separates sandstone from underlying Prairie du Chien - Jordan aquifer. Not Basal St. Peter considered to be an important source confining unit. for public supplies in area of study. Prairie du Chien 0 -250 Dolomite, sandstone, sandy dolomite; light brown, Prairie du Chien: Permeability is due n i Group buff, gray; thinly to thickly bedded. to fractures, joints, and solution cavities in the rock. Yields small to large supplies of water to wells. Pumping rates of up to 1,800 gal /min have been obtained. L TABLE 4 (continued) GEOLOGIC UNITS AND THEIR WATER- BEARING CHARACTERISTICS Approximate range in thickness System Geologic Unit (feet) Description Water- Bearing Characteristics Hydrogeologic Unit Prairie du Chien - Jordan aquifer. Cambrian Jordan Sandstone 0 -100 Sandstone, white to yellowish, fine- to coarse- Jordan: Permeability is mostly grained, massive to bedded, cross - bedded in intergranular but may be due to joint places, quartzose; loosely to well cemented, partings in cemented parts. Main source of water for public supply in metropolitan area. Recorded yields are from 36 to 2,400 gal /min. Prairie du Chien- Jordan aquifer: Supplies about 75 percent of ground water pumped in the metropolitan area. Yields from 85 to 2,765 gal /min. St. Lawrence 0 -65 Dolomitic siltstone and fine - grained dolomite Confined unit regionally. May yield St. Lawrence - Formation sandstone, gray to greenish, glauconitic. small quantities to domestic wells Franconia locally. confining unit. r-. Franconia 0 -200 Sandstone, gray to greenish, glauconitic, very fine Confining unit regionally. May yield r-. Sandstone grained; some interbedded micaceous shale and small quantities to domestic wells dolomitic sandstone. locally. Ironton Sandstone yellow to white- medium- to coarse - Sandstone grained, poorly cemented. An important aquifer beyond the limits Ironton-Galesville- of the Prairie du Chien- Jordan aquifer. aquifer. 0 -80 _ - Yields of wells range from 40 to 400 Galesville Sandstone gal /min. yellow to white, medium- to coarse - Sandstone grained, poorly cemented. Eau Claire 0 -150 Sandstone, siltstone and shale, gray to Confining unit regionally. May yield Eau Claire Sandstone reddish - brown, fossiliferous. small quantities to domestic wells confining unit. locally. Mount Simon As much Sandstone, gray to pink, medium- to coarse - grained. Sandstone as 200 Some pebble zones and thin shaley beds. A secondary major aquifer that supplies Mount Simon - about 10 percent of ground water Hinckley aquifer. - pumped in the metropolitan area. Recorded yields range from 125 to Precambrian Hinckley As much Sandstone, buff to red, medium- to coarse - grained; 2,000 gal /min. Sandstone as 200 well sorted and cemented. Water quality information is collected on a municipal level to determine treatment needs. Brooklyn Park, Maple Grove and Osseo currently use drift wells for all or part of their municipal water supplies. BEDROCK AQUIFERS The geologic units and their water bearing characteristics are provided in Table 4. The southern portion of the watershed is underlain by the Prairie du Chien /Jordan aquifer. The uppermost bedrock formation in the southern half is St. Peter sandstone. These aquifers are sources of quality water and have sufficient yields for future growth. Most of the municipalities in the Watershed draw their water from either of these aquifers or the deeper Mt. Simon - Hinckley aquifer. Recharge of bedrock aquifers is a complex process. Among the variables affecting recharge are depth to the aquifer, location and permeability of the various formations, ground grater movement and pumping. Of particular concern is the presence of buried bedrock valleys. These valleys, filled with glacial drift, can act as conduits for recharge to one or more aquifers. Studies are being conducted to further define these valleys and their relationship to the various aquifers. Pumping, a form of discharge, can induce aquifer recharge under certain conditions. For example, where wells are pumping from an aquifer near a hydraulic connection to a stream and drawing the water level of the aquifer below that of the stream, induced recharge occurs. Pumping may also cause water from overlying sediments to be induced into the aquifer by reversal in head differences. These flow reversals (from discharge to recharge) are gradual occurrence where groundwater discharge is first lessened -- affecting stream • base flow -- before actual flow reversal occurs. III -10 Discharge from bedrock aquifers occurs through springs and seeps along valley walls. Discharge may also occur as subsurface flow out of the area and as flow into streams following upward flow into buried valley deposits. Until site- specific data are collected to fully understand critical areas of ground water recharge, the entire watershed area has the potential, to some degree, to recharge bedrock aquifers. Several agencies are currently studying the surficial and bedrock geology, water movement and water quality of the entire Twin Cities area. As information becomes available, the understanding of the complexities of ground water recharge and discharge will be furthered. Agencies coordinating special studies or on -going data collection efforts are: Minnesota Geological Survey, Minnesota Department of Natural Resources, Minnesota Pollution Control Agency, Minnesota Department of Health, Metropolitan Council. i i III -11 IV. OBJECTIVES AND POLICIES This section of the plan discusses the objectives and policies that will provide the framework for creating the management strategies of the West Mississippi Watershed Plan through the year 2000. The purpose of this section is to present the objectives and identify associated policies to meet these objectives. BACKGROUND The Metropolitan Surface Water Management Act ( MSWMA) sets forth the purpose and the basis for the Watershed Management Plan. Following is the purpose as set by Minnesota Statutes: 473.875 SURFACE WATER MANAGEMENT PROGRAM PURPOSE The purpose of the surface water management programs required by Sections 473.875 to 473.883 is to preserve and use natural water storage and retention systems in order to (a) reduce to the greatest practical extent the public capital expenditures necessary to control excessive volumes and rates of runoff, (b) improve water quality, (c) prevent flooding and erosion from surface flows, (d) promote groundwater recharge, (e) protect and enhance fish and wildlife habitat and water recreational facilities, and (f) secure the other benefits associated with the proper management of surface water. Mindful of the purpose set forth by the MSWMA the Watershed Management Commission has developed water management objectives for the watershed. These are presented in the following subsection. OBJECTIVES AND POLICIES Following are the water management objectives of the watershed. These objectives incorporate the purpose set forth in the Minnesota Statute and reflect the diversity of the watershed. One or more policies are stated after each and provide a context in which to meet the objective. 0 IV -1 I OBJECTIVE A • To develop hydrologic systems along with a water- related land use planning process to accommodate existing and adopted land use plans within municipalities. Discussion This objective insures that all local governments are both aware of and involved in the watershed planning process. A plan, to be realistic and implementable, must address the existing and future plans of the municipalities. Coordination will insure that all land use plan elements are considered and duplications of effort minimized. Policy Al: Solicit the cooperation of the municipalities within the watershed. ® A2: Develop a water resources management plan that accommodates the land use plans of the municipalities. A3: Develop a water resources management plan that is flexible in incorporating future municipal plans. OBJECTIVE B To preserve and use natural storage and retention areas to maintain and improve the hydrologic systems within the watershed. Discussion The key element in this objective is the preservation of the storage capacity of lakes, ponds, and wetlands for an efficient and effective water management plan. Since storage areas are few, further elimination of storage areas cannot be afforded. Also, storage areas throughout the watershed that currently may not IV -2 be used to their full potential should be considered for enhancement. The Commission will coordinate the effort necessary among the government agencies to properly and efficiently manage the entire system. Flooding of residences occurs at several locations after significant rainfall within the watershed. This indicates that the existing condition is not adequate and remedial measures are necessary. When projected to the year 2000, the peak discharge rate out of each subwatershed will, in most cases, exceed the present rates. A policy to manage the effects of new development is warranted. The Commission proposes to limit the effects of any new development to that subwatershed in which the development occurs. For each subwatershed peak outflow rates will not be allowed to exceed the projected management plan rates which may require capital works of improvement. There will be instances where exceptions may be allowed and are discussed in the management plan section of this report. Policy B1: Preserve the present storage capacities of protected waters and wetlands and natural watercourses. B2: Coordinate the preservation and enhancement of storage areas with state, county, and municipal agencies. B3: Limit developed runoff rate to the projected management plan rate for each subwatershed. B4: Provide for additional storage either on -site or within the subwatershed where necessary to comply with the management plan. B5: Consider other forms of runoff volume and rate control where necessary to comply with the management plan. IV -3 OBJECTIVE C To reduce, to the greatest extent practical, the public capital and maintenance expenditures necessary to control excessive volumes and rates of runoff. Discussion This is a straightforward directive from the Minnesota Statute. Water management must be done in an efficient manner to minimize public expenditures. Project planning and agency coordination must be effective in minimizing unnecessary and marginal project components and eliminate duplication of effort. The operations and maintenance program and capital improvement program must be effectively designed and implemented to insure efficiency. Policy Cl: The management plan adopted shall provide the most efficient and effective methods to limit public costs. OBJECTIVE D To maintain or improve both surface water and groundwater quality. Discussion The purpose of this objective is to maintain or improve the quality of surface water and groundwater. Fish and wildlife habitats will benefit from the improved quality of lakes, streams and wetlands. Most significant is the prevention of pollutants, especially nutrient and sediment loadings, from entering lakes and streams. The treatment and control of runoff and the use of wetlands as a natural treatment method have both proven effective in improving water quality. Water quality monitoring efforts should be implemented to enable identification of potential problems and to establish water resource strategies. IV -4 Groundwater, a valuable source of drinking water, must be protected from contaminants. The protection of surface water quality is important since groundwater aquifers are recharged from surface water. The West Mississippi Watershed Management Commission will strive to protect groundwater recharge areas from potential contamination sources. (See Objective G.) Policy D1: Promote the treatment and /or control of runoff to enhance water quality in order to reverse the upward trends in pollutants, especially nutrient and sediment loadings. 02: Preserve and protect wetlands which provide natural treatment for runoff where necessary to comply with the plan. D3: Establish a water quality monitoring system for identifying changing conditions and potential problems. D4: Protect groundwater recharge areas from potential sources of contamination. D5: Promote or establish a program to reduce discharge of substances contributing to water quality degradation. OBJECTIVE E To prevent and control flooding damage. Discussion The Commission will ban any encroachment upon the floodway fringe as defined in the management plan that will reduce flood storage capacity and thus increase flood flows except as provided herein. Development changes (structures and • fill) will be allowed in the floodway fringe only if they have been protected IV -5 from high water and compensatory storage is provided equal in volume to the i encroachment. Also, encroachments may not create hazardous velocities. Policy E1: Prohibit encroachment without acceptable mitigating action that will reduce the storage capacity of floodplains. E2: Allow only structures in the floodway fringe that have been flood - proofed or will not be subject to excessive damage. This recognizes that there are existing non - conforming uses within the floodway fringe. OBJECTIVE F To control erosion and sedimentation. Discussion Runoff velocities must be minimized and natural cover enhanced, on a watershed -wide basis, to preserve valuable soil resources and protect water quality. At construction sites, where significant soil disruption may occur, on -site sediment containment and erosion control will be required. Policy F1: Minimize runoff velocities and maximize natural cover to reduce erosion. F2: Require all measures necessary to effectively control sediment and erosion within construction sites. OBJECTIVE G To promote groundwater recharge. IV -6 Discussion . Portions of the West Mississippi watershed are identified as groundwater recharge areas. The MSWMA encourages the protection of surface water that recharges groundwater aquifers. The Commission will encourage protection of recharge areas from potential sources of contamination. A major area for groundwater recharge is in the area of floodplains. Management policy will control development within the floodplains that are in the recharge areas of the Prairie du Chien - Jordan aquifer or surficial aquifers. Policy G1: Evaluate and control development over groundwater recharge areas. OBJECTIVE H To protect and enhance water - related fish and wildlife habitats. Discussion The Commission will promote and encourage coordination with the Minnesota Department of Natural Resources whose primary responsibility is to protect and enhance water- related fish and wildlife habitats and to protect rare and endangered species. The Commission will promote wetland preservation which provides a habitat for game fish spawning and wildlife. Policy H1: Promote the adoption of those aspects of local shoreland regulations that enhance fish and wildlife habitat. H2: Preserve protected waters and wetlands that provide habitat for game fish spawning and wildlife. IV -7 I H3: Coordinate with the Department of Natural Resources to enhance fish and wildlife habitats. H4: Coordinate with the Department of Natural Resources to protect rare and endangered species. OBJECTIVE J To protect and enhance opportunities for water recreation. Discussion The Commission does not directly manage water -based recreation within the watershed. However, it is policy of the Commission to coordinate with the State, counties, and municipalities to enhance their ongoing recreational programs which may be affected by water resource management activities. Policy J1: Coordinate with the State, counties, and municipalities to enhance water -based recreation. OBJECTIVE K To coordinate and communicate the relationships between municipalities, agencies and citizens which affect water management within the watershed. Discussion The purpose of this objective is twofold. First, it is important to have a particular agency or group responsible for overseeing plans and activities that may affect water resources. This adds both consistency of approach and provides a central focus oint for agencies and citizens. Second where several p 9 , governmental units r o are involved in problems and i r 9 p obl.. s a solutions that cross political boundaries a separate agency or group charged with overseeing the entire area is IV -8 imperative in accomplishing established goals and objectives in an orderly • fashion. The Commission will function as coordinator in the water management efforts of the municipalities. Policy K1: Coordinate activities of municipalities and citizens relating to water management. IV -9 V. MANAGEMENT PLAN INTRODUCTION This section of the plan addresses the management issues of concern within the West Mississippi watershed. These issues have been identified through analysis of 1) TR -20 model results, 2) physical and hydrologic inventories and 3) input from member communities. The TR -20 model was used to assess existing and future storm water runoff and storage scenarios on a subwatershed basis. Analysis of the physical and hydrologic inventories provide information on environmental issues that are not direct model components. Input was solicited from member communities to identify needs and concerns from a municipal perspective. This section describes the role of the Commission in implementing water management strategies then discusses these strategies on an issue - specific basis. The responsibilities and level of involvement of local governmental units and the West Mississippi Watershed Management Commission are identified. GOVERNMENTAL RESPONSIBILITIES Under the authority of the Surface Water Management Act and the Joint Powers Agreement the West Mississippi Watershed Management Commission shall administer the regulatory functions of this watershed management plan through providing the framework for local water management plan content and regulatory functions. The administering agencies for the regulations contained in the local plans will be the local governmental units. The Commission will provide technical review of all significant (as identified in this plan) local developments associated with the following issues: runoff management, flood plain management, erosion and sedimentation control, storm water treatment, wetland management. These issues are discussed in greater detail under their respective topic areas in the following subsection. The management standards to be used by the Commission for ® project reviews and an example of the application are presented in Appendix A. V -1 The Commission may become a permitting agency under the Surface Water Management • Act if: 1) the local unit does not implement its plan, 2) the proposed action requires an amendment to or variance from the local plan or 3) the local unit requests the West Mississippi Watershed Management Commission to require permits within its jurisdiction. V -2 I SURFACE WATER AND WETLAND CLASSIFICATION The surface waters and wetlands of Shingle Creek watershed are classified for management purposes based on water quantity and quality considerations. This classification will enable management for the appropriate purpose of each waterbody and wetland to meet the objectives of this plan. The classification categories are: recreational, aesthetic, runoff management, and special purpose. Following is a description of each category and the level of treatment necessary for a y o water flowing into the waterbodies and wetlands. RECREATIONAL: Suitable for all recreation and for propagation and maintenance of fish. These waters are managed such that Minnesota Pollution Control Agency's Water Quality Standard "2B" ranking (suitable for cool or warm water fish and suitable for water recreation) is maintained and flow and water elevations are controlled. Treatment will consist of best management practices and will include removal of fine sands and sediment, skimming of oil and floatable materials and nutrient removal. AESTHETIC: Suitable for management as an attractive resource for the ur oses of aesthetics and property value enhancement. P P P p Y Management measures assure visual quality is maintained. Treatment will consist of best management practices and will include removal of fine sands and sediment and the skimming of oil and floatable materials. These waters may be used for runoff management but flow and elevations will be controlled to avoid water elevations which may permanently affect the Y P Y character of the resource. • V -3 RUNOFF MANAGEMENT: Managed solely as storm water storage, treatment and conveyance components. SPECIAL PURPOSE: Suitable for use related to a unique characteristic based on quality, biological, physical or geographical characteristics. This designation will be used b the West Mississippi mm' y Watershed Management Commission as needed. Treatment will be appropriate to maintain the characteristics necessary to support the special purpose. Using these four categories all Protected Waters and Wetlands (as defined by the DNR) and streams or ditches tributary to aesthetic waters shall be considered "aesthetic." Judicial and county ditches and waterbodies not identified as Protected Waters or Wetlands are classified as "runoff management" waterbodies. There are no recreational waterbodies and currently no special purpose areas. Though adjacent to the watershed the Mississippi River is not directly addressed in this plan. However, through water quality and quantity controls established within the watershed, the Mississippi River will realize benefits associated with surface water management since it is a protected water and waters tributary to it are classified as "aesthetic ". TABLE 5 WATERBODY AND WETLAND CLASSIFICATION RECREATIONAL None. AESTHETIC - All DNR protected waters and wetlands. - Streams or ditches tributary to recreational or aesthetic waters. RUNOFF MANAGEMENT - Judicial ditches. - County ditches. - All wetlands including DNR Protected Wetlands and other waterbodies. SPECIAL PURPOSE None. v -4 WATER MANAGEMENT ISSUES AND STRATEGIES The following issues have been identified for the West Mississippi watershed: 1. Runoff management 2. Flood plain management 3. Shoreland management 4. Water quality monitoring 5. Erosion and sedimentation control 6. Stormwater treatment 7. Wetlands management 8. Ground water protection Strategies are developed to address each issue while meeting the objectives and policies set forth by the Commission. These management strategies describe the course of action the Commission has chosen to address the management issues. Presented next is the procedure for implementing the strategies. Projects, plans and programs are presented. The responsibility and level of participation of each governmental unit and the West Mississippi Watershed Management Commission are identified. Specific tasks to be done by the Commission, roles of the local governments and coordination among government agencies are i presented. Last is a discussion of costs and a schedule of completion by year. The projects and programs listed are those in which the Commission will have a participatory role. V -5 1. RUNOFF MANAGEMENT Introduction e Storm water runoff management in the West Mississippi watershed is necessary to 9 pp Y resolve current management problems and accommodate future land use changes. Storm water surcharges occur at several locations following a significant rainfall and indicates that existing storm water management is not adequate and modifications are necessary. Urban development is projected to continue in the watershed through the year 2000. Future water management must address runoff related to new development. eve opment. Management Strategy The watershed has two distinct types of runoff patterns. Nearly half of the subwatersheds drain directly to the Mississippi River and do not convey water from other subwatersheds. The remaining subwatersheds contribute water to or collect flow from other subwatersheds. Because of these differences, the two drainage patterns require different management strategies. Runoff management sectors are used to assess the needs of projected development (Map 8, Table 6). The management sectors are based on the two drainage patterns, runoff control locations and municipal boundaries. This approach simplifies the analysis of runoff rates by reducing the numbers of analysis units (from subwatersheds to management sectors) while accomplishing the overall water management objectives. Runoff analysis for those management sectors (1, 4, 7 and 8) draining directly to the Mississippi River was based on a comparison of the flow capacity of each outlet with that expected for the 100 -year critical storm. Runoff analysis for sectors 2, 3, 5 and 6 was based on TR -20 model peak outflow rates for the 100 -year critical storm. V -6 WATERSHED MANAGEMENT PLAN z, WEST MISSISSIPPI 26 UWM IS I WATERSHED MANAGEMENT COMMISSION I 7 es,� UWM 14 I UW 13 25 9 `.^ y CeCMPLiN RUNOFF MANAGEMENT 24 U IM 11 I �j UWM 12 18. SECTORS UWM 5a 220 IBb it WM lob FUTUP OUTLE I I UMW 9 I 1 la DU LEND �_ Q 2i : J UWM bb �.� Runoff Management —, UWM 5 ` \ `--- o. Sector Boundary U W M ��4,� 2 c 0c) \ 2 I` SECTOR DESIGNATIONS UWM IOc \ ��— � � -- UWM I �_�� - �_ _. ;UWM8 r' UWM L... 1 Lower West Mississippi -� � � I �E� l E87 _- - i2 ��A �E. ( �. `UWM3 I 2 Edinbrook �M�PLE_-LS — _ _ _ _ / UWM 2 EB 6b 2b -� - -- -Z - ` ) -� �, 3 Osseo E8 6a I E85 \ EB4 - \2 t _ V 4 Upper West Mississippi 1 • I 1 \ E83 � \ I Eb I 11 I UWMI �. Fl 5 Ox bow Creek EB2 �� 1 J ^ l \ 0 6 South Champlin 7 Champlin 8 North Champlin �.LWM6 I I' LW M 5 11 Fj 1►. 1 I LWM4 �� a BROOKLYN CENTER P,.,... UW 17 I . IA 29 LWM3 3 CIAMPLIN 21 v JWM H / MAP 8 LWM 2 1/2 0 2 LWM 1 1/4 1 Scale in Miles NORTH E. A. HICKOK AND ASSOCIATES WAYZATA, MINNESOTA TABLE 6 DESCRIPTION OF RUNOFF MMAGENENT SECTORS IN . WEST MISSISSIPPI WATERSHED Subwatersheds Subwatershed at Outlet Runoff Management Sector Within Management Subwatershed Outlet of Structure Number Name Sector Location Management Sector Number 1 Lower West LWM1 Brooklyn Center Each subwatershed 1 Mississippi LW42 Brooklyn Park outlets directly 2 LWM3 Brooklyn Park to the Mississippi 3 LW44 Brooklyn Park River 4 LW45 Brooklyn Park 5 LWM6 Brooklyn Park 6a LWM7 Brooklyn Park 6b 2 Edinbrook EB1 Brooklyn Park EB1 7 EB2 Brooklyn Park EB3 Brooklyn Park EB4 Brooklyn Park EB5 Brooklyn Park 3 Osseo EB6a Osseo, Brooklyn Park EB6a 12a EB6b Maple Grove, Osseo EB7 Maple Grove 4 Upper West UW41 Brooklyn Park Each subwatershed 13 Mississippi UWM2 Brooklyn Park outlets directly 14 UW43 Brooklyn Park to the Mississippi 15 UW44 Brooklyn Park River 16 UWM5 Brooklyn Park, Champlin 17 5 Oxbow Creek UWM6a Champlin UWM6a 18a UWM6b Brooklyn Park UWM7 Brooklyn Park UW48 Brooklyn Park UWM9 Brooklyn Park UWM10a Brooklyn Park UWM10b Maple Grove UWM10c Maple Grove 6 South Champlin UWM11 Champlin UWw12 24 UWM12 Champlin 7 Champlin LWM13 Champlin Each subwatershed 25 UW414 Champlin outlets directly 26 UWM15 Champlin to the Mississippi 27 River 8 North Champlin UWM16 Champlin Each subwatershed 28 UWM17 Champlin outlets directly 29 to the Mississippi River V -8 Preservation and maintenance of the existing drainage system components are necessary to insure the system will continue to function as designed. Control over drainage system components and any modifications is required to prevent reduction of the drainageway retention capacity. Preservation of the existing storage capacity and capacity necessary to accommodate future (planned) storage needs is necessary. Protected waters and wetlands and natural watercourses (as defined by the DNR) are key system storage components that require preservation. To insure proper water conveyance, drainageway components must be kept free of obstructions. The accumulations of natural and man -made debris can inhibit flow and cause localized flooding. Runoff and storage monitoring systems are a necessary part of a comprehensive storm water management plan. Once storage area volumes and drainageway capacities have been defined a monitoring system is needed to insure the system • components are functioning as intended. A monitoring system will also identify deviations that may result from changes in land use. The following strategies are adopted with respect to runoff management: 1.1. Municipalities shall, in their local plans, address deficiencies where subwatersheds that drain directly to the Mississippi River (runoff management sectors 1, 4, 7 and 8) do not have sufficient flow capacity for the 100 -year critical storm. 1.2. Maximum allowable peak discharge rates established at the discharge point for runoff management sectors 2, 3, 5 and 6 shall be attained by the municipalities. 1.3. Public easements will be required or other methods of control implemented to preserve wetlands, drainageways, flood plains and open water bodies used for storm water storage to meet plan requirements. 1.4. Improvements that will modify the storage capacity of existing drainageways and ponding areas will be regulated. 1.5. The drainageway system will be maintained by completing necessary repairs to control structures and removing debris that inhibits runoff capacities. 1.6. A watershed monitoring system will be established to record storage area elevations, stream flow and precipitation. V -9 Implementation The main implementation mechanism to accomplish the runoff management strategies is adoption and implementation of a local water management plan by each municipality. These plans must define how municipalities will implement local water planning and management activities that are required under the SWMA and this plan. In addition to content requirements identified in this plan, local plans must include the following information pertaining to runoff management to meet the SWMA requirements: - Subwatershed delineations. - Existing and proposed physical environment and land use. - Determination of the runoff, 1 -year, and 100 -year rainfall event water elevations and corresponding discharge rates for all designated stormwater storage areas in the existing and year 2000 development conditions. - Storage volume determinations and allocation of storage. - Measures to be employed to protect wetlands, ditches, drainageways and stormwater storage areas. Municipalities are encouraged to use information generated as part of this plan to assist in the preparation of the runoff rate analysis sections of the local water management plan. Appendix B of this plan defines rainfall events and durations to be used in the local plans for consistency in approach throughout the watershed. Local plans must demonstrate that for a 100 -year return frequency rainfall event of critical duration A) the future outflow rates are or will be accommodated by an outlet of appropriate size for each subwatershed or suitable ponding or overflow is provided in runoff management sectors 1, 4, 7 and 8, and B) the outflow from runoff management sectors 2, 3, 5 and 6 does not exceed the rate V -10 identified by the Commission. Table 7 identifies, for each subwatershed in management sectors 1, 4, 7 and 8, the future outflow rates for the 100 -year critical storm. Flow capacities for the i ex stin outlet structures g uc ures are also provided. Table 8 identifies allowable outflow rates for management sectors 2, 3, 5 and 6 and the amount of storm water storage required. The allowable outflow rates were agreed upon by members of the West Mississippi Watershed Management Commission.. When all outflow rates are met, storm water runoff for the 100 -year storm for the fully developed condition will be effectively managed. For runoff management sectors 3 and 5 (comprised of two or more municipalities with subwatersheds that do not empty directly to the Mississippi River) a method for apportioning outflow to each municipality must be identified in the local plans. Local plans must identify runoff rates that are in concert with the local plans of other municipalities. If the allowable rate is not met the review of the local water management plan will be turned over to an ad hoc committee composed of: - The West Mississippi Watershed Management Commission engineer (without vote). - A representative of the community for which the plan was prepared. - Two representatives appointed by the Commission. This ad hoc committee will review the municipal plan in the context of the entire runoff management sector and investigate methods by which the established rate can be obtained. Investigation may include a determination of whether rate control can be provided in downstream stormwater storage areas outside the municipality's boundary and if downstream drainage facilities can accommodate the increased runoff rate. Upon completion of their investigation the committee shall present the findings to the Commission and make a recommendation. The S Commission will review the information and take action, and if necessary, amend I this management plan. V -11 TABLE 7 FLOW CAPACITIES AND PEAK OUTFLOW RATES FOR RUNOFF MANAGEMENT SECTORS 1, 4, 7 AND 8 100 -Year Peak Runoff Management Sector Sub- Outlet Structure Flow Capacity Outflow Rates (cfs) (5) Number Name Watershed Location (1) Type Size Slope % (cfs) (3) Existing Future 1 Lower West LWM1 55th Ave. N. RCP 42" .50 80 125 125 Mississippi LWM2 59th Ave. N. Concrete 30" 5.88 110 130 130 LWM3 65th Ave. N. RCP 78" .25 280 360 360 LWM4 70th Ave. N. RCP 72" .16 180 ** 170 170 LWM5 74th Ave. N. RCP 66" .42 240 ** 160 160 LWM6 81st Ave. N. RCP 60" .50 200 300 300 LWM7 83rd Ave. N. RCP 30" .43 30 45 45 i 4 Upper West UWM1 92nd Ave. N. -- -- -- -- 10 20 Mississippi UWM2 93rd Ave. N. Steel 24" Culvert 25 40 90 UWM3 101st Ave. N. Steel 45" Culvert 100 ** 55 90 UWM4 Sunset Road CMP 24" Culvert 20 ** 15 25 UWM5 Kyle Ave. CMP 30" Culvert 30 30 100 7 Champlin UWM13 Shepard Cir. RCP 36" 3.60 140 ** 45 45 UWM14 Nevada Cir. RCP 60" .04 60 135 185 UWM15 (4) Pribble St. RCP 60 -- 113 ** 100 500 8 North Champlin UWM16 Colburn St. RCP 33" 2.77 95 ** 50 50 UWM17 Revere Ln. RCP 48" .60 120 ** 35 35 *All subwatersheds in Management Sectors 1, 4, 7 and 8 outlet directly to the Mississippi River. (1) Outlet at Mississippi River unless otherwise noted. (2) Outlets under West River Road. (3) These rates are based on full flowing conditions for storm sewers and a 12 -foot surcharge for culverts under West River Road. (4) Storm sewer proposed as part of Champlin's Comprehensive Stormwater Plan. Existing outlet is a culvert under West River Road near Sherwood Street. * *(5) Overflow routes shall be designated to accommodate excess runoff where peak outflow rates exceed flow capacity. 0 TABLE 8 ALLOWABLE PEAK OUTFLOW RATES AND STORMWATER STORAGE REQUIRED FOR RLNOFF MANAGEMENT SECTORS 2, 3, 5 AND 6 - - - - -- 100 -Year, Critical Storm - - - - -- Stomwater Runoff Management Sector Subwatershed at Outlet Structure Allowable Peak Storage Amount N46er Name of Management Sector Outlet Location Type Size Outflow Rates (cfs) Required (ac -ft) 2 Edinbrook EBl Mattson Brook CMP 70 "x96" 460 600 under West arch River Road culvert 3 Osseo EB6a T. H. 169 Box 8 110 100 south of culvert** 93rd Ave. 5 Oxbow Creek UW16a West River Road RCP 30" 40 %0 southeast of culvert Vera Cruz Ave. 6 South Champlin UW412 Mississippi River RCP 48" 130 180 northeast of storm Oxbow Park sewer *These allowable peak outflow rates were established by the Commissioners of the West Mississippi Watershed Management Commission. **Actual controlling structure is a 54" RCP upstream of culvert. To insure that modification of storage areas and drainageways does not affect intended storm water management, the municipalities will submit development • plans to the Commission for review if the development is 1) adjacent to a protected water or wetland, 2) within the 100 -year flood plain or 3) development of 15 acres or greater for lands zoned single family detached housing and 5 acres or greater for other land uses. The specific requirements for plan review are presented in Appendix A, Management Standards. The costs for implementing the storm water management features outlined in this plan and ultimately in the municipalities' local plans shall be borne by each respective community except cases where the work effort is clearly intended to benefit not only the local municipality but also upstream or downstream municipalities. The Commission may provide technical and financial assistance in monitoring the flow and storage capabilities of system components. The Commission may also provide a water quantity monitoring system to include a lake elevation monitoring program, a flow measurement system and a precipitation monitoring system. Schedule and Costs Costs associated with this plan component relate to review of local water management plans for compliance with this plan are described in the Implementation Program section of this plan. The Commission may elect to institute monitoring at runoff management sector outlets at additional costs. The capital improvement program of this plan may contain projects related to runoff management. Such projects and their funding mechanisms are addressed in the Implementation Program of this plan. • V -14 2. FLOOD PLAIN MANAGEMENT 0 Introduction Flood plain management is necessary to maintain sufficient floodway capacity for the 100 -year flood and to minimize flood - related property damage. To ensure effective flood plain management the Commission intends to establish the 100 -year flood plain boundaries using runoff rates generated by the SCS TR -20 model and incorporating this data into the HEC -2 computer model to determine 100 -year flood profiles. Flood Insurance Studies performed under the provisions of the National Flood Insurance Act of 1968 and the Flood Disaster Protection Act of 1973 have only defined the flood lain adjacent to the Mississippi River. The boundaries of a p J flood that has a recurrence interval of 100 -years (commonly referred to as the 100 -year flood) have been defined. T Federal ederal Em r n e ge cy Management Agency (FEMA) imposes a 1 -foot surcharge limit for the 100 -year flood. Flood plain encroachment may not raise the elevation of the 100 -year flood over 1 foot (i.e., 1 -foot surcharge) above the 100 -year flood plain elevation before encroachment, provided hazardous velocities are not produced. In Minnesota flood plain encroachment is limited to that which would result in a 0.5 -foot surcharge. Management Strategy It is proposed that 100 -year flood profiles and flood plain delineation be developed for Edinbrook in Runoff Management Sector 2 and Oxbow Creek in Runoff Management Sector 5. Encroachment upon the flood plain will reduce flood flow capacity and increase velocity. The strategy of the Commission is to restrict development of the flood plain except in cases where actions have been included to mitigate adverse impacts. V -15 The following strategies have ben adopted i respect t flood 1 9 e a o ed w th re ec o 0o in a P P P i management: 2.1. Encroachment upon the floodway area of the 100 -year flood will not be permitted. 2.2. Encroachment shall be allowed in the flood fringe area of the 100 -year flood plain only if: - compensatory storage is provided in the 100 -year flood plain of equal or greater volume than the encroachment upon the flood fringe, and - encroachment does not create a surcharge, and - encroachment does not create hazardous velocities. 2.3. New structures and facilities will be allowed within or adjacent to the 100 -year flood plain only if 1.0 feet of freeboard above the 100 -year profile is provided. 2.4. All site areas below the 100 -year flood plain elevation after approval of allowable encroachments shall be preserved and dedicated for flood storage by means of granting an appropriate easement to the respective municipality. 2.5. The flood fringe boundary for the fully developed condition will be established. The Commission recognizes that these policies may result in existing non - conforming uses. These existing uses will be exempt from providing mitigative actions. However, any redevelopment that will increase encroachment beyond that of the existing condition must meet the above - stated flood plain development requirements. Implementation The Commission will administer the flood plain management program and review all projects proposed within the 100 -year flood plain. Developments and redevelopments within the flood plain are to be reviewed by the Commission as identified in the Management Standards (Appendix A). Flood plain management strategies shall be incorporated into the local water management plans. V -16 i Enforcement of flood plain development policies will be the responsibility of the municipality in which the development is to occur. Where variances to the local plans are requested, the Commission will review and determine whether the action can be accommodated within the policies and provisions of this plan. Supplemental Studies Two studies are proposed to be conducted by the Commission to determine 100 -year flood profiles along Edinbrook and Oxbow Creek. Flood plain areas will also be identified which need to be available for future flood storage to maintain tnese flood profiles. These two studies are shown below along with the estimated cost. The estimated costs may vary depending on the amount of field work required. 1. Edinbrook Flood Plain Study Estimated Cost: $21,000 2. Oxbow Creek Flood Plain Study Estimated Cost: $14,000 Schedule and Costs The Commission will review all local projects where development is proposed p within the 100-year flood lain. This is one of several items identified for review by the Commission. An estimated cost for all reviews is presented under Subsection 5, "Storm Water Treatment" of this Section. The two supplemental studies identified above will be conducted at a time determined appropriate by the Commission. V -17 3. SHORELAND MANAGEMENT Introduction It is important that shoreland around watershed lakes, streams and rivers be developed in a manner consistent with environmental protection standards in order to preserve and enhance the quality of surface waters within the Watershed. The Minnesota Department of Natural Resources has been charged with administering a shoreland management program. Management Strategy It is the general management strategy of the Commission to encourage municipalities to adopt and implement local shoreland ordinances. Maple Grove currently has a shoreland management ordinance. The following strategy has been adopted with respect to shoreland management: 3.1. Encourage municipalities to adopt shoreland protection ordinances. Implementation The Commission encourages local units of government to adopt and implement ordinances for the protection of shoreland. These shoreland ordinances shall address the control of shoreland development per requirements identified in Minnesota Rule 1983, Part 6120.27. In conjunction with local units of government and the Department of Natural Resources, the West Mississippi Watershed Management Commission will encourage the adoption and implementation of shoreland management regulations to be in compliance with Minnesota Regulations (MR 6120). Administration and enforcement of shoreland management regulations is the 9 9 responsibility of the municipalities. V -18 Schedule and Costs No costs or schedules are anticipated with this plan component beyond those associated with review of local water management plan for compliance with this watershed management plan. V -19 4. WATER QUALITY MONITORING AND IMPROVEMENT Introduction Waterbodies within the West Mississippi watershed are important to the residents of the Twin City metropolitan area. They provide significant storage for flood waters within the watershed, provide a low cost conduit that is available to convey storm water runoff from the watershed and provide valuable habitat for fish and wildlife. If the quality of these waters is impaired due to the presence of physical or chemical impurities, r excessive biological activity, previous mentioned p o e e ve olo cal ac y y 9 , p attributes could be adversely affected. For these reasons, water quality protection in these lakes and streams is of vital importance. To provide the Commission with water quality information that will enable them to identify problems and water quality trends a water quality monitoring program has been included in this plan. Limited water quality data exists for the watershed. The Commission will institute a monitoring program to collect data in a consistent fashion and on a regular basis to assess the existing conditions and observe changes over a period of time. Management Strategy The Commission will design and implement a water quality monitoring program. It will include, but not be limited to, monitoring of 1) the quality of water in selected waterbodies, 2) the flow rate and quality of water discharged from each subwatershed and 3) a special projects monitoring program to allow a detailed analysis of water quality in areas in which problems are observed or V -20 thought to exist. The monitoring program will be coordinated with other water quality monitoring programs where appropriate to avoid duplication of effort. The Commission may consider a water treatment program should data suggest that treatment may be beneficial. The following strategies have been adopted with respect to water quality monitoring: 4.1. A water quality monitoring program will be established to identify existing and changing conditions and potential problems. 4.2. Data collection and analysis will be coordinated with agencies involved in water quality monitoring. 4.3. A treatment program will be considered, if warranted, based on data generated through the monitoring program. Implementation The Commission will design and implement a long -term water quality monitoring program for waterbodies within the watershed. Efforts will be made to coordinate this monitoring with other programs to avoid duplicative efforts. A sampling framework will be established to yield results for significant water bodies and for outflow from selected subwatersheds. The program will include monitoring in selected areas where water quality problems are suspected and further evaluation is necessary. These selected areas will be identified by the Commission on a year -to -year basis. Precipitation monitoring will be included as part of the program. Data from the monitoring program will be entered on the Minnesota Pollution Control Agency's computerized water quality data management system, STORET, and will be made available on a request basis. An annual report will be prepared containing information from the monitoring program. V -21 Schedule and Costs The monitoring program will 9 P 9 1 commence after this plan has been adopted. It is essential to begin monitoring to establish base line information and identify potential problem areas where special monitoring may be warranted. Water quality monitoring costs are based on the aggressiveness of the program and will be available once the program has been designed. i V -22 5. EROSION AND SEDIMENTATION CONTROL I ntroduction Erosion and sedimentation occurs from rimaril two sources -- agriculture and p Y 9 land development. In the West Mississippi watershed agricultural areas are few and land use is comprised mainly of residential, commercial, industrial and open space uses. Existing agricultural areas will continue to be urbanized as development continues to the year 2000. Erosion can dramatically decrease agricultural potential. Agricultural areas are susceptible to wind and runoff erosion. Careful farming practices such as reduced tillage, contour plowing and wind break establishment reduce erosion and preserve valuable topsoil. Control of agricultural runoff will also reduce the transport of pesticides and unwanted nutrients that may cause fish kills and accelerate eutrophication of lakes and streams. As land development construction continues in response to the growth needs of each community, it is usually accompanied by an associated loss of soil material due to erosion. Sediment removed from areas stripped of vegetative cover can be carried off -site into downstream drainageways and water bodies. Once present in the downstream areas, the eroded sediment materials can degrade the water quality, obstruct flow and reduce the depth of downstream water bodies. These and other problems associated with construction site soil erosion require that this issue be addressed. Management Strategy The Commission will support the efforts of the U.S. Department of Agriculture, Soil Conservation Service and the Hennepin Conservation District in addressing soil stabilization within the watershed. Cooperative efforts with these agencies will be explored to inform property owners of judicious farming and land use practices to preserve valuable soil resources and reduce sediment, pesticide and nutrient loadings. V -23 The Commission will require sediment containment and erosion control at land ® development and construction sites. A permit program will be established to increase awareness of the issue and to ensure conformance. The following strategies have been adopted with respect to erosion and sediment control: 5.1. Coordinate with the various governmental agencies responsible for control of agricultural soil erosion and sedimentation. 5.2. A review program will be established for all land development and construction site work to insure every effort will be made to minimize sediment transport. Implementation Strategy Local governmental units will be responsible for enforcing erosion and sedimentation control plans for all development and redevelopment sites. The Commission will review all proposed single family, detached residential developments of 15 acres or greater and 5 acres or greater for all other land uses and submit its recommendations to local governmental units for implementation. As part of their local plan, municipalities must identify acceptable erosion control and sedimentation control measures to meet the requirements of the Management Standards (Appendix A). The Commission requires that the owner of land to be developed to prepare a sediment - erosion control plan for all construction activities in which existing protective vegetative cover is removed or disturbed. The approval of said plan by the municipality must be obtained prior to any construction activity. The plan must address sediment containment by either structural or non - structural means. The re- establishment of permanent vegetative cover immediately upon completion of the construction activity will also be required. V -24 The sediment - erosion control plan must, at a minimum, include information outlining the direction of all site runoff and the location of erosion control measures. Structural methods for erosion control may include, but are not limited to, silt fences, hay bale barriers, diversion dikes and sedimentation basins. Installation of structural measures shall be in accordance with the manufacturer's specifications and accepted Soil Conservation Service and engineering practices. Non- structural methods include, but are not limited to, natural vegetative barriers, phased development practices and grading practices that minimize slopes. These methods will also be implemented in accordance with accepted Soil Conservation Service and engineering practices. The erosion control 1 n must p a address cover establishment, both temporary a nd permanent. Cover establishment practices include, but are not limited to, seeding, mulching, and sodding. All structural and non - structural erosion control measures must remain in -place and be properly maintained until permanent vegetative cover is established. It is recommended that local units of government give consideration to obtaining a surety to provide adequate safeguards to insure the plan is carried out by the developer. Schedule and Costs The Commission will review plans with specified characteristics as described above. This is an ongoing effort as plans are continually submitted for review. Cost estimates for review of development plans are included in the following discussion of storm water treatment. V -25 6. STORMWATER TREATMENT ® Introduction Stormwater treatment is necessary to reduce water quality problems in the system and protect waters that recharge groundwater supplies. This would primarily include reducing the amount of sediments and nutrients that enter streams via a stormwater system. Management Strategy Each municipality shall prepare a local water management plan in conformance with West Mississippi Watershed Management Commission requirements. These plans must demonstrate that treatment for new development and redevelopment is provided for stormwater runoff prior to its discharge into any public water. Existing development is required to provide treatment as part of a redevelopment or as designated by the Commission or local plan. The following strategies have been adopted with respect to stormwater treatment: 6.1. Establish an education program on the judicious use of contaminating substances that may enter the stormwater system. 6.2. Require the construction of stormwater treatment facilities to reduce the quality degradation impact on public waters. 6.3. Encourage communities to use centralized stormwater treatment facilities to provide the most cost - effective and efficient means of treatment. 6.4. Encourage communities to incorporate treatment in their local plans for existing development. Implementation Stormwater treatment strategies shall be part of the local water management plan for each municipality. Treatment of stormwater can be broken down into three parts: Sedimentation - The removal of sediment from stormwater runoff from a 2 -inch rainfall event which is equivalent to a 1 -year frequency, 12 -hour duration storm. Skimming - The skimming, removal, and suitable disposal of oil and floatable materials from stormwater runoff for a 2 -inch rainfall event. Nutrient Removal - The removal of nutrients from stormwater runoff to the maximum practical extent. V -26 The use of ponding areas for sedimentation is identified in the Management Standards found in Appendix A. For stormwater treatment purposes, a ponding area shall be of a size sufficient to store runoff from a 2 -inch rainfall event for the fully developed condition. Discharge shall be limited to that required for the pond to empty no sooner than 6 hours after the rainfall event. Appendix C contains information necessary to size treatment ponds and an example illustration of a pond sizing calculation. Skimming shall be considered adequate if a baffle structure extends at least 4 inches below the normal water surface and the velocity of water passing under the baffle does not exceed 0.5 feet per second during peak discharge. Sedimentation, skimming and nutrient removal shall be provided for stormwater runoff from new developments and redevelopments prior to discharging it into any public waters as defined by the Minnesota Department of Natural Resources. Public waters and wetlands shall not be used for temporary erosion and sediment control purposes. Wetlands under the control of a municipality designated in the local water management plan as available for treatment may be used for sedimentation and skimming. Existing developments are not required to provide stormwater treatment. Good housekeeping procedures offer a means of treatment and control available to existing facilities. The Commission encourages centralized stormwater treatment facilities to be included in local water management plans. Centralized treatment ponds shall be sized to store the collective runoff of all contributory areas for the 2 -inch rainfall event. Centralized treatment ponds, which reduce the number of smaller individual treatment ponds, can also provide areas for wildlife habitat, recreation and ground water recharge, and will also result in lower maintenance costs and less land areas required than if ponds were constructed for each land development. V -27 Measures to remove nutrients include, but may not be limited to, the use of wetland treatment sytems, the establishment of good housekeeping practices such as street sweeping and leaf removal, the placmeent of controls on the use of fertilizers and the implementation of sediment and soil erosion control projects. The level of treatment required will be determined by the classification of the receiving water body or wetland. The following table shows the treatment levels necessary for each type of receiving water classification. (The classification is provided on page V -4.) TABLE 9 TREATMENT LEVELS FOR WATER BODIES AND WETLANDS Classification Sedimentation Skimming Nutrient Removal Recreational X X X Aesthetics X X None Runoff Management None None None Special Purpose X* X* X* *As appropriate to special purpose. Schedule and Costs The Commission will review development and redevelopment plans which involve stormwater treatment and meet the criteria for review as identified in the Management Standards (Appendix A). The Commission will also review plans involving flood plain encroachment and erosion and sedimentation control (Appendix A). Plan review is a continual process and as development and redevelopment plans are submitted to the municipalities and provided to the Commission for review. The cost for plan reviews is estimated at $14,000 annually (1987 index). V -28 7. WETLAND MANAGEMENT Introduction Wetlands are an extremely valuable resource in the West Mississippi watershed. They are instrumental in providing habitat for fish and wildlife, serve as ground water recharge areas and provide for the storage of storm water runoff. Wetlands have also been identified as areas that have the ability to remove nutrients, solids, and other pollutants from storm water runoff. These reasons justify the Commission's interest in protecting these wetland areas. Management Strategy The Minnesota Department of Natural Resources (DNR) currently has authority to preserve Protected waters and wetlands. The wetlands under this jurisdiction include all Types 3, 4 and 5 wetlands, as defined in the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Circular No. 39. A permit from the DNR is necessary for the alteration of a protected water or wetland. A policy of the West Mississippi Watershed Management Commission addresses the preservation of habitats for game fish and wildlife in conjunction with storage and water quality purposes. For these wetlands under state jurisdiction, the Commission will coordinate with the DNR in preserving waters and wetlands. The Commission also acknowledges the value of wetlands not under the DNR jurisdiction. Most significant is the ability of these wetlands to assimilate the nutrients washed from the surrounding watershed and to provide a natural means of temporary runoff storage. It is necessary to balance these attributes with the need for urban growth and development necessary to maintain a viable community. The Commission realizes a need to establish a strategy that will consider the water storage and nutrient assimilative ability of wetlands not under DNR jurisdiction and help determine whether encroachment or damage of these wetlands can be tolerated. V -29 The following management strategies are adopted with respect to wetland management: • 7.1. Protected waters and wetlands as defined by the Public Waters and Wetlands Inventory of Hennepin County will be managed through coordination with DNR programs and used for runoff management. 7.2 Wetland development guidelines will be established to preserve treatment characteristics of wetlands not under DNR jurisdiction. Implementation To assure compliance with development guidelines the West Mississippi Watershed Management Commission may also require local water management plans to include a program to manage certain wetlands not included in the DNR's protected waters and wetlands inventory. Local governmental units will enforce compliance with the program. Schedule and Costs No costs or schedules are anticipated with this plan component beyond those associated with review of local water management plans for compliance with this watershed management plan. V -30 8. GROUND WATER PROTECTION Introduction The protection of water supplies is an important concern in the watershed. As stated in the physical inventory, municipalities within the watershed obtain water from bedrock aquifers, drift aquifers and the Mississippi River. Of the five communities in the watershed, one relies entirely on drift wells, two use both bedrock aquifer and drift wells and two rely entirely on bedrock aquifers. In all, four bedrock aquifers are used and several wells draw from more than one bedrock aquifer. Of the three water sources the most susceptible to contamination are the drift aquifers. The high permeability of drift material allows for potential rapid downward movement of contaminants. The extent of these surficial and buried aquifers is largely unknown because of extreme variability in their occurrence. Bedrock aquifers also recharge through percolation. Since bedrock formations are usually deeper than drift aquifers water generally infiltrates farther and has more opportunity for purification. However, there are locations where this bedrock is relatively close to the surface or surficial materials of high porosity overlay the aquifers. In these instances runoff water can reach bedrock aquifers relatively easily. A comprehensive discussion of ground water recharge must take into account numerous other factors beyond the scope of this discussion. Slope, soil characteristics, depth to water table, effects of drawdown, lateral ground water flow, precipitation, and location and effect of confining layers all affect the ability of areas to recharge ground water. V -31 To compound the issue the Twin Cities Area is geologically complex. The United States Geological Survey (USGS) work on the regional round water model • 9 9 o el has verified the extremely complex nature of recharge in the Twin Cities area. Generally, precipitation falling any where in the region can potentially recharge the groundwater system. Currently there is only a very approximate delineation of ground water recharge areas in the Twin Cities area. These are based on existing information for only a few of the components affecting ground water recharge. Within the watershed information does exist from test borings and well logs and can give some information of local usefulness. The Hennepin Conservation District, in conjunction with the Minnesota Geological Survey, has recently initiated a study of ground water resources and movement. This effort will greatly further the understanding of ground water characteristics in the watershed. Management Strategies The Commission supports the efforts to further the understanding of ground water in the County. Adequate information essential to provide the proper management of groundwater resources through land use planning, permitted development and water allocation. The Commission will assume a review and comment role on all MPCA and MDNR requests that may effect ground water within the watershed. The Commission will also require local governmental units to develop zoning and building regulations as part of their local water management plans to protect ground water resources. V -32 The following strategies have been adopted with respect to ground water protection: 8.1. A procedure will be established to review and comment on development that may affect ground water quality and quantity. 8.2. Procedures will be adopted by local governmental units level to control development that may affect ground water resources. Implementation The Commission will take an advocacy role towards better ground water management. The Commission will support efforts to provide essential ground water information on which to base management decisions. Support from other watershed management organizations will be sought to demonstrate the need for such an effort. As part of local water management plans land use controls shall be developed to protect groundwater resources. Schedule and Costs No costs or schedules are anticipated with this plan component beyond those associated with review of local water management plan for compliance with this watershed management plan. Should the Commission elect to participate in groundwater study efforts, additional costs will be incurred. V -33 VI. IMPLEMENTATION PROGRAM CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT Three supplemental studies have been identified in Section V - Management Plan. These are 1) flood profile study for Edinbrook, 2) flood profile study for Oxbow Creek, and 3) drift aquife recharge study. It is anticipated that the completion of the supplemental studies will result in specific capital improvements which will proceed and be funded under the provisions of Section VII and VIII of the "JOINT AND COOPERATIVE AGREEMENT FOR THE ESTABLISHMENT OF A WEST MISSISSIPPI WATERSHED MANAGEMENT COMMISSION ". As supplemental studies are completed and capital improvements specifically identified, the Commission will keep its members and other appropriate agencies advised of proposed capital improvements. The capital improvements program shall be subject to at least a biennial review at which time the Commission will advise its members and other agencies of changes in the capital improvements program. 00 LOCAL COMPREHENSIVE PLAN AMENDMENTS No changes to local comprehensive plans are anticipated as a result of this plan. LOCAL WATER MANAGEMENT PLANS Commission's Role Following approval of this watershed management plan, local municipalities are required under the Surface Water Management Act to complete local water management plans. These local plans must meet the statutory requirements of the Surface Water Management Act and the content requirements identified in this plan. The Commission must then review these plans within 60 days of submittal for conformance with this water management plan. VI -1 VII. AMENDMENT PROCESS Section 473.878 of the Minnesota Statutes establishes the requirements for the Watershed Management Plan and outlines a review process for plan approval. The review process is long and complicated. Subdivision 9 of said section requires that all amendments to the adopted plan be referred to cities, counties and other agencies in the same manner as is required for initial approval of the plan. The West Mississippi Watershed Management Commission is aware that a number of detailed engineering studies will be required to complete the refinement of the plan to the satisfaction of the Commissioners and their member cities. These additional studies will provide and perfect data and fill in details necessary to manage the watershed. The Commission is aware that detailed studies may be necessary as the West Mississippi Watershed Management Commission proceeds to implement the final approved plan. The Commission believes that these studies and other engineering, planning, zoning, building and miscellaneous studies and details can and will affect portions of the plan and will help establish more definite management standards. The Commission does hereby find and determine that significant amendments to this Watershed Management Plan shall be processed and approved in accordance with Minnesota Statutes, Section 473.878 Subdivision 9. The Commission further finds and determines that this plan along with detailed studies outlined herein and other insignificant changes or changes which are required for more refined data shall not be considered amendments to the plan and will not be processed through the entire review process. It is the intent of the Commission to keep • VII -1 its members and all other agencies advised of significant plan changes but not to incur additional engineering, legal or other expenses to process work contemplated by this plan as supplemental, or auxiliary to support and clarifying findings set forth in this plan. The Commission desires to be open, efficient, and effective in establishing and implementing the plan and does not wish to use its time and financial resources to process paperwork or minor changes which do not have a significant effect on the members or on other governmental agencies. VII -2 APPENDIX A ® MANAGEMENT STANDARDS WEST MISSISSIPPI WATERSHED MANAGEMENT COMMISSION The West Mississippi W r Watershed Management Commission requires that the following types of matters be reviewed: 1. Plans of any land development* or individual site development adjacent to or within a lake, wetland, or a natural or altered natural watercourse as listed in the final inventory of Protected Waters and Wetlands for Hennepin County, as prepared by the State of Minnesota Department of Natural Resources. 2. Plans for any land development or site development within the 100 -year floodplain as defined in this plan. 3. Plans of any land development or site development of 15 acres or larger for lands zoned for single family detached housing and 5 acres or larger for all other land uses. 4. Plans of any land development or site development regardless of size, if such review is requested by a member municipality. 5. Land use amendments to a municipality's comprehensive plan. Land development is also defined to include redevelopment of exiting lands. MANAGEMENT STANDARDS Development Adjacent to or Within a Protected Water or Wetland 1. There shall be no area encroachment upon a Protected Water or Wetland or rough grading below the ordinary high water mark without approval of the Commission and the Minnesota Department of Natural Resources. 2. Design of encroachments, when permitted, shall provde compensatory volumes of equal or greater volume than that removed by the encroachment and compensatory areas to offset the elimination of vegetation provding biological treatment f st rmw r runoff n wildlife habitat. g e o o ate u off a d e 3. Development plans for properties adjacent to a Protected Water or Wetland shall contain provisions for temporary erosion and sediment control that will prevent deposition of se imed ntinnto the Protected Water or Wetland during the development process. 4. Development plans for properties of 2.5 acres or greater, not including individual residential lots, shall contain permanent provisions for treatment of the stormwater runoff. Such treatment shall consist of providing a ponding area adequate in size to store runoff from a 2 -inch rainfall event based upon a fully developed site. In lieu of individual treatment ea ent ponds, a central retention pond may be used if sized to store the collective runoff of all contributory areas for the 2 -inch rainfall event. Pond discharge shall be limited to that required for the pond to empty no sooner than 5 hours after the rainfall event. In addition, a means of retaining oils and floatable debris shall be provided in a manner acceptable to the Commission (see Appendix C). A -1 5. All site areas used for the purpose of flood storage or treatment of ® stormwater runoff shall be preserved and dedicated for that use by means of granting an appropriate easement to the respective municipality, including areas required for access to maintain the easement. Floodplain Development 1. There shall be no encroachment upon the floodway area of the 100 -year floodplain as defined in this plan. Alterations of the floodway may be proposed subject to approval of the Commission and the Minnesota Department of Natural Resources. 2. Encroachment shall be allowed in the floodway fringe area of the 100 -year flood plain (as defined in the West Mississippi Watershed Management Plan) only if both of the following conditions are met: a. Compensatory storage is provided in the 100 -year floodplain of equal or greater volume than that removed by the encroachment upon the floodway fringe. b. The encroachment does not create hazardous velocities. 3. Buildings within or adjacent to the 100 -year floodplain shall be constructed so that the elevation of the top of the lowest floor is a minimum of 1.0 feet above the 100 -year flood elevation as defined in this plan. The 1.0 feet of required freeboard is intended to allow for the increase of flood elevations as a result of future development and to provide a factor of safety for wind and wave action. 4. All site areas below the 100 -year floodplain elevation after approval of allowable encroachments shall be preserved and dedicated for flood storage by means of granting an appropriate easement to the respective municipality. Development of 15 Acres or Larger for Lands Zoned Single Family Detached Housing and 5 Acres or Larger for Other Land Uses 1. Development plans shall contain permanent provisions for treatment of the stormwater runoff. Such treatment shall consist of providing a ponding area adequate in size to store runoff from a 2 -inch rainfall event based upon a fully developed site. In lieu of individual treatment ponds, a central retention pond may be used if sized to store the collective runoff of all contributory areas for the 2 -inch rainfall event. Pond discharge shall be limited to that required for the pond to empty no sooner than 6 hours after the rainfall event.. In addition, a means of retaining oils and floatable debris shall be provided in a manner acceptable to the Commission (see Appendix C). A -2 2. Development plans shall contain provisions for temporary erosion and sediment control that will prevent soil particles from being transported off the site using the Hennepin Conservation District erosion and sediment control standard as a guide. 3. All site areas used for the purpose of flood storage or treatment of stormwater runoff shall be preserved and dedicated for that use by-means of granting an appropriate easement to the respective municipality, including areas required for access to maintain the easement. A -3 APPENDIX B RAINFALL EVENTS AND DURATIONS • RAINFALL (IN INCHES) IN MINNEAPOLIS -ST. PAIR. METROPOLITAN AREA FOR DURATIONS FROM 30 MINUTES TO 24 HOURS AND RETURN PERIODS FROM 1 TO 100 YEARS Data Taken from U.S. Department of Comerce - Weather Bureau Technical Paper No. 40 - Dated May 1961 Return Frequency 24 -Hour 12 -Hour 6 -Hour 3 -Hour 2 -Hour 1 -Hour 30 Minute 15 Minute 1 -Year 2.3 2.0 1.7 1.5 1.4 1.2 0.9 0.6 2 -Year 2.8 2.4 2.1 1.7 1.7 1.4 1.1 0.7 5 -Year 3.6 3.1 2.7 2.3 2.2 1.8 1.4 1.0 10 -Year 4.2 3.7 3.1 2.6 2.5 2.1 1.7 1.3 25 -Year 4.6 4.2 3.5 3.0 2.8 2.3 1.9 i.4 50 -Year 5.3 4.6 4.0 3.4 3.1 2.7 2.1 1.5 100 -Year 5.9 5.0 4.4 3.8 3.5 2.9 2.4 1.7 Maximum probable 6 -hour precipitation for 10 square mile area = 24 inches. B -1 • APPENDIX C SUGGESTED RETENTION AND TREATMENT POND DESIGN I APPENDIX C SUGGESTED RETENTION AND TREATMENT POND DESIGN SUGGESTED RETENTION AND TREATMENT POND DESIGN To minimize potential downstream flooding and improve the quality of stormwater runoff, ponding areas will be required for certain developments as specified in the Management Standards (Appendix A). Ponds shall be designed to store the amount of runoff generated by 2.0 inches of rainfall which is equivalent to the rainfall produced by a 1 -year frequency, 12 -hour duration rainfall event. The procedure recommended by the West Mississippi Watershed Management Commission (WMWMC) for determining runoff volume is the Soil Conservation Service (SCS) Method found in Hydrology Guide for Minnesota U.S. Department of Agriculture, Soil Conservation Service, St. Paul, Minnesota. The SCS has determined that the amount of runoff generated by a certain rainfall is directly related to the land use drainage characteristics of soil groups present. Figure C -1 describes the drainage characteristics of these soil types. The hydraulic curve number (CN) can be obtained from Figure C -2 given information on soil cover and land use. Once the CN has been determined, the runoff generated for 2.0 inches of rainfall can be found in Table C -1 and the appropriate pond size can be determined. An example pond size calculation has been provided in Figure C -3. The rate of discharge at the pond outlet shall allow sufficient time for suspended material to settle out while also minimizing the possible vegetative damage that may occur as the water is ponded over a period of time. The WMWMC has determined that the pond outlets shall be designed to allow a detention time for the total runoff generated by the 2.0 -inch rainfall to be a period not less than 6 hours nor greater than 48 hours except where the necessary outlet design to meet this rate requires an orifice of less than 2.0 inches in diameter. In such cases, a 2.0 -inch diameter orifice shall be used. C -1 A detention time of 6 hours was found to remove approximately 70 percent of • sediment present in urban stormwater runoff. This was based on a typical urban runoff sediment composition of 20 percent fine sand (0.05 mm -1.0 mm), 40 percent silt (0.005 mm to 0.05 mm) and 40 percent clay ( <0.005 mm) as derived from National Urban Runoff Program (NURP) analysis. As a final treatment measure, a means of retaining oils and floatable materials shall be provided at the pond outlet prior to discharge. The WMWMC recommends the "above grade" type of skimmer to enhance the frequency and quality of maintenance while promoting maximum exposure of trapped oils to sunlight. A typical baffled weir detail has been provided in Figures C -4 and C -5. The exit velocity at the skimmer shall be limited to a maximum of 0.5 feet per second during peak discharge. C -2 FIGURE C -1 HYDROLOGIC SOIL GROUP Soil properties influence the process of generating runoff from rainfall and they must be considered in estimating runoff. Site soils must be identified and their associated hydrologic soil group determined based on information in the Soil Survey of Hennepin County, Minnesota The hydrologic parameter in determining runoff from an individual storm is the minimum rate of infiltration obtained for a bare soil after prolonged wetting. The influences of both the surface and the horizons of a soil are therefore considered. For definition purposes the infiltration rate is the rate at which water enters the soil at the surface and which is con ro ed by surface conditions, and the transmission rate(1) is the rate at which the water moves in the soil and which is controlled y—the internal properties. The hydrologic soil groups for Minnesota are defined as follows: Group A (Low runoff potential) - Soils having high infiltration rates even when thoroughly wetted, consisting chiefly of deep, well to excessively drained sands and /or gravel. These soils have a high rate of water transmission and would result in a low runoff potential. (Minimum infiltration rate: 0.30 to 0.45 inch per hour.) Group B - Soils having moderate infiltration rates when thoroughly wetted, consisting chiefly of moderately deep to deep, moderately well to well drained soils with moderately fine to moderately coarse textures. These soils have a moderate rate of water transmission. (Minimum infiltration rate: 0.15 to 0.30 inch per hour.) Group C - Soils having slow infiltration rates when thoroughly wetted, consisting chiefly of (1) soils with a layer that impedes the downward movement of water, or (2) soils with moderately fine to fine texture and a slow infiltration rate. These soils have a slow rate of water transmission. (Minimum infiltration rate: 0.05 to 0.15 inch per hour.) Group D (High runoff potential) - Soils having very slow infiltration rates when thoroughly wetted, consisting chiefly of (1) clay soils with a high swelling potential, (2) soils with a high permanent water table, (3) soils with claypan or clay layer at or near the surface, and (4) shallow soils over nearly impervious materials. These soils have a very slow rate of water transmission. (Minimum infiltration rate: 0 to 0.05 inch per hour.) (1)Similar to hydraulic conductivity and permeability rate. C -3 FIGURE C -2 HYDROLOGIC CURVE NUMBER COMPUTATION SHEET LAND USE FOR URBAN AREAS Watershed Site D.A. Acres Computed by Date Checked by Date Curve Numbers Acres Moisture Condition II LAND USE DESCRIPTION Per A I B C D Practice Soils Soils Soils Soils Product Cultivated Land: without conservation treatment 72 81 88 91 with conservation treatment 62 71 78 81 Pasture or range land: poor condition 68 79 86 89 good condition 3n 61 74 80 Meadow: good condition 30 58 1 71 78 Wood or Forest land: thin stand, poor cover, no mulch 45 66 77 83 good cover 25 55 70 77 Open Spaces, lawns, parks, golf courses, ceme- teries, etc. good condition: grass cover on 75% or more of the area 39 61 74 80 fair condition: grass cover on 50% to 75% of the area 49 6c) 79 84 Commercial and business areas (85% impervious) 89 92 94 '95 Industrial districts (72% impervious) 81 88 91 93 Residential: Average lot size Average % Impervious 1 acre or less 65 77 85 90 92 1/4 acre 38 61 75 83 87 1/3 acre 30 57 72 81 86 1/2 acre 25 54 70 80 85 1 acre 20 51 68 79 84 Paved parking lots, roofs, driveways, etc. 98 98 98 98 Streets and roads: paved with curbs and storm sewers 98 98 98 98 gravel 76 85 89 91 dirt 72 82 87 89 Marsh 85 85 115 5 Other Total Acres Product Total Weighted Runoff Curve No. Product Total Total Acres a C -4 I FIGURE C -3 EXAMPLE - Pond Size Calculation i Given: The development of a 40 acre site is proposed with soils of hydrologic group B. Thirty acres will be developed single family residential with 1/4 acre lot sizes and the remaining 10 acres will be developed commercial. Determine: The runoff from a 2.0 -inch rainfall (equivalent to a 1 -year frequency, 12 -hour duration storm) using the SCS method. Solution: Use Figure C -2 to compute the weighted runoff curve number (CN). Land Use Acres Soil Curve Number Product Residential, 1/4 acre lots 30 B 75 2,250 Commercial 10 B 92 920 Total 40 3,170 Weighted CN = 3,170 = 79.3; use 79 4T Runoff Table C -1 is used to determine runoff for 2.0 inches of rainfall for a CN of 79. Runoff = 0.52 inches Volume Total runoff = 0.52 x 1 ft x 40 ac = 1.7 ac -ft and required 12 in - - -- --- storage volume Discharge Allowable Peak = 1.7 ac -ft x 43,560 ft3 x 1 hr = 3.5 cfs i Discharge Rate 6 hr — a�c-ft - 3 - , - 6U�sec - - -- NOTE: This guideline for determining runoff is suggested by the West Mississippi Watershed Management Commission. Actual design may deviate from that outline herein due to individual design circumstances associated with a given project. C -5 TABLE C -1 RUNOFF FOR 2 INCHES OF RAINFALL Curve N o. Runoff (in ches) Curve No. Runoff (inches) *53 .01 77 .45 54 .01 78 .48 55 .02 79 .52 56 .02 80 .56 57 .03 81 .60 98 .04 82 .65 59 .04 83 .70 60 .06 84 .74 61 .07 85 .80 62 .09 86 .85 63 .10 87 .91 64 .11 88 .96 65 .13 89 ( 1.03 66 .15 90 1.10 67 .18 91 1.17 68 .19 92 1.24 69 .22 93 1.32 70 .24 94 1.39 71 .26 95 1.48 72 .29 96 1.58 73 .32 97 1.68 75 .35 98 1.78 .38 76 .41 *There will be no runoff for Curve Numbers lower than 53 for 2 inches of rainfall. SOURCES National Engineering Handbook Section 4. Hydrology Guide for Minnesota. C -6 DESIGN CRITERIA: MAXIMUM LLLOWABLE VELOCITY THROUGH THE BAFFLED WEIR IS 0.5 FEET PER SECOND FOR A 2 INCH RAINFALL EVENT. WEIR SHOULD BE DESIGNED SUCH THAT THE LENGTH OF THE WEIR AND OPENING THROUGH THE WEIR COMBINE TO MAINTAIN THE MAXIMUM ALLOWABLE VELOCITY OF 0.5 FEET PER SECOND. 4 MINIMUM OVERLAP POND LEVEL PRODUCED BY TREATED LUMBER PLANKS A 2 INCH RAINFALL EVENT TREATED LUMBER POSTS IMBED WEIR INTO.AGGREGATE DIRECTION A MINIMUM OF 4 OF FLOW POND BOTTOM OUTLET PIPE A so z I TOE GEOTEXTILE i�1 1 TO I!/2 INCH FILTER AGGREGATE FABRIC INTO _ SHALL BE A FREE DRAINING UNDISTURBED '-" MINERAL PRODUCT EXCLUDING SOIL CRUSHED CARBONATE QUARRY °3 (MIN) 3 (MIN) ROCK, CRUSHED CONCRETE AND GEOTEXTILE FABRIC SALVAGED BITUMINOUS MIXTURE TO PREVENT SOIL EROSION SECTION A -A NOT TO SCALE TYPICAL BAFFLED WEIR DETAIL PLEASE NOTE: THIS IS A SUGGESTED DESIGN APPROACH FOR A TREATMENT POND THAT WILL DRAIN AND WHEN PROPERLY IMPLEMENTED WILL BE IN CONFORMANCE WITH THE MANAGEMENT STANDARDS. THIS IS NOT A REQUIRED DESIGN AND THIS DETAIL IS SUBMITTED FOR INFORMATIONAL PURPOSES ONLY. EUGENE A. HICKOK a ASSOCIATES 345 INDIAN MOUND WAYZATA, MN 55391 FIGURE °C -4 PHONE (612) 473- 4224 BURY ENDS OF WEIR INTO BANK A MINIMUM OF 2 FEET SO THAT FLOW WILL NOT ENDS LO WEIR. TO PASS AROUND II I z as W o } W A °' 3 A 0 W W� z � C7 W z w-j OUTLET PIPE wL m — m I o = �U PLACE I TO. I V2 .INCH FILTER AGGREGATE I i IN THIS AREA. Lie \L PLAN VIEW NOT TO SCALE TYPICAL BAFFLED WEIR DETAIL EUGENE A. HICKOK a ASSOCIATES 545 INDIAN MOUND WAYZATA,MN 55391 FIGURE C -5 PHONE (612) 473 -4224 APPENDIX D WEST MISSISSIPPI WATERSHED MANAGEMENT COMMISSION JOINT POWERS AGREEMENT • JOINT AND COOPERATIVE AGREEMENT FOR THE ESTAB- LISHMENT OF A WEST MISSISSIPPI WATERSHED MANAGE - MENT "COMMISSION TO PLAN, CONTROL AND PROVIDE FOR THE DEVELOPMENT OF THE WEST MISSISSIPPI WATERSHEDS PREFACE That part of the Upper Mississippi River Watershed lying West of the Mississippi River is a small isolated minor watershed that is basically a direct tributary to the Mississippi River. It encompasses parts of the following cities: Champlin, Brooklyn Center, Brooklyn Park, Maple Grove, Minneapolis, Osseo. A very small section of the Upper Mississippi Watershed as defined bythe Metropolitan Council is in the City of Dayton but it is not proposed that said area be annexed to or governed by this Agreement. All areas of Champlin which are not in the Elm Creek Watershed shall be subject to this Agreement. The southerly boundary of the West Mississippi River Watershed can reasonably be established on the Brooklyn Center /Minneapolis corporate line (i.e. - the centerline of 53rd Avenue North) and the small area of the Upper Mississippi Watershed in Minneapolis can be joined to the Middle Mississippi River Watershed and be planned and controlled by the Watershed Management Organization being established for the Middle Mississippi area. Minnesota Laws of 1982, Chapter 509, mandated that all watersheds within the seven county Metropolitan area must be governed by a watershed management organiza- tion and that such an organization is to be in existence by December 31, 1983. The watershed is authorized to organize under a joint powers agreement pursuant to Minnesota Statutes, Section 471.59 or if such an organization is not created, Hennepin County shall petition for the establishment of a watershed district under Minnesota D -1 Statutes, Chapter 112. All the cities in the West Mississippi Watershed have expressed a desire to proceed with a joint powers organization to establish a Watershed Manage- ment Organization which will comply with the law for management of this isolated minor watershed with drainage directly to the Mississippi River, excluding the small area in Minneapolis. It is the belief of these five cities that it will provide for more efficient planning and administration if the West Mississippi River Watershed is planned and administered under a joint powers agreement. It has been determined by the five cities involved in the watershed that they desire to proceed under a Joint Powers Agreement rather than under Chapter 112 as a watershed district. Each party to this agreement has been fully advised that the Watershed Management Organization being created shall have the powers and responsi- bilities set forth in the Metropolitan Surface Water Management Act, Minnesota Statutes Sections 473.875 to 473.883, as amended by this Agreement. Each member further recognizes that this is a binding contract and failure to cooperate or to carry out a member's responsibilities will result in a breach of this contract. The purpose of this organization shall be to assist the five member West Mississippi Watershed cities to preserve and use natural water storage and retention systems to: 1. Reduce to the greatest practical extent the public capital expenditure necessary to control excessive volumes and rates of runoff. 2. To improve water quality within the watershed. 3. To prevent flooding and erosion from surface flows. 4. To promote ground water recharge. 5. To protect and enhance fish and wildlife habitat and water recreational facilities. D -2 r • 6. To secure other benefits associated with the proper management of surface water. 7. To promote and encourage cooperation among member cities in coordinating local surface water plans and to be aware of their neighbor's problems and to protect the public health, safety, and general welfare. The West Mississippi Watershed waters flow through many sub- watersheds directly to the Mississippi River. It is not anticipated that the West Mississippi Watershed will have many capital improvement projects; if they do, it is hereby expressed that the intent of this Agreement is to encourage that the solutions should be handled by agreements between the Cities involved. It is the intent of this Agreement to subject all five cities in the West Mississippi Watershed to a common set of policies and to comply in all respects with the provisions of the Metropolitan Surface Water Management Act. The purpose of this Preface is to clarify and establish for any court of review or any arbitrator or for the elected successors to the representatives who have entered into this agreement the reasons and purpose for this joint and cooperative venture. The parties to this Agreement realize that the success or failure of the West Mississippi Watershed Organization created by this Agreement is dependent upon the sincere desire of each member City to cooperate in the exercise of a joint power to solve joint problems. Each party hereby agrees to be bound by this agreement and pledges its cooperation. D -3 JOINT AND COOPERATIVE AGREEMENT The parties to this agreement are governmental units of the State of Minnesota, all of which have lands which drain surface water within the West Mississippi Watershed and all of which have power and responsibility to construct, reconstruct, extend and maintain storm drainage facilities to improve water quality, to promote ground water recharge, and to protect, promote and preserve water resources within the Watersheds. This agreement is made pursuant to the authority conferred upon the parties by Minnesota Statutes 1982, Sections 471.59 and 473.875 to and including Section 473.883. NAME L The parties hereto create and establish the West Mississippi Watershed Manage- ment Commission. GENERAL PURPOSE IL The general purpose of this agreement is to provide an organization which can investigate, study, plan and control the construction of facilities to drain or pond storm waters, to alleviate damage by flood waters; to improve the creek channels for drainage; to assist in planning for land use; to repair, improve, relocate, modify, consolidate or abandon, in whole or in part, drainage systems within the watershed area; to do whatever is necessary to assist in water conservation and the abatement of water pollution and the improvement of water quality; to promote ground water recharge; and to protect and enhance fish and wildlife habitat and water recreational facilities. In addition to the aforestated purposes, the organization hereby created shall serve as the Watershed Management organization for the West Mississippi Watershed and shall carry out all the duties and responsibilities outlined in Minnesota Statutes, Section 473.875 through 473.883, both inclusive. • D -4 I DEFINITIONS III. For the purposes of this agreement, the terms used herein shall have the meanings as defined in this article. Subdivision 1. "Commission" means the organization created by this agreement the full name of which is "West Mississippi Watershed Management Commission ". It shall be a public agency of its members and a watershed management organization as defined in Minnesota Statutes, Section 473.877. Subdivision 2. "Board" means the board of commissioners of the Commission, consisting of one commissioner or one alternate commissioner from each of the d which shall be the governing governmental units which ' party o h' agreement an c g c Lsap tyt this g rg body of the Commission. Subdivision 3. "Council" means the governing body of a governmental unit which is a member of this Commission. Subdivision 4. "Governmental Unit" means any city, county or town. Subdivision 5. "Member" means a governmental unit which enters into this agreement. Subdivision 6. "West Mississippi Watershed" means the area generally contained within a line drawn around the extremities of all terrain whose surface drainage is tributary to the Mississippi River and designated as the Upper Mississippi River Watershed in Figure 39 "Twin City Metropolitan Area Watershed for Surface Water Management" as published by the Metropolitan Council and lying Westerly of the Mississippi River, and within the mapped areas delineated on the map filed with the Water Resources Board pursuant to Minnesota Statutes, 473.877 Subd. 2 except as follows: All areas in the City of Minneapolis and City of Dayton are excluded, and • all areas in the City of Champlin which are not included in the Elm Creek Watershed area shall be included as a part of this Watershed Management Org%nization. D -5 MEMBERSHIP IV. The membership of the Commission shall consist of all of the following govern- mental units: City of Brooklyn Center City of Brooklyn Park City of Champlin City of Maple Grove City of Osseo No change in governmental boundaries, structure or organizational status shall affect the eligibility of any governmental unit listed above to be represented on the Commission, so long as such governmental unit continues to exist as a separate political subdivision. BOARD OF COMMISSIONERS V. Subdivision 1. The governing body of the .Commission shall be its Board. Each member shall be entitled to appoint one representative on the board, and one alternate who may sit when the representative is not in attendance and said representative or alternate representative shall be called a "Commissioner ". Subdivision 2. The council of each member shall determine the eligibility or qualification of its representative on the Commission but the terms of each Com- missioner shall be as established by this agreement. D -6 Subdivision 3. The term of each commissioner and Alternate Commissioner appointed by each member shall be three years and until their successors are selected and qualify and shall commence on February 1, except that the terms of the Com- missioners first appointed shall commence from the date of their appointment and shall terminate as follows: a. The Commissioners appointed by the Cities of Brooklyn Center and Brooklyn Park shall terminate on February 1, 1985. b. The Commissioners appointed by the Cities of Champlin and Maple Grove shall terminate on February 1, 1986. c. The Commissioner appointed by the City of Osseo shall terminate on February 1, 1987. Any vacancy shall be filled for the unexpired term of any Commissioner by the council of the governmental unit of the member who appointed said Commissioner. Subdivision 4. The council of each member agrees that its representative commissioner will not be removed from the Board prior to the expiration of his term, unless said Commissioner consents in writing or unless said council has presented the Commissioner with charges in writing and has held a public hearing after reasonable notice to the Commissioner. A certified copy of the Council's Resolution removing said Commissioner shall be filed with the Secretary of the Board of Commissioners and shall show compliance with the terms of this section. Subdivision 5. Each member shall within 30 days of appointment file with the Secretary of the Board of Commissioners a record of the appointment of its Com- missioner and its Alternate Commissioner. Subdivision 6. Commissioners shall serve without compensation from the Com- mission, but this shall not prevent a governmental unit from providing compensation D -7 for its Commissioner for serving on the board, if such compensation is authorized by such governmental unit and by law. Commission funds may be used to reimburse a Commissioner or Alternate Commissioner for expenses incurred in Commission business and authorized by the Board. Subdivision 7. At the first meeting of the Board and in February of each year thereafter, the Board shall elect from its Commissioners a Chair, a Vice Chair, a Secretary, a Treasurer, and such other officers as it deems necessary to conduct its meetings and affairs. At the organizational meeting or as soon thereafter as it may be reasonably done, the Commission shall adopt rules and regulations governing its meetings. Such rules and regulations may be amended from time to time at either a regular or a special meeting of the Commission provided that a ten day prior notice of the proposed amendment has been furnished to each person to whom notice of the Board meetings is required to be sent; a majority vote of all eligible votes of the ® then existing members of the Commission shall be sufficient to adopt any proposed amendment to such rules and regulations. POWERS AND DUTIES OF THE BOARD n Subdivision 1. The Commission, acting by its duly appointed Board of Com- missioners, shall as it relates to flood control, water quality, ground water recharge and water conservation and other duties as set forth in Chapter 509, Minnesota Laws of 1982 and construction of facilities for the West Mississippi Watershed, have the powers and duties set out in this article. Subdivision 2. It may employ such persons as it deems necessary to accomplish its duties and powers. Any employee may be on a full time, part time or consulting basis as the Board determines and shall be considered Commission staff. D -£3 ® Subdivision 3. It may contract for space and for material and supplies to carry on its activities either with a member or elsewhere. Subdivision 4. It may acquire necessary personal property to carry out its powers and its duties. Subdivision 5. It shall develop an overall plan containing a capital improvement program within a reasonable time after qualifying, and said plan shall meet all of the requirements as established in Minnesota Statutes, Section 473.878. Said overall plan shall establish a comprehensive goal for the development of the West Mississippi Watershed and shall establish a proposed procedure for accomplishing the purposes of the organization as set forth in Article R. In preparing the overall plan, the board may consult with the engineering and planning staff of each member governmental unit. It may consult with the Metropolitan Council and other public and private bodies to obtain and consider projections of land i use, population growth, and other factors which are relevant to the improvement and development of the West Mississippi Watershed. Said overall plan shall include the location and adequacy of the outlets or outfalls of subtrunks and subdistricts within the West Mississippi Watershed. The plan shall include the quantity of storage facilities and the sizing of an adequate outlet for all subtrunk, subdistrict and branch lateral storm sewers. Upon completion of the overall plan, each member shall be supplied with a copy of the proposed plan and the plan shall be submitted for review and comment to Hennepin County and the Hennepin Soil and Water Conservation District. All govern- mental units which expect that substantial amendment of its local comprehensive plan will be necessary in order to bring their local water management into conformance with the Commission's watershed plan shall. describe as specifically as possible, the D -9 amendments to the local plan which it expects will be necessary. The Commission shall hold a public hearing after 60 days mailed notice to the clerk of each member governmental unit. The mailed notice of the hearing shall be sent at the same time the plan is submitted to the members and to other governmental agencies. After such public hearing, the board shall prescribe the overall plan which shall be the outline for future action by the Commission. The Commission shall then submit the plan, any comments received and any appropriate amendments to the plan to the Board of Commissioners of Hennepin County. The County shall approve or disapprove projects in the capital improvement programs which may require the provision of county funds pursuant to Minnesota Statutes Section 112.60 Subd. 2 or Section 473.883. The County shall have 60 days to complete its review. If the County fails to complete its review within 60 days the plan and capital improvement programs shall be deemed approved. After completion of the review by Hennepin County, the plan and capital improvement programs shall be submitted to the Metropolitan Council for its review. After completion of the review by the Metropolitan Council pursuant to Minnesota Statutes, Section 473.175, the Commission shall submit the plan to the Minnesota Commissioner of Natural Resources and the Minnesota Pollution Control Agency for review and comment on the consistency of the plan with state laws and rules relating to water and related land resources and to the Minnesota Water Resources Board for review as provided in Minnesota Statutes, Section 112.46. After return of the plan, a copy of the plan shall be submitted to each of the members together with all comments of the reviewing authorities. The Commission shall wait for at least 30 days for comments from its members. D -10 The Commission shall adopt the overall plan within 120 days P P y after approval of the plan by the Minnesota Water Resources Board. The Commission shall then implement the approved plan and approved capital improvement program by resolution of the Commission as hereinafter set forth. The adoption of said overall plan shall be only upon a favorable vote of 2 /3rds of all eligible votes of the then existing members of the Commission for the West Mississippi Watershed. A copy of the adopted plan shall be filed with the Clerk of each member governmental unit. Upon notice and hearing as provided for in adopting the overall plan, said plan may be amended by the Board on its own initiative or on the petition of any member governmental unit. The review provisions set forth in this section are those required by Minnesota Statutes, Section 473.878. If the law is amended, approvals shall be as required by law and the provisions contained in this section shall be amended accordingly. Subdivision 6. It shall make necessary surveys or utilize other reliable surveys and data and develop projects to accomplish the p purposes for which the Commission is organized. Subdivision 7. It may cooperate or contract with the State of Minnesota or any subdivision thereof or federal agency or private or public organization to accomplish the purposes for which it is organized. Subdivision 8. It may order any member governmental unit or units to construct, clean, repair, alter, abandon, consolidate, reclaim or change the course or terminus of any ditch, drain, storm sewer, water course, natural or artificial, within the West Mississippi Watershed. Subdivision 9. It may order any member governmental unit or units to acquire, operate, construct or maintain dams, dikes, reservoirs and appurtenant works or other improvements necessary to implement the overall plan. D -11 Subdivision 10. It shall regulate, conserve and control the use of storm and surface water within the Watershed. Subdivision 11. It may contract for or purchase such insurance as the board deems necessary for the protection of the Commission. Subdivision 12. It may establish and maintain devices for acquiring and recording hydrological and water quality data within the Watershed. Subdivision 13. It may enter upon lands within or without the watershed to make surveys and investigations to accomplish the purposes of the Commission. The Commission shall be liable for actual damages resulting therefrom but every person who claims damages shall serve the Chair or Secretary of the Board of Commissioners with a Notice of Claim as required by Chapter 466.05 of the Minnesota Statutes. Subdivision 14. It shall provide any member governmental unit with technical data or any other information of which the Commission has knowledge which will assist the governmental unit in preparing land use classifications or local water management plans within the watershed. Subdivision 15. It may provide legal and technical assistance in connection with litigation or other proceedings between one or more of its members and any other political subdivision, commission, board or agency relating to the planning or construction of facilities to drain or pond storm waters or relating to water quality within the Watershed. The use of commission funds for litigation shall be only upon a favorable vote of a majority of the eligible votes of the then existing members of the Commission. Subdivision 16. It may accumulate reserve funds for the purposes herein Y ur P P mentioned and may invest funds of the Commission not currently needed for its operations, in the manner and subject to the laws of Minnesota applicable to statutory cities. D -12 Subdivision 17. It may collect monies, subject to the provisions of this agreement, from its members, Hennepin County and from any other source approved by a majority of its board. Subdivision 18. It may make contracts, incur expenses and make expenditures necessary and incidental to the effectuation of these purposes and powers and may disburse therefor in the manner hereinafter provided. Subdivision 19. It shall cause to be made an annual audit of the books and accounts of the commission and shall make and file a report to its members at least once each year including the following information: a. the financial condition of the commission; b. the status of all commission projects and work within the watershed; C. the business transacted by the commission and other matters which affect the interests of the commission. Copies of said report shall be transmitted to the clerk of each member governmental unit. Subdivision 20. Its books, reports and records shall be available for and open to inspection by its members at all reasonable times. Subdivision 21. It may recommend changes in this agreement to its members. Subdivision 22. It may exercise all other powers necessary and incidental to the implementation of the purposes and powers set forth herein and as outlined and authorized by Minnesota Statutes, Sections 473.875 through 473.883. Subdivision 23. It shall cooperate with the State of Minnesota, the Commissioner of Natural Resources and the Director of the Division of Waters, Soils and Minerals of the Department of Natural Resources in complying with the requirements of Chapter 105 of the Minnesota Statutes. D -13 Subdivision 24. Each member reserves the right to conduct separate or concurrent studies on any matter under study by the Commission. Subdivision 25. It may define and designate subtrunk and subdistricts within the watershed and shall have authority to separate the watershed into different subtrunk and subdistricts and to allocate capital improvement costs to a subtrunk or subdistrict area if that district is the only area that benefits from the capital improvement. METHOD OF PROCEEDING VII. Subdivision 1. The procedures to be followed by the board in carrying out the powers and duties set forth in Article VI, Subdivisions 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, and 10, shall be as set forth in this article. Subdivision 2. The Board shall immediately proceed to prepare the overall plan as set forth in Article VI, Subdivision 5. Upon adoption of said overall plan, the Board shall proceed to implement said plan, and this implementation may be ordered by stages. Subdivision 3. The location and adequacy of the outlets for the subdistrict and subtrunks within the West Mississippi Watershed shall be determined and the Commission shall then prepare plans which will provide capacity to outlet the surface waters which will be collected within the Upper Mississippi Watershed. In determining the necessary capacity for said outlets, the Commission shall take into consideration the quantity of land within the watershed which each member governmental unit has to pond or act as a reservoir for surface waters. It shall consider only lands which are under public ownership or under public control and that will be perpetually dedicated to acting as a reservoir for surface waters. The commission may require from each D -14 member governmental unit a commitment in writing of the lands which shall be so dedicated, including a legal description of the gross area and the capacity in acre feet of water storage. No project which will channel or divert additional waters to subdistrict and subtrunks which cross municipal boundaries shall be commenced by any member governmental unit prior to approval of the board of the design of an adequate outlet or of adequate storage facilities. The adequacy of said outlet shall be determined by the board after consultations with its professional engineers. Subdivision 4. All construction, reconstruction, extension or maintenance of outlets for the various subdistrict and subtrunks, including outlets, lift stations, dams, reservoirs, or other appurtenances of a surface water or storm sewer system which involve construction by or assessment against any member governmental unit or against privately or publicly owned land within the watershed shall follow the statutory procedures outlines in Chapter 429 of the Minnesota Statutes except as herein modified. The Board shall secure from its engineers or some other competent person a report advising it in a preliminary way as to whether the proposed improvement is feasible and as to whether it shall best be made as proposed or in connection with some other improvement and the estimated cost of the improvement as recommended and the proposed allocation of costs between members. The Commission shall have authority to separate the watershed into subtrunks or subdistricts if the capital improvement project and costs only benefit a subtrunk or subdistrict area. If the Commission determines that a capital improvement and capital cost benefits only a subtrunk or subdistrict area it may so designate that said area shall be responsible for said costs and may allocate the costs to said area or areas rather than to the entire watershed. e D -15 The Board shall then hold a public hearing on the proposed improvement after mailed notice to the clerk of each member governmental unit within the Watershed. The Commission shall not be required to mail or publish notice except by said notice to the clerk. Said notice shall be mailed not less than 45 days before the hearing, shall state the time and place of the hearing, the general nature of the improvement, the estimated total cost and the estimated cost to each member governmental unit. The board may adjourn said hearing to obtain further information, may continue said hearing pending action of the member governmental units or may take such other action as it deems necessary to carry out the purposes of this Commission. To order the improvement, in accordance with the powers and duties established in Article VI, Subdivisions 7, 8 and 9, a resolution setting forth the order shall require a favorable vote by two - thirds of all eligible votes of the then existing board of the Commission. The order shall describe the improvement, shall allocate in percentages the cost allocation between the member governmental units, shall designate the engineers to prepare plans and specifications, and shall designate the member who will contract for the improvement in accordance with Subdivision 7 of this Article. After the board has ordered an improvement it shall forward to all member governmental units an estimated time schedule for the construction of said improvement. The board shall allow an adequate amount of time, and in no event less than 45 days, for each member governmental unit to conduct hearings, in accordance with the provisions of the aforestated Chapter 429 or the charter requirements of any city, or to ascertain the method of financing which said member governmental unit will utilize to pay its proportionate share of the costs of the improvement. Each member governmental unit shall ascertain within a period of 90 days the method it shall use to pay its proportionate share of the costs. D -16 I If the Commission proposes to utilize Hennepin County's bonding authority as set forth in Minnesota Statutes, to s Section 473.883 proposes or if the Commission ro oses to e certify all or any part of a capital improvement to Hennepin County for payment, then and in that event all proceedings shall be carried out in accordance with the provisions set forth in said Section 473.883. Subdivision 5. The board shall not order and no engineer shall be authorized by the board to prepare plans and specifications before the board has adopted a resolution ordering the improvement. The board may order the advertising for bids upon receipt of notice from each member governmental unit who will be assessed that it has completed its hearing or determined its method of payment or upon expiration of 90 days after the mailing of the preliminary report to the members. Subdivision 6. Any member governmental unit being aggrieved by the determi- nation of the board as to the allocation of the costs of said improvement shall have 30 days after the commission resolution ordering the improvement to appeal said determination. Said appeal shall be in writing and shall be addressed to the board asking for arbitration. The determination of the member's appeal shall be referred to II � a Board of Arbitration. The Board of Arbitration shall consist of three persons; one to be appointed by the Board of Commissioners, one to be appointed by the appealing member governmental unit, and the third to be appointed by the two so selected. In the event the two persons so selected do not appoint the third person within 15 days after their appointment, then the Chief Judge of the District Court of Hennepin County shall have jurisdiction to appoint, upon application of either or both of the two earlier selected, the .third person to the board. The third person selected shall not be a resident of any member governmental unit and if appointed by the Chief Judge said D -17 person shall be a registered professional engineer. The arbitrators' expenses and fees, together with the other expenses, not including counsel fees, incurred in the conduct of the arbitration shall be divided equally between the Commission and the appealing member. Arbitration shall be conducted in accordance with the Uniform Arbitration Act, Chapter 572 of the Minnesota Statutes. Subdivision 7. Contracts for Improvements. All contracts which are to be let as a result of the board's order to construct, clean, repair, alter, reclaim or change the course or terminus of any ditch, drain, storm sewer, watercourse, or to acquire, operate, construct or maintain dams, dikes, reservoirs or their appurtenances or to carry out any of the other provisions of the plan as authorized by Minnesota Statutes, Section 473.879, and for which two or more member governmental units shall be responsible for the costs, shall be let in accordance with the provisions of Section 429.041 of the Minnesota Statutes. The bidding and contracting of said work shall be let by any one of the member governmental units, as ordered by the Board of Commissioners, after compliance with the statutes. All contracts and bidding procedures shall comply with all the requirements of law applicable to contracts let by a statutory city in the State of Minnesota. The Commission shall not have the authority to contract in its own name for any improvement work for which a special assessment will be levied against any private or public property under the provisions of Chapter 429 or under the provisions of any City charter. This section shall not preclude the Commission from proceeding under Minnesota Statutes, Section 473.883. Subdivision 8. Contracts with Other Governmental Bodies. The Commission may exercise the powers set forth in Article VI, Subdivision 7, but said contracts shall, require a favorable vote of two -thirds majority of the eligible votes of the then existing members of the Commission. D -18 Subdivision 9. Supervision. All improvement contracts awarded under the provisions of Subdivision 7 of this Article shall be supervised by the member govern- mental unit awarding said contract or said member governmental unit may contract or appoint an qualified f pp y q staff member or members of the Commission to carry out said supervision, but each member agrees that the staff of this Commission shall be authorized to observe and review the work in progress and the members agree to cooperate with the Commission staff in accomplishing the purposes of this Commission. Representatives of the Commission shall have the right to enter upon the place or places where the improvement work is in progress for the purpose of making reasonable tests and inspections. The staff of this Commission shall report, advise and recommend to the board on the progress of said work. Subdivision 10. Land Acquisition. The Commission shall not have the power of eminent domain. The member governmental units agree that any and all easements or interest in land which are necessary will be negotiated or condemned in accordance with Chapter 117 of the Minnesota Statutes by the unit wherein said lands are located, and each member agrees to acquire the necessary easements or right of way or partial or complete interest in land upon order of the Board of Commissioners to accomplish the purposes of this agreement. All reasonable costs of said acquisition shall be considered as a cost of the improvement. If a member governmental unit determines it is in the best interests of that member to acquire additional lands, in conjunction with the taking of lands for storm and surface drainage or storage, for some other purposes, the costs of said acquisition will not be included in the improvement costs of the ordered project. The board in determining the amount of the improvement costs to be assessed to each member governmental unit may take into consideration D -19 the land use for which said additional lands are being acquired and may credit the acquiring municipality for said land acquisition to the extent that it benefits the other members of this agreement. Any credits may be applied to the cost allocation of the improvement project under construction or the board if feasible and necessary may defer said credits to a future project. If any member unit refuses to negotiate or condemn lands as ordered by the board, any other member may negotiate or condemn outside its corporate limits in accordance with the aforesaid Chapter 117. All members agree that they will not condemn or negotiate for land acquisition to pond or drain storm and surface waters within the corporate boundaries of another member within the West Mississippi Watershed except upon order of the board of this Commission. The Commission shall have authority to establish land acquisition policies as a part of the overall plan. The policies shall be designed to equalize costs of land throughout the watershed. Subdivision 11. Pollution Control And Water Quality. The Commission shall have the authority and responsibility to protect and improve water quality in the watershed as this is one of the main purposes set forth in the Surface Water Management Act. All member governmental units agree that they will refuse to allow the drainage of sanitary sewage or industrial wastes into any watercourse or storm sewer draining into the Mississippi River. The board may investigate on its own initiative and shall investigate upon petition of any member all complaints relating to pollution of the Mississippi River or its tributaries. Upon a finding that the creek or surface waters are being polluted, the board shall order the member governmental unit to abate this nuisance and each member agrees that it will take all reasonable action available to it under the law to alleviate the pollution and to assist in protecting and improving the water quality of surface water in the watershed. 0 -20 Subdivision 12. Local Water Management Plans. The Commission shall have power and authority to review the members' local water management plans, capital improvement programs and official controls required by Minnesota Statutes 473.879. The members also understand that the overall plan and capital improvement program required for the entire watershed must consist of the local parts in the plan and therefore every effort shall be made by the Commission to coordinate the local plans with the watershed's overall plan. The members further understand and agree that upon completion and approval of the overall plan required by Minnesota Statutes 473.878, each member will be required to present their local management plan to the Commission as required by Minnesota Statutes, Section 473.879. It is therefore important that each member provide the Commission with their best effort to coordinate and plan for the individual member's local plan at the same time the watershed overall plan is being assembled. FINANCES VIII. Subdivision 1. The Commission funds may be expended by the board in accordance with this agreement and in accordance with the procedures as established by law and in the manner as may be determined by the board. The board ' shall designate one or more national or state bank or trust companies, authorized by Chapters 118 and 427 of the Minnesota Statutes to receive deposits of public moneys and to act as depositories P P Y P for h i t e Commission funds. In no shall they event a be a disbursement of Commission e funds without the signature of at least two board members, one of whom shall be the Treasurer or his Authorized Deputy Treasurer. The Treasurer shall be required to file with the Secretary of the board a bond in the sum of at least $10,000 or such higher amount as shall be determined by the board. The Commission shall pay the premium on said bond. D -21 Subdivision 2. Each member agrees to contribute each year to a general fund, said fund to be used for general administration purposes including, but not limited to: salaries, rent, supplies, development of an overall plan, engineering and legal expenses, insurance, bonds, and to purchase and maintain devices to measure hydrological and water quality data. Said funds may also be used for normal maintenance of the facilities, but any extraordinary maintenance or repair expense shall be treated as an improvement cost and processed in accordance with Subdivision 4 of this Article. The P p u annual contribution by each member shall be based fifty percent (50 %) on the assessed valuation of all property within the Watershed and fifty percent (50 %) on the basis of the total area of each member within the boundaries of the watershed each year to the total area in the Upper Mississippi Watershed governed by this Agreement. In no event shall any assessment require a contribution for general fund purposes to exceed one-half of a mill on each dollar of assessed valuation within the watershed. Subdivision 3. (a) An improvement fund shall be established for each improvement project instituted under Article VII, Subdivision 3. Each member agrees to contribute to said funds its proportionate share of the engineering, legal and administrative costs as determined by the Commission as the amount to be assessed against each member as a cost of the improvement. The board shall submit in writing a statement to each member, setting forth in detail the expenses incurred by the Commission for each project. Each member further agrees to pay to or contract with the member governmental unit awarding said contract for the improvement, its proportionate share of the cost of the improvement in accordance with the determination of the board under Article VII, Subdivision 4. The member awarding the contract shall submit in writing copies D -22 of the engineer's certificate authorizing payment during construction and the member being billed agrees to pay its proportionate share of said improvement costs within 30 days after receipt of the statement. The member awarding the contract shall advise other contributing members of the tentative time schedule of the work and the estimated times when the contributions shall be necessary. (b) Notwithstanding the provisions of paragraph (a) of this subdivision, the Commission may by a vote of 2 /3rds of all eligible votes of the then existing members of the Commission decide to proceed to fund all or any part of the cost of a capital improvement contained in the capital improvement program of the plan pursuant to the authority and subject to the provisions set forth in Minnesota Statutes, Section 473.883. 1 It is expressed as a goal of this Agreement that cost sharing of capital improvement costs be assigned and agreed to by members pursuant to Article VIII, Subdivision 5, Subsections 1 and 2 of this Agreement. Without such agreement, all improvements will be constructed pursuant to Minnesota Statutes, Section 473.883. The Commission and Hennepin County may establish a maintenance fund to be used for normal and routine maintenance of an improvement constructed in whole or in part with money provided by Hennepin County pursuant to Minnesota Statutes, Section 473.883. The levy and collection of an ad valorem tax levy for maintenance shall be by Hennepin County based upon a tax levy resolution adopted by a 2 /3rds vote of all eligible members of the Commission and remitted to the County on or before October 10th of each year. If it is determined to levy for maintenance, the Commission shall be required to follow the hearing process established by Minnesota Statutes, Section 112.611 and acts amendatory thereof and in addition thereto. Mailed notice shall be sent to the Clerk of each member municipality at least 30 days prior to the hearing. D -23 Subdivision 4. On or before July 1 of each year, the Board shall adopt a detailed budget for the ensuing year and decide upon the total amount necessary for the general fund. Budget approval shall require a favorable vote by two -thirds of all eligible votes of then existing members of the Board. The secretary of the Board shall certify the budget on or before July 1 to the clerk of each member governmental unit together with a statement of the proportion of the budget to be provided by each member. The Council of each member agrees it will review the budget, and the Board shall upon notice from any member received prior to August 1, hear objections to the budget, and may, upon notice to all members and after a hearing, modify or amend the budget, and then give notice to the members of any and all modifications or amendments. Each member agrees to provide the funds required by the budget and said determination shall be conclusive if no member enters objections in writing on or before August 1. If no objections are submitted to the Board, each member agrees to provide the funds approved by the Board, after the Board has conducted the aforementioned hearing. Modifications or amendments to the original budget require a favorable vote by a majority of all eligible voters of then existing members of the Board. The budget shall not in any event require any member to contribute in excess of one -half of a mill on each dollar of assessed valuation of all taxable property within the watershed and within said members corporate boundaries. The schedule of payments by the members shall be determined by the board in such a manner as to provide for an orderly collection of the funds needed. D -24 Upon notice and hearing, the board by a favorable vote of three - fourths of all eligible votes of then existing members may adopt a supplemental budget requiring additional payments by the members within 60 days of its adoption but in no event shall the budget require any member to contribute in excess of one-half of a mill on each dollar of assessed valuation of all taxable property within the watershed or within any member's corporate boundaries in any one calendar year. Members' attention is drawn to Minnesota Statutes, Section 473.882, which authorized a Watershed Management Tax District to be created within each member City to pay the costs of planning and for the purpose of paying capital costs and /or normal and routine maintenance of facilities. Subdivision 5. Cost Allocation. The Commission shall apportion to the respective members on either (1),(2), or (3) of the following bases: (1) A negotiated amount to be arrived at by the members who have lands in the subdistrict. It is anticipated that most capital improvements will be made under this provision; or (2) (a) Fifty percent of all capital costs or the financing thereof shall be apportioned to each member on the basis of the real property valuation of each member within the boundaries of the watershed each year to the total real property valuation in the West Mississippi Watershed area governed by this Agreement. (b) Fifty percent of all capital costs or the financing thereof shall be apportioned to each member on the basis of the total area of each member within the boundaries of the watershed each year to the total area in the Upper Mississippi Watershed governed by this Agreement. D -25 (c) Capital costs allocated under the 50% area 50% assessed valuation formula herein set forth may be varied by the Commission by a 3 /5ths vote if: (1) any member community receives a direct benefit from the capital improvement which benefit can be defined as a lateral as well as a trunk benefit, or (2) the capital improvement provides a direct benefit to one or more members which benefit is so disproportionate as to require in a sense of fairness a modification in the 50/50 formula. (d) Credits to any member for lands acquired by said member to pond or store storm and surface water shall be allowed against costs set forth in Subsections (a), (b) and (c) of this Section. (3) If agreement is not reached to proceed as set forth in Subsection 1 or 2 of this Subdivision and if the project is constructed and financed pursuant to Minnesota Statutes, Section 473.883, the members understand and agree that said costs will be levied on all taxable property in the watershed as set forth in the statute. Subdivision 6. 7he members agree to contribute a total of $15,000 as the organizational expense fund and to provide for the operating budget in the calendar year 1984. Each member governmental unit shall contribute its proportionate share based fifty percent (50 %) on the assessed valuation of all property within the watershed and fifty percent (50 %) on the basis of the total area of each member within the boundaries of the watershed. MISCELLANEOUS PROVISIONS I%. Subdivision 1. 'Ilse Commission shall not have the power to issue certificates, warrants or bonds. Subdivision 2. The Commission shall not have the power of eminent domain and shall not own any interest in real property. All interests in lands shall be held in the name of the corporate member wherein said lands are located. D -26 Subdivision 3. The Commission shall not have the power to levy a special assessment upon any privately or publicly owned land. All such assessments shall be levied by the member wherein said lands are located. It shall have the power to require any member to contribute the costs allocated or assessed according to the other provisions of this agreement. Subdivision 4. Each member agrees that it will not directly or indirectly collect or divert any additional surface water to the Mississippi River or its tributaries from any subdistrict or subtrunk without a permit from the Board of Commissioners. Permits may be granted by the board for a member to proceed with the construction or reconstruction of improvements within the individual corporate members' boundaries and at its sole cost upon a finding: (1) that there is an adequate outlet; (b) that said construction is in conformance with the overall plan; (c) that the construction will not adversely affect other members of this agreement. Subdivision 5. Any member who is more than 60 days in default in contributing its share to the general fund shall have the vote of its board member suspended pending the payment of its proportionate share. Any member who is more than 60 days in default in contributing its proportionate share of the cost of any improvement to the contracting member shall upon application of the contracting member have the vote of its board member suspended, pending the payment of its proportionate share. Any board member whose vote is under suspension shall not be considered as an eligible member as such membership affects the number of votes required to proceed on any matter under consideration by the board. D -27 Subdivision 6. Enforcement. Members agree to be bound by the determination of the Commission and agree to use their best efforts to carry 'out directives from the Commission; failure to respond may result in a legal action by the Commission to require the member to act under a court order. DURATION X. Subdivision 1. Each member agrees to be bound by the terms of this agreement until January 1, 2005, and it may be continued thereafter at the option of the parties. Subdivision 2. This agreement may be terminated prior to January 1, 2005, by the unanimous consent of the members. Subdivision 3. In addition to the manner provided in Subdivision 2 for termination, any member may petition the board to dissolve the agreement. Upon 30 days notice in writing to the clerk of each member governmental unit, the board shall hold a hearing and upon a favorable vote by three - fourths of all eligible votes of then existing board members, the board may by Resolution recommend that the Commission be dissolved. Said Resolution shall be submitted to each member governmental unit and if ratified by three - fourths of the councils of all eligible members within 60 days, said board shall dissolve the Commission allowing a reasonable time to complete work in progress and to dispose of personal property owned by the Commission. DISSOLUTION XL Upon dissolution of the Commission, all property of the Commission shall be sold and the proceeds thereof, together with monies on hand, shall be distributed to the eligible members of the Commission. Such distribution of Commission assets shall be made in proportion to the total contribution to the Commission as required by the last annual budget. D -23 EFFECTIVE DATE XII. This agreement shall be in full force and effect upon the filing of a certified copy of the resolution approving said agreement by all five members for the West Mississippi Watershed area to be governed by this Agreement. Said resolution shall. be filed with the City Manager of the City of Brooklyn Center, who shall notify all members in writing of its effective date and set a date for the board's first meeting. Said first meeting shall take place at Brooklyn Center City Hall within 30 days after the effective date and shall be called by the Brooklyn Center City Manager. IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the undersigned governmental units, by action of their governing bodies, have caused this agreement to be executed in accordance with the authority of Minnesota Statutes 471.59. D -29 Approved by the City Council CITY OF BROOKLYN CENTER P 1984 By Its By Its Approved by the City Council CITY OF BROOKLYN PARK 1984 B Its By Its Approved by the City Council CITY OF CHAMPLIN 1984 By Its By Its Approved by the City Council CITY OF MAPLE GROVE 1984 By Its By Its Approved by the City Council CITY OF OSSEO 1984 By Its By Its D -30 APPENDIX E HYDROLOGIC DATA OXBOW CREEK (UWM lob) (uWM 9) (UWM 7) WATERSHED DRAINAGE DIRECTLY TO THE MISSISSIPPI RIVER (LWM I) (UWM 3) I 63 BI 13 10 (MISS (LWM 2) 5I (UWM 4) (UWM IOc) 83 6 9 12 (LWM 3) (UWM S) J52 (LWM 4) (UWM 13) 53 71 (UWM 100) (UWM B) (UWM 6b) (UWM 60) (MISSISSIPPI (LWM 5) (UWM 14) SOUTH RIVER) 72 CHAMPLIN ® (LWM 6) (UWM 15) 15 70 I 55 73 m (LWM 7) (UWM 16) 74 V {� (UWM II) (UWM 12) (UWM 1) (UWM 17) 61 OSSEO EDINBROOK (UWM 2) 62 (MISSISSIPPI RIVER) BO 2 3 4 5 6 7 59 ID I LINO - 0 STRUCTURE NO.1 (EB7) (EB6b) (EB6a) (EB5) (EB4) (ES 3) (EB2) (EBI) CROSS-SECTION NO 1 (AT DOWNSTREAM END OF REACH) I - -� INTERVENING AREA WEST MISSISSIPPI WATERSHED E.A. HICKOK & ASSOCIATES FEB- 1967 HYDROLOGISTS - SUBWATERSHED FLOW ROUTING - FUTURE IIIMiEAPOLIS- MNiPESOTA WEST MISSISSIPPI WATERSHED MRNAGEMENT PLAN HYDROLOGIC DATA Existing Land Use Dist.( %)(3) Composite Time Subwatershed Outlet Details Future Land Use Dist.( %) Curve No. of Conc. U/S D/S Emergency Water- Total Existing/ Existing/ Invert Invert Overflow shed Area DRAG) M4(2) Future Future Outlet Structure Elev. Elev. Elev. No. (ac) (ac) (ac) SF W C/R I/M PW GS PG Dev.(4) Dev.(4)(hrs) Location Type Size (ft NGVD) (ft NGVD) (ft NGVD) LWM1 340 30 310 99 0 0 0 0 1 0 60/60 0.710.7 Miss. River RCP Storm 42" 805.49 99 0 0 0 0 1 0 at 55th Ave. Sewer LWM2 350 60 290 85 1 0 6 0 8 0 60/60 0.6/0.6 Miss. River Concrete 30" 808.5 85 1 0 6 0 8 0 at 59th Ave. Sewer LWM3 440 0 440 29 20 16 20 0 15 0 72172 0.9/0.9 Miss. River RCP Storm 78" 808.0 29 20 16 20 0 15 0 at 65th Ave. Sewer LW44 480 20 460 71 16 5 0 0 8 0 60/60 0.9/0.9 Miss. River RCP Storm 72" 803.0 N 71 16 5 0 0 8 0 at 70th Ave. Sewer LWM5 410 10 400 80 12 0 0 0 8 0 61/61 0.9/0.9 Miss. River RCP Storm 66" 818.5 80 12 0 0 0 8 0 at 74th Ave. Sewer LWM6 320 20 300 77 7 0 0 0 6 10 70/73 0.710.7 Miss. River RCP Storm 60" 804.75 77 17 0 0 0 6 0 at 81st Ave. Sewer LWM7 90 25 65 48 6 0 0 0 46 0 65/65 0.5/0.5 Miss. River RCP Storm 30" 811.65 48 6 0 0 0 46 0 at 83rd Ave. Sewer SYMBOLS: NOTES: SF = Single Family (1)Direct runoff area draining directly to Mississippi River and not included in runoff model. W = Multiple Family (2)Modeled area draining through identified subwatershed outlet. C/R = Commercial /Retail (3)Land use distribution includes total area. I/M = Industrial /Manufacturing (4)Based on area to be modeled. PW = Public Waters /Wetland GS = Green Space No ponding areas (reservoirs) were utilized in the West Mississippi Watershed runoff model. PG = Potential Growth WEST MISSISSIPPI WATERSHED MANAGEMENT PLAN (continued) HYDROLOGIC DATA Existing Land Use Dist.( %)(3) Camposite Time Subwatershed Outlet Details Future Land Use Dist.(%) Curve No. of Conc. U/S D/S Emergency Water- Total Existing/ Existing/ Invert Invert Overflow shed Area DRAG) M4(2) Future Future Outlet Structure Elev. Elev. Elev. No. (ac) (ac) (ac) SF MF C/R I/M PW GS PG Dev.(4) Dev.(4)(hrs) Location Type Size (ft NGVD) (ft NGVD) (ft NGVD) EBl 1210 45 1165 24 2 0 0 1 10 63 53/65 8.9/1.3 Mattson CMP 70" Approx. 75 11 3 0 1 10 0 Brook at Arch x 13 ft West River Culvert 90" above Road. invert EB2 1300 0 1300 0 0 1 1 0 18 80 52/68 12.4/3.4 Edinbrook R , 54 21 6 1 0 18 0 at Xerxes w Ave. EB3 630 0 630 0 3 0 0 0 12 85 41/67 10.5/2.0 Edinbrook 48 24 16 0 0 12 0 at Nobel Ave. SYMBOLS: NOTES: SF = Single Family (1)Direct runoff area draining directly to Mississippi River and not included in runoff wdel. W = Multiple Family (2)Modeled area draining through identified subwatershed outlet. i C/R = Cawrcial /Retail (3)Land use distribution includes total area. I/M = Industrial /Manufacturing (4)Based on area to be modeled. PW = Public Waters/Wetland GS = Green Space No ponding areas (reservoirs) were utilized in the West Mississippi Watershed runoff model. PG = Potential Growth WEST MISSISSIPPI WATERSHED MANAGEMENT PLAN (continued) HYDROLOGIC DATA Existing Land Use Dist. %)(3) Carposite Time Subwatershed Outlet Details Future Land Use Dist.( %) Curve No. of Conc. U/S D/S Emergency Water- Total Existing/ Existing/ Invert Invert Overflow shed Area DRAG) MA(2) Future Future Outlet Structure Elev. Elev. Elev. No. (ac) (ac) (ac) SF MF C/R I/M PW GS PG Dev.(4) Dev.(4)(hrs) Location Type Size (ft NGVD) (ft NGVD) (ft NGVD) EB4 730 0 730 0 0 0 0 3 22 75 48/69 11.8/2.3 Edinbrook 25 24 9 17 3 22 0 at Zane E85 730 0 730 0 0 1 1 0 6 92 47/71 12.212.7 Edinbrook 47 15 1 30 1 6 0 m EB6a 230 0 230 52 7 6 0 0 23 12 67/68 0.8/0.8 T.H. 169 RCP 54" 62 9 6 0 0 23 0 south of 93rd Ave. SYMBOLS: NOTES: SF = Single Family (1)Direct runoff area draining directly to Mississippi River and not included in runoff model. W = Multiple Family (2)Modeled area draining through identified subwatershed outlet. C/R = Camiercial /Retail (3)Land use distribution includes total area. I/M = Industrial/Manufacturing (4)Based on area to be modeled. PW = Public Waters/Wetland ` GS = Green Space No ponding areas (reservoirs) were utilized in the West Mississippi Watershed runoff model. PG = Potential Growth WEST MISSISSIPPI WATERSHED MANAGEMENT PLAN (continued) HYDROLOGIC DATA Existing Land Use Dist.( %)(3) Camposite Time Subwatershed Outlet Details Future Land Use Dist.( %) Curve No. of Conc. U/S D/S Emergency Water- Total Existing/ Existing/ Invert Invert Overflow shed Area DRAG) MAW Future Future Outlet Structure Elev. Elev. Elev. No. (ac) (ac) (ac) SF MF C/R I/M PW GS PG Dev.(4) Dev.(4)(hrs) Location Type Size (ft NGVD) (ft NGVD) (ft NGVD) EB6b 280 0 280 47 0 14 10 0 19 10 71/74 1.1/0.8 Central Ave. RCP 36" 874.0 4T 20 0 19 0 north of Culvert 93rd Ave. EB7 300 0 300 70 0 4 0 0 7 19 69/72 2.2/1.3 Near Elm RCP 24" Proposed future outlet m 80 0 4 9 0 7 0 Creek School i I I UWI, 110 40 70 20 0 0 0 0 20 60 47/59 1.8/1.8 West River 80 0 0 0 0 20 0 Road near 92nd Ave. SYMBOLS: NOTES: SF = Single Family (1)Direct runoff area draining directly to Mississippi River and not included in runoff model. MF = Multiple Family (2)Modeled area draining through identified subwatershed outlet. CA = Camiercial /Retail (3)Land use distribution includes total area. I/M = Industrial/Manufacturing (4)Based on area to be modeled. PW = Public Waters/Wetland GS = Green Space No ponding areas (reservoirs) were utilized in the West Mississippi Watershed runoff model. PG = Potential Growth WEST MISSISSIPPI WATERSHED MWVAGEMENT PLAN (continued) HYDROLOGIC DATA Existing Land Use Dist.( %)(3) Carposite Time Subwatershed Outlet Details Future Land Use Dist.( %) Curve No. of Conc. U/S D/S Emergency Water- Total Existing/ Existing/ Invert Invert Overflow shed Area DRAG) MA(2) Future Future Outlet Structure Elev. Elev. Elev. No. (ac) (ac) (ac) SF W C/R I/M PW GS PG Dev.(4) Dev.(4)(hrs) Location Type Size (ft NGVD) (ft NGVD) (ft NGVD) UW42 210 10 200 26 0 0 0 0 '50 24 58/63 2.5/0.5 West River Steel 24" Approx. 36 4 0 0 0 50 0 Road north Culvert 4# ft of 93rd above Ave. invert UWN3 760 120 640 0 0 0 0 0 33 69 50/64 8.0/2.1 West River Steel 45" Approx. 54 12 0 0 1 33 0 Road near Culvert 18 ft 101st Ave. above o ' extended invert rn UW44 240 10 230 28 0 0 0 0 25 47 44/53 7.011.2 West River CMP 24" 5 0 0 0 0 25 0 Road near Culvert Sunset Road SYMBOLS: NOTES: SF = Single Family (1)Direct runoff area draining directly to Mississippi River and not included in runoff model. W = Multiple Family (2)Modeled area draining through identified subwatershed outlet. C/R = Carmiercial /Retail (3)Land use distribution includes total area. I/M = Industrial/Manufacturing (4)Based on area to be modeled. PW = Public Waters/Wetland GS = Green Space No ponding areas (reservoirs) were utilized in the West Mississippi Watershed runoff model. PG = Potential Growth WEST MISSISSIPPI WATERSHED MANAGEMENT PLAN (continued) HYDROLOGIC DATA Existing Land Use Dist.( %)(3) Carposite Time Sub Outlet Details Future Land Use Dist.( %) Curve No. of Conc. U/S D/S Emergency Water- Total Existing/ Existing/ Invert Invert Overflow shed Area DRAG) MAW Future Future Outlet Structure Elev. Elev. Elev. No. (ac) (ac) (ac) SF MF C/R I/M PW GS PG Dev.(4) Dev.(4)(hrs) Location Type Size (ft NGVD) (ft NGVD) (ft NGVD) Uft 370 30 340 50 0 0 0 0 14 36 51/59 5.1/1.4 West River CM' 30" Approx. 6 7 3 0 0 14 U Road, west Culvert 51 ft of Kyl a above Ave. invert UW16a 205 40 165 53 0 0 0 0 47 0 47/47 .5/.5 West River RCP 30" Approx. 3 0 0 0 0 47 U Road south- Culvert 6 ft east of Vera above Cruz Ave. invert m I UW46b 520 0 520 0 0 0 0 7 29 64 59/69 10.9/7.4 109th CMP 202" 859.13 859.17 862.19 48 16 0 0 7 29 O Ave. N., Arch x east of Culvert 27" Jackson Jr. High UW47 150 0 150 0 0 0 0 0 14 86 56/71 3.6/2.2 101st Ave., 51 35 0 0 0 14 0 west of Regent SYMBOLS: NOTES: SF = Single Family (Mirect runoff area draining directly to Mississippi River and not included in runoff model. MF = Multiple Family (2)Modeled area draining through identified subwatershed outlet. C/R = Commercial /Retail (3)Land use distribution includes total area. I/M = Industrial/Manufacturing (4)Based on area to be modeled. PW = Public Waters/Wetland GS = Green Space No ponding areas (reservoirs) were utilized in the West Mississippi Watershed runoff model. PG = Potential Growth WEST MISSISSIPPI WATERSHED M4NAGEMENT PLAN (continued) HYDROLOGIC DATA Existing Land Use Dist.( %)(3) Cu posite Time Subwatershed Outlet Details Future Land Use Dist.( %) Curve No. of Conc. U/S D/S Emergency Water- Total Existing/ Existing/ Invert Invert Overflow shed Area DRAG) M4(2) Future Future Outlet Structure Elev. Elev. Elev. No. (ac) (ac) (ac) SF W C/R I/M PW GS PG Dev.(4) Dev.(4)(hrs) Location Type Size (ft NGVD) (ft NGVD) (ft NGVD) M 670 0 670 3 0 0 0 9 25 63 55/68 12.5/8.7 Zane Ave. W 0 9 25 0 near 103rd Ave. LW49 450 0 450 17 0 0 0 16 8 59 58/71 1.3/1.5 Near DNR 59 17 0 0 16 8 0 Protected Wetland 202W m 0 0 LW10a 730 0 730 0 0 0 0 4 13 83 49/71 10.5/6.5 Winnetka 36 1 11 4 13 0 Ave., south of 101st Ave. SYMBOLS: NOTES: SF = Single Family (1)Direct runoff area draining directly to Mississippi River and not included in runoff model. W = Multiple Family (2)Modeled area draining through identified subwatershed outlet. C/R = Carmrercial /Retail (3)Land use distribution includes total area. I/M = Industrial/Manufacturing (4)Based on area to be modeled. PW = Public Waters/Wetland GS = Green Space No ponding areas (reservoirs) were utilized in the West Mississippi Watershed runoff model. PG = Potential Growth WEST MISSISSIPPI WATERSHED MANAGEMENT PLAN (continued) HYDROLOGIC DATA Existing Land Use Dist.( %)(3) Composite Time SuN4atershed Outlet Details Future Land Use Dist.( %) Curve No. of Conc. U/S D/S Emergency Water- Total Existing/ Existing/ Invert Invert Overflow shed Area DRAG) MA(2) Future Future Outlet Structure Elev. Elev. Elev. No. (ac) (ac) (ac) SF W C/R I/M PW GS PG Dev.(4) Dev.(4)(hrs) Location Tye _ Size (ft NGVD) (ft NGVD) (ft NGVD) UM10b 100 0 100 1000 0 0 0 0 0 58/58 1.4/.5 Future 00 0 0 0 0 0 0 outlet UNM1Oc 280 280 280 100 0 0 0 0 0 0 58/58 1.4/.5 Future 00 0 0 0 0 0 0 outlet m UWN11 560 0 560 37 7 0 0 1 0 55 59/77 3.2/0.9 Winnetka RCP 48" 863.03 6 23 0 0 1 0 0 Ave. and Storm 110th Place Sewer UW412 585 10 575 78 0 0 0 3 O 18 65/73 4.9/0.8 Miss. River RCP 48" 825.0 8 10 9 0 3 0 0 northeast Storm of Oxbow Sewer Park SYMBOLS: NOTES: SF = Single Family (1)Direct runoff area draining directly to Mississippi River and not included in runoff model. MF = Multiple Family (2)Modeled area draining through identified subwatershed outlet. C/R = Commercial /Retail .(3)Land use distribution includes total area. I/M = Industrial/Manufacturing (4)Based on area to be modeled. PW = Public Waters/Wetland GS = Green Space No ponding areas (reservoirs) were utilized in the West Mississippi Watershed runoff model. PG = Potential Growth HEST MISSISSIPPI WATERSHED MANAGEMENT PLAN (continued) HYDROLOGIC DATA Existing Land Use Dist.( %)(3) Carposite Time Subwatershed Outlet Details Future Land Use Dist.(% ) Curve No. of Conc. U/S D/S Emergency Water- Total Existing/ Existing/ Invert Invert Overflow shed Area DRAG) MA(2) Future Future Outlet Structure Elev. Elev. Elev. No. (ac) (ac) (ac) SF W C/R I/M PW GS PG Dev.(4) Dev.(4)(hrs) Location Type Size (ft NGVD) (ft NGVD) (ft NGVD) UW413 350 210 .140 1000 0 0 0 0 0 62/62 1.9/1.9 Miss. River RCP 36 829.0 00 0 0 0 0 0 0 at Shepard Storm Circle Sewer UW414 560 0 560 94 0 1 0 0 5 0 59/59 2.3/0.9 Miss. River RCP 60" 824.5 94 0 1 0 0 5 0 at Nevada Storm Circle Sewer m 0 0 UWM15 550 0 550 40 0 0 24 0 4 32 57/70 3.5/0.7 West River Culvert Future outlet to the Mississippi 40 19 0 37 0 4 0 Road near River is proposed near Pribble St. Sherwood St. SYMBOLS: NOTES: SF = Single Family (1)Direct runoff area draining directly to Mississippi River and not included in runoff model. W = Multiple Family (2)Modeled area draining through identified subwatershed outlet. C/R = Ccamercial/Retail (3)Land use distribution includes total area. I/M = Industrial/Manufacturing (4)Based on area to be modeled. PW = Public Waters/Wetland GS = Green Space No ponding areas (reservoirs) were utilized in the West Mississippi Watershed runoff model. PG = Potential Growth APPENDIX F CHARACTERISTICS OF PROTECTED WATERS AND WETLANDS APPENDIX F CHARACTERISTICS OF PROTECTED WATERS AND WETLANDS DNR ID No. Acres Type Section Township Range 27 -60W 45 4 5, 32 119, 120 21 27 -202W 10 3 5 119 21 27 -203W 15 3 4, 5 119 21 27 -204P 19 3 5, 8 119 21 27 -205W 7 3 4 119 21 27 -206W 12 4 4 119 21 27 -207W 18 3 4 119 21 27 -208W 7 3 9 119 21 27 -210W 4 3 3 119 21 27 -212W 9 3 2, 11 119 21 27 -248W 7 3 31 120 21 27 -249W 16 3 32 120 21 27 -250W 12 4 5 119 21 27 -251W 28 3 5, 8 119 21 27 -254W 7 3 6, 7 119 21 27 -255W 24 3 6 119 21 27 -283W 3 3 5 119 21 27 -559W 8 4 17 119 21 27 -632W 18 3 16, 17 119 21 *Type 3: Inland Shallow Fresh Marshes Usually vegetation choked with emergent aquatics and generally having 0 -6 inches water throughout the growing season. Typical vegetation includes cattail, reed canary, arrowhead, bullrushes, sedges and reed grasses. Type 4: Inland Deep Fresh Marshes Usually having 6 inches to 3+ feet open water with submergent and emergent aquatics. Typical vegetation includes cattail, reed canary, rushes, wild rice, pond weeds, waterlilies and duckweed. SOURCE: Protected Waters /Wetlands Inventory, Hennepin County. F -1