HomeMy WebLinkAboutCCP 08-20-2001
.
~
. EN HILLS .
FILE
AGENDA
CITY COUNCIL WORKSES$ION
qry HALL
MONDAY, AUGUST 20; 2001,4:45 P oM.
4:45 p.M:1. . CnD to Order
4~45 P.M. :z. .. Staft~li(lllltems.
II> F'iBaRte
. . 2002 Budget Discussion
b. ,.He Works&. Safety
· . DRAFTStonnwater Mll1lll8ement Plan
Co AdministratIOn
· City Hall Dedication (Flag pole and treeS)
Couoell Comments
Mjouri
The above times 1I1.8YY.ary depending upon Iengdl of issUe discussion.
. , , -' -
Tentative ~fl~Meetiofl Sehdale
Meeting dates, times lII1d looati(!llS l\I'e subject tIIcb8nge.
Please cont8(:t City Hall for the most.curre!1t schedule.
August]
AUll1lllt13
August 16
Au~ 20
August 27
A...lIt 27
ugust 28
August 29
Tea.iatlve ~ber l\f~~.1e
Meeting dates, times lII1d l(K:ati0n$ are subjec:tto cb8nge.
Please COIlt8(:t City HaD focthe mosteui1$lt sebeduIe
(Planning WOrksession) CANCELED
Planning Conunission.
Sept. 3
Sept. $
CoulldlMeotlog
7:30 P.M.
Operations &. Finance CANCELFJ)
Cotmnittee
. Sept., 10
Sept. t '7
Sept 20
COUlItriI Wo~ ....4~J>.M.
(pMP WorIcselIsion)
Couml Meetillt
Parks &. Recreatioo
Committee
6:30P.M.
7:38P.M.
7:00 P.M.
Sept. 24
Sept. 25
Communic8!lons
Committee
7:00 A.M.
Sept. 26
_f"....~
HolkItq
(p/anningW~)6:30 P.M.
Planning CommiltSfuo 7:30 P.M.
Con.e11 Meetmg .
7:30P.M.
CouRellWo~ 4:45 P.M.
Operations &. F~. 7:00 P oM.
Committee
CounellMeetlag 7:30P.M.
Parks &. RecrelIIion .
Committee .
7:00P.M.
ClllJHi1uDications
Committee
7:00AM.
HP Laser Jet 3200
[l!]@
. CITY OF ARDEN HILLS
6516345137
ADG-16-2001 12:34PM
i n yen t
Fax Call Report
Job Date
Time
Type
Identification
Duration
0:50
Pages
1
Result
513 8/16/2001
12:33:19PM Send
96286833
OK
.
.
HP Laser Jet
3200
M@
i n yen t
CITY OF AROEN HILLS
6516345137
AUG-16-2001 12c35PM
Fax Call Report
Job Date
Time
Type
Identification
Duration
0:53
Pages
Resu It
514 8/16/2001
12:34:37PM Send
97637060891
1
OK
HP Laser Jet 3200
D!)@
.......i !!
....... ...11 H
CITY OF AROEN HILLS
6516345137
AUG-16-2001 12:37PM
i n v e n t
Fax Call Report
12:35:57PM Send
1:19
Pages
1
Result
Job Date
Time
Type
Identification
Duration
515 8/16/2001
96333846
OK
HP Laser Jet
3200
(8@
~C[TY OF ARDEN HILLS
6516345137
AUG-16-2001 12:38PM
i n v e n t
Fax Call Report
Job Date
Time
Type
Identification
Duration
0:56
Pages
Result
516 8/16/2001
12:37:44PM Send
92282191
1
OK
HP Laser Jet
3200
M//.. i@
" ,
mm" .... __A
.CITY OF ARDEN HILLS
6516345137
AUG-16-2001 12:39PM
i n v e n t
Fax Call Report
Job Date
Time
Type
Identification
Duration
Pages
Result
517 8/16/2001
12:39:08PM Send
94821262
0:33
I
OK
HP Laser Jet 3200
r~... i@
-.:a
.CITY OF ARDEN HILLS
6516345137
AUG-16-20Dl 12:4DPM
i n v e n t
Fax Call Report
Job Date
Time
Type
Identification
Duration
0:28
Pages
Result
518 8/16/2001
12:40:09PM Send
92281753
1
OK
.
I
I
~
~
I
I
I
It
I
I
~
I
I
I
~
,
I
Arden Hills
Local Storm water Management
Plan
.'\ 'l{ 1!')')'F E~' T .H.ILl.....
Ii ,-=-L";"~
" ._-~.'-
City of Arden Hills, Minnesota
SEH No. A-ARDEN01 01.00
August, 2001
"=SE"H
SHORT ELLIOTT HENDRICKSON INC
Multidisciplined.
Single Source,
I
I'
I
I
I
I
I
II
I
I
I
I
I
I
~
I
~SeJ
3535 Vadnais Center Drive, S1. Paul, MN 55110-5196
651.490.2000
651.490.2150 FAX
architecture
environmental
engineering
lranSp01"tation
August 15, 2001
RE: City of Arden Hills
Loeal Stormwater Management Plan
SEH No. A-ARDENOlO1.00 SPWR
Joseph p, Lynch
Administrator
City of Arden Hills
4364 West Round Lake Boulevard
Arden Hills, Minnesota
Dear Mr, Lynch:
Enclosed is the final draft of the Arden Hills Local Stormwater Management Plan. We would point
out a eouple of items for your consideration.
1. Under Annual Report to the Council on page 42 of the draft plan, we are requesting that you
provide a date that the report would be provided to the City Council, if different than July I st.
2. The Cost/Benefit section of the draft Plan is pending completion and should be available for the
City Council paekets.
3. Finally, Appendix L - Agreements with RCWD and Neighboring Communities is empty. This
was done purposely for existing or future agreements as appropriate.
We would appreciate both your comments and Greg Brown's at your earliest convenience. Our
intent is to submit the final draft Plan to the City Council's next meeting for their discussion and
possible approvaL Upon, the Council's approval, the Plan would be sent out for the required 60 day
agency review and comment.
Thanks for your time and effort and we look forward to your comments. In the interim, if you have
any questions, please contact either Beth Peterson (651.765.2901) or myself at 651.490.2029.
Sincerely,
/) /' /./. .'. / 0/
, pi." ,'/./' ,'<
\'-7~'.j ../, /~..~,,~).
/p....C/(_.~<~., - J'<
~, "
(;/ Joel Schilling, Sr. Scli~tist
Project Manager
ah
Enclosure
c: Greg Brown, P.E. - Consulting City Engineer
F:\wp\projeels\ab\arden\OIOl\r\lraDsL.eltcr.doc
Short Elliott Hendrickson Inc.
Your Trusted Resource
Equal Opportunity Employer
I
I
I
I
,
I
I
I
.
I
I
I
I
I
I
>
I
Table of Contents
Page
Executive Summary ............................................................................................. 1
Section 1 - Introduction....................................................................................... 3
Authorization and Need ................................................................................3
Background................................................................................................... 4
Purposes of Metropolitan Water Management Program ............................... 6
Plan Summary.............. ... .................................,... ... .......... ... ........................ 6
Section 2 - Physical Environment ...................................................................... 8
Soils..............................................................................................................8
Precipitation............ ........... ... ...................... ... ... ........................... ........ ......... 10
Surface Water Resources.............................................................................11
Lakes and Other Significant Water Bodies ................................................... 13
Water Quality........ ............... ...................... ...... ... ...... .................. ....... ........... 14
Utilities...... ...... ................................................................................... ... ........ 20
Water Appropriation Permits..........................,.............................................. 20
Water-based Recreation Areas..... ... ... ... ..................... ... ....... .......... ........ ...... 21
Unique Features and Scenic Areas .............................................................. 21
Pollutant Sources............................. ..... ......... ................... ... ...... ................... 21
Section 3 - Hydraulic and Water Quality Analyses ........................................... 22
Hydraulic Analyses ... ....................,.................. ................... .... ....... ........ ....... 22
Water Quality Analyses.................................................................................24
Lakes and Ponds ..........................................................................................24
Lake Josephine Assessment Report............................................................. 25
Section 4 - Goals, Policies, and Objectives....................................................... 27
General..... ........ .................. ............................................... ............. ... ........... 27
Goals and Policies ........................................................................................27
Maintenance and Street Sweeping Program/Schedule................................. 28
Public Participation, Information, and Education........................................... 29
Finance........................... ............. ... ...... ... ...... ... ...................... ..... ................. 30
A-ARDEN0101.00
Page;
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
It
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
Table of Contents (Continued)
Section 5 - Implementation.................................................................................. 36
Introduction ................ ........... ............. ...... ..... ... ............................................. 36
Implementation Priorities ...... .... ... ....................... ............... .... ... .................... 36
CosVBenefit for Pollutant Removal...................................................,........... 39
Amendment Procedures ...............................................................................40
Request for Amendments .............................................................................40
Staff Review... ... .... ........ ... ................ ...... ........... ........... ..... .................. .......... 40
Council Consideration......... ............. ........ ... ......................., ... .... .............. ..... 40
Public Hearing, Council, and RCWD Approval.............................................. 40
Council Adoption..... ................................... .............................. ............ ......... 40
Annual Report to Council.............................................................................. 40
NPDES... ......... .................. ............. .............................. ........ ....... ........... ....... 41
GIS ..........................................,...................................................................41
A-ARDENOto1.00
Page ii
City of Arden Hills, Minnesota
Local Stormwater Management Plan
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
II
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
Table of Contents (Continued)
List of Tables
Table 1
Table 2
Table 3
Table 4
Table 5
Table 6
Table 7
Rainfall in Minneapolis - SI. Paul Metropolitan Area........................... 10
Lake Tier Classification ....................................................................... 13
Summary Data on Lakes in Arden Hills............................................... 24
Advantages and Disadvantages of Different Funding Alternatives ...... 31
Arden Hills LSWMP Implementation Summary................................... 36
Capital Improvement Plan ................................................................... 37
Annual Operating Costs ...................................................................... 39
List of Figures
Figure 1 - Location Map
Figure 2 - Soils Map
Figure 3 - 100-Year, 24-Hour Rainfall
Figure 4 - Map with Drainage Ditches
Figure 5 - MN/DNR Protected Waters Inventory Map
Figure 6 - National Wetlands Inventory Map
Figure 7 - Storm Drainage System (Foldout in back pocket)
Figure 8 - Existing Land Use
Figure 9 - Future Land Use
Figure 10- Proposed Regional Pong Locations
City of Arden Hills, Minnesota
Local Stormwater Management Plan
A-ARDEN0101.00
Page ii;
5
9
11
12
15
16
17
18
19
23
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
II
I
I
I
I
I
I
~
I
Appendix A
Appendix B
Appendix C
Appendix D
Appendix E
Appendix F
Appendix G
Appendix H
Appendix I
Appendix J
Appendix K
Appendix L
Appendix M
Table of Contents (Continued)
List of Appendices
Regulatory Responsibilities
Best Management Practices (BMPs)
Developer Guidelines
Hydrologic Modeling and Water Quality Modeling Results
Data from MPCA Lake Water Quality Assessment Program and
MDNR Lakes Database
Interim Strategy to Reduce Nonpoint Source Pollution to all
Metropolitan Waterbodies
Local Plan Requirements of Rice Creek Watershed District
State of Minnesota Rules Governing Local Storm water
Management Plans
Water Quality Source Controls
Pond Design Standards
Rainfall Frequency Atlas for the Midwest
City of Arden Hills Agreements with RCWD and Neighboring
Communities
Example Agreement (regarding Stormwater Management Practices
Water Quality Treatment Pond)
A-ARDEN0101.00
Pageiv
City of Arden Hilis, Minnesota
Local Stormwater Management Plan
I
I
I
I,
I
I
I
.
t
I
I
I
I
I
I
8.15.01
Arden Hills
Local Stormwater Management Plan
Executive Summary
Minnesota Statutes, Sections 103B.20l - 103B.255 and Minnesota Rule,
Chapter 8410 eomprises the Metropolitan Surface Water Management
Program. The Statute and Rule requires the preparation of watershed plans by
watershed management organizations such as Rice Creek Watershed District.
Local water management plans must subsequently be prepared by the
respective local governments and be consistent with the watershed plan. The
Arden Hills Local Storm Water Management Plan (LSWMP) has been
prepared according to State statutory and rule requirements.
The Plan is subdivided into five sections:
I) Introduction;
2) Physical Environment;
3) Hydraulic and Water Quality Analyses;
4) Goals, Policies, and Objectives; and
5) Implementation.
The Plan is eonsistent with the requirements of the Rice Creek Watershed
District.
The City of Arden Hills has seven lakes that are either partially or entirely
lying within City limits. Therefore, the lakes have always been a focus of the
City, and the protection of its water resources is a high priority. The City has a
shore land proteetion ordinance and a sediment and erosion control ordinanee,
Significant growth and development is not anticipated in Arden Hills, exeept
in the Twin Cities Army Ammunition Plant (TCAAP) property which
occupies nearly one-third of the land area in the City. Over the next 20 years,
TCAAP land is expected to be released from the federal government for
redevelopment.
A-ARDEN0101.00
Page 1
I
I
I
I
j
I
I
II
I
I
I
I
I
t
I
8.15.01
Section 3 includes a summary of the hydraulic and water quality analyses
results, Both the hydraulic and the water quality models were completed for
the eleven proposed regional ponds that were identified in a previous
comprehensive drainage study. There were two more proposed regional ponds
that were identified in this study that are being completed as. part of a TH 96
reconstruction projeet. The modeling did not include the entire City, and was
strictly focused on the proposed regional ponds.
The City has chosen to adopt the goals and policies of Rice Creek Watershed
Distriet as their own. However, the Plan reflects specific goals for the City
relating to maintenance, public education and participation and fmanee, which
are included in Section 4.
Section 5 includes a summary of implementation strategies and priorities and
a capital improvement plan to address existing and future stonnwater
management issues facing the City of Arden Hills.
The Arden Hills Local Stonnwater Management Plan is intended to give
overall planning guidance to the City officials, staff, citizens and developers.
The information presented is an estimate of the ultimate conditions of the
City. The Plan should not, however, be used for fmal design of facilities.
Rather, it is intended to supplement City Planning and guide site-specific,
detailed analysis. As more information becomes available, the plan should be
regularly updated. In this way, Arden Hills stormwater management efforts
will remain dynamie and flexible.
A-ARDEN0101.00
Page 2
City of Arden Hills, Minnesota
Local Stormwater Management Plan
I
~
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
.
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
8.15.01
Section 1 - Introduction
Authorization and Need
Minnesota Statutes, Sections 103B.20l - 103B.255 and Minnesota Rule,
Chapter 8410 comprises the Metropolitan Surface Water Management
Program. The Statute and Rule requires the preparation of watershed plans by
watershed management organizations such as Rice Creek Watershed District.
Local water management plans must subsequently be prepared by the
respective local governments and be consistent with the watershed plan. The
Arden Hills Local Storm Water Management Plan (LSWMP) has been
prepared according to State statutory and rule requirements.
The boundaries of Arden Hills lie entirely within Rice Creek Watershed
District (RCWD). The watershed district updated their Water Resource
Management Plan in Oetober, 1997. The City of Arden Hills is required to
submit their Local Stormwater Management Plan for review for consisteney
with the updated RCWD plan, The City of Arden Hills recently updated
Comprehensive Plan must include the LSWMP as required by Minnesota
Statutes, Section 473.859, and Subdivision 2 and be reviewed by the
Metropolitan Council.
The City of Arden Hills is only a small part of the Minneapolis - St. Paul
metropolitan area, The nature of physical development and redevelopment
within Arden Hills, its nature resources, people, economy and government
plan must all be placed in context with what is happening in the larger
metropolitan area, particularly the metropolitan area in the immediate vicinity
of Arden Hills. The cities in the metropolitan area are impacted increasingly
by environmental concerns. These concerns include loss of wetlands, lake and
river water quality, wastewater treatment, groundwater protection, shore land
development, and construction erosion and sedimentation problems. The
impact of these environmental concerns affects recreational opportunities,
aesthetic considerations, and also affects eeological diversity and wildlife
habitat.
Often city councils and their respeetive staffs are under varied pressure from
homeowners, park and recreational users, land developers, real estate agencies
and environmental groups in their communities. Chapter I03B and the
politieal environment make water resource management planning an
important issue,
City of Arden Hills, Minnesota
Local Stormwater Management Plan
A-ARDEN0101.00
Page 3
I
~
I
I
I
,
I
t
I
-
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
.8.15.01
Background
The land that became the City of Arden Hills was originally part of Mounds
View Township. The area was first settled in the mid-1800s. In 1906, Joseph
Hackney, a State senator and millionaire, settled on the land and built Arden
Farms. This farm and the terrain would eventually give the City its name, In
1951, the City of Arden Hills was created.
The City of Arden Hills is loeated in Ramsey County, approximately eight
miles north of the downtown areas of Minneapolis and St. Paul. It is bordered
on the north and easy by Shoreview, the west by Mounds View and New
Brighton, and the south by Roseville. The City of Arden Hills is bordered by
County Road I to the north, Lexington Avenue to the east, Interstate 35W to
the west, and partially by County Road D to the south. The City's area covers
approximately 9.4 square miles. The Twin Cities Army Ammunition Plant
(TCAAP) occupies approximately 4 square miles of the northern portion of
the City, or nearly one-third of the entire land area of Arden Hills. Over the
next 20 years, TCAAP land is expected to be released by the federal
government to be redeveloped. Site contamination clean up will determine
rate of land release. See Figure 1 for location map.
The lakes have always been the focus of the Arden Hills' community. There
are seven lakes that lie entirely or partially within the City limits. Lake
Johanna is the largest lake in the City, covering approximately 230 acres.
There are also public ditches and wetland complexes throughout the City. The
City falls entirely under the jurisdiction of Riee Creek Watershed District.
The southern portion of Arden Hills is fully developed. The TCAAP land, in
the northern portion of the City, will be redeveloped in the future. The
redevelopment of TCAAP will have a significant impact on the future nature
of the City. The TCAAP Framework Plan includes preserving nearly one-half
of the area in its natural state, public parks, mixed residential and mixed
business use. A large portion of the City is residential, but Arden Hills also
consists of lakes and parks, and serves as home to many businesses of
multiple sizes, along with two private eolleges. The City of Arden Hills aims
to maintain their existing residential neighborhoods, strengthen their
commercial and industrial areas, and incorporate the redevelopment of
TCAAP into the City's long range planning.
A-ARDEN01 Ot .00
Page 4
City 01 Arden Hills. Minnesota
Local Stormwater Management Plan
I N
+
(
;.
':-.. \
.~
/~
~
'"
l:l
&
0....
~;
r' :-'''::
I
I
I,.
I
,
.'
,
,..,-,,)'
I
I
I
I
I
.
..
I
Location Map
NOT TO SCALE
FILE NO.
AARDEN0101.00
FIG NO.
1
I
..
I
I
I
I
I
t
I
It
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
8.15.01
Purposes of Metropolitan Water Management Program
The purposes of the water management programs required by Minnesota
Statutes sections 103B.205 to 103B.255 are to:
(1) protect, preserve and use natural surface and groundwater storage
and retention systems;
(2) minimize public capital expenditures needed to correct flooding
and water quality problems;
(3) identify and plan for means to effectively protect and unprove
surface and groundwater quality;
(4) establish more uniform local policies and official controls for
surface and groundwater management;
(5) prevent erosion of soil into surfaee water systems;
(6) promote groundwater recharge;
(7) protect and enhance fish and wildlife habitat and water
recreational facilities; and
(8) secure the other benefits associated with the proper management
of surface and groundwater.
The intent of the Local Stormwater Management Plan is to gather all essential
information and planning data into a single document which describes the
existing environment, establishes speeifie policy and management methods
for protection and future enhancement of the City's water and wetland
resources, while recognizing the need for proper land utilization and growth.
The Plan has been prepared in conformance with the criteria set forth in the
Rice Creek Watershed District (RCWD) Water Resource Management Plan.
The criteria, as a minimum, establish the degree of performance necessary to
achieve improvement in water quality and quantity management. These
criteria are not intended to dictate or preempt the design proeess, but rather
provide guidelines to proper development.
Plan Summary
The Arden Hills Local Stormwater Management Plan includes the elements
required by Minnesota Statutes Chapter I03B and the Metropolitan Couneil's
guidelines for Water Management Plans which include the requirements
found in Minnesota Rules, Chapter 8410, and the requirements set forth in the
RCWD Water Resource Management Plan. The Plan includes identification of
and recommendations for protection and maintenance of the existing
hydrologic system, the goals and policies for water quality and quantity,
A-ARDEN0101.00
Page 6
City of Arden Hills, Minnesota
Local Stormwater Management Plan
I
..
I
I
I
I
I
t
I
It
,I
I
I
I
I
I
I
8.15.01
erosion and sediment control, recreation, fish and wildlife enhancement, and
an implementation program with a process for Plan amendment. The Plan
supplements the Watershed District's Plan, creating a rational, efficient local
management approach. By minimizing public capital expenditures and
enhancing water quality, the City will best manage its important water
resourees,
City of Arden Hills, Minnesota
Local Water Resource Management Plan
A-ARDENOt 01.00
Page 7
I
~
I
I
I
I
I
I
II
I
I
I
I
I
I
~
I
8.15.01
Section 2 - Physical Environment
Geology and Topography
Arden Hills is located in Ramsey County, which is dominated by the Eastern
St. Croix Moraine. This glacial and terminal moraine is characterized by steep
hills interspersed with deep depressions. The depressions are oceupied by
small lakes or are f1lled with peat.
The topography of the City is relatively diverse, with undulating to steep
slopes, The highest point in Ramsey County is located in Arden Hills, on the
TCAAP property. The entire City is ultimately tributary to Rice Creek.
Detailed deseriptions of the City's bedrock geology can be obtained from the
Riee Creek Watershed Distriet. In addition, the Minnesota Geological Survey
can provide maps detailing the bedrock hydrogeology of Minnesota,
addressing rock formations and aquifers.
Soils
Most of the soils within Arden Hills are glacial tills, The soils tend to be well
drained, and moderately coarse textured.
The main souree of information on existing soils found within the City of
Arden Hills was prepared by the Natural Resource Conservation Service
(NRCS). The NRCS has established four general types of soil groups based on
texture and slope as described below:
· Group A - Low runoff potential, high infiltration
· Group B - Moderate infiltration
· Group C - Slow infiltration rate
· Group D - Very slow infiltration rate, high runoff potential
The runoff potential of an area is determined using these general soil
characteristies in combination with land use classifications, vegetation of the
area and rainfall intensity determined from charts for the various design
storms.
The most eommon type of soil found in Arden Hills are the Hayden soils,
whieh are classified as Group B soils. They vary in slope anywhere from 2 to
25 pereent slopes, and tend to be fine sandy loams. Figure 2 is a soils map for
the City.
A-ARDEN0101.00
Page 8
City of Arden Hills, Minnesota
Local Stormwater Management Plan
2000
I
N
+
o
2000 Feet
I
LEGEND
~] Water
Soil Groups
EllA
DAlO
_B
DBIO
DC
D c/o
DO
DURB
D Water
_ Unknown
SeJ
Soils Map
FILE NO.
MRDEN0101.00
FIG NO.
2
I
~
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
II
I
I
'.
I
I
I
~
I
8.15.01
Soil characteristics are also considered when developing erosion control plans.
Special procedures for erosion and sediment control should be incorporated
into all construction projects. The erosion control handbook published by
Board of Water and Soils Resources (BWSR) includes recommended
management practices. The Minnesota Pollution Control Agency (MPCA)
published in 2000 a document titled Protecting Water Quality in Urban Areas,
Best Management Practices for Dealing with Storm Water Runoff from
Urban, Suburban and Developing Areas of Minnesota, which may be used for
reference or its replacement document when it is approved. The Ramsey Soil
Erosion and Sediment Control Handbook may also be used for erosion
protection guidance.
Precipitation
Climate within the Minneapolis-St. Paul metropolitan area is deseribed as a
humid continental climate with moderate precipitation, wide daily temperature
variations, warm humid summers and cold winters. The total average annual
precipitation is approximately 29 inches. The average annual snowfall is
approximately 50 inches, which is equivalent to roughly five inches of water.
Rainfall data for the Minneapolis-St. Paul metropolitan area is shown in Table
1.
Table 1
Rainfall in Minneapolis - St. Paul Metropolitan Area
(inches)
Return 24-hour 12-hour 6-hour 3-hour 2-hour 1-hour 30- 15 -
Frequency minute 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 t.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
The lOO-year, 24-hour rainfall and the average annual precipitation for the
State of Minnesota is shown in Figure 3. The table and figure indicate
climatological information found in the U.S. Department of Commerce,
Weather Bureau Technical Paper No. TP-40. Another good resource for
rainfall data is the Rainfall Frequency Atlas for the Midwest published by the
Midwestern Climate Center and Illinois State Water Survey. A table from this
resouree ean be seen in Appendix K.
A-ARDEN0101.00
Page 1 0
City of Arden Hills, Minnesota
Local Stormwater Management Plan
I
~
I
I
I
I
I
I
.
I
I
I
I
I
I
~
I
8.15.01
The 24-hour duration, NRCS Type II rainfall distribution with average soil
moisture eonditions (AMC-2) will be used for overall subwatershed planning
within the City of Arden Hills.
Surface Water Resources
Drainage Ditches
The City of Arden Hills has publie ditehes within the City limits. Most of the
ditehes in the RCWD were constructed primarily to drain land for agricultural
purposes. Ramsey County Ditch 4 drains into Little Johanna Lake and
subsequently outlets into Lake Johanna. Ramsey County Diteh 4 flows from
the south end of the City towards the northwest. Ramsey County Ditch 12
flows east-west through the central part of the City, Valentine Lake drains into
Ramsey County Ditch 12. Figure 4 shows the approximate location of these
ditches.
City of Arden Hills, Minnesota
Local Water Resource Management Plan
A-ARDEN0101.00
Page 11
.'
~
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
.
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
1:.. S. DEPARTWE!iT OF AGltlCULTVRE
MINNESOTA
9OILCONSERVJo.TION SERVICE
r
...
".
".
to.
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
IOO-YEAR 24-HOUR RAINFALL<INCHES)
.~
+
+
+
+
+
.
+
+
+
+
+
e.
+
+
+
...
+
+
+ + ':!....!. ":'..A .. -
SOURCE: USWB TP 40
+
+
+
,..
IT
".
...
......'CI.LlIlCOUl......IU'
1-9
FIGURE 3
~-L-409BI
N
~+
2000 0
I
I
I
I
I
I
II
I
I
I
I
I LEGEND
r::,/ _.---.c' . . . \ .j
, C.....';>~,' .
i(:~;t;:~." - '----~:---.--
1 1.,' I,'> .~O-,
~ -~~- -"
- -~-j:-'--~-~"""--
'-._- ------
'~r'~-j-~-:J=-- "
! l
J,
, .
~..
2000 Feet
,
,
,
j- - "r;
.~ - !~ ~..:.: )
~Lr1)1 fF:-c>
'~'\\' ;.:0.., ;c" ""'.,..
" / ,I ,
"
"'-1
I ../....~/ County Ditches
, Water
I c-x County Ditch ID
I
~SBi
NOTE: DITCH LOCATIONS ARE APPROXIMATE.
FILE NO.
Drainage Ditches AA~~N~~~OO
4
I
'-
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
II
I
I
I
I
I
I
)-
I
8.15.01
Lakes and Other Significant Water Bodies
Residents of Arden Hills enjoy a high quality of natural resources with
numerous lakes and wetlands within the City limits. There are seven lakes
which lie entirely or partially within the City limits of Arden Hills: Lake
Johanna, Lake Josephine, Little Johanna Lake, Valentine Lake, Round Lake,
Karth Lake and Sunfish Lake. RCWD has prioritized lakes within the district
on the basis of trophic state indices, recreational facilities and lake capability.
Tier 1 lakes consistently supporting swimming or have signifieant public uses,
Tier 3 waterbodies include all DNR protected lakes, wetlands, and
watercourses not included in Tiers 1 and 2. Tier 4 includes any remaining
wetlands, stormwater basins, and conveyance systems. The following table
lists the tier identification of the lakes within the City of Arden Hills.
Table 2
lake Tier Classification
lake Tier
Johanna 2
Josephine 2
Karth 3
Little Johanna 3
Round 3
Sunfish 3
Valentine 3
The RCWD Plan does not lists any Tier I water bodies in Arden Hills,
However, additional water quality data collection and analysis by the
Minnesota Pollution Control Agency would indicate that Josephine Lake
would be considered a Tier I lake (Section 3, Water Quality Analyses).
The Department of Natural Resources (DNR) Protected Waters which lie
within the City limits can be seen in Figure 5 The DNR Protected Water
comprise watercourses such as Riee Creek, lakes and wetlands greater than
2.5 acres. The DNR has jurisdiction over these protected water bodies at and
below the Ordinary High Water (OHW) level. The OHW is defined as the
elevation delineating the highest water level which has been maintained for
sufficiently long periods oftime to leave evidence upon the landscape.
Figure 6 shows the wetlands within the City of Arden Hills that are included
in the National Wetlands Inventory (NWI) prepared by the U.S, Fish and
Wildlife Service (1991), Areas shown on the DNR and NWI maps indicate the
presence of wetlands, but show only the general location of wetlands. Site
visits for. delineation of wetland boundaries are required for permitting. It
City of Arden Hills, Minnesota
Local Water Resource Management Plan
A-ARDEN010LOO
Page 13
I
~
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
II
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
8.15.01
should be noted that some of these wetlands may have been created as
stormwater detention basins in conjunction with urban development.
Arden Hills has many public waters within the City. The lakes and wetlands
provide an environmental habitat for fish and wildlife within- the City. These
water bodies should be protected from degradation by pollution or
eontarnination from surface water or groundwater sources.
Stonn Drain System
The existing drainage system for Arden Hills is shown in Figure 7. A further
investigation of the thirteen proposed regional ponds that were determined in
the "Comprehensive Drainage Survey Maintenance Plan and Ponding
Recommendations" that was completed by BRW, Ine, in May, 1999, has been
completed.
Water Quality
Land Use
The area south of Highway 96 is developed for the most part, TCAAP, in the
northern portion of the City, is the only large area that will be redeveloped
within the City. Arden Hills is a fairly stable community, and foresees
minimal amount of development and population growth in the next 5 to 10
years. It is difficult to predict the redevelopment that will occur in the City
until the land release of TCAAP. Disregarding the TCAAP area, the majority
of the City of Arden Hills is residential. There are also many large
corporations, various sized businesses, two private colleges, and parks and
open areas in the City. Figure 8 shows existing land use, while the potential
future land use is shown in Figure 9.
A-ARDENOt 01.00
Page 14
City of Arden Hills, Minnesota
Local Stormwater Management Plan
~
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
II
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
l-~~I r -
\......".. J .
J ~~~c32 26-31-25 ,~
II-:;::;;~~;";> ~C'--= -::::=::""--; ~'!:
..-~-;~ '-'<;~~,_J:--~~:-:~~._ ~~:!.;'
i,:~~~i~[7A}7'
II ";:;;_,~ c'"}l -.:, "
r'" ,; '~~I',' ~~---_
\!;,,:,/,,~':,}r-t~~:,t ,-~, ~>
11 t7~/;! (<: 1 ii"
!:~ .:'/ /:,\'~~~ I L
\,19"",<;1, "<~;") rl,
I", ", ,.,~" "1 cr ""f """"'''I:'''''''~
\'-"''''''li ",:L 23"~,-,_,
f~!;1r,i'~"'~ /< l' '-r "
14 ~li\\~h~~'12/'" ~ i .. ,m "'--y _,,_
':;', );1!"," ":~~=~1 ", ' I
, \t;,;:~,~;~~"~~R#l:~, ~=-:f~:~~~)\ ~~~:'c'~~
, ..,!'.., "l'rt,,., \' .~,
1(".. ' lcC:L~~,f?'['."~i~;" '<;";
i: -"'\' ,.~'~.'.. ,l,,' ,
I:~:
l!~,',
,~ ~~~;
:'1~-~5<:--~:,~~~;:~~~~:i.:~ ~
!.:/ -"-':--. : :;:~~---~;::::.~:'-~-..;,;.
.,,'~ -~"=-'=o..'-~~>~;s,-~~
; v'" "i-'l
f<,._'~',:i
;F''''~'\. '
.,} __...._~_o_.,., ..:. {
I" ~'~ ;~~~~ili€;.~:\, ,('" ,';?=~~~:t~"
/: ,~~- . ',"''''', "'I "c'
'~~~~t-;-(, ~\-;~-~_'I-~~; ~ ,~\,.-'lj~,';L.. -. --,:~_~.:=
[~':. L,-', \, ",:';.>{' \ r-~ :It, ,:+. ,.
,. .::~_ 1- --,.~, - >_' '~fi' t- ____'.-=r_____ a ".-~----,-_,._-"'1"'.-
\~j'{.:;rd~T"":tC{'0:s;}l~~I~t;;:~~~~-
J '''''''I" "~/'"'""fi;"r ' C'''-',
~:i:~ Appropriation Permit Locations ~,~::~~" j J~~!~~~;tl~t~E~~~2
~..~~~_.':.:)
;xlt\
==."':"-?=:m ~,: -.::~\,__
N
+
2000
o
LEGEND
)
~SeJ
2000
I
Feet
.'? ,-'--
, i
<'i"",
--i:
:~~
i
.J
Water Appropriation Permits
FILE NO.
MRDEN0101.00
FIG NO.
5
I
I
I
I
II
I
I
I
I
I
I
2000
,
N
+
o 2000
,
Feet
LEGEND
Wetland Classification
_ Type 1
_ Type 2
_ Type 3
_ Type 4
_ Type 5
_ Type 6
_ Type 7
=::J Type 8
=::J Industrial/Municipal
_ Riverine
o Upland
Waterline
I
~SEH
'~1-'=~~~'~2~-.~~~~:~:I_\.. ",
'-, ./:, '
cJI .._.______..__~'^__,~___.___/./ .. \. .. ,
II >~, l~i'~" . ,--.. .
I ~) ,1.,1. (
i""" ''i'-~-''1~I-'''''''<
'~'\!J"i/ ,.,'.../("of.,',!:C
1. .." -,i': .,-.' ,J
" /">,,' I /, 'f . ..
.:;;{J i/Ci:.~" ,~" '
\ ,:1: ,f"- r l... q)
'./., /' ,'..,
y) "/'\' ~',-t.
,~ ~r'~/ ~
.~.. ". :.' Lo,~.":--'"~ ;_._~ '_,
:';5'-:,:'!\,\:j"~--
'. :~~~ :'-'- ,,~=-~~. - L
~....,.f ._-.
~ -i
~""i"''"''';:'\
:,i,,,,,,,:';'-:"'i\.
.. -~;:::,:'~ '~:7<v
~
, .~
~Ei~~
National Wetland
Inventory Map
FILE NO.
MRDEN0101.00
FIG NO.
6
I
N
+
Ie
1
~ooo
o
2000
4000 Feet
I
I
I
I
I
.
I LEGEND
1-; Water
Land Use
_ AG - Agriculture
I 0 SFD - Single Family Detached
g SFA - Single Family Attached
MF - Multiple Family
_ MH . Mobile Home Park
I '--.J NC - Neighborhood Commercial
o CC - Community Commercial
o RC - Regional Commercial
_ He - Highway Convenience
_ OFC - Office
I !Zjj MU - Mixed Use
'::=1 LI - Ught Industrial
_ HI - Heavy Industrial
_ IN - InstitutIonal
10 SRO - Outdoo Sport/Recreation
_ SRI - Indoor SportJRecreation
_ OSN - Natural Open Space
_ asp - Passive Open Space
o ROW - Right-aI-Way
RR - Railway
, UTL - Utility
VAC - Vacant
, WaterlWetlands
,. AP - Airport
I
"\'
<. ,
" --.
,i
~ !
,
'r['l',:,-,:_~-~~ ,::;-:'~Jq..
:::J --,~'" '
-'::=;~'~~(-~:'~;'-'---~::
_.~~~~ -~
't::..~\l-~" '
c~,
'J 'jff '=
.::...,'''''''l::j
Existing Land Use
FILE NO.
AARDEN0101.00
FIG NO.
8
I
N
.
1000
,
o
2000
4000
I
I
I
I
I
.
I
I
I LEGEND
I
I
I
-- Water
Land Use
ORES - TCMP Residential
I -1 LDR - Low Density Residential
D MDR - Medium Density Residential
D HDR - High Density Residential
_ COM - Commercial
'0 IND - Industrial
_ INST - Inst~utional
=:J GC - Go~ Course
=:J Joined Athletic Facil~ies
_ Public
_ P\OS - Parks I Open Space
_ S-PUB - Semi-Public
D Right-of-Way
-- WATER
I
-..!.
~'.~; ,',;:";;
i,M""',
" ~lj\~r~~'~.
~':'I'
.,;1.""- ;jl,~
''l''~_'
-,>7'~~~~\;d
-.,k\'j
y ~-
'l\f-->.../
'-, -~
'-.
Future Land Use
FILE NO.
AARDEN0101.00
FIG NO.
g
.
,
.
.
.
.
.
""'
I
I
I
I .
I
L
8.15.01
As areas develop and redevelop, SlOrmwater runoff increases. Roofs,
driveway, parking lots, and other impervious surfaces increase the amount of
runoff and decrease the amount of soil infiltration associated with this area.
The City of Arden Hills has 15 parks within its City limits totaling
approximately 350 acres. The City intends to maintain these park areas, make
necessary improvements to the park system, and continue to expand the trail
system to connect the neighborhoods to these parks and other trails. The parks
are a vital part of the Arden Hills community.
Arden Hills has a DNR-approved shoreland ordinance. It is important that the
shoreland of lakes be protected and developed in a manner consistent with the
Minnesota DNR management standards in order to maintain or improve the
quality of the water bodies within the City.
Utilities
Public utilities in Arden Hills include sanitary sewer, storm sewer, and the
water distribution system,
Sanitary sewer interceptor and treatment is provided to the City via the
Metropolitan Council Environment Services (MCES) system. The City's
Sanitary Sewer Utility has jurisdiction over the sanitary sewer collection
system within the City's borders. There are numerous lift stations that exist in
the City.
The St. Paul Water Utility provides drinking water to Arden Hills through the
City of Roseville. Once in the City, the City's Water Utility has jurisdiction
over the system. There are only two areas in the City that are not served by the
City water serviee. The fIrst is the Old Highway 10 area (Highway 96 to
Wedgewood Circle), which consists of single family homes, is served by
private wells. The second is TCAAP with its own water supply faeility. At
this time the City does not know how to most effectively provide water
service to the TCAAP area once redevelopment occurs,
The entire City is not served with storm sewer. The City requires storm sewer
to be installed with the reconstruction of streets. This poliey may not always
be feasible or practical, so alternate design standards may be used when
appropriate. Currently, storm drainage is provided through a combination of
open ditches and storm sewer.
Water Appropriation Permits
Groundwater Resouree Data
Ramsey County published The Ramsey County Groundwater Quality
Protection Plan in 1994, The Plan identifies groundwater contaminated areas
and predicts areas that are sensitive to groundwater contamination, along with
A-ARDEN0101.00
Page 20
City of Arden Hills, Minnesota
Local Stormwater Management Plan
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
lit
I
I
I
I
I
I
~
I
8.15.01
Section 3 - Hydraulic and Water Quality Analyses
Hydraulic Analyses
Regional Ponds
There are thirteen proposed regional ponds in Arden Hills that were identified
in a 1999 comprehensive drainage study by BRW lne, (Dames and Moore
Group Company). TCAAP property was not considered or modeled as part of
this Plan, Two ponds within TCAAP, P-l and P-13, will be completed as part
of the reconstruction of TH 96, and will not be discussed in this Plan.
Figure 10 shows the approximate loeations of the proposed regional ponds.
They are mostly loeated in natural low lands or inlets to lakes. It should be
noted that the City would need to further investigate the proposed regional
pond locations with respect to jurisdictional wetlands and regulatory
restrictions that may affect the construetion of these facilities.
Summary Discharge Data
HydroCAD@ modeling was completed for the eleven proposed regional ponds.
At this stage the ponds are only concepts, and therefore the modeling
consisted of the immediate drainage areas only and the proposed concept
pond. The modeling did not include any information from the upstream
drainage areas. The concept pond was assumed to be rectangular in shape,
with a ten-foot shelf below the normal water level, side slopes of 3: I
everywhere else, and a depth of six feet.
The 5, 10, and lOO-year, 24-hour, storms were run, using antecedent moisture
conditions II. The results of these models can be seen in Appendix D,
The lOO-year design storm was used to calculate a peak height of the pond
and to determine if any potential damage or flooding could occur at the
neighboring structures. Only one pond, P-12, has the potential for flooding
and will need more detailed analysis during design to ensure no damage to the
surrounding struetures will occur.
In addition to the HydroCAD modeling, stormwater quality and treatment
modeling was undertaken using the P8 Urban Catchment model.
A-ARDENOt Ot .00
Page 22
City of Arden Hills, Minnesota
Local Stormwater Management Plan
\.
2000
I
I
I,
I
I
I
I
It
I
I
I
I
I
I
N
+
o 2000 Feet
I
LEGEND
_ Proposed Ponds
Water
I
;___' 'r ~,I
L",",
)~~~}
; -:-: ...- ,:;'/~'j;;~~,';;'"
I". ');:C.,)-
r;~'r -~I
~y'l . -;11-) :' -~____-----
\,t,,~ -;~~~~:t:~l' '~<--'7r"~.tr-:"'-- ,~
I . j .,,( '/ !' J
. \ ,'".,. i ! 1
,1 \~./.I' ,:,:~\", ~ . <:)
\_ ;::..;;] r::~~:-';~ ' J
\,~,~~:~;, <~.~::,.{.;; ~..~ --"'~,
., '. . _._'1.. ...',~,,,,.,, y',
\ 'i". \ "....".. .'. '" _./... , "--"r:;-;l3., .
.v- ~~'~:">;\'-' .. . """ .~ L~.~L" .~-~-
;~"~y?~~(J~~~f~~ii~~'-=;;
121.,1 0 "'.' '1",,___... ,". coC'
~f;'- -~",=.,."",":>:"- -(:,'i. ',-'......
C!). ! '" .. j) . l' ~'_e'._ .'
,~::, l~~-~~;:,~'" ~}:;:'-~11~o~QL_"" ~<,~
,'" ,~-~".-",;:;, 6 1l;-. """i1i''S
;.J: \ t~,~~c.~~~~~;~-~;i}_~~;:,';"'ir\:C:::;':~'._"
.....~........ I: -'~a::~~..'J'I'\\''''-.,'
'"V!:li' '",",.~,,;./- ,-- ,'r %. '
""'!f3li...~' . ~-::i.,.>~, 0 ",;,,';\ ~
_-;;;:~~ ,c:,_~ ~. ,~!.i". \-..."
,<;,,Y' '--,.-:~-'::~:~:::;:-;.-:':'~,<"~. .,'_ ': '
'''f'~' d' ..", .
'",,' "- ,------ " '. "'-;~
"l~~~\ : i~(~-:-\\ -:,. ~',-
{~ .' ,,(~ji - -:-~;~ I ,: ~~<\\,
r'~,,~-----~';~ ('J 'i ;./".'~'\,,,~\ ....-'~-~:::":~-, ~ ~--'''.'''--I
."" J ,. !c>>~fl
!' "c. . ,:~C.~;l~~}~k<,,,',:o~ "~~ ._.AI. ..
I, .. _"- - '.~ " -, ...-"c,> ({ I~"I
r.,F.~=t.P-,": '\ ' \.,,:y. >iP) ~!~j , "r
Ii . ...1 ;'" ~" ;< ....... r - - - ~1 - - - ,~'""--=>
I '.~:-.';;:~...1<>I6" ...... ~.'. .. '~~,7 p _>-CT-C;.(;;.:fl"I'~.k, ~f51'" I
~ -- d~..."~ 'loI ",," 'I'"' 0'),"'1
," .~ ~;:J"'jZ],<O]" ,.)!~;i;.-:~::8!f:~?':~=('_-=J
. (jI.. .......7 \III... ~.",)" t' i...__ ~ i-- C
~~."::~j~._.C~_1 :.E~~\\(.~,.-J~1k:~~}~i~
:,___'-c-",:~m'~) ','...;.0"'" .-' .,,;'.1"'"~1
~---_.~........, , .-.'\;:) E" po x5
-;ztCCt( " r'.j~i'>jcG"-: ,,~;
, ,-~" ".,of... . \, . !~12 '~'?<-7.'
.1'- . ",:",,",~__~~2~:-:=-~.~ ),,_-<,_, /<'_;;:-~_/ L_~%,.,,,,
, . ':;~J~~;~~::! ~~' --'~-t-:~:=<1:a:, j/t?j/--' \)g?~
j.@i7"-,,:r:-;-\t@]r" \"'-~11 :~i( \;tl:
- ""-L'....'JF""c. ,--,'"
d~'-::':;:'~'~~'~
C '\l
Q ,Q'1
1"7.,
V\ .",
,.
:~.,
..------7- _.'~
":>:n '..~.'J
""'. '} -
/~ :J"
)
----.,-"~-'
:/
,
. p"-. < ;..
: if (~~
f'A \- ~
.~,----;......!'8)~';'
".'\ ' ,
:'iJ, ',-(
Proposed Regional Pond Locations
FILE NO.
AARDEN0101.00
FIG NO.
10
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
II
I
I
I
I
I
I
~
I
8.15.0t
Water Quality Analyses
P-8 models were created for the eleven proposed regional ponds. The ponds
were designed to meet NURP (Nationwide Urban Runoff Program) standards,
whieh are removal of 90% of total suspended solids (TSS) and 65% of total
phosphorus (TP). As with the hydrologic modeling, no upstream drainage
areas were used in the water quality modeling. The ponds were modeled
using only the immediate drainage areas. Therefore, it is reeommended to
model the entire drainage system during either a feasibility study or fmal
design to calculate the pollutant removal efficiencies of the entire system. The
results from the P-8 models can be found in Appendix D,
Lakes and Ponds
The Minnesota Pollution Control Agency (MPCA) and Minnesota Department
of Natural Resourees (MDNR) maintain lake information databases on many
lakes in Minnesota. The data is available on the WEB at
htto:/lwwW.DCa.state.mn.us/waternakeaualitv.htmt and www.dnr.state.mn.us/laI<etind.hnnl.
Summary water quality data is available for all the lakes in Arden Hills except
Sunfish Lake (no data) on the TCAAP property. This lake has the potential to
be studied and monitored as part of the redevelopment of TCAAP. The
information from the MPCA's database can be found in Appendix E. Table 3
provides summary data on the each of the lakes in Arden Hills.
Table 3
Summary Data on Lakes in Arden Hills
Trophic
Lake Name MONR Surface State Recreational
Number Area Index Suitability
(TSI)
Josephine 62 - 57 109 acres 51 Full Support (M)
Round 62 - 70 122 aeres 54 Full Support (M)
Valentine 62-71 60 acres 65 Non-Supported
Karth 62 - 72 15 acres 66 Non-Supported
Johanna 62 - 78 230 acres 54 Partial Support
Little Lake Johanna 62 - 58 18 acres 85 Non-Supported
Trophic State Index (TSI) combines measures of summer Secchi Disk
transparency and epilimnetic (upper portion of lake characterized by warmer
and lighter water) concentrations of chlorophyll-a and total phosphorus to
come up with the value. The index ranges from 0 to 100, with the higher
values indicating more eutrophic (over nourished) conditions in the lake. For
the ecoregion Arden Hills is located in, typically a TSI value of less then 59
fully supports swimming. Swimming is partially supported between a TSI
value of 60 and 65.
A-ARDEN0101.00
Page 24
City of Arden Hills, Minnesota
Local Stormwater Management Plan
I
I
a
I
I
,
I
.
I
I,
I
I
I
I
I
8.15.01
Josephine and Round lakes both fully support swimmable use classification,
although they are sensitive to increases in phosphorus nutrient loading. Lake
Johanna only partially supports swimmable use classification due to algae
blooms and low transparency for a significant portion of the summer. Karth,
Little Lake Johanna and Valentine lakes do not support swimmable use
classification due to severe and frequent algae blooms and low transparency
for most of the summer. Round, Karth, Little Lake Johanna and Valentine
lakes have either small surface areas or are quite shallow in average depth and
therefore would not be considered likely candidates for swimmable use,
However, water quality data in support or non-support of this use is important
for wildlife management of these water bodies.
Lake Josephine Assessment Report
The MPCA along with MDNR, Ramsey County Public Works, RCWD and
Josephine Lake Association issued a Lake Assessment Report for Josephine
Lake in 1998. Pertinent portions from that report are as follows:
(page jji)
A good historical data base is available for assessing trends in water
quality of Lake Josephine. These data include 22 years of Secchi data
and several years of water chemistry data. Based on an analysis of 22
years of CLMP, MPCA, DNR, Met. Council, Ramsey County, and two
environmental consulting firm's Secchi transparency data, Lake
Josephine exhibited a significant improvement in transparency over
time (R. = 0.52; p={J.()OO8). Summer mean Secchi transparency
measures ranged from 2.3 to 4.3 feet from 1975-1979. In contrast,
from 1981-1989 summer-mean Secchi ranged from 3.0 to 10.2 feet
and from 1990-1998 summer-mean Secchi ranged from 5.2 to 12.1
feet. Summer-mean total phosphorus and chlorophyll-a concentrations
exhibited a decline over this time period as welL
(page 3)
Lake Josephine's watershed is relatively small at about 734 acres,
excluding the lake. The vast majority (96%) of the watershed is in
urban/residential lake use. This percentage, although not typical for
lakes in the North Central Hardwood Forest ecoregion, is rather typieal
for lakes in the Twin Cities metro area. Little Lake Josephine is about
12 acres in size, much of which is covered by cattails and emergent
vegetation; however, the open water portion has maximum depth of 25
feet. Originally, about 260 acres drained through Little Lake Josephine
prior to entering Lake Josephine. In 1980, a project conducted by the
RCWD, in consultation with E.A. Hickok Engineering, resulted in an
additional 220 acres of direet drainage from Lake Josephine watershed
City of Arden Hills, Minnesota
Local Water Resource Management Plan
A-ARDEN0101.00
Page 25
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
II
I
I
I
I
I
I
~
f
8.15.01
to Little Lake Josephine. As a result, about 480 acres (65%) drained
through Little Lake Josephine prior to entering Lake Josephine.
This would result in dramatic improvements in the quality of Lake
Josephine (emphasis added).
It is noted that only half of Lake Josephine is within the boundaries of the City
of Arden Hills while the remainder is within the City of Roseville, Also, the
RCWD stonn sewer diversion projeet took place in Roseville. This
importance of this discussion is three-fold, First, a value judgement was made
by all agencies involved in the 1980 project that resulted in diverting storm
water from one publie water into another for treatment. Second, Little Lake
Josephine has operated much like a NURP stonn water detention pond and
thus has improved Lake Josephine's water quality. Third and most important,
some of the proposed eleven ponds may involve existing wetlands similar, bnt
much smaller in surface area and depth than Little Lake Josephine and their
use may come into play with implementation of the City's LSWMP.
A-ARDEN0101.00
Page 26
City of Arden Hills, Minnesota
Local Stormwater Management Plan
I
'-
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
II
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
8.15.01
Section 4 - Goals, Policies, and Objectives
General
The City of Arden Hills has adopted the goals and policies from Rice Creek
Watershed District (RCWD) for this Plan.
These goal~ and policies provide for future development and redevelopment
while minimizing surface water problems and enhancing the environment.
The goals and policies are used as a guide in the design and construetion of
private and public developments impacting water resources in the City.
Goals and Policies
A goal or objective is a desired end toward which water management efforts
are directed, The fundamental objective of Riee Creek Watershed District
Water Resource Management Plan, (1997) is "to provide for the wise, long-
term management of its water and associate land resources." This section of
the Arden Hills plan identifies the goals for water resources planning and
management functions. The goals of this plan were established in accordance
with the goals of RCWD, which hasjurisdietion in Arden Hills.
Each goal has several corresponding policies. Policies are governing
principles that provide the means for achieving established goals. RCWD' s
overall policy "provides an impartial, objeetive basis for developing effective
plans and programs for water resources management" (Rice Creek Watershed
District Water Resouree Management Plan, 1997).
Rice Creek Watershed District will share with the City authority over all water
resource issues within the City of Arden Hills. Therefore the City will
reference the RCWD rules, objectives and polieies as their own. The City will
make sure private developers are aware of RCWD rules while balaneing the
need to protect the health, safety and welfare of the community. These
objectives and policies, as seen in the Rice Creek Watershed District's Water
Resource Management Plan can be found in Appendix G. However, the City
will still have some participation in the managing of water resource issues
within the City limits, such as a maintenance and street sweeping
program/schedule, public participation, information, education, and finance.
City of Arden Hills. Minnesota
Local Water Resource Management Plan
A-ARDEN0101.00
Page 27
I
~
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
.
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
8.15.01
Maintenance and Street Sweeping Program/Schedule
Maintenance and Inspection
Routine maintenance reduces long-term capital improvement costs related to
the City's drainage system, while achieving water quantity and water quality
goals, Inspections help to frod problems in the drainage system before they
become major problems.
Below are the recommended maintenance and inspeetion activities the City
should undertake to ensure that their drainage system is performing efficiently
and effectively:
Storm Sewers
1. Inspect storm sewer outfalls on an annual basis for evidence of scouring
or the presence of significant deposition of silt. Scouring problem areas
will be noted and stabilized. In areas where silt deposition is evident,
which is indicative of significant erosion upstream, an inspection of the
upstream watershed will be made to identify the source of erosion. Once
this erosion problem is determined suitable corrective measure will then
be undertaken to eorrect the problem.
Ponds and Wetlands
1. Visually inspect stormwater retention and detention ponds every two
years to determine if the pond is performing adequately.
2. Conduct a pond bottom survey every ten years to determine required
"dead storage" volume. Once a pond has lost half of its dead storage
volume, the accumulated sediment should be removed from the pond.
3. A pond maintenance agreement with private pond owners shall be
required. This will ensure that private ponds are kept in good operating
condition and that routine maintenance occurs. See Appendix M for an
example agreement.
4. Review the salt/sand applieation policy for its balance with public safety
and environmental protection.
Street Sweeping
Street sweeping is most effective in removing coarse particles, sand, leaves,
debris, and other similar materials. It is recommended to have a semiannual
street sweeping program, with the most beneficial sweeping is accomplished
early in the spring after snow melt, and in the fall after the leaves have fallen.
It has not been proven that sweeping the streets more than twice a year
provides a significant increase in sediment removal. So in terms of a
cost/benefit ratio it does not make sense to sweep the streets more than twice a
year at this time.
A-ARDEN0101.00
Page 28
City of Arden Hills, Minnesota
Local Stormwater Management Plan
I
~
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
.
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
8.15.01
There are two types of sweepers eommonly used: vacuum sweepers and
mechanical broom sweepers. Vacuum sweepers are more effective for
removing fine particles, but are ineffective at cleaning wet surfaces.
Mechanical broom sweepers are effective at picking up large particles and
cleaning wet surfaees, They also cost less to operate than the vacuum
sweepers. However, mechanical broom sweepers generally create airborne
dust during their operation and are not effective in removing the fme particles.
Public Participation, Information, and Education
The City of Arden Hills would like to increase public participation and
knowledge in management of the water resourees. Water quality issues
depend heavily on actions taken by private landowners.
The purpose of public partieipation, information and education efforts is to:
· Disseminate information regarding the Local Stormwater Management
Plan's (LSWMP) content; and
. Create support for the implementation of the LSWMP's goals and
policies.
RCWD does have a Technical and Citizen Advisory Committee that provides
education and information to the district eommunity.
However, the City will provide its citizens with watershed education in
addition to RCWD. There are some educational opportunities that the City
may complete which are relatively inexpensive, yet reach out to the citizens of
Arden Hills.
The implementation may inelude, but is not limited to:
1. Publieize seleeted issues using the City newsletter
2. Publicize issues on the City web site and create links on the site to
other web sites which highlight water quality issues
3. Develop a stormwater stencilinglsignage program
4. Encourage the Lake Assoeiations and other lake homeowners to
participate in a lake protection plan proeess
By using both the City newsletter and the web site to publicize selected issues,
more residents could be reaehed, The issues could include a variety of water
resource subjects including the use of phosphorous fertilizers, information on
the water quality of the lakes in the City, best management practiees (BMPs),
and information of current water quality improvement projects.
City of Arden Hills, Minnesota
Local Water Resource Management Plan
A-ARDENOt Ot .00
Page 29
I
~
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
.
I
I
I
I
I
I
;
I
8.15.01
Web site links could include some of the same topics discusses on the web site
and the City uewsletter. The most benefieial approach from the City would be
to eoordinate the topics on the web site and the newsletter, and reference each
other. Suggested links would be to the RCWD homepage, report or articles on
water quality proteetion, MPCA Lake Assessment Site, and the M/DNR Lakes
Database whieh provides information on the lakes in Minnesota including data
from the water quality monitoring and fishery information,
The stormwater stenciling program is a volunteer program that marks storm
sewer inlets with a notice indicating where the pipe outlets to. This may be
done with different mediums such as paint, decals or signs. Aecording to the
Final Report-Arden Hills Water Quality Task Force- Junel2000, studies have
shown these programs has a 60% or better attention rate by the local residents.
Finance
Paying for water management projeets has become more complex in recent
years. In the past, special assessments against benefitted properties finaneed
most of the necessary improvements. However, the fmancial options have
broadened considerably. The question is, which method(s) best suit the needs
of the City.
The major categories of funding sources are 1) Ad Valorem Taxes 2) Special
Assessments 3) Development Charges [Building Permits, Land Development
Fees and Land Exaetion] 4) Grants. The City does have a storm water utility
inplace. Following is a description and financing prineiples used with each of
these fmancing mechanisms.
Table 3 illustrates the advantages and disadvantages of the different fmancing
methods.
Ad Valorem Tax
General taxation is the most common revenue source used to fmance
government serviees including minor maintenance measures for drainage and
water quality facilities. Using property tax has the effect of spreading the cost
over the entire tax base of a eommunity,
A special tax district can also be used to raised revenue. The special tax
district is similar to the administrative structure under general taxation except
that all or part of the community may be placed in the tax distriet. The
principle is to better correlate improvement costs to benefitted or contributing
properties.
A-ARDEN0101.00
Page 30
City of Arden Hills, Minnesota
Local Stormwater Management Plan
I
\t
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
II
I
I
I
I
I
I
~
I
8.15_01
Table 4 (Continued)
Funding Method Advantages Disadvantages
Grants 1. Reduce cost burden to residents in 1. Undependable source of revenue.
the eommunity_ 2. Increase administrative costs for
securing and managing the funds.
3. Most often grants require eost
sharing and thus additional funding
source. This results in double
administrative costs due to several
funding sources.
4. Limited availabil~y on an irreguiar
schedule.
5. Requires considerable lead time
from aoolication to receivinn funds.
Grants
State grants are available for surfaee water management and nonpoint source
pollution. However, it is generally not a good financial practice to rely on
grants for a service program. This source of revenue is not dependable and
requires constant speculation as to its availability. Grants are useful but should
only be used to supplement a planned local revenue source, Examples of some
available grants include:
Environmental Protection Agency (EPA): 604b - Urban Water Ouality Grant
The EPA's 604b Grant Program is targeted at water quality improvements in
urban areas. The grant is not a cost share program, but does require local
partieipation. The grant is generally administered through the state.
Environmental Protection Agency (EPA): Underground Iniection Control
Program
The U. S. Environmental Protection Agency's Underground Injection Control
(UIC) program involves inventories of groundwater protection areas in the
City to address abandoned drainage or domestic disposal wells which are
potentially harmful to underground sources of drinking water. The results of
the questionnaire can provide a great deal of information on the degree of risk
to the City's underground sources of drinking water. The EPA has provided
funding and training for volunteers to implement the UIC program at the loeal
level.
Environmental Protection Ageney (EP A): Environmental Education Grant
The EPA's Environmental Education Grant, enacted in 1991, is targeted at
cities or organizations in the amount of $25,000 or less. The Environmental
Education Grant is intended to fInance local education initiatives related to the
nature environment. Grants are awarded on a SO/50 cost share basis.
A-ARDEN0101.00
Page 32
City of Arden Hills, Minnesota
Local Stormwater Management Plan
I
~
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
II
I
I
I
I
I
I
~
I
8.15.01
Environmental Protection Ageney (EP A): Clean Lakes Grant
The Federal Clean Lakes Grant is the next step in lake restoration following
the State Clean Water Partnership Program. The program ean include
significantly more funding than the state program and can be used for
development and implementation of lake restoration planS. Clean Lakes
funding is administered through the MPCA.
Environmental Proteetion Agencv (EPA): Section 319 - Clear Water Act
Funding through EPA's Section 319 program supports state programs but is
potentially available for urban BMP and project implementation coordination.
The grants program includes a spring application period (May to June) for the
state. The program is significant in that it can fund implementation (i.e"
eonstruction) rather than funding planning efforts or studies. Available funds
may involve either full or matehing funds.
U.S. Army COqJs of Engineers: Section 22 Planning Assistanee to States
Programs
Funds are a 50/50 cost share, The program is administered through state
planning. Eligible projects are given to COE to prepare a eost estimate for
preliminary design. The estimate is negotiated with the "customer". The
"eustomer" provides 50 pereent cost share in the form of eash. The COE then
completes the preliminary design or study. These funds are applicable on an
"as-available" basis.
Wallop-Breaux Funds
The program is called Wallop-Breaux, referring to the 1984 amendments to
the Dingell-Johnson program and named for its primary sponsors, Senator
Malcolm Wallop (R-WY) and Senator John Breaux (D-LA). Its formal name
is the Aquatic Resources Trust Fund, of which part is used for sportfishing
enhancement ($215.3 million, in 1992) and part is used for boating safety in
each state ($70 million, in 1992). Wallop-Breaux is an example of a user-
pays/user-benefits program, where taxes on an activity are strictly reinvested
baek into the activity's maintenance,
The Internal Revenue Service collects the money and gives it to the U, S. Fish
and Wildlife Service. After taking a percentage off the top for administration,
the service gives money to each state based on its relative size and the number
of resident fishermen, No state receives more than 5 percent of the total, nor
less than 1 percent of the total fund.
To obtain Wallop-Breaux funds, the state sends a proposal to the U. S. Fish
and Wildlife Service office in its region. The project must be "substantial in
eharacter and design," but there is no requirement that the project directly
benefits sport fishermen, In 1991,32.4 percent went to surveys and research.
About half of the 6 percent the service takes pays for the staff that administers
City of Arden Hills, Minnesota
Local Water Resource Management Plan
A-ARDEN0101.00
Page 33
I
~
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
II
I
I
I
I
I
I
r
I
8.15.01
the funds. The rest of the $12 million a year in administrative money is used
for various special projeets. Wallop-Breaux is supposed to be new money for
new fishery improvements. But some of the money is being used to replace
state funding from licenses and the general treasury. The U. $, Fish and
Wildlife Serviee views itself as simply a conduit of dollars to the states.
Pittman-Robertson - Federal Aid in Wildlife Restoration Act
Funded by an excise tax on angling and hunting equipment, this program
helps rai<;e the revenue necessary to fund specifie restoration projects by state
fish and wildlife agencies.
Sport Fish Restoration Act
States receive federal aid monies for fisheries management, administered by
the U. S. Fish and Wildlife Service on a 75 percent (federal) and 25 pereent
(state) basis. The federal share is from excise taxes and the state share is
mainly from sport fishing licenses.
DNR's Flood Hazard Mitigation Program
Up to 50 percent cost sharing is available through the bonding program. As
with PFA funds, this alternative best applies to a phased construetion scenario,
sinee the state funding is on the biennium,
Metropolitan Council Water Ouality Initiative Grant
Annually, Metropolitan Council sponsors the Water Quality Initiative Grant
Program. Initially focused on improving the quality to the Minnesota River,
the program expanded in 1996 to consider larger, regional based applications.
The program includes both technical and educational grant categories. A
maximum of $100,000 is available, with up to three grant periods. A 25
pereent match is required. Applieations have been due in Mareh.
Metropolitan Livable Communities Fund
The Metropolitan Livable Communities Fund is focused on projeets that
demonstrate alternative forms of urban design and development that promotes
more effieient use of land and regional services. This funding source could be
geared towards water quality restoration and/or retrofitting treatment into a
redeveloping setting. An example is the Phalen Village in St. Paul, where the
Restoration of Ames Lake near a mostly vacant shopping center, was funded
in 1996.
RCWD Cost-Sharing for Municipal Retrofit Stormwater Ouality BMPs
The purpose of this program is to encourage municipalities to incorporate
water quality management praetiees in redevelopment, roadway, and storm
sewer improvement projects. The amount of the cost share by RCWD is 75%
of estimated project cost, or bid cost (whiehever is lower), not to exceed
$50,000.
A-ARDEN0101.00
Page 34
City of Arden Hills, Minnesota
Local Stormwater Management Pian
I
~
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
.
I
I
I
I
I
I
~
I
8.15.01
MPCA Low Interest Loans
Typically used for wastewater treatment and collection systems, MPCA's
State Revolving Loan Fund dollars can be used in watershed or nonpoint
source control. PFA administers the State Revolving Loan Program for
MPCA. MPCA recently adopted rules to facilitate application of this program.
(Skwira, 1996). PFA typically waives the interest payment in the first two
years of the 20-year loan period and the interest rate is generally below the
bonding rate. There is no dollar limit or eompetition for these funds.
MPCA Clean Water Partnership
MPCA receives federal matching funds for preserving and protecting lakes
and for enhancing their public use and enjoyment, under the Federal Clean
Lakes Program. The MPCA's Clean Water Partnership Program (CWP)
provides matching funds for lake improvement projects and nonpoint source
pollution abatement. The grant program is very competitive and the grant
administration can be time eonsuming and expensive,
Miscellaneous Funding Sources
· DNR Outdoor Recreation Grant Program
. DNR Natural and Scenic Area Grant Program
. LCMR Legislative Commission Minnesota Resources
City of Arden Hills, Minnesota
Local Water Resource Management Plan
A-ARDEN0101.00
Page 35
I
..
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
--
I
I
I
I
I
I
~
I
8.15.01
Section 5 - Implementation
Introduction
The Implementation Section is intended to provide guidance in carrying out
the plan objectives. The implementation program summarizes the schedule for
and cost of recommended actions. Lastly, procedures for amending the plan
are discussed, Table 4 summarizes the implementation schedule for of the
Arden Hills Loeal Storrnwater Management Plan.
Table 5
Arden Hills LSWMP Implementation Summary
C\I C') ~ 10 <D r-- <Xl '" 0 ~
0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 ~ ~
0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
C\I C\I C\I C\I C\I C\I C\I C\I C\I C\I
Adopt Arden Hills LSMP )(
Assessment of Problem Areas )( )(
Pond Design Standards and )( X X )( )( )( X X X )(
Developer Guidelines
Administer Land Use Controls X )( X X X X X )( X X
Capital Improvements X )( X X X X X X X X
Storm Water Utility or Other )( X X X )( )( )( )( )( )(
Financing Method
Information and Education X X X X )( )( X )( X )(
· Minnesota Wetland Conservation Aet to be administered by RCWD.
· FEMA has reviewed the City of Arden Hills to determine flood prone
areas.
· RCWD's Board and the eitizen Advisory Committee to take the lead in
information and education activities.
Implementation Priorities
The implementation plan includes identification and prioritization of capital
improvements, administration, inspections, permitting, plan amendments,
fmancing alternatives, public involvement and monitoring programs.
Prioritization of improvements is based on a review of all recommended
actio ns,
A-ARDEN0101.00
Page 36
City of Arden Hills, Minnesota
Local Stormwater Management Plan
I
..
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
II
I
I
I
I
I
I
~
I
8.15.01
Planning-level estimates of eapital expenditures has been made. Future
anticipated projects are also listed. The activities have been distributed
throughout a lO-year implementation plan extending though 201 L
The Capital Improvement Plan is summarized in Table 5.
Table 6
Capital Improvement Plan
Preliminary
Project Project Description Project Cost Date(s) of
Location Description Estimate Implementation Comments
Feasibility study Preliminary engineering and $43,000 1 Cost does not include
for Pond P-? design surveying of ponds in
drainage system
Feasibility study Preliminary engineering and $19,000 1 Cost does not include
for Pond P-8 design surveying of ponds in
drainage system
Feasibility Study Preliminary engineering and $19,000 1 Cost does not include
for Pond P-l0 design surveying of ponds in
drainage system
Feasibility Study Preliminary engineering and $19,000 1 Cost does not include
for Pond P-ll design surveying of ponds in
drainage system
Feasibility Study Preliminary engineering and $31,000 1 Cost does not include
for Pond P-12 design surveying of ponds in
drainage system
Feasibility study Preliminary engineering and $33,000 2 Cost does not include
for Pond P-2 design surveying of ponds in
drainage system
Feasibility Study Preliminary engineering and $43,000 2 Cost does not include
for Pond P-3 design surveying of ponds in
drainage system
Feasibility study Preliminary engineering and $43,000 2 Cost does not inelude
for Pond P-4 design surveying of ponds in
drainage system
Feasibility Study Preliminary engineering and $31,000 3 Cost does not include
for Pond P-5 design surveying of ponds in
drainage system
Feasibility Study Preliminary engineering and $24,000 3 Cost does not include
for Pond P-6 design surveying of ponds in
drainage system
City of Arden Hills, Minnesota
Local Water Resource Management Plan
A-ARDENOt01.00
Page 37
I
~
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
.
I
I
I
I
I
I
~
I
8.15.01
Table 6 (Continued)
Project Project Description Preliminary Date(s) of Comments
Location Description Project Cost Implementation
Estimate
Feasibiltty Study Preliminary engineering and 38,000 3 Cost does not include
for Pond P-9 design surveying of ponds in
drainage system
Feasibility Study Subtotal $343,000
Pond P-7 Regional pond, includes $337,000 1
engineering and construetion
costs
Pond P-8 Regional pond, ineludes $146,890 1
engineering and eonstruction
eosts
Pond P-10 Regional pond, includes $146,890 1
engineering and construetion
costs
Pond P-11 Regional pond, includes $149,620 1
engineering and construetion
costs
Pond P-12 Regionai pond, includes $239,370 1
engineering and construction
costs
Pond P-2 Regional pond, includes $260,470 2
engineering and construction
costs
Pond P-3 Regional pond, includes $337,000 2
engineering and construction
costs
Pond P-4 Regionai pond, includes $337,000 2
engineering and construction
costs
Pond P-5 Regional pond, includes $239,370 3
engineering and eonstruetion
costs
Pond P-6 Regional pond, includes $190,420 3
engineering and construction
eosts
Pond P-9 Regional pond, includes $293,750 3
engineering and construction
eosts
Regional Pond Construction Subtotal $2,6n,780
Total $3,020,780
A-ARDEN0101.00
Page 38
City of Arden Hills, Minnesota
Local Stormwater Management Plan
I
..
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
.
I
I
I
I
I
I
~
I
8.15.01
The Implementation Plan is not a hard and fast commitment to eomplete each
and every activity in the time frame suggested. Rather, it is a suggested course
of action that will aecomplish the major goal of this plan, to aeeommodate
growth in the eommunity while protecting the environment.
The Capital Improvement Plan was developed based on RCWD's Tier
classifieations for the lakes in Arden Hills. The scheduling of these projects
should be coordinated with the City's Pavement Management Program
(PMP), which was also ereated prioritizing the neighborhoods around the Tier
2 lakes.
The east estimate for the construction of the proposed ponds does not include
land acqnisition or easement acquisition. The eost also does not take into
account if a feasible study will be completed. The cost does inelude the larger
construetion items such as excavation and restoration, and engineering and
administrative costs. The final project cost may change based on the
determination of scope of work.
Table 6 includes annual operating and maintenance costs, which are separate
from capital expenditures.
Table 7
Annual Operating Costs
Project Project Preliminary Date(s) of Comments
Location Description Project Cost Implementation
Estimate
Public Updating and managing web page. $10,000 Annual
Education and distribution of newsletter
Maintenance of Annual maintenance of ponds and $40,000 Annual
Ponds and ditches, including dredging when
Ditches necessary
Street Sweeping the streets twiee a year $30,000 Annual Assumes City labor
Sweeping and equipment, no
eontract sweeping.
The Implementation Plan should be reviewed on an annual basis. At that time,
each proposed improvement is to be reeonsidered, City budgets adjusted, and
additional improvements added to the program.
Cost/Benefit for Pollutant Removal
(PENDING)
City of Arden Hills, Minnesota
Local Water Resource Management Plan
A-ARDEN0101.00
Page 39
I
..
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
.
I
I
I
I
I
I
~
I
8.15.01
Amendment Procedures
The Arden Hills Local Stormwater Management Plan is intended to extend
through the year 2011. Par the plan to remain dynamic, an avenue must be
available to implement new information, ideas, methods, standards and
management practices. Persons either residing or having business within the
City shall be able to request amendment proposals at any time.
Request for Amendments
Written requests for plan amendment are submitted to the City staff. The
request shall outline the need for the amendment as well as additional
materials that the City will need to consider before making its deeision.
Staff Review
A deeision is made to the validity of the request, Three options exist;
I) rejeet the amendment
2) aceept the amendment as a minor issue, with minor issues collectively
added to the plan at a later date
3) aceept the amendment as a major issue, with major issues requiring an
immediate amendment. In acting on an amendment request, staff shall
recommend to City council whether or not a public hearing is warranted.
Council Consideration
The amendment and the need for a public hearing shall be considered at a
regular or special Couneil meeting. Staff recommendations should also be
considered before decisions on appropriate action(s) are made,
Public Hearing, Council, and RCWD Approval
This step allows the public input based on the public sentiment. Council shall
determine when the public hearing should oceur in the process. Based on the
Public hearing, Council could approve the amendment, and, if neeessary, refer
the amendments to the Watershed District Board for comment and approval.
Council Adoption
Pinal action on an amendment following approval by the RCWD is Couneil
adoption. However, prior to the adoption, an additional public hearing could
be held to review the plan changes and to notify the appropriate stakeholders.
Annual Report to Council
A brief annual report should be made by City staff summarizing development
changes, capital improvements and other water management-related issues
that have occurred over the past year. The review should also include an
update on available funding sources for water resouree issues. Grant programs
A-ARDEN0101.00
Page 40
City 01 Arden Hills, Minnesota
Local Stormwater Management Plan
I
..
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
.
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
8.15.01
are especially important to review since they may change annually. These
changes do not necessarily require individual amendments. The reports ean,
however, be considered when the plan is brought up to date. The report should
be completed by June 1st of each year to allow implementation items to be
considered in the normal budget process. Copies of the report should be filed
with the RCWD. The annual update can also serve as an important publie
information tooL A summary could be published in the City's newsletter.
NPDES
An NPDES (National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System) General Storm
Water Permit for Construction Activity disturbing an area greater than or
equal to five acres is filed by the Contraetor and Owner of a project within the
City of Arden Hills, This permit application is completed in addition to the
permit application required by RCWD.
The newly enacted U.S, Environmental Proteetion Agency, Phase II NPDES
storm water regulations will like apply to the City of Arden Hills with a
deadline of Mareh, 2003. However, it is not clear at this time how the MPCA
will administer this program and its minimum requirements. It is clear,
however, that the Construction Aetivity portion of the Phase II regulations
will drop to one acre versus the present five acre threshold.
GIS
The City does have GIS (Geographic Information System) data for the entire
City. It was supplied by the I-35W corridor coalition, which ineludes a
membership of seven cities. The GIS data includes information on roads,
parcels, existing and future land use, water and zoning,
However, the City does not have GIS data on any utilities: storm sewer,
sanitary sewer, or watermains. In the future it is recommended that the City
develop utility GIS information. Arden Hills could then use it to keep record
of their maintenanee program and also use it for assessment. Developing this
data would be beneficial to the City.
City of Arden Hills, Minnesota
Local Water Resource Management Plan
A.ARDEN0101.00
Page 4 t
I
Ie
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
.
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
Appendix A
Regulatory Responsibilities
I
..
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
..
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
f
I
Appendix A: Regulatory Responsibilities
Administrative Responsibilities
Several entities will have administrative responsibilities within the planning area, For a loeal water
management effort to be successful, eaeh entity's commitment and role must be clearly understood.
Those currently having some level of administration responsibility include the City, WMOs, Ramsey
County, MnDNR, MPCA, the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers and BWSR.
City of Arden Hills
The City of Arden Hills is responsible for issuing building permits for all land alteration thereby
enforcing the policies and standards of this plan. The City is responsible for inspecting the
construction sites within its boundaries which may impact water quantity and quality. The City is
also responsible for the maintenance and repair of ditches within their own boundaries.
The City's administrative responsibilities include, but are not limited to the following:
· Comprehensive plan update(s);
· Land use regulation;
· Ordinance review and amendment;
· Local plat review and amendments;
. Building permits;
· Sediment and erosion control (subdivision ordinanee);
· Groundwater - wells;
· Participation and cooperation with the programs ofthe WMOs, DNR and Ramsey County;
· Hydrologic model update with comprehensive plan changes.
· Financing Alternatives;
· Capital improvements;
· Conveyance system/pond maintenance;
Watershed Mana~ement Organizations (WMOs)
Responsibilities ofthe Rice Creek Watershed District include:
. Monitoring;
· Local plan review and approval;
· Projects of regional significance; and
· Verification of local plan implementation.
· Wetland Management as LGU
· Inter-City concerns
Metropolitan Council: Comprehensive Plan Amendment
Metropolitan Council has a regional review authority regarding surface water management
including:
· Local Plan Review;
· Regional eontrols related to nonpoint source pollution; and
I
I.
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
.
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
{'
I
8.15.01
This plan and all subsequent amendments will become part of the City's Comprehensive Plan
(adopted by reference), in accordance with Environmental Review 21040, 1995 revisions to
Minnesota Statutes 103B.235, Subd. 3A and 473.859, Subd. 2 (Chapter 176, Laws of Minnesota
1995), as part ofthe adoption process for this plan.
Metropolitan Councils' review of this plan is concurrent with the watershed review. Comments are
forwarded to the WMOs. According to Metropolitan Council staff, the plan does not have to be re-
submitted as a formal comprehensive plan amendment, subjeet to additional review, at a latter date.
The adopted City plan will meet Metropolitan Council's requirements and will be thereby
recognized as a comprehensive plan amendment.
Federal and state agencies
Federal and state agencies will continue to have certain administrative responsibilities. These
responsibilities include, but are not limited to:
· Wetland alteration:
- Department of National Resources for all issues relating to state protected waters and
wetland; and
- U.S. Army Corps of Engineers, U.S. EPA, and U.S. Fish and Wildlife for all issues related to
all wetland are not under the jurisdietion of the DNR.
· Ground Water Issues;
· Individual sewage treatment systems; and
. Hazardous waste/spill response.
Local Ordinances
The City has most of the necessary official controls to implement this plan today. The following text
includes a discussion oflocal controls as required by Riee Creek Watershed District and other
agencies.
Shore land Management
There is a DNR approved shoreland ordinance in-place at this time.
Floodplain Management
The City of Arden Hills currently does participate in the National Flood Insurance Program. A
minimum requirement for elevations of new structures is eurrently included in an existing City
ordinance, Chapter 13 of the City's eodes. In areas not regulated by floodplain management control,
the lowest floor elevation shall be determined by an elevation of available flood information or
placing the lowest floor at a level at least three feet above the highest known water level
Groundwater (Wellhead) Protection
The groundwater protection ordinance would establish overlay districts for wellbead protection areas
and any areas of spring activity or groundwater/surface water interaction. It would also address
permitted uses in the various protection zones and could be further developed to address
abandonment of wells.
I
I.
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
..
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
{'
I
8.15.01
Wetland Protection
Wetland protection is provided by the wetland conservation act which is managed by the watershed
management organizations.
Erosion Control
Arden Hills has adopted an erosion and sediment control ordinance. The regulation establishes
standards and speeifieations for conservation practices and planning activities which minimize soil
erosion and sedimentation.
A-ARDEN0101.00
Page 46
City of Arden Hills, Minnesota
Local Stormwater Management Plan
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
.
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
f
I
Appendix B
Best Management Practices (BMPs)
I
Appendix B: Best Management Practices (BMPs)
I
I
I
I
I
I
II
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
r
I
Applicable References
· Developer Guidelines section of the Mounds View Local Water
Management Plan;
. Minnesota Pollution Control Agency's Protecting Water Ouality in Urban
Areas. 1989; .
. Minnesota Storm Water Advisory Group's Guidance for Evaluating Urban
Storm Water and Snowmelt Runoff into Wetlands:
. Wetland Policies (found in Water Resourees Management Plan), Wetland
Ordinance and Wetland Classification should all be referenced to make
sure design is consistent with the standards of the City;
. Storm Water BMP Design Supplement for Cold Climates. U.S.
Environmental Protection Agency, December 1997;
. Design of Storm Water Wetlands. Metropolitan Council of Governments,
October 1992;
. Controlling Urban Runoff: A Practical Manual for Planning and
Designing Urban BMPs. Metropolitan Council of Governments, October
1987;
. Thermal Impacts Associated with Urbanization and Storm Water
Management Best Management Practiees. Metropolitan Council of
Governments, Deeember 1990;
. Handbook - Urban Runoff Pollution Prevention and Control Planning.
U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, September 1993;
. Modular Storm Water Treatment Systems: A collection of currently
available pre-fabricated water quality treatment devices. Short Elliott
Hendrickson Inc. (SEH); and
. Ramsey County Soil Erosion and Sediment Control Handbook.
",.
.!.
it:
....
-i
:.l
:n
:>-,
J.l
~
-
-
.2:
:::i
-
..
~
;::)
:.l
;..
'-'
:.::
'-
:::J
:r.
~
u
.
::;
, ~
, ,
"E ....
-~ :::
",
~ .~ ~
U
Q :: ~
~ ..- :::2
3 ~ ~
.c'; .
~ ~ ~
~ '=
"5 ~-2
~ 2 E"
] -~.~
- :5-
] ;-~
J! ~ E
~i
- ~ -
.~ ~ ~
~ - ,..
'=' :: ~
::'" ~
- u ~
.: = ~
.!:! .... ;-
';; ~;j
=~ ~. ~
-~:.=
- .-
~ ~ 5
~
:. -~
.~ ~
~
E..
;;
.~
u
- ~:.
:: ~:;
;;-=
<oi ~ 5
... =--
._~:... -
_. ~.~
.
--~ .... =
~-;
== .;;
1 ~-s
~"E~
:!:! '-; V)
-:;-
~ . ~
:: ~.~
1 ~ ~
.. ~ ~
:: ......
E :: ~
~ ~ 3
'= 'E i
:5 I ~
:.l
.,
= z :.>
- :l z
- <
:l <:
'- ::l
:..> z
- ~
-
z :....
<:
'1::~
;; ::
:?:: -~
~...-:
:: ..:::. :;
.. -::-=
~H
-= ..-:
~ '" ;;:
'" "
~ ;:; ';'
~ ~~
~";-;
,
~~ ~
'Li
" =
- >
- 0 ...
-~ ~ ~
".:: ;;-
., ~...
! ~.~
-- L.I "I
:. =".=1
;:.~:;
"" --=
.~ -
] ~~
- .... ::
~ .: ;
~~:
~.~ 5
:..
2:
~
~
:.::
:.:.::;
. -
=:-
- -
Z~
=:=
::::..
~
..
~
,.
:0
=-
~
..
~
-
.~
"
j
o
.~
u
u
~
;;
"
~~
u
~
,
>
(j
z
~
"!
:
~
,;;
~
"
~
~
~
~
u
I
;;
.
...
:
;;
;:.
:0
=:
,
o
~
;;
.~
i
o
=:
..;
'0
.!
=?
;:;
:;>
=..l::!
:-;
u ,
~~
~;
1~
- ~
:=:.::
~ ~ ~
- '-~=
"
;;;
~ ~
:;; ~ ~
~ :::.~
~ '; E'
~ E ;
;.:; --=
::> = l':I
;,=;:
:.; ':,:-:;
~ =- ..:
=: ... =-
~ ]~
~ '" ~
:; .; ;;:
~ z ~
.= 0
"" >..;t
~ ';: :-
" .
:?::..
i:'" :: :::
~-::::l
~ .=~
~ ~.:
~~~
.2 ;;: ii
~ ~.~
~ = tJ
i=" = l"; '"::l
o. = = ::
:. -.-
::.:
:;
z
<
-""
~~
::z
:r.~
:--
:.t:€:
-
.
J: E
::,'::::::
=
"
~ !
~ ~
\:: ~
~ -
~ .E-
o
'z ~
~~
~ 1 i
~ ~
E -
~ -
~
- . ~
g ..::.
':-
~ ;; :;
;...
-
- ,
~
z
.2
;:;
~
~
I
I
~
I
I
I
I
I
II
<Jl
-"
"
>i
?
C
OJ
:>
8
I
I
"-'
o
-<
."
~
()
I
~
is
-"
'"
.~
~
<ii
'"
3<
~
-"
.....
-<
X
5'
j
~
I
I
I
-<
'"
'"
-<
-"
~
cr-
."
..
;:.
15
()
I
,
I
I
41
I
I
I
I
Extended Detention Pond
Design I (') ~ 0 @ e 0 Moderate
Design 2 . e 0 e ~ 0 Moderate
Wet Pond Design 3 . ll) 0 e (') 0 High
Design 4 (') e @ ~ @ 0 Moderate
Design 5 (') e @ @ ll) 0 Moderate
Design 6 . <9 . e ll) 0 High
Infiltration Trench
Design 7 (') e e <9 (') ~ Moderate Key
Design 8 . e e ll) . (') High o 0 to 20% Removal
Design 9 . (') <9 . . . High o 20 to 40% Removal
InfIltration Basin e 40 to 60% Removal
Design 7 (') e e ~ e 0 Moderate ll) 60 to 80% Removal
Design 8 . e e 0 . <9 High . 80 to 100% Removal
Design 9 . ll) 0 . . . High o Insufficient Knowledg
Porous Pavement
Design 7 0 0 e ~ e 0 Moderate
Design 8 . <9 ~ 0 . . High
Design 9 . 0 0 . . . High
Water Quality Inlet
Design 10 \) 0 0 0 0 0 Low
FIlter Strip
Design II @ 0 0 0 ~ 0 Low
Design 12 . e e 0 . 0 Moderate
Grassed Swale
Design 13 0 0 0 0 0 0 Low
Design 14 @ ~ 0 @ 0 0 Low
Design 1: FIrst-flush runoffvolurne detained for Design 7: Facility exfitraleS first-flush; 05 inch
6-12 hours. runoffftmpervious acre.
Dt:sign 2: Runoff volume produced by 1.0 inch. Design 8: Facility exfiltratcs one inch runoff volume per
detained 24 hourn. impervious acre.
Design 3: As in Design 2. but with shallow mmh in Design 9: Facility exfiltratcs all runoff, up to the 2 YeM
bonom stage. design stonn,
Design 4: Penrument pool eqwiJ to 05 inch storage Design 10: 400 cubic feet wet storage per impervious acre.
per imercious acre. Design 11: 20 foot wide turf strip.
Design 5: Pernunent pool eqwiJ to 25 (V r); where Design 12: 100 foot wide forested strip, with level spreader.
Vr = mean storm nmoff. Design 13: High slope swales, with no check dams.
Design 6: Penrument pool equal to 4.0 (Vr); approx. Design 14: Low gradient swales with check: dams.
2 weeks retention.
Figure 16: Comparative Pollutant Removal Of Urban BMP Designs
SourcJ:: Thomas R.. Schueler. COnlTolling Urban Runoff: A Practical Man.u.a.l for Planning aM Designing Urban BMPs. (Merropolitan
Washington Council of Govmuncnts. Ju1y~ 1987) p. 26.
I:
I
II
I
I
I
I
1
I
r
I
Developing
Effective BMP Systems for Urban Watersheds
fiGURE 7
Urban StOrlnWltc:r Retrofit Technique1
1. No Rc:trofit
V
&
~
I"
~
2. Souree Retrofit
3. Open a..onel
Retrofit (T)
4. Open Chann~l
Retrofit (II)
S. Natural Cbanne!
Retrofit
~tl
V-r~1
6. Off-tine Retrofit
7. BMP Retrofit
S.In.Line Retrofit
v
I
L:::::,.
KEY 0 I I Storm Drain 0 Off.Uno Retrofit
- Open Channel 6. In.UneRetrofit
W ltenhed ~"";I NatunlOllnDel . BMP Retrofit
. I Receivini Suum V Source: Retrofit
2S
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
II
1
I
I
I
I
I
I
,
I
I
~
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
.
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
r 5
I
,
~ I
I
..
..
-
)
""
-
J
'C
ell
'C
;;
o
...
a.
~
.
.
o
o
<;::
Q1l
c:
ell
m
C/l
:2
Ul
f-
C/l
~~
o
z
o
a.
.."
- -
. c
~"'"
f.~
.~ c
:::;0
~
e
.
e
.
e
e
e
.
o
e
.
..
.."
~
>,
"-
",0
o 0
z: 0
Co
c: 0
~t;~
~
.:5:?::,,:
.
o
~
.
o
e
~
e
.
.
.
.
.
."
~
c
..., '"
.0:;;:
Z ~
~ :l
.- = ~
~ a
W Q
=::J'):"
~
o
~
.
o
o
e
o
.
e
.
.
.
",.-g
. Q
0,,-
z:
c: .:.
.~:
'" W
.:5~
e
o
e
.
e
o
.
o
.
e
.
.
e
'"
0.."
z: '"
C ,'0
.~-
.- -
'" ~
::~
e
o
.
.
o
o
.q.
ell~
II
Ii
Ot
, ..
~,... ..
:,,0.' -.
rel~~
-::';::~::':-:', .
o e,~i~iit'
_ . A.i,:;~~!:.
Q ~:7 '-"-,'d_'.,."..
- ,,'~ "-;,,,", "'-"
e .I~O!
o 0 E~llt~
. at!
>-. ...,
. e ~ .~
u
.e e
e ~
~
'5
.w
."
t
,..;
.
"
~
:;:
;a
.w
-..;
....
Q
3'
.J
~
~ -
\.Q ~ r-- --!
:;) :.; ~ ~
z ~ z: ......-l
c: :l = .;..I
g~ II ~
~,8
t . t r . . ~ ~
t. ,):.;: l.~. t !i
~~;........' '.
STANDARD POND SYSTEM DESIGN
CROSS-SECTION VIEW
IV
safety St::r.n .).cra;e
III
ba."1K:wll flco~ s::crags (2yr.)
II
varia~le =:0 storage
per;";'1a:1ent p~al ~c;,age
~.
risar
a::~i-sa~j:: collars
revars;
E;J pipe
!;2:te
valves
p:nc: ::::';::n
u
ba;i:1
CoPYright 1991, !'etrq::olitan Wash.i:1gton Council of Governments
F''74/
s~a:lized out1alJ
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
II
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
,
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
II
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
~.'C.
!" "
-0.:.,
:'''1-'
:...-=
_.
!-i
~--
POND DESIGN NO.1: DRY ED POND SYST"M
DR'" 1-' ;r--~
: , ?-- ..
. .f-"w~> .:
--'"\
,;r--~
~,~~h ljl/'-~ ,
POND DESIGN NO.2: ED MICRO?OOL SYST"M
~ - - --.- - - - - - -- --- -~&WJ""'i.:~
~ /~
""'---- -- - ~ I/.
POND DESIGN NO.3: SHALLOW::D MARSH SYSTEM
POND DESIGN NO.4: W=., ED POND
~-----------
~~
---' \.
~.7'
"
POND DESIGN NO.5: W=., POND SYSTi::M
~.~ - /~\ ~ - - - ~,~ ~ - - J'\
POND DESIGN NO.6: SHALLOW MAi'iSH SYS,,,M
^
POND D"SIGN NO.7: DRY INC'ILEn SYSTEM
--'~
Copyright 1991, Metrop:Jli tan Nashington Council of Goverrnrents
~,
......t....
-J
...
'/
-
a
:::?:
w
r-
CI)
>-
CI)
o
z
o
0..
o
L!.J
>-
II:
o
~
o
z
z
CJ
CI)
L!.J
o
o
z
o
0..
.:~'
f-: I
":"'1
'_'1.
,or
',""",,
o
..,- "' ;".::-:':::
.Jv.~CI-~;_:~~"t,"~y~/'::::
,
I
I
1
I
r
I
I
I
I
\
\
\
"0
.:; 0
~ u
o ,-
u >
o
0'"
UJ
.:;,::.::.::
"
"'i"-
.... "I -\,
~/ ::J -/-;-- '.-
0...... ,
0.....- ,
)}/:}}/:; I
r
...,_.."_.~",,, 0
0/""""'''' Q,.....'...' E
~ <:':i-'~&;;.:.I/~'~'"", ;:,::}r;~!,'i~:r.W{~::JI f ~
, I
,
E
:>
E
"
E
1!
..
a;
E
o
~
.s
'3
I
I
I
I
z
o
>=
<(
u
o
-'
-'
<(
w
<::>
<(
a:
o
>-
'JJ
::'!
C.
,r;
E
E
","..
" ~..c
, E Co
~"E
-Ee
S! E E
-"'0
vV'"
~I II
" 0 0
~F:i
~~~
~ 0 ~
o Co 0
.n Co ~
_::...2
II
I
I
I
'"
8
c
...
o
.~
~
""
o
I
I
....
''';
"
:;
8
5
.w
'"
C
-:j
0;
"
:;:
i3
.w
''';
....
Q
5'
.J
~
I
I
I
I
~
'"
'"
....
-'-'
~
'"
,~
,,;
;:.
6"
u
I
I
I r&
..rf
~
I n""
_0:;.;-
Q
I
I
I ~
W
J-
(J)
I >-
(J)
-l
0
0 '"
II ~ 0
0 =E
" -
a:
u
I ~
0
w
I N
0
z
I z
0
(J)
w
I 0
0
Z
0
I ~
I
'"
.S!
<S
>-
" 0
_ 0
...." " 0.
, EO
/\ coW
.....,.. E-
-
-,; .~ 0
...~ \. E
I ,........
I.~
,..
;;
"
~
rn
'-'
c
~
~
<3
"-'
o
.-<
.rl
~
8
c
.8
'"
C
'rl
.c
rn
'"
:;::
:a
'-'
-..;
.-<
8.
o
]j
~
z
o
;::
<C
U
o
..J
..J
<(
W
"
<C
a:
o
>-
Ul
~
Q.
.s
E
E
o
'" "
n-a~
-;nEJ::
-. "== c.
5E~
" E E
~ll".lE
-;--;0
"'--
" 0 ,
:; 0 >-
_ 0. '"
~e.tj
Cl.~ ~
wE 0
.-<
'"
'"
.-<
'-'
.c
'"
-..;
>4
iO:
o
u
.
~.
."7~"
,.
,
(j....
--
Q
:2
w
r-
en
>-
en
I
C/J
a:
<(
:2
o
w
I .
\ '.
\
\
I
1
I
I~
I~
151
x
" "
E
I
I
I
I
I
I
.'
3:
o
....(
--l
<(
I
en
C?
o
z
z
(9
C/J
W
o
o
z
o
c..
1 .
\ .
\ '.
<
"'
"'
,
,
,
-,
1
,
I
I
\
\
\
\
\
I
I
I
,
. /
. ,
,
-'..-...e'
~
,
-"""':'':..4
~
..j
~
_.
1.-1
'"
I
~
.1:! ~.= <::
1 _ u
~ - 0 c
E 1 ;; 0
~ ~
0 _u _
, .E I "; <:3
E c
\ ""0
\ "5 I _~..::::J
.0 ;::-
\ '" I d
c c..
\ 0 ~
0. e I -;;;
\~ ""
0 I -.!l <:;
I "- ;; c
0 I ~ .5
I '2
I '-' I IC':,)U::..;::
I E
\ -oJ I
\ c:: I '"
I '" ;;
I C; I :;;
:: I
\ x
I '" I iau'.J'2!.::
1 c.. I --"
E ;; ~
I "' 0 I " ;
'-' _f ~
I ~=
u
I c
0
~ ~
1
I
,
/
,
O""O~OI.OO1,(",.O
I.=I"I:"M_ "";"r;",:,-?
T + + +
SJiilaCJ!lua:::
./
z
o
~
<
'-'
o
...J
...J
<
UJ
Cl
<
a:
o
....
'"
~ "
c... l'CI"'::
.S ~ -a ~
E~.E~
E.E E E
l.()'::=~
-e.-o
IlEo'V
-0-/1
~-~o
c.. . 00
,..00.
~ :a 0.0
g..c2w
~ e.~.....
"iii.E.EN
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
.-
~
~ I
8
"-<
o I
I
I
....
y '';
lJ
< !:j
8
c
o
.u
0'
c
'';
r
Ui
'"
3:
~ I
'';
....
2.
o
~I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
.
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
,
I
,
;,~:
. , c
1-<, ~
!.~'.. ';;;
~ ,..
.....s C-
. . " 0
-~,- ~ c
0 ~
I ~ "
"
_....: a.
o
z
o
0..
o
w
l-
w
<j;.
~
o
z
z
c=l
(f)
w
o
o
z
o
0..
.,
:.,'-.'
,.'
. .
""<:'...."':.--...
, ......~.....
':.--,::>.-
1:::J
t;'
I,
I
I
I
1
1
I
/ .
I
I
I
,
I
I
\
,
,
a.
'0 "
C '0
Q. 1!
" "
" ;;
c E
~ 0
E '"
" ~
Q.
"!
'"
'"
"
"."
""
"'0
"C-
"
"",
",,,
""
=0
,,-
-;;;'"
E
~
"
"
"
.Q
.~
'"
"
-
"
~
:;
.Q
."
"
o
C-
. \
. \
\
\
\
I
I
. I
I
I E
. I =
.1-53
I 1;1
/ E
" I
I
I
I
. / -
/---:~
/ E
::;
;:;;
>-
'5
;;;
'"
~
E
z
o
;::
""
u
o
-'
-'
<(
w
'-'
<(
0::
o
....
Ul
;"!
a.
E '"
~ ~"3-
.=EE
c.o ~
E", E
.- E
E~",
EO'"
o &. n
--"
a = 01
>-~~
'" '" 0
.g~U;
-,,0
E c.W
"
'"
~
'"
a!
:>
S
.'"
o
....
''';
lJ
C
8
c
o
'"
'"
c
''';
.c
<Jl
'"
:;:
~
..,
''';
...;
8-
Q
'"
.0
~
...;
'"
'"
....
'"
~
:;.
''';
'"
~
Q'
U
...,
'-!
~ -;
'--"
......i
~
..J
::;;:
W
f-
(f)
>-
(f)
o
z
o
0..
f-
w
$:
ti'i
c5
z
z
c=l
(f)
w
o
o
z
o
0..
.\
-.:..,
.~
-
'...1
"
g
..<
c
'"
.:;
c
~
,:
::;
.~
"
"
E
~
c
'"
.=>
E
"
c
o
~
o
2
I
\
~ 1
E I
C
E \
1! '
~ \
E '\
~/\
:g ,
.Q
."
"
o
Q.
\
\
\
\
I
I
I
I
I
1'5
c
I~
I :?:
"
;;
~
'0
C
"
o
'"
co
c
'i:>,
'"
"
-"l
E
E
"
,,,=
;;
c
z
o
;::
<
()
g
-'
<(
OJ
c:>
<
0::
o
>-
Ul
;"!
0..
E '"
,- "'
- Q.
E E
E""
'" E
- E
II 0
,..<0
~ II
~o
o 0
- Q.
I
<Jl
!
IlJ
8
I
I
I
I
I
I
II
I
I
I
I
I
I
~
I
"-'
o
...;
''';
lJ
~
o
u
5
..,
'"
,;i
.c
<Jl
~
~
''';
...;
8-
o
1:J
t!
,
....
'"
'"
....
'"
.c
'"
''';
><
S:
8
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
II
I
I
I
I
I
I
)-
I
:;""J
"
.""'~
. ...;.:,
~ "..
. -0;,..
...........
-.:.".
::;;:
W
f-
(f)
>-
(f)
I
(f)
a:
<:(
:2
$:
o
-l
....I
<:(
I
(f)
(0
o
z
z
(9
(f)
ill
o
o
z
o
0..
".
-~
- -
~lf
< .= = ':"':I
g ::"'0 I
~ I ~ ~ ~ I
~ ;:.~ ~I
o I ~~ ~ I
C; -= J:; ~,
z
9
."
3,.,
C .":::
'"
'0 -
c "
- >
="5
"
;:~
"0 g
" G
;jE
~
0;
.Q
>-
g
;;;
\
\
\
\
\
\
\
\
I
I
I
I
I
'-'
o
....
''';
U
~
"
<3
5
..,
'"
,;i
~
Ui
'"
:;:
~
..,
''';
....
8-
o
1:J
~
<Jl
'"
c
~
'"
~
8
<:
"
Q.
o
0;
;; I
,5
0;
Q.
'"
<:
o
Q.
'0
~
'"
'"
- '"
".=>
= ~
~ -
-=~
'0 _
- ~
= "
:.:! Q
"5.::
;: "
- >
O,l:'=
- "
" -
E~
0::
- ;:
-
....
'"
'"
....
'"
~
Q
''';
'-'
~
o
u
, '.
t-:
~.t~.
.,.'--:,
........~.
-.
" I
'-_-.,t,.
".-,
--....
::;;:
ill
f-
(f)
>-
(f)
a:
w
~
l.J...
~---?
>-
a:
CI
~
o
z
z
c=l
(f)
w
o
o
z
o
0..
~1
.
.
~
._~.
,~_.
,.,,~
~.-
z
o
~
()
o
-'
-'
<
'"
'-'
<
0::
o
....
Ul
:!!
0..
.~ ctl l'lJ L'C
E-a.ca
EEl>."
"''3i~""
- E E "
, E E E
oU')o~
ONC\j_
Q. II II "
r:I..: e m
O't U._ '?i
5 :; ~ ~
c.. =- .Q ....,
.......'..,
I.
I
\
\
\
\
\
\
\
\
\
'"
"
Q
<:
..e
c
'"
a;
'0
'"
'"
;:
E
<;
;;
o
'"
;"!
;;
;:;;
~
I
I
I
I
I
"",. .'.
:X" I
~tI
..,
c
~ I
'-'
~
8
"-' I
0
....
''';
tJ
~ I
0
u
E
'" I
,;i
~
Ui
'"
:;:
:a I
..,
''';
....
8-
0 I
l:J
~
~ I
~,
''';
'"
b:
0,
u
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
It(
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
.JL.- Filter gravel
~ch dla. hol8s in riser
to dewater sediment storage
Temporary storage
Permanent
pool and
sediment
storage
OrifICe pia
ij requ~ed
Slotted riser
PVC principal
spillway pipe
Outlet protection
ff required
Figure 6.1-6: Slotted riser with PVC pipe
Prefabricated slotted riser
10/89
6,1.9
Removable cap,
plug or screen
ErTtlankment
SIot1ed inlet
See detail.
Orifice plate
See detail.
Elbow
See note 5,
Principal spillway pipe wijh sloned riser
i B t Slotted inlet
~! 4" D. Rows of 1" x 4"
vertical slots
4" centered,
m E. Degrees around
4' the circumfer-
ence. See
notes 1 & 2.
A
+t OrifICe plate
(R\
~ Minimum thickness:
,10" for metal or fibergiass
,25" for plastic or PVC
Standard DimensionsTable
A
in.
B
in.
C D
in. rows
min.
E Slot area
(jegr, ft"/ft,
1.50-3,50
3,75-5,50
5.75-6,00
6
8
10
4 4
6 6
8 8
90
60
45
Notes and Comments
1, Slotted inlets shall be fabricated from corrugated
metal, smooth steel or PVC plastic pipe. Materials
shall have at least the minimum wall thickness given in
the standard dimensions table.
2. Slols shall be cut cleanly and deburred, Ends of
slots may b9 round or square.
3. Orifice plats, cap and aJlfittings shall be snug and
securely fastened. Orifice plate shall be Cleanly cut
and free of burrs w~h care taken not to round the
edges. It should be a minimum of 2.0 feet below
grade for proper functioning.
4. The portion of the inlet ~ow grade may be perfo-
rated with a gravel filter for additional dewatering ot
basin.
Minimum wall thickness
corrugated smooth steel PVC
metal base in, in.
.167
.250
,383
16
16
16
,10
,10
,13
,15
,20
,25
5. Fabricated or standard elbow, fabricated or
standard tee with main tile line or plug in upstream
end. or standard tee with one end embedded in
concrete.
6. The height ~ lnlet is above the sediment pool level
shall be such that the velocity 01 flow through the slots
is less than 2.0 feet per second.
7. Head on the orifice, if placed as suggested, may
be figured by adding 0.7 times the maximum depth of
imlX'onded water plus the depth of the orifice below
grade. Has a relatively constant rats of change.
Figure 6,1-7: Slotted riser standard dimensions
6,1-10
10/89
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
.
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
II
'-
.i
I
I
I
I
I
I
Parking lot
-
Stonn
sewer
1 Infiltration trench with surface Inlet I
Rner strip
Rner fabric
lines trench
Underground trench with olVgrft separator
.
Washed stone
or gravel
6"-12" sand filler
6"-12" sand filter
Observatio
port
10/89 4.4- 3
3-chamber oiV
grit separator
~ Screen to keep
leaves out
Downspout
Overflow outlet
10' minimum
Paved surface
Overflow to stonn sewer
Washed stone
or gravel
Cistern type design
Washed stone
or gravel
'.' 'r',
6"-12" sand filter
Figure 4.4-1: TyplcallnflltratJon trench use
Obse rvatlon port
CHAPTER 5: INFILTRATION TRENCHES
Infiltration trenches are an adaptable 8MP that effectively remove both
soluble and particulate pollutan"t.s. As with other infiltration systems)
trenches are not intended to trap c.oarse sediments. Grass buffers (for
surface trenches) or special inlets (for underground trenches) must be
installed to capture sediment before it enters the trench. Depending on the
degree of storage./exfiltration achieved, trenches can provide groundwater
recharge, low flow augmentation and localized streambank erosion control.
Individual trenches are primarily an on-site control, and are seldom
practica.l or economical on sites larger than 5 or 10 acres. Trenches are
only feasible when s.oils are permeable and the water table and bedrock are
situated well below the bottom of the trench. Aside from regular inspections
and more rigorous sediment and erosion control, trenches have limited routine
maintenance requirements. However, trenches. will prematurely clog if
sediment is not kept out before, during and after construction of a site.' If
a trench does become severely clogged, partial or complete replacement of the
structure may be required. '
Figure 5.1: Schematic of an Infiltration Trench
Wellcap
......
Observation Well
Sand Filler (6.12 Feet Deep)
or Fabric equivalent
'"
Runod E:dutrate:s
, Through Undisturbed Subsoils
with II Minimum fe 01 0.5 Inches/Hour
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
II
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
~
I
5.4 Chapter 5: InHltrationTrenches
I
DESIGN l:
I
Median Strip DesiKD (Figure 5.2), This design is frequently used
for highway median strips and parking 101: "islands" (depressions
in between two lots or adjacent sides of one lot). Sheet flow is
accepted from both sides of the trench, and is filtered through a
20 foot wid. grassed buffer strip. The strip is an integral part
of the trenc.hJ and should be graded to have a uniform slope not
greater than 51, and should directly abut the contributing
impervious ares. Berms located on each side of the strIp form a
shallow depression that temporarily stores runoff before it enters
the trench. An overflow pipe is used to pass excess runoff.
I
I
I
Figure 5.2:
Median Strip Trench Design
I
Top View
Side View
.
~fi~~z;~l~~tlf
<-1"'0' '.'.'...
Inflow
I
20" Grasa Flit., Stl1p
--....
I
Permeable Filter
Fabric: One Fool
Below Sur1ac~.
Traps Debris
I
Sides lined.with P~rmeable Filtel Fabric
,
,
Clean Washed Slone or Gravel
(':.5-3.0 tneh'
'6-12 Inch Sand Filtel
01 Permeable Filter
Cloth Lines Bottom
I
I
Screened Overflow Pipe
I
J?~'i~L.. ";"""'~""""'
1~~~~Ii:"..".:;',:;;;;:;
--
Outflow
I
I
Chap~er 5: Infil~r4~ion Trenches
5,5
DESIGN 2:
P.rkin~ Lot Perimeter (Figure 5,3). This design accepts sheet flow
from the lower end of a parking lot. Slotted curb spacers are used
as level spreaders to route sheet flow from the parking lot over
the 20 foot wide filter strip (and also keep cars from damaging the
strip). After being filtered over the grass strip, runoff enters
the surface of the trench.. A shallow berm is installed at the far
end of the trench to ensure t.hat runoff does not escape. The
trench should have an overflow to pass large design storms. such as
a PVC 'pipe with holes drilled on its underside. set near the top of
the trench (Figure 5,3),
Figure 5.3: Parking lot Perimeter Trench Design
Top View
;; . .
..' "~
. .:';:::,.:
~ {;". ,,:.It
.',. ,:...-
. :.-..-"' ""
~'.~1"';..:'.10
1J:.:":~.~ --:~-
'J,j' {-. ....
Side View
Dripline of Tree Should
Nol Extend Ower TrenCh
Berm (Grassed)
~=r"' 1 ifhU ~o==,
c." ~ ,'..-.,<, ,00 ','"
- ~ I~ ~ ft.t ~fb\ ~~; F,It" S'np
~".. "'" ~!~ ~f:fo~,~;'~~~"" !
~. I~
'--+
,
,
,
, '
~..\~
==
I
J
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
II
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
~
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
.
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
5.6
Chapter 5: Infiltration Trenche.
l
DESIGN 3:
Swale De.i~ns (Figure 5.4). Low density residential runoff (5-15%
impervious) can be treated through 8 series of surface t:renches
located in swale drainage systems. The major design requirement is
that the longitudinal slope of the swale collection system should
never exceed 5%. Otherwise, concentrated flows will develop that
might erode the swales and contamina1:e. the trench. In addit.ion)
concentrated flows may pass around or over the surface of the
trench and never infiltrate. An earthen check dam or railroad tie
placed perpendicularly to the flow path, on the downstream side of
the trench) can prevent "short-circuiting" and increase the volume
of runoff exfiltrated by ehe trench. The slope of the trench
should be as close -Co zero as feasible, and should have sideslopes
of 5:1 (h:v) or less.
Figure 5.4: Swale/Trench Design
Top View
-lllIJl{t
~~i~jffiil[~~'
r.:.,. \',,'~...<O.rectJcn "_.....V
>! ;~t:;;.~9)ffi~~ .g;"p:,'
. g:ij 8 :=;~::t;>},:r..
: tFt;-'~ ~-~,. 'S''',v'W
;~. .. .. ';'f:~s~~ ~....-1:ti&~~
,'>,." (-",jI'~ <J'<'~~':''';:;;'
":,,', ." .v..'"" 'P" '. l'''C0
~~'2~~j.~'~.;';,.:.' . ~:.4."')"
g~..~~(j~~;
'~~f~_~~:~~~ C~Z .~~~
(-""",J :l!~: '1'" ~
'-.~: :--.._.~
;<~~~:.;!:.:) '~'r" ;"
. - ~q-- /.!!"'.'
..."""'" ~ l/;-~-..
;O.-:;>';\-. .. .J-."- t~'--,::;,'
\;'"-\~}-w ($.':::. -.3,.~ .'::" I
" ""./ I ;,~",~~
v .)t."..1 ''!r.:'~ j .' I'::'~~
'l;...\X1 !?o.~< !H_ I l'::'~
,/. ,_;"'-_, '.' i ,,~-,
.' -" J) I ,',
..~. .~ ,"
y.... .. .,...........~.-
1: . ....... '...,,"'.;.,-.!. ,_~
. "\"..,.~ ~.) ~.'M^..,- .. .""".
-I ,. .'i;,.... ..."..:~.~ ~':.u::.~~z."'&~,~.),..s~?" ',~
../-*~ ;~...v-... "-,~,..~,.~.v> ,,;,
-''i,. ~_ .... ~-J -----. -- ~
:-1'i,f,1\,I::' L" ii,
....\......~ .' '"
/ af
''"'
Side View
Auncff
Road
Remon
"11, --..
"
",
-
Permeable Filler Fabric: Lines 5ide:s
and Abo alOne Fool Treflch Depth
6 Inch Sand layiltr
E::dlltra1lon
CHAPTER 6: INFILTRATION BASINS
Infil-cration basins are effective in removing both soluble and fine
particulate pollutants borne in urban runoff. Coarse-grained pollutants
should generally be removed before they enter a basin. Unlike other
infiltration systems, basins can be easily adapted t9' provide full control of
peak discharges for large design storms. Also, basins can serve relatively
large drainage areas (up to 50 acres). Depending on the degree of
storage/exfiltration achieved in the basin, significant groundwater
recharge, low flow augmentation and localized streambank erosion control can
be achieved.
Figure 6,1: Schematic of an Infiltration Basin
Top View
...- -
~
-
/
-----.........-
/
"
\
\
I
I
/
/
/
~-.,,~~-..::..~-.,;.:... .....
..;. Embankment ;_~~:~'............
, (
I
\
I -<)
\ ~ ~
Rip..p _ A-
I ~ ::-;:
':~-~-~~::-
/
-
.-'
-
-
---
-
.......
----
......
Side View
Back-up Undsfdraln Pipe in Case of SLBndlng Wahtr Probloms
I
J
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
II
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
~
I
6.6 Chapur 6: Infiltraeion Basins
Figure 6.4: Off-line Infiltration Basin Design
I
Top View
Sand
Filtration
Chamber
Pretr.ats
Runoff
I
FirSIHalf
Inch of
Runoff
Diverted
from Channel
l
c--- .-
,.'
~.
~
a~
I
I,
,...----
~-
Perlorated
Underdrains
Lead to
Basin
I
Side View
I
Sand
Gr8\lel
..........n__nn...
".-..-....--..-----
no ...--.....0-....
II
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
,--
Perforated
Underdrain
Dense GIlISS Cover
I
6.12
Chapter 6: Infiltration Basins
J
I
Depth to'Seasonally High Water Table
A minimum of two to four feet of clearance is needed between the floor of
the basin and the seasonally high "'ater table. This depth can be readily
determined from soil borings taken during wet weather. High water tables
often present a majo:t: obstacle to the Use of infiltration basins, since
basins are usually located in depressions at the low end of a watershed where
local water tables are located near the the ground surface.
I
1
Proximity to Wells and Foundations
Basins should be located at least 100 feet away from drinking water wells
to minimize the possibility of groundwater contamination) and should be
situated at least 10 feet down-gradient and 100 feet up-gradient from
building foundations to avoid potential seepage problems.
I
Maximum Depth of Reservoir
I
To insure that the basin completely drains within 72 hourst it may be
necessary to limit the depth of the basin if underlying soils have relatively
low exfiltration rates. Recommended depth limits for basins are shown for
various soil textures in Table 6.2.
I
Watershed Size
I
Md WRA (1983b) suggests that basins can be applied to sites ranging from 5
. to 50 acres in size. Other BMPs J such as extended detention ponds and wet
ponds J are better candidates on larger sites as they are more capable of
handling sustained baseflow.
..
Table 6,2: Soil Limitations For Infiltration Basins
I
SCS SOIL'
GROUP
MAXIMUM DEPTH OF'
STORAGE (inches)
48 hrs 72 hrs
I
MINIMUM INFIL-
SOIL TRATION RATE
TYPE (fc--inches/hr)
Sand 8,27
Loamy Sand 2,41
Sandy Loam 1.02
Loam 0,52
Silt Loam 0.27
I
A
397
595
A
116
174
1
B
49
73
I
B
25
37
C
13
19
I
Sandy Clay Loams, Clay Loams, Silty Clay Loams, Sandy Clay, Silty
Clay,an~ Clay Soils are not included as these soil types are all
NOT FEASIBLE for infiltration basins,
1 Maximum Depth in the Basin that can drain completely within 48 or
72 hours after a storm, given the soil infiltra~ion rate.
I
I
~
I
I
I
I
I
I
II
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
,
I
,~
tl
~
c::
I
~
c
...... ..
~
,"
.~ ,."
,," ~.
. .
',1..'
,....
. .
'.. "
-.,
.....
. .
".....
.: :.:
!
I I
II
L
;, i-.
;; I .2
... ad
-r .. ·
.;, ~ [.
51:1
-I
I '
i
"-:!l'l-
, ~
,
i
d'
", . .............
'@
c,._.....
e~
,i~
~.a
~_&
&~i
!w
=il
!!o
dil"
a '
l~i~
~~
Oow
:~l5
W
,.
:::!
1'5
f
"
:'
!
t;
~
~
~
~
..
"
!
i
is
6
g
a
..
..l
~
"
i:!
~
~
()
~
M=1
@ID
~
<i1:
g
Y
1)=
C=38
~.-
~:
Q
@g~
~~
1)=0
M=1
~
<i1:
i:=<l
@
::
@
@i)
i",
B~
"'i
f
"-
g...o
.....~:i
;:~~
,,~ ,
""-5
1O:l/-
IC;:~
Ol"'-
"'~
Q~
j;,
~
;,
~
'I<.!Y
Q;\:
',;'.
~....:'.
.::t:rt~~;:
;'.::~m~~~
.:::;;:;{~~
~~sttf
",;".::9.':-::;'
'-::::.~
g
:;;:l
,~
d-
...
.;~
~i"'
'"
-
. 'C" __" .",
.~-::>>::.
....:....~..'
;{~}:f/
i'{{;
8"":':
~~.
~:>..
::,:::.g~~:
~
ffil:l
~~
~I
_ !i
%
.",...
d=:S
,"
"!l~
""!CI-
" 8
..~-
GI~:'
:; li
';:-
d_Q
."!l
.,gQ
""!Ci:!
""'::I
i~1d
-'
...
-<
~
S'~ ...
Q
5~
!i;:l>- :2
!!l'-g Q
" ~lS ...
Co-
!l.:'li! c.J>
- "'I< ...
~~~ !II>
.....~
.." .
"~!2 -'
~ ' -<
-!2g :2
iiIi. ...
~
~~ 0
~
I-
'" ...
."
:!!e
Q
....
~
Ii"'''
s"v
$j~
2l'i'
. ffi:
.,...
:5-
...
...
"'"
~
""
C!l
8
Q
...
~
c.ll
...
!II>
't:j
"-
...
~i
en
<II
Cl
""
...
I
~
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
.
I
I
I
I
I
I
~
I
Appendix C
Developer Guidelines
I
~
I
1
I
I
1
I
II
I
I
1
I
I
I
I
,
I
Appendix C: Developer Guidelines
The City of Arden Hills developed a Local Stormwater Management Plan to analyze and minimize
the impact of existing and future development on the City's natural resources, It is important to the
City to have consistent analysis and data collection, Therefore, all hydrologic, hydraulic and water
quality analysis should be prepared in a common format. Data shall be submitted in a consistent
format consistent with Rich Creed Watershed District guideline that will allow for a timely review
by City staff.
Key Points
When preparing your engineering calculations, please remember these key points:
· A pre-design meeting with the City and the appropriate WMO is encouraged before ANY data
will be accepted. The purpose of the meeting is to specifically address approvals and permits,
pond requirements, trunk storm drain analysis, wetland impacts, water quality treatment, erosion
control and discharge to lakes and sensiti ve wetland resources,
· Rate control is not required IF downstream systems (ponds and storm drains) can be shown to
adequately detain/retain the runoff.
. Regional sedimentation ponds may be used for some developments,
1
1
I
I
I
I
1
.
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
Appendix C
Developer Guidelines
I
'-
I
1
I
I
I
I
I
II
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
r
I
Appendix C: Developer Guidelines
The City of Arden Hills developed a Local Stormwater Management Plan to analyze and minimize
the impact of existing and future development on the City's natural resources. It is important to the
City to have consistent analysis and data collection. Therefore, all hydrologic, hydraulic and water
quality analysis should be prepared in a common format. Data shall be submitted in a consistent
format consi~tent with Rich Creed Watershed District guideline that will allow for a timely review
by City staff.
Key Points
When preparing your engineering calculations, please remember these key points:
· A pre-design meeting with the City and the appropriate WMO is encouraged before ANY data
will be accepted. The purpose of the meeting is to specifically address approvals and permits,
pond requirements, trunk storm drain analysis, wetland impacts, water quality treatment, erosion
control and discharge to lakes and sensitive wetland resources,
· Rate control is not required IF downstream systems (ponds and storm drains) can be shown to
adequately detain/retain the runoff.
· Regional sedimentation ponds may be used for some developments.
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
It
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
Appendix D
Hydrologic Modeling and Water Quality Modeling Results
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
It
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
Data for Arden Hills
TYPE II 24-HOUR RAINFALL~ 3,50 IN
Prepared by Short Elliott Hendrickson Inc.
HydroCAD 5,11 001264 ecl 1986-1999 Applied Microcomputer Systems
WATERSHED ROUTING
Page 26
17 Jul 01
-------------------------------------------------------------
-------------------------------------------------------------
G 0 000 G
} !: J && &
~ ~ ~
000 ~~<g>
;i\ ~ & AM Lili
o SueCATCHMENt 0 REACH
D"';.
[J LINK
Data for Arden Hills
TYPE II 24-HOUR RAINFALL= 3.50 IN
Prepared by Short Elliott Hendrickson Inc.
HydroCAD 5.11 001264 tcl 1986-1999 Applied Microcomputer Systems
Page 27
17 Jul 01
SUB CATCHMENT 1
Pond P-1
PEAK= 90,74 CFS @ 12,09 HRS, VOLUME = 6,38 AF
ACRES CN
49,10 81
Arden Hills LWMP
SCS TR-20 METHOD
TYPE II 24-HOUR
RAINFALL= 3.50 IN
SPAN= 10-20 HRS, dt=,1 HRS
Method
DIRECT ENTRY
Comment
Segment ID:
Tc (minl
20,0
SUBCATCHMENT 1 RUNOFF
Pond P-l
98
BS
88
75
7B
55
~ 5B
~ 55
u 5B
~ 45
::3 4B
o 35
-' 38
u. 25
28
15
18
5
e",
AREA:;: 49. 1 AC
Tc= 213 HIN
eN= 81
SCS TR-20 METHOD
TYPE I I 24-HCUR
RAINFALL= 3.58 IN
PEAK::: 9B. 74 CFS
e 12.09 HRS
VOLUME= 0,38 AF
~
~
!::
~ ~
'"
N
C'
!
~
TIME (hcu,..~)
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
tI
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
It
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
Data for Arden Hills
TYPE II 24-HOUR RAINFALL= 3.50 IN
Prepared by Short Elliott Hendrickson Inc.
HydroCAD 5.11 001264 tcl 1986-1999 Applied Microcomputer Systems
Page 28
17 Jul 01
SUBCATCHMENT 2
Pond P-2
PEAK= 92.45 CFS @ 12.09 HRS,
VOLUME = 6.54 AF
ACRES CN
57.59 78
SCS TR-20 METHOD
TYPE II 24-HOUR
RAINFALL= 3.50 IN
SPAN= 10-20 HRS, dt=,l ERS
Method
DIRECT ENTRY
Comment
Segment ID:
Tc (min)
20,0
SU8CATCHMENT 2 RUNOFF
Pond P-2
98
85
88
75
78
65
';l 60
c,. 55
u 58
~ 45
:3 4"
o 35
..J 38
lL 25
28
15
18
5
8",
AREA= 57.59 AC
Tc~ 20 MIN
eN= 78
SCS TR-za METHOD
TYPE II 24-HOUR
RAINFAll= 3.58 IN
PEAK= 92.45 CFS
e 12.13'3 HRS
VOLUME= 6,54 Af
'"
~ ::: ~ ~
~ ~ ~
oo
N
TIME Chaur,5)
Data for Arden Hills
TYPE II 24-HOUR RAINFALL= 3,50 IN
Prepared by Short Elliott Hendrickson Inc,
HydroCAD 5,11 001264 (c) 1986-1999 Applied Microcomputer Systems
Page 29
17 Ju1 01
SUBCATCIlMENT 3
Pond P-3
PEAK= 71,23 CFS @ 12.09 HRS, VOLUME= 5.05 AF
ACRES
46,65
CN
77
SCS TR-20 METHOD
TYPE II 24-HOUR
RAINFALL= 3,50 IN
SPAN= 10-20 HRS, dt=,l HRS
Method
DIRECT ENTRY
Comment
Segment ID:
Tc (min)
20,0
SUB CATCHMENT 3 RUNOFF
Pond P-3
78
65
68
55
~ 50
" 45
t 48
35
:3 3.
~ 25
U. 2.
15
'"
S
"d;
AREA= 46.65 AC
Tc= 2e HIN
eN: 77
SCS TR-28 METHOD
TYPE r I 24-HCUR
RAINFALL= 3.58 IN
PEAK= 71,23 CFS
e 12.89 HRS
UOLUME= 5. 05 AF
'"
':'
~
:!'
::: ~ ~
~
N
:':
TINE (hour!:>)
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
.
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
It
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
Data for Arden Hills
TYPE II 24-HOUR RAINFALL= 3.50 IN
Prepared by Short Elliott Hendrickson Inc.
HydroCAD 5.11 001264 (c) 1986-1999 Applied Microcomputer Systems
Page 30
17 Jul 01
SUBCATCHMENT 4
Pond P-4
PEAK= 86.02 CFS @ 12.14 HRS, VOLUME= 6.89 AF
ACRES CN
57,99 79
SCS TR-20 METHOD
TYPE II 24 - HOUR
RAINFALL= 3.50 IN
SPAN= 10-20 HRS, dt=.l HRS
Method
DIRECT ENTRY
Comment
Segment ID,
Tc (min)
25.0
SUBCATCHMENT 4 RUNOFF
Pond P-4
85
ea
75
,.
65
,.
. 55
4- 5.
u 45
4.
:3 30
o ,.
~ 25
2.
15
,.
5
8,,';
AREA:: 57,99 AC
Te: 25 NIN
eN= 79
SCS TR-20 METHOD
TYPE II 24-HOUR
RAINFALL= 3.50 IN
PEAK= 86.82 CFS
e 12.14 HR5
UOLUME= 6.89 Af
:: ~
~
'"
N
~
M
:':
~ ~
TIME (hou~~)
Data for Arden Hills
TYPE II 24-HOUR RAINFALL~ 3,50 IN
Prepared by Short Elliott Hendrickson lnc,
HvdroCAD 5.11 001264 (c) 1986-1999 Applied Microcomputer Systems
Page 31
17 Jul 01
SUBCATCIlMENT 5
Pond P-5
PEAK~ 91.31 CFS @ 12.01 HRS, VOLUME~
5,53 AF
ACRES CN
31.36 89
SCS TR-20 METHOD
TYPE II 24-HOUR
RAlNFALL~ 3.50 IN
SPAN~ 10-20 HRS, dt~,l HRS
Method
DIRECT ENTRY
Comment
Segment ID:
Tc (min)
15,0
SUBCATCHMENT 5 RUNOFF
Pond P-5
98
85
88
75
78
65
. 68
4- 55
u 58
~ 45
3 4.
o 35
...J 38
"- 25
28
15
18
5
".'i
AREA:::: 31.36 AC
Tc= 15 HIN
eN:;:; 89
SCS TR-20 METHOD
TYPE II 24-HDUR
RAINFALL= 3.50 IN
PEAK= 91 .3! CFS
e 12.81 HRS
VOLUME: 5. 53 AF
:;
~
::
~
:"
'::
"!
'"
'"
N
TIME (hour:.)
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
..
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
.
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
Data for Arden Hills
TYPE II 24-HOUR RAINFALL= 3.50 IN
Prepared by Short Elliott Hendrickson Inc,
HvdroCAD 5.11 001264 (c) 1986-1999 Applied Microcomputer Systems
Page 32
17 Jul 01
SUBCATCIlMENT 6
Pond P-6
PEAK= 52,97 CFS @ 12,03 HRS, VOLUME= 3,27 AF
ACRES CN
30,10 77
SCS TR-20 METHOD
TYPE II 24-HOUR
RAINFALL= 3,50 IN
SPAN= 10-20 HRS, dt=.l HRS
Method
DIRECT ENTRY
Comment
Segment ID:
Ie (min)
15.0
SUBCATCHMENT 6 RUNOFF
Pond P-6
5.
45
4.
~ 35
"
"- 3.
u
~ 25
3 28
0
...J
"- 15
,.
5
'\,';
AREA= 30. I AC
Tc;:= 15 MIN
eN= 77
SCS TR-20 METHOD
TYPE: II 24-HDUR
RAINFALL= 3.50 IN
PEAK= 52.97 CFS
e 12.133 HRS
UOlUt-'E= 3.27 AF
~ ~ :: ~ ~ I'"-
~
'"
'"
N
TINE (hDur~)
Data for Arden Hills
TYPE II 24-HOUR RAINFALL= 3.50 IN
Prepared by Short Elliott Hendrickson Inc.
HvdroCAD 5,11 001264 (c) 1986-1999 Applied Microcomputer Systems
Page 33
17 Jul 01
SUB CATCHMENT 7
Pond P-7
PEAK= 83,54 CFS @ 12.27 HaS, VOLUME =
8,37 AF
ACRES CN
77,77 77
SCS TR-20 METHOD
TYPE II 24 -HOUR
RAINFALL= 3,50 IN
SPAN= 10-20 HaS, dt=.1 HRS
Method
DIRECT ENTRY
Comment
Segment ID.
Tc (minl
35.0
5UBCATCHMENT 7 RUNOFF
Pond P-7
88
75
70
65
68
o 55
4- 56
u '5
'8
:3 ]5
o 38
~ 25
28
15
'8
5
6",
AREA= 77. 77 AC
Te:; 35 HrN
eN= 77
scs TR-Z8 METHOD
TYPE II 24-HOUR
RAINFALL= 3.50 IN
PEAK= 83.54 CFS
e 12.27 HRS
UOLUME::: 8. 37 ~F
~
M
::':
~
:"
'::
!"
m
'"
N
TIME (hour5)
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
..
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
It
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
Data for Arden Hills
TYPE II 24-HOUR RAINFALL= 3,50 IN
Prepared by Short Elliott Hendrickson Inc.
HydroCAD 5.11 001264 ec) 1986-1999 Applied Microcomputer Systems
Page 34
17 Jul 01
SUBCATCHMENT 8
Pond P-8
PEAK= 53,39 CFS @ 12,02 ERS, VOLUME= 3,26 AF
ACRES CN
24,0082
SCS TR-20 METHOD
TYPE II 24-HOUR
RAINFALL= 3,50 IN
SPAN= 10-20 ERS, dt=.l HRS
Method
DIRECT ENTRY
Comment
Segment ID:
Tc (min)
15.0
SU8CATCHMENT 8 RUNOFF
Pond P-8
58
45
40
~ 35
"
<0- 38
u
~ 25
3 28
0
-'
"- 15
18
5
".'i
AREA= 24 AC
Te= 15 MIN
eN= 82
SCS TR-28 METHOD
TYPE I I 24-HOUR
RAINFALL= 3.58 IN
PEAK= 53.39 CFS
e 12.02 HRS
VOLUME= 3.26 AF
~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~
~
N
TIME (hour~)
Data for Arden Hills
TYPE II 24-HOUR RAINFALL~ 3,50 IN
Prepared by Short Elliott Hendrickson Inc.
HydroCAD 5,11 001264 (c) 1986-1999 Applied Microcomputer Systems
Page 35
17 Jul 01
SUBCATCHMENT 9
Pond P-9
PEAK; 58,17 CFS @ 12.22 HRS, VOLUME~
5.41 AF
ACRES CN
64.87 72
SCS TR-20 METHOD
TYPE II 24-HOUR
RAINFALL~ 3,50 IN
SPAN; 10-20 HRS, dt~.l HRS
Method
DIRECT ENTRY
Comment
Segment ID:
Tc (min)
30,0
SU8CATCHMENT 9 RUNOFF
Pond P-9
55
58
45
~ 48
" 35
<,.
u 30
~
" 25
0 20
..J
u.. 15
18
5
8~
AREA= 6"1.87 AC
Te;= 38 NIN
eN= 72
SCS TR-20 METHOD
TYPE Il 24-HQUR
RAINFALL= 3.50 IN
PEAK= 58. 17 CFS
e 12,22 HRS
VOLUME= -5,41 AF
~ ~ ! ~ ~
~
~
~
m
N
TIME (hour~)
I
I
I
I
~
I
I
II
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
t
I
It
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
Data for Arden Hills
TYPE II 24-HOUR RAINFALL~ 3,50 IN
Prepared by Short Elliott Hendrickson Inc.
HydroCAD 5.11 001264 (c) 1986-1999 Applied Microcomputer Systems
Page 36
17 Jul 01
SUBCATClIMENT 10
Pond P-10
PEAK~ 41,89 CFS @ 12.03 HRS, VOLUME~ 2.61 AF
ACRES CN
27,96 74
SCS TR-20 METHOD
TYPE II 24-HOUR
RAINFALL~ 3,50 IN
SPAN~ 10-20 HRS, dt~.l HRS
Method
DIRECT ENTRY
Te (min)
15.0
Comment
Segment ID:
SUBCATCHMENT 10 RUNOFF
Pond P-10
40
35
3B
~
" 25
4-
u
~ 2B
:3
0 15
-'
"- 10
5
El.';
AREA= 27.95 AC
Te= 15 HIN
eN= 74
scs TR-28 METHOD
TYPE II 24-HOUR
RAINFAlL= 3.58 IN
PEAK= 41 .89 CFS
e 12.83 HRS
VOLUME= 2,51 AF
~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~
~
'"
N
TIME (hour~)
Data for Arden Hills
TYPE II 24 -HOUR RAINFALL; 3,50 IN
Prepared by Short Elliott Hendrickson Inc.
HvdroCAD 5,11 001264 ic) 1986-1999 Applied Microcomputer Systems
SUB CATCHMENT 11
Pond P-11
PEAK; 40.87 CFS @ 12.09 HRS, VOLUME;
2.91 AF
ACRES CN
28.19 76
Page 37
17 Jul 01
SCS TR-20 METHOD
TYPE II 24-HOUR
RAINFALL; 3.50 IN
SPAN; 10-20 HRS, dt;.l HRS
Method
DIRECT ENTRY
Comment
Segment ID:
SUBCATCHMENT 11 RUNOFF
Pond P-11
48
35
3"
~
" 25
4-
u
~ 20
:3
0 15
..J
"- '0
5
0",
MEA= 28.19 AC
Tc:= 213 MIN
eN= 75
SC5 TR-2B METHOD
TYPE II 24-HOUR
RAINFALL= 3.50 IN
PEAK= 413.87 CfS
e 12.89 HR5
VOLUME= 2.91 AF
~ ~ :'!: ~ 'E :::
~
m
'"
N
TIME (hours)
Tc (min)
20.0
I
I
I
I
1
I
I
..
I
I
I
I
I
I
M
I
~
I
I
I
I
I
I
It
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
Data for Arden Hills
TYPE II 24-HOUR RAINFALL= 3.50 IN
Prepared by Short Elliott Hendrickson Inc.
HydroCAD 5,11 001264 (c) 1986-1999 Applied Microcomputer Systems
Page 38
17 Jul 01
SUBCATCHMENT 12
Pond P-12
PEAK= 80,67 CFS @ 12,09 ERS, VOLUME= 5,67 AF
ACRES eN
43.65 81
SCS TR-20 METHOD
TYPE II 24-HOUR
RAINFALL= 3.50 IN
SPAN= 10-20 HRS, dt=.l ERS
Method
DIRECT ENTRY
Tc (min)
20,0
Comment
Segment ID:
SUBCATCHMENT 12 RUNOFF
Pond P-12
'8
75
78
65
68
~ 55
" 58
i:J 45
v 48
'" 35
o 38
-' 25
"- 28
15
18
5
8"
AREA= 43.65 AC
Te:::: 28 HIN
eN= 81
5CS TR-28 METHOD
TYf[ II 24-HOUR
RAINFALL= 3.58 IN
PEAK= sa. 67 CFS
e 12.89 HRS
VOLUME= 5. 67 AF
~ :: ~ ~
~ ~ ~
"
N
<:::
TIME (hour5)
Data for Arden Hills
TYPE II 24-HOUR RAINFALL= 3,50 IN
Prepared by Short Elliott Hendrickson Inc,
HydroCAD 5.11 001264 (c) 1986-1999 Applied Microcomputer Systems
Page 39
17 Jul 01
POND 1 Pond 1
Qin 90.74 CFS @ 12.09 HRS, VOLUME= 6,38 AF
Qout= 9.84 CFS @ 12,99 HRS, VOLUME= 4.37 AF, ATTEN= 89%, LAG= 54,0 MIN
ELEVATION AREA INC,STOR CUM.STOR STOR-IND METHOD
(FT) (AC) (AP) (AF) PEAK STORAGE = 15,30 AF
897,2 1.69 0,00 0.00 PEAK ELEVATION= 904.6 FT
902,2 2,10 9.48 9.48 FLOOD ELEVATION= 907,2 FT
903.2 2,40 2.25 11.73 START ELEVATION= 903.2 FT
905,2 2,58 4.98 16,71 SPAN= 10-20 HRS, dt=.l HRS
907,2 2.78 5,36 22,07
# ROUTE
1 P
INVERT
903.2'
OUTLET DEVICES
24" CULVERT
n=.012 L=100' S=.Ol'/'
CC=,9
Cd=,6
Ke=,5
POND 1 INFLOW & OUTFLOW
Pond 1
98
85
88
75
7.
65
~ 6.
~ 55
u 58
~ 45
:3 48
o 35
...J 38
U. 25
28
15
18
5
a",
STOR-IND METHOD
PEAK STOR= 15.38 AF
PEAK ELEU= 984.6 FT
Qln= 90.74 CFS
Qout= 9.84 CFS
L~G= 54 HIN
;,- ------------
N ~ :: ~ ~
- -- ------
!::: ~ ~
'"
N
TIME (hour~)
I
~
I
I
I
I
I
I
tI
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
~
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
It
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
Data for Arden Hills
TYPE II 24-HOUR RAINFALL~ 3.50 IN
Prepared by Short Elliott Hendrickson Inc,
HydroCAD 5.11 001264 (cl 1986-1999 Applied Microcomputer Systems
Page 40
17 Jul 01
POND 2 Pond 2
Qin 92.45 CFS @ 12,09 HRS, VOLUME~ 6,54 AF
Qout~ 10.41 CFS @ 13.00 HRS, VOLUME~ 4,58 AF, ATTEN~ 89%, LAG~ 54.7 MIN
ELEVATION AREA INC,STOR CUM.STOR STOR-IND METHOD
(FT) (AC) (AF) (AF) PEAK STORAGE ~ 14.64 AF
890.0 1.59 0,00 0.00 PEAK ELEVATION~ 897.5 FT
895,0 2.00 8,98 8,98 FLOOD ELEVATION~ 900.0 FT
896,0 2.28 2.14 11,12 START ELEVATION~ 896,0 FT
898.0 2.46 4,74 15.86 SPAN~ 10-20 HRS, dt~,l HRS
900,0 2.62 5.08 20.94
# ROUTE
1 P
INVERT
896 ,0'
OUTLET DEVICES
24" CULVERT
n~.012 L~100' s~.ol'I' Ke~,5
Cc~.9
Cd~.6
PO NO 2 INFLOW & OUTFLOW
Pond 2
9.
B5
8"
75
78
~ 55
" 68
4- 55
u 58
~ 45
:3 48
o 35
-' '8
"- 25
28
15
'8
5
800
STOR-WD METHOD
PEAK STOR= 14,64 AF
PEAK ELEU= 897.5 FT
Qln= 92.45 CF5
Qout.= 10.41 CFS
LAG= 54. 7 HIN
-- -----
/ -----
I
{\J ~ :: ~ ~
!;:
'"
~
"
N
TIME (hour~)
Data for Arden Hills
TYPE II 24-HOUR RAINFALL~ 3,50 IN
Prepared by Short Elliott Hendrickson Inc,
HydroCAD 5,11 001264 (c) 1986-1999 Applied Microcomputer Systems
Page 41
17 Jul 01
POND 3 Pond 3
Qin 71.23 CFS @ 12,09 HRS, VOLUME~ 5,05 AF
Qout~ 5,28 CFS @ 13,74 HRS, VOLUME~ 2.83 AF, ATTEN~ 93%, LAG~ 98.6 MIN
ELEVATION AREA INC.STOR CUM. STOR STOR-IND METHOD
(FT) (AC) (AF) (AF) PEAK STORAGE ~ 17.51 AF
873.2 2.13 0.00 0,00 PEAK ELEVATION~ 880.2 FT
878.2 2,58 11. 78 11.78 FLOOD ELEVATION~ 883.2 FT
879.2 2,91 2.75 14.52 START ELEVATION~ 879.2 FT
881. 2 3.11 6.02 20.54 SPAN~ 10-20 HRS, dt~.l HRS
883,2 3,32 6.43 26,97
# ROUTE
1 P
INVERT
879.2'
OUTLET DEVICES
24" CULVERT
n;.012 L=100' S;,OI'/'
Cc=.9
Cd=,6
Ke=,5
POND 3 INFLOW & OUTFLOW
Pond J
76
65
6a
55
~ 5a
o 4S
't 40
~ 35
:3 3.
:: 2S
'" 2.
15
la
S
ao>
STOR-IND METHOD
PEAK STOR~ 17.51 AF
PEAK ELEU= 880.2 FT
aln::: 71.23 CFS
Qout~ 5.2B eFS
LAG:::: 98.5 MIN
...----
/
N ~ :::
~
'E ~ ~ ~
'"
N
TIME (hours)
I
~
I
I
I
I
I
I
II
I
I
I
I
I
I
a
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
It
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
Data for Arden Hills
TYFE II 24-HOUR RAINFALL~ 3.50 IN
Prepared by Short Elliott Hendrickson Inc.
HydroCAD 5.11 001264 (c) 1986-1999 Applied Microcomputer Systems
Page 42
17 Jul 01
POND 4 Pond 4
Qin ~ 86,02 CFS @ 12,14 HRS, VOLUME~ 6.89 AF
Qout~ 8.62 CFS @ 13 ,41 HRS, VOLUME~ 4.26 AF, ATTEN~ 90%, LAG~ 76.2 MIN
ELEVATION AREA INC,STOR CUM,STOR STOR-IND METHOD
(FT) (AC) (AF) (AF) PEAK STORAGE ~ 18.50 AF
873,6 2.13 0,00 0.00 PEAK ELEVATION~ 880,9 FT
878.6 2.58 11.78 11.78 FLOOD ELEVATION~ 883.6 FT
879.6 2.91 2,75 14,52 START ELEVATION~ 879.6 FT
881. 6 3,11 6,02 20.54 SPAN~ 10-20 HRS, dt~,l HRS
883,6 3.32 6.43 26,97
# ROUTE
1 P
INVERT
879.6'
OUTLET DEVICES
24" CULVERT
n~,012 L~100' S~,Ol'/' Ke~,5 Cc~,9
Cd~,6
POND 4 INFLOW & OUTFLOW
Pond 4
65
88
75
70
65
~ 68
" 55
<,. 58
~ <15
48
:0 35
~ 30
"- 25
28
15
18
5
"ri;
ST~-IND METHOD
PEAK STaR; 18.50 AF
PEAK ELEU= 880.9 FT
Qln= 86.62 CF5
Qout; 8.62 CFS
LAG= 76.2 HIN
/,,--
/
N ':'
-- -------
:':
!'
~ ~ ~
'"
'"
N
TIME (hour~)
Data for Arden Hills
TYPE II 24-HOUR RAINFALL= 3.50 IN
Prepared by Short Elliott Hendrickson Inc.
HvdroCAD 5.11 001264 (c) 1986-1999 Applied Microcomputer Systems
Page 43
17 Jul 01
POND 5 Pond 5
Qin = n.31 CFS @ 12,01 HRS, VOLUME = 5.53 AF
Qout= 11. 3 2 CFS @ 12,59 HRS, VOLUME = 4.15 AF, ATTEN= 88%, LAG= 34.6 MIN
ELEVATION AREA INC,STOR CUM.STOR STOR-IND METHOD
(FT) (AC) (AF) (AF) PEAK STORAGE = 13 ,29 AF
918.0 1.44 0.00 0,00 PEAK ELEVATION= 925.4 FT
923.0 1.83 8.18 8.18 FLOOD ELEVATION= 928.0 FT
924.0 2.10 1. 97 10,14 START ELEVATION= 924,0 FT
926.0 2,28 4.38 14,52 SPAN= 10-20 HRS, dt=.l HRS
928,0 2,46 4.74 19.26
# ROUTE
1 P
INVERT OUTLET DEVICES
924,0' 24" CULVERT
n=,012 L=100' S=.Ol'/' Ke=,05
Cc=.9 Cd=,86
POND 5 INFLOW & OUTFLOW
Pond 5
90
85
80
75
7B
65
~ 68
<!! 55
u 50
~ <5
:3 40
o ]5
-' ]8
u.. 25
20
15
18
5
i3cii
STDR-IND METHOD
PEAK STaR~ 13.29 AF
PEAK ELEU= 925.4 FT
Gln= 91.31 CFS
Qou"t= 1 t .32 CFS
LAG: 34.6 MIN
-....-----
-- -----
:: ~ ~ ~ ~
~
'"
N
TIME (hQur~)
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
tI
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
~
I
I
I
I
I
I
II
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
Data for Arden Hills
TYPE II 24-HOUR RAINFALL= 3.50 IN
Prepared by Short Elliott Hendrickson Inc.
HydroCAD 5,11 001264 (c) 1986-1999 Applied Microcomputer Systems
Page 44
17 Jul 01
POND 6 Pond 6
Qin = 52,97 CFS @ 12,03 HRS, VOLUME= 3.27 AF
Qout= 5.20 CFS @ 12,92 HRS, VOLUME= 2,27 AF, ATTEN= 90%, LAG= 53.5 MIN
ELEVATION AREA INC.STOR CUM, STOR STOR-IND METHOD
(FT) (AC) (AF) (AF) PEAK STORAGE = 9.71 AF
880,3 1.11 0.00 0,00 PEAK ELEVATION= 887.3 FT
885.3 1.45 6.40 6.40 FLOOD ELEVATION= 890.3 FT
886,3 1.69 1.57 7.97 START ELEVATION= 886.3 FT
888,3 1. 85 3,54 11. 51 SPAN= 10-20 HRS, dt=.l HRS
890.3 2,02 3.87 15.38
# ROUTE
1 P
INVERT
886,3'
OUTLET DEVICES
24" CULVERT
n=,012 L=100' S=.OI'/'
CC=.9
Cd=,6
Ke=.5
POND 6 INFLOW & OUTFLOW
Pond 6
5.
45
40
" 35
<0- 3.
u
25
:3 20
0
-'
"- t5
t.
5
0.';
STOR-IND METHOD
PEAK STDR= 9.71 AF
PEAK ELEV= 887.3 FT
Qln= 52.97 CFS
Oout:= 5.28 CFS
LAG= 53.5 HIN
,...- -------~---
~ ~ :: ~ ~
C:
~ ~
"'
N
TIME Chour-&)
Data for Arden Hills
TYPE II 24-HOUR RAINFALL= 3.50 IN
Prepared by Short Elliott Hendrickson Inc.
HvdroCAD 5,11 001264 (c) 1986-1999 Applied Microcomputer Systems
Page 45
17 Jul 01
POND 7 Pond 7
Qin = 83.54 CFS @ 12,27 HRS, VOLUME= 8.37 AF
Qout= 11.13 CFS @ 13 .61 HRS, VOLUME= 5.37 AF, ATTEN= 87%, LAG= 80,2 MIN
ELEVATION AREA INC,STOR CUM,STOR STOR-IND METHOD
(FT) lAC) (AF) (AF) PEAK STORAGE = 19.20 AF
865,2 2.13 0.00 0.00 PEAK ELEVATION= 872.8 FT
870.2 2.58 11.78 11. 78 FLOOD ELEVATION= 875,2 FT
871. 2 2,91 2.75 14,52 START ELEVATION= 871.2 FT
873,2 3.11 6,02 20.54 SPAN= 10-20 HRS, dt=.l HRS
875,2 3,32 6.43 26.97
# ROUTE
1 P
INVERT
871. 2 '
OUTLET DEVICES
24" CULVERT
n=,012 L=100' S=.Ol'/'
Cc=.9
Cd=.6
Ke=,5
PO NO 7 INFLOW & OUTFLOW
Pond 7
Ba
75
7"
65
50
" 55
4- sa
u 45
~ 4a
:3 35
o 3a
~ 25
2a
15
18
5
8",
STOR-IND METHOD
PEAK STOR= 19.28 AF
PEAK ELEU~ 872.8 FT
QJn= 83.54 CFS
Qout= 11. J 3 CFS
LAG= 88.2 MIN
~...--
/
N ~
----------
-----
~ ~ ::! ~ ~ ~
'"
N
TIME (hour~)
I
~
I
I
I
I
I
I
II
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
~
I
I
I
I
I
I
II
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
Data for Arden Hills
TYPE II 24-HOUR RAINFALL~ 3,50 IN
Prepared by Short Elliott Hendrickson Inc,
HvdroCAD 5,11 001264 (c) 1986-1999 Applied Microcomputer Systems
Page .46
17 Jul 01
POND 8 Pond 8
Qin 53.39 CFS @ 12.02 HRS, VOLUME; 3,26 AF
Qout~ 7.48 CFS @ 12,58 HRS, VOLUME; 2,53 AF, ATTEN~ 86%, LAG~ 33,4 MIN
ELEVATION AREA INC,STOR CUM,STOR STOR-IND METHOD
(FT) (AC) (AF) (AP) PEAK STORAGE ~ 6.76 AF
873.1 ,81 0.00 0.00 PEAK ELEVATION~ 879.3 FT
877.1 1.11 3,84 3,84 FLOOD ELEVATION~ 882.1 FT
878 ,1 1.33 1.22 5,06 START ELEVATION; 878,1 FT
880.1 1.47 2,80 7.86 SPAN; 10-20 HRS, dt;.l HRS
882,1 1.62 3.09 10.95
# ROUTE
1 P
INVERT
878.1'
OUTLET DEVICES
24 h CULVERT
n;.012 L;100' s;.ol'I'
Ke;.5
CC;,9
Cd;.6
PO NO 8 INFLOW & OUTFLOW
Pond 8
50
45
40
~ 35
.
"- 38
u
25
::; 20
0
-'
w.. 15
10
5
0~
STOR-INO METHOD
PEAK STOR= 6.76 AF
PEAK ELEU= 879.3 FT
Qln= 53.39 CF5
Qout= 7.48 eFS
LAG::: 33.4 HIN
I --- ----
I ----- -------
/
~ ~ :: ~ ~ C: !" !" '"
N
TIME Chour5)
Data for Arden Hills
TYPE II 24-HOUR RAINFALL= 3.50 IN
Prepared by Short Elliott Hendrickson Inc.
HydroCAD 5,11 001264 (c) 1986-1999 Applied Microcomputer Systems
Page 47
17 Ju1 01
POND 9 Pond 9
Qin 58,17 CFS @ 12.22 HRS, VOLUME = 5,41 AF
Qout= 6,52 CFS @ 13 .81 HRS, VOLUME = 3.31 AF, ATTEN= 89%, LAG= 95,2 MIN
ELEVATION AREA INC,STOR CUM.STOR STOR-IND METHOD
(FT) (AC) (AF) (AF) PEAK STORAGE = 15,56 AF
901. 2 1.83 0,00 0,00 PEAK ELEVATION= 908,3 FT
906,2 2,25 10.20 10,20 FLOOD ELEVATION= 911.2 FT
907.2 2,55 2,40 12.60 START ELEVATION= 907.2 FT
909,2 2.74 5,29 17.89 SPAN= 10-20 HRS, dt=.l HRS
911.2 2,94 5.68 23,57
# ROUTE
1 P
INVERT
907,2'
OUTLET DEVICES
24 n CULVERT
n=.012 L=lOO' S=.Ol'/'
Cc=.9
Cd=,6
Ke=.5
POND 9 INFLOW & OUTFLOW
Pond 9
55
58
45
~ 40
-!!. 35
~ 30
:3 25
:3 20
LL '5
'0
5
B",
STOR-IND METHOD
PEAK STOR= 15.56 AF
PEAK ELEU= 908.3 FT
Qln= 58.17 CFS
Qout.= 6.52 CFS
LAG= 95.2 MIN
---------
----------
,
,
~ ~
~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~
'"
N
TIME (hour-e.)
I
~
I
I
I
I
I
I
II
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
~
I
I
I
I
I
I
II
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
Data for Arden Hills
TYPE II 24 -HOUR RAINFALL= 3, 50 IN
Prepared by Short Elliott Hendrickson Inc.
HydroCAD 5,11 001264 Ie) 1986-1999 Applied Microcomputer Systems
Page 48
17 Jul 01
POND 10 Pond 10
Qin 41. 89 CFS @ 12,03 HRS, VOLUME= 2.61 AF
Qout= 4.70 CFS @ 12.82 HRS, VOLUME = 1.91 AF, ATTEN= 89%, LAG= 47.5 MIN
ELEVATION AREA INC. STOR CUM,STOR STOR-IND METHOD
(FT) (AC) (AF) (AF) PEAK STORAGE = 7.32 AF
873,8 .81 0.00 0.00 PEAK ELEVATION= 880.7 FT
878.8 1.11 4,80 4,80 FLOOD ELEVATION= 883,8 FT
879.8 1. 33 1.22 6,02 START ELEVATION= 879,8 FT
881,8 1.47 2,80 8,82 SPAN= 10-20 HRS, dt=.l HRS
883,8 1. 62 3.09 11. 91
# ROUTE
1 P
INVERT
879.8'
OUTLET DEVICES
24" CULVERT
n=,012 L=100' S=,Ol'/'
Ke=,5
Cc=.9
Cd=.6
POND 10 INFLOW & OUTFLOW
Pond 10
46
35
3.
~
. 25
..
u
~ 2.
:a
0 15
..J
"- 16
5
l\\
STQR-INO METHOD
FEAK STOR= 7.32 AF
PEAK ELEU= 88B.7 F1
Qln= 41.89 CFS
Qaut= 4.79 ITS
LAG= 47.5 HIN
,E- ------_________
N ~ :!: ~ ~ ~
~ ~
'"
N
TIME (hDur~)
Data for Arden Hills
TYPE II 24-HOUR RAINFALL= 3.50 IN
Prepared by Short Elliott Hendrickson Inc,
HvdroCAD 5,11 001264 (cl 1986-1999 Applied Microcomputer Systems
Page 49
17 Jul 01
POND 11 Pond 11
Qin = 40.87 CFS @ 12,09 HRS, VOLUME = 2.91 AF
Qout= 5,65 CFS @ 12.84 HRS, VOLUME = 2,17 AF, ATTEN= 86%', LAG= 44,9 MIN
ELEVATION AREA INC.STOR CUM,STOR STOR-IOO METHOD
(FT) (AC) (AF) (AF) PEAK STORAGE = 7,60 AF
871.3 ,83 0.00 0.00 PEAK ELEVATION= 878,3 FT
876.3 1.13 4,90 4.90 FLOOD ELEVATION~ 880.3 FT
877.3 1.35 1.24 6,14 START ELEVATION= 877,3 FT
879,3 1.49 2,84 8,98 SPAN= 10-20 HRS, dt=,l HRS
880,3 1.64 1.57 10.55
# ROUTE
1 P
INVERT
877.3'
OUTLET DEVICES
24. CULVERT
n=,012 L=100' S=,Ol'/'
Cc=,9
Cd=,6
Ke=.5
POND I 1 INFLOW & OUTFLOW
Pond 11
4.
35
J8
~
. 25
4-
U
~ 20
:3
0 15
..J
LL 18
5
13.\
STDR-IND METHOD
PEAK STDR= 7.60 AF
PEAK ElEU= 878.3 FT
Gin= 48,87 CFS
Oout= 5.65 CfS
LAG= 44.9 MIN
, --- ---
I ------ --- --
I --------
~ ':' :: ~ ~ c: ~ ~ '"
N
TIME (hQur~)
I
~
I
I
I
I
I
I
II
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
~
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
II
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
Data for Arden Hills
TYPE II 24-HOUR RAINFALL~ 3.50 IN
Prepared by Short Elliott Hendrickson Inc,
HvdroCAD 5.11 001264 (c) 1986-1999 Applied Microcomputer Systems
Page 50
17 Jul 01
POND 12 Pond 12
Qin 80.67 CFS @ 12.09 HRS, VOLUME~ 5.67 AF
Qout~ 9.68 CFS @ 12.89 HRS1 VOLUME~ 4,04 AF, ATTEN~ 88%, LAG~ 48,2 MIN
ELEVATION AREA INC,STOR CUM,STOR STOR-IND METHOD
(FT) (AC) (AF) (AF) PEAK STORAGE = 13 .25 AF
878.7 1.44 0,00 0,00 PEAK ELEVATION= 886,1 FT
883,7 1.83 8.18 8.18 FLOOD ELEVATION~ 888.7 FT
884.7 2.10 1. 97 10,14 START ELEVATION~ 884.7 FT
886.7 2,28 4.38 14 .52 SPAN~ 10-20 HRS, dt=,l HRS
888.7 2,46 4,74 19,26
# ROUTE
1 P
INVERT
884.7'
OUTLET DEVICES
24. CULVERT
n~.012 L~100' S~,Ol'/'
Cd~.6
Ke=.5
Cc=.9
POND 12 INFLOW & OUTFLOW
Pond 12
80
75
70
65
60
~ 55
. 50
~ 45
~ 4"
:3 35
o 38
...J 25
u. 20
15
18
5
".5
STQR- I NO METHOD
PE~ STOR= I 3. 25 AF
PE~ ELEU= 886. I FT
Gln= 8EL67 CFS
Gout.= 9.68 CFS
LAG= 48.2 MIN
f'- -------------~-------
~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~
'"
N
TIME Chour5)
I
~
I
I
I
I
I
I
.
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
Data for Arden Hills
TYPE .11 24-HOOR RAINFALL= 4.15 IN
Prepared by Short Elliott Hendrickson Inc,
HydroCAD 5,11 001264 (c) 1986-1999 Applied Microcomputer Systems
WATERSHED ROUTING
Page 51
17 Jul 01
-------------------------------------------------------------
-------------------------------------------------------------
0) CD 000 (0
j ): jtiJi II,
& L?.:, &
00 0 ~~ ~
Ifh\& ALi1~
OSUBCATCH~ENi 0 REACH
6PctlD
[JUNK
Data for Arden Hills
TYPE II 24-HOUR RAINFALL= 4.15 IN
Prepared by Short Elliott Hendrickson Inc,
HvdroCAD 5.11 001264 (c) 1986-1999 Applied Microcomputer Systems
Page 52
17 Jul 01
SUBCATClIMENT 1
Pond P-1
PEAK= 119,7 CFS @ 12.08 HRS, VOLUME=
8,38 AF
ACRES
49,10
CN
81
Arden Hills LWMP
SCS TR-20 METHOD
TYPE II 24-HOUR
RAINFALL= 4,15 IN
SPAN= 10-20 HRS, dt=,l HRS
Method
DIRECT ENTRY
Comment
Segment ID:
Tc (minl
20.0
SU8CATCHMENT 1 RUNOFF
Pond P-I
12a
lla
laa
9a
~ Be
"- 7a
u
v 58
:3 5.
:3 4B
"- 3a
2a
la
a",
AREA= 49. 1 AC
Te:;::; 20 MIN
eN.: 81
SCS TR-28 METHOD
TYPE I I 24-HOUR
RAINFALL= 4.15 IN
PEAK= 119,7 CFS
e 12.88 HR5
IJOLUME;: 8,38 AF
'"
~
:':
~
~
~
~
c:
'"
N
TIME (hour-~)
I
J
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
II
'.
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
~
I
I
I
I
I
I
.
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
Data for Arden Hills
TYPE II 24-HOUR RAINFALL~ 4,15 IN
Prepared by Short Elliott Hendrickson Inc,
HydroCAD 5.11 001264 (c) 1986-1999 Applied Microcomputer Systems
Page 53
17 Jul 01
SUB CATCHMENT 2
Pond P-2
PEAK~ 125.0 CFS @ 12,09 HRS, VOLUME~ 8.79 AF
ACRES CN
57.59 78
SCS TR-20 METHOD
TYPE II 24 - HOUR
RAINFALL~ 4,15 IN
SPAN~ 10-20 HRS, dt~.1 HRS
Method
DIRECT ENTRY
Tc (min)
20.0
Comment
Segment ID:
SUBCATCHMENT 2 RUNOFF
Pond P-2
128
liB
'a8
g.
" aa
1i 78
6a
is sa
-' 4a
u. 3a
28
1B
8m
AREA= 57.59 AC
Tc:; 20 MIN
eN::: 78
SCS TR-28 METHOD
TYPE I I 24-HOUR
RAINFAlL= 4.15 IN
PEAK=: 125.0 CFS
e 12.89 HRS
VOLUME= 8.79 AF
~ :: ~ ~
C:
'"
:"
m
N
~
TIME (hour~)
Data for Arden Hills
TYPE II 24-HOUR RAINFALL~ 4.~5 IN
Prepared by Short Elliott Hendrickson Inc,
HydroCAD 5.1~ 00~264 tcl ~986-1999 Applied Microcomputer Systems
Page 54
~7 Jul 01
SUBCATCIIMENT 3
Pond P-3
PEAK~ 97,13 CFS @ ~2,09 HRS, VOLUME~
6.84 AF
ACRES CN
46,65 77
SCS TR-20 METHOD
TYPE II 24-HOUR
RAINFALL~ 4,15 IN
SPAN~ 10-20 HRS, dt~.~ HRS
Method
DIRECT ENTRY
Comment
Segment ID:
Tc (mini
20.0
SUBCATCHMENT 3 RUNOFF
Pond P-3
95
98
85
B.
75
7a
~ 65
" 6a
4- 55
u 5a
45
:3 48
o 35
...J 3.
LL 25
2a
15
Ie
5
8",
AREA: 46.65 AC
Tc= 213 MIN
eN= 77
scs TR-28 METHOD
TYPE I I 24-HQUR
RAINFALL= 4.15 IN
PEAK= 97. I 3 CFS
e 12.89 HRS
IJOLUME= 6.84 AF
'"
C!
~
:c
~
!::
'"
'"
'"
N
TIME (hour;:.)
I
J
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
II
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
\.
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
II
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
Data for Arden Hills
TYPE II 24-HOUR RAINFALL= 4.15 IN
Prepared by Short Elliott Hendrickson Inc.
HydroCAD 5.11 001264 (c) 1986-1999 Applied Microcomputer Systems
Page 55
17 Jul 01
SUBCATCHMENT 4
Pond P-4
PEAK= 115,7 CFS @ 12.14 HRS, VOLUME= 9,19 AF
ACRES CN
57,99 79
SCS TR-20 METHOD
TYPE II 24-HOUR
RAINFALL= 4,15 IN
SPAN= 10-20 HRS, dt=,l HRS
Method
DIRECT ENTRY
Comment
Segment ID:
Tc {minl
25,0
SUB CATCHMENT 4 RUNOFF
Pond P-4
"0
'08
98
88
. 78
4-
u 68
3 58
0 ..
...J
lL 3.
2.
'0
0",
AREA::: 57,99 At:
Te:= 25 MrN
eN= 79
SCS TR-20 METHOD
TYPE 11 24-HQUR
RAINFALL= 4.15 LN
PEAK= 115.7 CFS
e 12.14 HRS
VOLUME= 9.19 AF
~ ~ ! ~ ~ ~ ~
~
'"
N
TIME (hour-50)
Data for Arden Hills
TYPE II 24-HOUR RAINFALL= 4.15 IN
Prepared by Short Elliott Hendrickson Inc,
HvdroCAD 5,11 001264 (cl 1986-1999 Applied Microcomputer Systems
Page 56
17 Jul 01
SUBCATCllMENT 5
Pond P-5
PEAK= 113,9 CFS @ 12,01 HRS, VOLUME=
6.90 AF
ACRES eN
31.36 89
SCS TR-20 METHOD
TYPE II 24-HOUR
RAINFALL= 4,15 IN
SPAN= 10-20 HRS, dt=,1 HRS
Method
DIRECT ENTRY
Comment
Segment ID:
Tc (min)
15,0
SUBCATCHMENT 5 RUNOFF
Pond P-5
I1B
IBa
9B
~ aa
. 70
4-
u 68
:3 50
0 40
-'
"- 30
20
,.
0",
AREA;: 31.35 Fe
Tc::= 15 MIN
eN= 89
SCS TR-28 METHOD
TYPE I I 24-HDUR
RAINFAlL= 4.15 IN
PEAK= 113.9 CFS
e 12.81 HR5
IJ(JLUHE= 6. 9El AF
~ ~
:: ~ ~
~ ~
'" '"
N
TIME Chour:')
I
~
I
I
I
I
I
I
II
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
\.
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
II
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
Data for Arden Hills
TYPE II 24-HOUR RAINFALL= 4.15 IN
Prepared by Short Elliott Hendrickson Inc.
HydroCAD 5,11 001264 (c) 1986-1999 Applied Microcomputer Systems
Page 57
17 Jul 01
SUE CATCHMENT 6
Pond P-6
PEAK= 72,22 CFS @ 12,02 HRS, VOLUME= 4,42 AF
ACRES
30.10
CN
77
SCS TR-20 METHOD
TYPE II 24 - HOUR
RAINFALL: 4,15 IN
SPAN: 10-20 HRS, dt:,l HRS
Method
DIRECT RNTRY
Conunent
Segment ID:
Tc (mini
15,0
SU8CATCHMENT 6 RUNOFF
Pond P-6
78
65
68
55
~ 58
~ 45
u 48
~ 35
::3 38
3 25
u.. 28
10
'"
5
8",
AREA= 38. 1 AC
Te:: 15 MIN
CNo::: 77
SCS TR-20 METHOD
TYPE II 24-HOUR
RAINFALL= 4.15 IN
PEAK= 72.22 CFS
e 12.82 HRS
UOLUME= 4.42 AF
~
~ :: ~ ~
~ ~ ~
'"
N
TIME (hours,)
Data for Arden Hills
TYPE II 24-HOUR RAINFALL= 4.15 IN
Prepared by Short Elliott Hendrickson Inc.
HvdroCAD 5.11 001264 (c) 1986-1999 Applied Microcomputer Svstems
Page 58
17 Jul 01
SUBCATCHMENT 7
Pond P-7
PEAK= 114,5 CFS @ 12.27 HRS, VOLUME= 11.35 AF
ACRES CN
77,77 77
SCS TR-20 METHOD
TYPE II 24-HOUR
RAINFALL= 4.15 IN
SPAN= 10-20 HRS, dt=,l HRS
Method
DIRECT ENTRY
Comment
Segment ID:
Tc (minl
35,0
SUB CATCHMENT 7 RUNOFF
Pond P-7
lie
lee
ge
~ 8e
~ 78
~ 68
3 5e
~ 48
LL 3e
28
1a
a",
AREA= 77.77 AC
Tc= 35 MIN
eN= 77
SCS TR-28 METHOD
TYPE I I 24-HOUR
RAINFALL= 4.15 IN
PEAK= 114.5 CFS
e 12.27 HRS
UDLUME= 11.35 AF
~
:;
~
~
,.... ~ ~
'"
N
:':
TIME (hov...)
I
J
I
I
I
I
I
1
I
II
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
~
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
.
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
Data for Arden Hills
TYPE II 24-HOOR RAINFALL= 4.15 IN
Prepared by Short Elliott Hendrickson Inc.
HydroCAD 5,11 001264 (c) 1986-1999 Applied Microcomputer Systems
Page 59
17 Jul 01
SUBCATCllMENT S
Pond P-S
PEAK= 69.89 CFS @ 12.02 HRS, VOLUME = 4,25 AF
ACRES CN
24,00 82
SCS TR-20 METHOD
TYPE II 24-HOUR
RAINFALL= 4,15 IN
SPAN= 10-20 HRS, dt=,l HRS
Method
DIRECT ENTRY
Tc (min)
15.0
Comment
Segment ID:
SUBCATCHMENT 8 RUNOFF
Pond P-8
7.
65
68
55
50
" 45
t 40
35
3 3.
o 25
-"
lL 20
15
I.
5
8",
AREA::: -24 AC
Tc= 15 HIN
eN;;; 82
SCS TR-28 METHOD
TYPE 11 24-HOUR
RAINFALL~ 4.15 IN
PEAK= 69,89 CFS
e 12.82 HRS
VOLUME= 4.25 AF
~ ~ ~
'"
N
~
~ ~ ~ ~
TIME (hour=>)
Data for Arden Hills
TYPE II 24-HOUR RAINFALL~ 4,15 IN
Prepared by Short Elliott Hendrickson Inc,
HvdroCAD 5.11 001264 (c) 1986-1999 Applied Microcomputer Systems
Page 60
17 Jul 01
SUBCATCHMENT 9
Pond P-9
PEAK~ 83,99 CFS @ 12.22 HRS, VOLUME=
7,63 AF
ACRES CN
64,87 72
SCS TR-20 METHOD
TYPE II 24-HOUR
RAINFALL= 4.15 IN
SPAN= 10-20 HRS, dt~.l HRS
Method
DIRECT ENTRY
Comment
Segment ID:
Tc (min)
30,0
SUBCATCHMENT 9 RUNOFF
Pond p-g
88
75
78
65
68
~ 55
c!!. 58
u 45
4.
:3 35
o '8
~ 25
2.
15
10
5
8"
AREA= 64. 87 ~C
Tc::= 38 MIN
eN= 72
SCS TR-20 METHOD
TYPE I I 24 -HOUR
RAINFALL= 4.15 IN
PEAK= BJ. gg CFS
e 12.22 HRS
lJOLUME= 7,63 AF
~
C'
~
~
::
:: ~ ~
"
N
TIME (houre.)
I
J
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
II
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
~
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
.
I
I
I
I
I
I
1
Data for Arden Hills
TYPE II 24-HOUR RAINFALL; 4.15 IN
Prepared by Short Elliott Hendrickson Inc:
HvdroCAD 5,11 001264 (c) 1986-1999 Applied Microcomputer Systems
Page 61
17 Ju1 01
SUBCATCllMENT 10
Pond P-10
PEAK= 58,77 CFS @ 12,03 HRS, VOLUME = 3,62 AF
ACRES
27.96
CN
74
SCS TR-20 METHOD
TYPE II 24-HOUR
RAINFALL; 4.15 IN
SPAN= 10-20 HRS, dt=,l HRS
Method
DIRECT ENTRY
Comment
Segment ID:
Tc (min)
15.0
SUBCATCHMENT 10 RUNOFF
Pond P-IB
55
58
45
~ 48
~ 35
~ 38
:3 25
g 28
LL 15
18
5
8",
AREA= 27.96 AC
Tc= 15 HIN
eN::: 74
scs TR-20 METHOD
TYPE I I 24-HQUR
RAINFAlL= 4. 15 IN
PEAK= 58. 77 CFS
e 12.83 HRS
VOLUME::; J. 62 AF
:"
~ :! ~ ~
~ ~ ~
'"
N
TIME (hour:!;)
Data for Arden Hills
TYPE II 24-HOUR RAINFALL= 4,15 IN
Prepared by Short Elliott Hendrickson Inc.
HvdroCAD 5.11 001264 (c) 1986-1999 Applied Microcomputer Systems
Page 62
17 Jul 01
SUBCATCHMENT 11
Pond P-l1
PEAK= 56.24 CFS @ 12,09 HRS, VOLUME=
3,97 AF
ACRES CN
28,19 76
SCS TR-20 METHOD
TYPE II 24-HOUR
RAINFALL= 4.15 IN
SPAN= 10-20 HRS, dt=.l HRS
Method
DIRECT ENTRY
Comment
Segment 10:
Tc (minl
20.0
SUBCATCHMENT 1 I RUNOFF
Pond P-ll
55
5.
45
4.
" 35
c-
u 30
~
:3 25
0 20
-'
LL 15
18
5
8",
AREA= 28.19 AC
Tc= 2121 MIN
eN= 76
SCS TR-28 METHOD
TYPE II 24-HOUR
RAINFALL= 4.15 IN
PEAK= 56.24 CFS
e 12.89 HRS
VOLUME= 3.97 AF
~ ~ ::
~ ~
~ ~
:"
'"
N
TIME Chour5)
I
J
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
.
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
~
I
I
I
I
I
I
It
I
I
I
I
I
I
1
Data for Arden Hills
TYPE II 24-HOUR RAINFALL~ 4.15 IN
Prepared by Short Elliott Hendrickson Inc.
HydroCAD 5,11 001264 (cl 1986-1999 Applied Microcomputer Systems
Page 63
17 Jul 01
SUBCATCHMENT 12
Pond P-12
PEAK~ 106.4 CFS @ 12.08 HRS, VOLUME~ 7,45 AF
ACRES CN
43.65 81
SCS TR-20 METHOD
TYPE II 24-HOUR
RAINFALL~ 4.15 IN
SPAN~ 10-20 HRS, dt=,l HRS
Method
DIRECT ENTRY
Comment
Segment ID:
Tc (min)
20,0
SUBCATCHMENT 12 RUNOFF
Pond P-12
188
98
88
. 7"
<.- 6"
u
~ 58
:3
0 4"
-'
LL '8
28
,.
8"
AREA= 43. 65 ~C
Tc:= 213 MIN
eN:: 81
SCS TR-28 METHOD
TYPE II 24-HDUR
RAINFALL= 4.15 IN
PEAK= 1136,4 CFS
e 12,88 HR5
VOLUME:= 7.45 AF
~
~
"
N
~ ~ ::! ~ ~
~
TIME (hour~)
Data for Arden Hills
TYPE II 24-HOUR RAINFALL= 4,15 IN
Prepared by Short Elliott Hendrickson rnc,
HvdroCAD 5,11 001264 (cl 1986-1999 Applied Microcomputer Systems
Page 64
17 Jul 01
POND 1 Pond 1
Qin = 119.7 CFS @ 12.08 HRS, VOLUME= 8.38 AF
Qout= 14,28 CFS @ 12.86 HRS, VOLUME= 6.10 AF, ATTEN= 88%, LAG= 46,7 MIN
ELEVATION AREA INC.STOR CUM,STOR STOR-IND METHOD
(FT) (AC) (AF) (AF) PEAK STORAGE = 16.40 AF
897.2 1.69 0.00 0.00 PEAK ELEVATION= 905.1 FT
902.2 2,10 9.48 9.48 FLOOD ELEVATION= 907.2 FT
903.2 2.40 2.25 11.73 START ELEVATION= 903,2 FT
905,2 2,58 4,98 16.71 SPAN= 10-20 HRS, dt=.l HR8
907.2 2,78 5.36 22,07
# ROUTE
1 P
INVERT
903.2'
OUTLET DEVICES
24" CULVERT
n=.012 L=100' 8=,01'/' Ke=.5
Cd=.6
CC~.9
POND 1 INFLOW & OUTFLOW
Pond 1
126
I1B
IB8
9B
" BO
4- 78
0
~ 58
:3 58
0 4"
-'
LL 3"
2"
'"
".\
STDR-IND METHOD
PEAK STaR~ 16.40 AF
PEAK ELEU= 905.1 FT
Oln= 119.7 CF5
Oout.::; 14.28 CFS
U=lG= 46.7 MIN
//- ---------------
-- -------
~
~
::
~
~
~
:"
~
'"
N
TIME (hou,....~)
I
J
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
II
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
~
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
.
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
Data for Arden Hills
TYPE II 24-HOUR RAINFALL= 4.15 IN
Prepared by Short Elliott Hendrickson Inc.
HvdroCAD 5.11 001264 tc) 1986-1999 Applied Microcomputer Systems
Page 65
17 Jul 01
POND 2 Pond 2
Qin = 125.0 CFS @ 12,09 HRS, VOLUME = 8.79 AF
Qout= 15.15 CFS @ 12,88 HRS, VOLUME = 6,54 AF, ATTEN= 88%, LAG= 47.8 MIN
ELEVATION AREA INC. STOR CUM.STOR STOR-IOO METHOD
(FT) (AC) (AF) (AF) PEAK STORAGE = 15.87 AF
890.0 1.59 0,00 0,00 PEAK ELEVATION= 898,0 FT
895,0 2.00 8,98 8,98 FLOOD ELEVATION= 900,0 FT
896,0 2.28 2,14 ll,12 START ELEVATION= 896,0 FT
898.0 2,46 4.74 15.86 SPAN= 10-20 HRS, dt=.l HRS
900,0 2.62 5,08 20.94
# ROUTE
1 P
INVERT
896.0'
OUTLET DEVICES
24' CULVERT
n=.012 L=100' S=.01'(' Ke=.5
CC=.9
Cd=,6
POND 2 INFLOW & OUTFLOW
Pond 2
12.
".
lee
98
^
. 88
1i 7B
s.
~ 58
-' ,.
w.. 3e
2e
'8
."
srrn-IND METI-(]D
PEAK STaR= 15.87 AF
PEAK ELEU= 898 Fl
Qln= 125.8 CFS
Qaut= 15.15 CFS
LAG= 47.8 MrN
- -----
/ -----
I ------
~ ~ ::
~
~
~ ~
'"
'"
N
TIME Choure.)
Data for Arden Hills
TYPE II 24-HOUR RAINFALL= 4,15 IN
Prepared by Short Elliott Hendrickson Inc.
HvdroCAD 5,11 001264 (c) 1986-1999 Applied Microcomputer Systems
Page 66
17 Jul 01
POND 3 Pond 3
Qin = 97 .13 CFS @ 12,09 HRS, VOLUME = 6,84 AF
Qout= 8,59 CFS @ 13 ,29 HRS, VOLUME= 4.25 AF, ATTEN= 91%, LAG= 72,0 MIN
ELEVATION AREA INC , STOR CUM,STOR STOR-IND METHOD
(FT) (AC) (AF) (AF) PEAK STORAGE = 18.49 AF
873.2 2,13 0.00 0.00 PEAK ELEVATION= 880,5 FT
878 ,2 2,58 11. 78 11,78 FLOOD ELEVATION= 883.2 FT
879.2 2.91 2.75 14,52 START ELEVATION= 879,2 FT
881. 2 3,11 6.02 20.54 SPAN= 10-20 HRS, dt=.l HRS
883.2 3.32 6,43 26,97
# ROUTE
1 P
INVERT
879,2'
OUTLET DEVICES
24" CULVERT
n=,012 L=100' S=.Ol'/' Ke=,5
Cd=,6
Cc=.9
POND 3 INFLOW & OUTFLOW
POr"ld 3
~~f
85
8a
75
7a
~ 65
. 68
<,. 55
.3 5E:1
45
:a 4a
o '5
-' ,a
LL 25
2a
15
la
5
B".\
STOR-IND METHOD
PEAK STOR= 18.49 AF
FEAK ELEU= 880.5 FT
Qln= 97,13 CFS
Qout.= 8. 59 CF5
LAG::: 72 MIN
,--
/
'" ~
----- -- ~-
:':
~ ~ ~ ~ ~
'"
N
TIME (hour5)
I
J
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
II
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
~
I
I
1
I
I
I
I
II
I
I
I
I
I
I
1
Data for Arden Hills
TYPE II 24-HOUR RAINFALL~ 4,15 IN
Prepared by Short Elliott Hendrickson Inc,
HvdroCAD 5.11 001264 (c) 1986-1999 Applied Microcomputer Systems
Page 67
17 Jul 01
POND 4 Pond 4
Qin ~ 115.7 CFS @ 12,14 HRS, VOLUME~ 9.19 AF
Qout~ 13 ,08 CFS @ 13 ,18 HRS, VOLUME~ 6,14 AF, ATTEN~ 89%, LAG~ 62,6 MIN
ELEVATION AREA INC ' STOR CUM.STOR STOR-IND METHOD
(FT) (AC) (AF) (AF) PEAK STORAGE ~ 19.78 AF
873.6 2.13 0.00 0,00 PEAK ELEVATION~ 881. 3 FT
878,6 2.58 11.78 11. 78 FLOOD ELEVATION~ 883,6 FT
879,6 2.91 2,75 14,52 START ELEVATION~ 879.6 FT
881. 6 3.11 6.02 20,54 SPAN~ 10-20 HRS, dt~,l HRS
883,6 3.32 6,43 26.97
# ROUTE
1 P
INVERT
879.6'
OUTLET DEVICES
24" CULVERT
n~,012 L~100' S~,Ol'/' Ke~.5
Cc~,9
Cd~,6
POND 4 INFLOW & OUTFLOW
Pond 4
".
lB.
g.
~ S8
0 70
<,.
u 50
~
:3 58
0 4.
-'
u.. 3.
2.
,.
8.\
STOR-IND METHOD
PEAK STOR= 19.78 AF
PEAK ELEU= 881.3 FT
Qln= 115.7 CFS
Dout= 13.88 CFS
LAG= 62. 6 MIN
/--
/
N ~
-------
-------
:: ~ ~ !::::
~
~
'"
N
TIME (hoo.;r:=.)
Data for Arden Hills
TYPE II 24-HOUR RAINFALL= 4.15 IN
Prepared by Short Elliott Hendrickson Inc.
HydroCAD 5,11 001264 (cl 1986-1999 Applied Microcomputer Systems
Page 68
17 Jul 01
POND 5 Pond 5
Qin 113,9 CFS @ 12,01 HRS, VOLUME = 6.90 AF
Qout= 15.54 CFS @ 12,54 HRS, VOLUME = 5,39 AF, ATTEN= 86%1 LAG= 31.5 MIN
ELEVATION AREA INC,STOR CUM. STOR STOR-IND METHOD
(FT) (AC) (AF) (AF) PEAK STORAGE = 14,03 AF
918,0 1,44 0.00 0,00 PEAK ELEVATION= 925.8 FT
923.0 1. 83 8.18 8.18 FLOOD ELEVATION= 928,0 FT
924,0 2.10 1.97 10,14 START ELEVATION= 924,0 FT
926.0 2.28 4.38 14,52 SPAN= 10-20 HRS, dt=.l HRS
928.0 2,46 4,74 19.26
# ROUTE
1 P
INVERT
924,0'
OUTLET DEVICES
24" CULVERT
n=,012 L=100' S=.Ol'I' Ke=.05
Cc=.9
Cd=,86
POND 5 INFLOW & OUTFLOW
Pond 5
118
188
98
80
. 78
4-
u 68
::3 5.
0 48
-'
U. 3.
,.
'8
'\i
STDR-IND METHOD
PEAK STOR= 14.03 AF
PEAK ELEU= 925.8 FT
Din: 113,9 CFS
Oout.= 15.54 CF5
LAG= 31.5 MIN
, ---- ----
I -----
/
N ':' :': ~ ~
:: ~ ~
'"
'"
TIME (hour:!.)
I
J
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
.
I
1
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
.
1
I
I
I
I
I
r
I
Data for Arden Hills
TYPE II 24-HOUR RAINFALL~ 4,15 IN
Prepared by Short Elliott Hendrickson Inc.
HvdroCAD 5.11 001264 Ic) 1986-1999 Applied Microcomputer Systems
Page 69
17 Jul 01
POND 6 Pond 6
Qin 72 ,22 CFS @ 12,02 HRSr VOLUME~ 4.42 AF
Qout~ 8.58 CFS @ 12,68 HRS, VOLUME= 3.30 AF, ATTEN= 88%, LAG= 39.6 MIN
ELEVATION AREA INC,STOR CUM,STOR STOR-IND METHOD
1FT) (AC) (AF) (AF) PEAK STORAGE = 10,30 AF
880.3 1.11 0,00 0.00 PEAK ELEVATION~ 887.6 FT
885.3 1.45 6.40 6.40 FLOOD ELEVATION~ 890.3 FT
886.3 1.69 1.57 7,97 START ELEVATION~ 886.3 FT
888.3 1. 85 3,54 11.51 SPAN= 10-20 HRS, dt=.l HRS
890,3 2.02 3.87 15.38
# ROUTE
1 P
INVERT
886,3'
OUTLET DEVICES
24" CULVERT
n=,012 L=100' S=.Ol'/' Ke=,5
CC=.9
Cd=.6
PONO 6 INFLOW & OUTFLOW
Pond 6
7B
65
68
55
5.
fi 45
~ 48
35
:3 3.
g 25
u. 2.
15
10
5
'\\
STDR-IND METHOD
PEAK STOR= 18.38 AF
PEAK ELEU= 887.6 FT
aln= 72.22 CFS
Gout= B. 58 CFS
LAG= 39.6 HIN
,/- ----~-------
~ !::
~
~
'"
N
~ ~ ::: ~
TIME (hour5)
Data for Arden Hills
TYPE II 24-HOUR RAINFALL= 4,15 IN
Prepared by Short Elliott Hendrickson Inc.
HydroCAD 5,11 001264 (c) 1986-1999 Applied Microcomputer Systems
Page 70
17 Ju1 01
POND 7
Pond 7
Qin = 114.5 CFS @ 12,27 HRS, VOLUME= 11. 35 AF
Qout= 15,90 CFS @ 13 .49 HRS, VOLUME= 7,79 AF, ATTEN= 86%, LAG= 73,0 MIN
ELEVATION AREA INC,STOR CUM, STOR STOR-IND METHOD
(FT) (AC) (AF) (AF) PEAK STORAGE = 20.88 AF
865.2 2.13 0,00 0,00 PEAK ELEVATION= 873.3 FT
870,2 2.58 11.78 11.78 FLOOD ELEVATION= 875.2 FT
871. 2 2,91 2.75 14 ,52 START ELEVATION= 871. 2 FT
873 ,2 3,11 6.02 20,54 SPAN= 10-20 HRS, dt=.1 HRS
875.2 3.32 6.43 26.97
/I ROUTE
1 P
INVERT
871. 2 '
OUTLET DEVICES
24 n CULVERT
n=,012 L=100' S=,Ol'/' Ke=.5
Cc=.9
Cd=.6
PONO 7 INFLOW & OUTFLOW
Pond 7
119
""
99
B"
" '"
<.-
u 6.
~
3 50
0 49
..J
u.. ,.
Z.
I.
'\,';
STOR-IND METHOD
PEAK STOR~ 20.88 AF
PEAK ELEU= 873.3 FT
Gln= 114.5 CF5
Qout.= f 5 .90 CFS
LAG= 73 MIN
/---
I
~
'" ~
---------
------
-------
~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~
'"
N
TINE (hours)
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
II
1
I
I
I
1
I
~
I
I
~
I
I
1
I
I
I
I
.
1
I
I
I
I
I
I
,
I
Data for Arden Hills
TYPE II 24-HOUR RAINFALL~ 4.15 IN
Prepared by Short Elliott Hendrickson Inc,
HydroCAD 5,11 001264 (c) 1986-1999 Applied Microcomputer Systems
Page 71
17 Jul 01
POND 8 Pond 8
I
Qin ~ 69,89 CFS @ 12.02 HR8, VOLUME~ 4.25 AF
Qout~ 11.25 CFS @ 12,50 HRS, VOLUME~ 3.45 AF, ATTEN~ 84%, LAG~ 29,2 MIN
ELEVATION AREA INC.STOR CUM, STOR STOR-IND METHOD
(FT) (AC) (AF) (AF) PEAK STORAGE ~ 7,25 AF
873.1 ,81 0.00 0.00 PEAK ELEVATION~ 879,7 FT
877.1 1.11 3.84 3,84 FLOOD ELEVATION~ 882,1 FT
878,1 1. 33 1.22 5,06 START ELEVATION~ 878,1 FT
880,1 1.47 2.80 7.86 SPAN~ 10-20 HRS, dt~,l HRS
882,1 1. 62 3.09 10.95
# ROUTE
1 P
INVERT
878.1'
OUTLET DEVICES
24" CULVERT
n~,012 L~100' S~.Ol'/'
Cc~.9
Cd~,6
Ke=,5
POND 8 INFLOW & OUTFLOW
Pond 8
7.
65
6.
55
~ 5.
o 45
iJ 48
35
:3 3.
g 25
U. 2.
15
,.
5
e",
STOR-lNO METHOD
PEAK STOR= 7. 25 AF
PEAK ELEU: 879.7 FT
Gln= 69,89 CFS
Qout= 1 I .25 CFS
LRG::; 29.2 MIN
Ir --.....-------
I --_______
J
N ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~
~
'"
N
TIME (hDur~)
Data for Arden Hills
TYPE II 24-HOUR RAINFALL= 4,15 IN
Prepared by Short Elliott Hendrickson Inc,
HvdroCAD 5,11 001264 tcl 1986-1999 Applied Microcomputer Systems
Page 72
17 Jul 01
POND 9 Pond 9
Qin = 83.99 CFS @ 12,22 HRS, VOLUME= 7.63 AF
Qout= 11. 05 CFS @ 13 ,41 HRS, VOLUME= 5,15 AF, ATTEN= 87%, LAG= 71. 6 MIN
ELEVATION AREA INC,STOR CUM,STOR STOR-IND METHOD
(FT) (AC) (AF) (AF) PEAK STORAGE = 16.70 AF
901. 2 1.83 0.00 0,00 PEAK ELEVATION= 908,7 FT
906,2 2.25 10,20 10.20 FLOOD ELEVATION= 911. 2 FT
907.2 2.55 2.40 12.60 START ELEVATION= 907.2 FT
909,2 2.74 5,29 17,89 SPAN= 10-20 HRS, dt=.l HRS
911,2 2,94 5.68 23.57
# ROUTE
1 P
INVERT
907,2'
OUTLET DEVICES
24" CULVERT
n=.012 L=100' S=,Ol'I' Ke=.5
CC=,9
Cd=,6
PONO 9 INFLOW & OUTFLOW
Pond 9
8a
75
7a
65
68
~ 55
~ 58
u 45
~ 48
'" 35
o 38
~ 25
28
'5
'8
5
8"
STCft-IND METHOD
PEAK STOR= 15.70 AF
PEAK ELEU~ 98e.7 FT
aln:::: 63.99 CFS
Oout.= t I . 05 CFS
LAG= 71.6 MIN
-------
r
,
/
N ':'
---- --
:':
"
~ !::: ~ ~
"
N
TIME (hDur~)
1
J
I
I
1
I
I
I
I
.
I
I
I
1
I
I
I
,
I
I
~
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
.
1
I
I
I
I
1
r
I
Data for Arden Hills
TYPE II 24-HOUR RAINFALL: 4,15 IN
Prepared by Short Elliott Hendrickson Inc,
HydroCAD 5.11 001264 (c) 1986-1999 Applied Microcomputer Systems
Page 73
17 Jul 01
POND 10 Pond 10
Qin : 58,77 CFS @ 12,03 HRSr VOLUME = 3.62 AF
Qout: 8,16 CFS @ 12.62 ERS, VOLUME: 2,83 AF, ATTEN= 86%, LAG= 35.6 MIN
ELEVATION AREA INC,STOR CUM,STOR STOR-IND METHOD
(FT) (AC) (AF) (AF) PEAK STORAGE : 7,81 AF
873,8 .81 0,00 0,00 PEAK ELEVATION= 881.1 FT
878,8 1.11 4.80 4.80 FLOOD ELEVATION= 883.8 FT
879,8 1.33 1.22 6.02 START ELEVATION= 879,8 FT
881. 8 1.47 2,80 8.82 SPAN: 10-20 HRS, dt=,l HRS
883,8 1.62 3,09 11.91
# ROUTE
1 P
INVERT
879.8'
OUTLET DEVICES
24' CULVERT
n=.012 L=100' S=.Ol'/'
Cc:.9
Cd=,6
Ke:,5
POND 10 INFLOW & OUTFLOW
Pond 10
55
50
45
~ 40
~ 35
~ 30
:3 25
g 20
u. IS
,.
5
.",
STOR-IND METHOD
PEAK STOR= 7.81 AF
PEAK ELEU:;: 881 .1 FT
Qln= 58.77 CFS
Oout= 8.16 CFS
LAG.::: 35. 6 M!N
, - -'- ---
I ---- ------
~ ~ :': ~ :" '::
TINE, (hour5)
~ ~
'"
N
Data for Arden Hills
TYPE II 24-HOUR RAINFALL= 4,15 IN
Prepared by Short Elliott Hendrickson Inc,
HydroCAD 5,11 001264 (el 1986-1999 Applied Microcomputer Systems
Page 74
17 Ju1 01
POND 11 Pond 11
Qin 56,24 CFS @ 12,09 HRS, VOLUME= 3,97 AF
Qout= 9.37 CFS @ 12.70 HRS, VOLUME= 3.14 AF, ATTEN= 83%, LAG= 36.5 MIN
ELEVATION AREA INC,STOR CUM.STOR STOR-IND METHOD
(FT) (AC) (AF) (AF) PEAK STORAGE = 8.12 AF
871. 3 .83 0.00 0,00 PEAK ELEVATION= 878.7 FT
876,3 1.13 4.90 4,90 FLOOD ELEVATION= 880,3 FT
877 .3 1.35 1.24 6.14 START ELEVATION= 877,3 FT
879.3 1.49 2,84 8.98 SPAN= 10-20 HRS, dt=.l HRS
880,3 1.64 1.57 10,55
# ROUTE
1 P
INVERT
877.3'
OUTLET DEVICES
24 n CULVERT
n=,012 L=100' S=.Ol'/' Ke=,5 Ce=,9
Cd=,6
POND II INFLOW & OUTFLOW
Pond 11
05
o.
45
~ 4"
. 35.
<.-
u 3"
v
:3 25
0 2.
..J
"- 15
'0
5
8~
STOR-IND METHOD
PEAK STOR= B, 12 AF
PEAK ELEU= 878.7 FT
Gln= 56.24 CFS
Qout= 9.37 CFS
LAG= .35.5 MIN
, ---
I ----
I -----
::: ~ :: !! 'E c: ~
~
~
N
TIME Chour5)
1
J
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
II
I
I
I
I
I
I
,
I
I
~
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
.
I
1
I
I
I
I
~
I
Data for Arden Hills
TYPE II 24 -HOUR RAINFALL= 4.15 IN
Prepared by Short Elliott Hendrickson Inc,
HvdroCAD 5.11 001264 (c) 1986-1999 Applied Microcomputer Systems
Page 75
17 Jul 01
POND 12 Pond 12
Qin 106.4 CFS @ 12.08 HRS, VOLUME= 7,45 AF
Qout= 14.10 CFS @ 12,79 HRS, VOLUME = 5,61 AF, ATTEN= 87%, LAG= 42.4 MIN
ELEVATION AREA INC.STOR CUM,STOR STOR-IND METHOD
(FT) (AC) (AF) (AF) PEAK STORAGE = 14.21 AF
878.7 1.44 0.00 0,00 PEAK ELEVATION= 886.6 FT
883,7 1.83 8,18 8,18 FLOOD ELEVATION= 888.7 FT
884.7 2,10 1.97 10.14 START ELEVATION= 884.7 FT
886.7 2,28 4.38 14.52 SPAN= 10-20 HRS, dt=.l HRS
888,7 2.46 4,74 19.26
# ROUTE
1 P
INVERT
884,7'
OUTLET DEVICES
24 n CULVERT
n=.012 L=100' S=,01'/'
Cc=.9
Cd=.6
Ke=.5
POND 12 INFLOW & OUTFLOW
Pond 12
188
98
88
~ 7.
0
"- 68
u
~ 58
3
0 4.
-'
U. 38
28
,.
a.\
STOR~IND METHOD
PEAK STOR~ 14.21 AF
PEAK ELEV= 886.6 FT
Gin:::: 186.4 CFS
Qout;: 14.113 CFS
LAG:::: 42.4 MIN
/- -----------
,
~ ~ :: ~
---------
~ ~
~ ~
~
N
TIME (hour-e,)
I
-.
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
II
I
I
I
I
I
I
~
I
Data for Arden Hills
TYPE II 24-HOUR RAINFALL~ 5.90 IN
Prepared by Short Elliott Hendrickson Inc,
HvdroCAD 5.11 001264 (cl 1986-1999 Applied Microcomputer Systems
WATERSHED ROUTING
Page 1
17 Jul 01
-------------------------------------------------------------
-------------------------------------------------------------
8 (3) 000 G)
/: J: Jd,fi &,
LJ...::; ~&
000 ~~~
lid. & A&M
OSUBCI'lTCHMENT D REACH
6,,,"0
o LtNK
Data for Arden Hills
TYPE II 24-HOUR RAINFALL= 5,90 IN
Prepared by Short Elliott Hendrickson Inc,
HydroCAD 5.11 001264 (c) 1986-1999 Applied Microcomputer Systems
Page 2
17 Ju1 01
SUBCATCHMENT 1
Pond P-1
PEAK= 200,8 CFS @ 12.08 HRS, VOLUME= 14.01 AF
ACRES CN
49,10 81
Arden Hills LWMP
SCS TR-20 METHOD
TYPE II 24-HOUR
RAINFALL= 5.90 IN
SPAN= 10-20 HRS, dt=,1 HRS
Method
DIRECT ENTRY
Comment
Segment ID:
Tc (min)
20.0
SUBCATCHMENT 1 RUNOFF
Pond P-l
2..
"0
16a
140
.
"- 12"
u
Ie.
:3 80
0
-' 6e
u..
4.
2e
0",
AREA= 49.1 ~
Tc= 20 MIN
eN: 81
SCS TR-28 METHOD
TYPE I I 24-HOUR
RAINFALL= 5,98 IN
PEAK= 208.8 CFS
e 12.88 HR5
VOLUHE= 14.81 AF
N
'"
:: ~
~
~ ~
'" '"
N
TIME Choure.)
1
J
I
I
1
I
I
I
I
..
I
I
I
I
I
I
1
I
~
I
1
I
I
I
I
I
II
1
I
I
I
1
I
~
I
Data for Arden Hills
TYPE II 24-HOUR RAINFALL= 5,90 IN
Prepared by Short Elliott Hendrickson Inc,
HvdroCAD 5,11 001264 (c) 1986-1999 Applied Microcomputer Systems
Page 3
17 Jul 01
SUBCATCHMENT 2
Pond P-2
PEAK= 217,8 CFS @ 12.08 HRS, VOLUME= 15.21 AF
ACRES
57,59
CN
78
SCS TR-20 METHOD
TYPE II 24-HOUR
RAINFALL= 5.90 IN
SPAN= 10-20 HRS, dt=.l HRS
Method
DIRECT ENTRY
Comment
Segment ID:
Tc (min)
20.0
SUBCATCHMENT 2 RUNOFF
Pond P-2
288
188
16B
~ 14a
.
4-
" 12a
~
18a
:3
0 80
--'
"- 68
4.
2.
.",
AREA= 57. 59 AC
Te::: 2B NUl
eN=: 78
SC5 TR-28 METHOD
TYPE II 24-HOUR
R~INFALL= 5.98 IN
PEAK:; 217,8 CFS
e 12.88 HR5
UDLUME= 15,21 AF
~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~
'"
N
TIME (hours,)
Data for Arden Hills
TYPE II 24 -HOUR RAINFALL~ 5,90 IN
Prepared by Short Elliott Hendrickson Inc,
HvdroCAD 5,11 001264 (cl 1986-1999 Applied Microcomputer Systems
Page 4
'17 Jul 01
SUBCATCHMENT 3
Pond P-3
PEAK~ 171.5 CFS @ 12.08 ERS, VOLUME~ 11,99 AF
ACRES CN
46.65 77
SCS TR-20 METHOD
TYPE II 24-HOUR
RAINFALL~ 5,90 IN
SPAN~ 10-20 ERS, dt~.l ERS
Method
DIRECT ENTRY
Comment
Segment ID:
Tc (min)
20,0
SU8CATCHMENT 3 RUNOFF
Pond P-3
170
168
150
148
138
128
~ 110
4- 18B
U gO
88
:3 '0
o 68
~ 50
48
3"
20
10
8"
AREA= 46.65 AC
To;:.;; 20 HIN
eN::: 77
SCS TR-28 METHOO
TYPE II 24-HOUR
RAINFALL= 5.9B IN
PEAK:;; 171.5 CFS
e 12,88 HR5
VOLUME= 1 \.99 AF
:;
C'
~
'!'.
~ ~ ~
"
N
::
TIME Chour5)
1
J
I
1
I
I
1
I
I
II
I
I
I
I
I
1
~
I
I
~
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
.
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
Data for Arden Hills
TYPE II 24-HOUR RAINFALL~ 5.90 IN
Prepared by Short Elliott Hendrickson Inc.
HvdroCAD 5,11 001264 (c) 1986-1999 Applied Microcomputer Systems
Page 5
17 Jul 01
SUBCATCIlMENT 4
Pond P-4
PEAK~ 200,0 CFS @ 12.13 HRS, VOLUME~ 15,72 AF
ACRES
57.99
CN
79
SCS TR-20 METHOD
TYPE II 24-HOUR
RAINFALL~ 5.90 IN
SPAN~ 10-20 HRS, dt~,l HRS
Method
DIRECT EN'l'RY
Comment
Segment ID:
Tc (min)
25,0
SUBCATCHMENT 4 RUNOFF
Pond P-4
288
190
188
178
168
158
" 148
1Il 130
4- 120
u 118
'-I 18B
9.
:3 88
o 78
...J 68
lL 58
48
38
2.
,.
"ci
AREA= 57.99 AC
Te:;; 25 HIN
CN::: 79
SCS TR-28 METHOD
TYPE II 24-HOUR
RAINFALL= 5.96 IN
PEAK::: 2BB.e ers
e 12.13 HR5
UOLUME= 15.72 AF
~
~ :: ~ ~
" ~
'"
'"
N
TINE (hour::.)
Data for Arden Hills
TYPE II 24-HOUR RAINFALL~ 5.90 IN
Prepared by Short Elliott Hendrickson Inc.
HydroCAD 5.11 001264 (c) 1986-1999 Applied Microcomputer Systems
Page 6
17 Jul 01
SUBCATCIlMENT 5
Pond P-5
PEAK~ 174,6 CFS @ 12,01 HRS, VOLUME~ 10.61 AF
ACRES CN
31. 36 89
SCS TR-20 METHOD
TYPE II 24 - HOUR
RAINFALL~ 5,90 IN
SPAN~ 10-20 HRS, dt~,l HRS
Method
DIRECT ENTRY
Comment
Segment ID,
Tc (min)
15.0
SU8CATCHMENT 5 RUNOFF
Pond P-5
".
16.
IS.
""
13.
r-.. 128
() 110
0:..... 108
..!:; 98
B0
:3 7.
g 68
LL 5.
4.
3.
2.
,.
".'i
AREA:: 31.36 AC
Tc= 15 MIN
CN= 89
SCS TR-28 METHOD
TYPE 11 24-HDUR
RAINFALL= 5.9B IN
PEAK::: 174.6 CFS
e 12.81 HRS
VOLUME= 18.61 AF
~
':'
::
!"
~
~ ~ ~
'"
N
TIME (hour:=.)
I
J
I
1
I
I
I
I
I
.
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
~
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
.
I
I
I
I
I
I
r
I
Data for Arden Hills
TYPE II 24-HOUR RAINFALL~ 5,90 IN
Prepared by Short Elliott Hendrickson Inc.
HvdroCAD 5.11 001264 {c) 1986-1999 Applied Microcomputer Systems
Page 7
17 Jul 01
SUBCATCHMENT 6
Pond P- 6
PEAK~ 127.5 CFS @ 12.02 HRS, VOLUME~ 7.74 AF
ACRES
30,10
CN
77
SCS TR-20 METHOD
TYPE II 24-HOUR
RAINFALL~ 5.90 IN
SPAN~ 10-20 HRS, dt~,l HRS
Method
DIRECT ENTRY
Comment
Segment ID:
Tc lmin)
15.0
SUBCATCHMENT 5 RUNOFF
Pond P-6
12"
""
,.a
~ ge
. .e
4-
u 7a
~
6a
6 50
c: 40
J"
28
1a
"",
ARER::: 38. 1 AC
Tc= 15 MIN
eN::: 77
SCS TR-20 METHOD
TYPE I I 24-HOUR
RAINFALL::: 5.9E1 IN
FEAK::: 127.5 CFS
e 12.82 HRS
UOLUME::: 7.74 AF
~
~ :!: ~ ~
~
!':
~
'"
N
TIME (hour~)
Data for Arden Hills
TYPE II 24-HOUR RAINFALL= 5,90 IN
Prepared by Short Elliott Hendrickson Inc,
HvdroCAD 5.11 001264 Ie) 1986-1999 Applied Microcomputer Systems
Page 8
17 Jul 01
SUBCATCHMENT 7
Pond P-7
PEAK= 204.1 CFS @ 12.26 HRS, VOLUME= 19,94 AF
ACRES CN
77,77 77
SCS TR-20 METHOD
TYPE II 24-HOUR
RAINFALL= 5.90 IN
SPAN= 10-20 HRS, dt=.l HRS
Method
DIRECT ENTRY
Comment
Segment ID:
Tc (min)
35.0
SU8CATCHMENT 7 RUNOFF
Pond P-7
2BB
1Ba
16"
l4a
.
<0- 12a
u
~ 1Ba
:3 BO
0
..J 60
"-
40
2B
B",
AREA::: 77.77 AC
Tc= 35 MrN
eN= 77
SCS TR-ZG METHOD
TYPE: r I 24-HDUR
RAINFALL= 5.9B IN
PEAK= 284.1 CF5
e 12.25 HRS
UOLUHE= 19,94 AF
~
M
~
~
~
~
~ ~
'"
N
TIME Chaur~)
I
J
I
I
1
I
I
I
I
II
I
I
I
I
I
I
~
I
I
'-
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
..
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
Data for Arden Hills
TYPE II 24-HOUR RAINFALL= 5,90 IN
Prepared by Short Elliott Hendrickson Inc.
HvdroCAD 5,11 001264 (c) 1986-1999 Applied Microcomputer Systems
Page 9
17 Jul 01
SUBCATCHMENT 8
Pond P-8
PEAK= 115.7 CFS @ 12,01 HRS, VOLUME= 7,01 AF
ACRES
24.00
CN
82
SCS TR-20 METHOD
TYPE II 24-HOUR
RAINFALL= 5.90 IN
SPAN= 10-20 HRS, dt=.l HRS
Method
DIRECT ENTRY
Comment
Segment ID:
Tc (min)
15.0
SU8CATCHMENT 8 RUNOFF
Pond P-8
"8
".
9.
~ B8
. 78
<,.
u 68
~
::3 58
0 4.
..J
"- 3.
28
18
8",
AREA::: 24 AI:
Tc:= 15 MIN
eN= 82
5CS TR-28 METHOD
TYPE II 24-HOUR
RAINFALL= 5.98 IN
PEAK:: 115.7 CFS
e 12.01 HR5
VOLUME:: 7.01 AF
~ ~ :: ~ ~
::: ~
~
'"
N
TIME (hour:=.)
Data for Arden Hills
TYPE II 24-HOUR RAINFALL= 5,90 IN
Prepared by Short Elliott Hendrickson Inc,
HvdroCAD 5,11 001264 (c) 1986-1999 Applied Microcomputer Systems
Page 10
17 Jul 01
SUBCATCllMENT 9
Pond P-9
PEAK= 161,2 CFS @ 12,21 HRS, VOLUME= 14.33 AF
ACRES CN
64.87 72
SCS TR-20 METHOD
TYPE II 24-HOUR
RAINFALL= 5,90 IN
SPAN= 10-20 HRS, dt=,l HRS
Method
DIRECT ENTRY
Comment
Segment ID.
Tc (min)
30,0
SUBCATCHMENT 9 RUNOFF
Pond p-g
160
150
148
138
128
,...., 118
(J 188
t 98
~ 88
3 70
o 68
...l 50
0.. 40
3.
2.
'8
"ci
AREA= 64.87 AC
T.::= 30 MIN
eN= 72
SCS TR-20 METHOD
TYPE II 24-HOUR
RAINFALL= 5.9B IN
PEAK= 161.2 CFS
e 12.21 HRS
UDLUME= 14.33 AF
~
:c
~
:
~
~
<:!
~
'"
N
TIME Chaur~)
I
J
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
..
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
'-
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
.
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
Data for Arden Hills
TYPE II 24-HOUR RAINFALL= 5.90 IN
Prepared by Short Elliott Hendrickson Inc,
HvdroCAD 5.11 001264 tel 1986-1999 Applied Microcomputer Systems
Page 11
17 Jul 01
SUBCATCIlMENT 10
Pond P-lO
PEAK= 108.3 CFS @ 12.02 HRS, VOLUME = 6,60 AF
ACRES
27.96
CN
74
SCS TR-20 METHOD
TYPE II 24-HOUR
RAINFALL= 5.90 IN
SPAN= 10-20 HRS, dt=.l HRS
Method
DIRECT ENTRY
Comment
Segment ID,
Tc (min)
15.0
SUBCATCHMENT 10 RUNOFF
Pond P-10
188
98
88
~ 78
"
.. 68
u
v
5B
3
0 4B
..J
IL 3B
28
18
8",
~REA::: 27.95 AC
Tc= !5 MIN
eN:: 74
SCS TR-20 METHOO
TYPE I I 24-HDUR
RAINFALL::; 5..90 IN
FEAK= 1138. 3 CFS
e 12.02 HRS
\.IOLUME= 5.68 AF
~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~
'" '"
'"
TIME ChDur5)
Data for Arden Hills
TYPE II 24-HOUR RAINFALL= 5.90 IN
Prepared by Short Elliott Hendrickson Inc,
HydroCAD 5,11 001264 (c) 1986-1999 Applied Microcomputer Systems
Page 12
17 Jul 01
SUBCATCHMENT 11
Pond P-ll
PEAK= 100.7 CFS @ 12,08 HRS, VOLUME=
7.05 AF
ACRES CN
28,19 76
SCS TR-20 METHOD
TYPE II 24-HOUR
RAINFALL= 5.90 IN
SPAN= 10-20 HRS, dt=.1 HRS
Method
DIRECT ENTRY
Comment
Segment ID:
Tc (min)
20,0
SUBCATCHMENT 1 I RUNOFF
Pond P-II
188
98
88
~ 78
. 58
"'
u
~ 58
:3 .8
0
...J 38
LL
28
18
8"
AREA:: 28.19 AC
T~= 20 MIN
eN= 76
SCS TR-28 METHOD
TYPE II 24-HOUR
RAINFALL= 5.90 IN
PEAK= 108.7 CFS
e 12.88 HRS
UOLUME= 7.85 AF
~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~
"
N
TIME ChOl.lr-::.)
I
J
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
.
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
~
I
I
I
I
I
I
It
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
Data for Arden Hills
TYPE II 24-HOUR RAINFALL~ 5,90 IN
Prepared by Short Elliott Hendrickson Inc.
HydroCAD 5,11 001264 tel 1986-1999 Applied Microcomputer Systems
Page 13
17 Jul 01
SUBCATCllMENT 12
Pond P-12
PEAK~ 178,5 CFS @ 12.08 HRS, VOLUME~ 12.45 AF
ACRES CN
43.65 81
SCS TR-20 METHOD
TYPE II 24-HOUR
RAINFALL~ 5.90 IN
SPAN~ 10-20 HRS, dt~,l HRS
Method
DIRECT ENTRY
Tc (min)
20.0
Comment
Segment ID:
SU8CATCHMENT 12 RUNOFF
Pond P-12
170
168
158
"0
130
r-.. 128
if) t 1B
t 10B
~ 90
:3 80
o 70
...J 6.
lL 50
4.
3.
2.
I.
0"
AREA= 43.65 AC
Tc:: 28 MIN
CN= 81
SCS TR-20 METHOD
TYFE II 24-HCUR
RAINFALL= 5.90 IN
PEAK= 178.5 CFS
e 12.88 HRS
VOLUME= 12.45 AF
r--- ~ ~
"
N
~
~ ::: ~ ~
TIME (hour~)
Data for Arden Hills
TYPE II 24-HOUR RAINFALL= 5,90 IN
Prepared by Short Elliott Hendrickson Inc.
HydroCAD 5,11 001264 (c) 1986-1999 Applied Microcomputer Systems
Page 14
17 Jul 01
POND 1
Pond 1
Qin = 200,8 CFS @ 12,08 HRS, VOLUME= 14,01 AF
Qout= 22.18 CFS @ 12,88 HRS, VOLUME= 10,84 AF, ATTEN= 89%, LAG= 47 ,8 MIN
ELEVATION AREA INC.STOR CUM,STOR STOR-IOO METHOD
(FT) (AC) (AF) (AF) PEAK STORAGE = 19,79 AF
897,2 1.69 0.00 0,00 PEAK ELEVATION= 906,4 FT
902,2 2,10 9,48 9.48 FLOOD ELEVATION= 907,2 FT
903.2 2,40 2,25 11.73 START ELEVATION= 903.2 FT
905.2 2.58 4.98 16.71 SPAN~ 10-20 HRS, dt=.l HRS
907,2 2,78 5.36 22,07
# ROUTE
1 P
INVERT
903.2'
OUTLET DEVICES
24" CULVERT
n=,012 L=100' S=,Ol'/'
Ke=,5
CC=,9
Cd=.6
PONO I INFLOW & OUTFLOW
Pond 1
2..
18a
16.
r-.. 148
"
4- 12e
u
'-' 1B13
STOR-IND METHOD
PEAK STQR= 19.79 AF
PEAK ELEU= g06.4 FT
Qln= 288.8 CFS
Qout= 22. 1 8 CFS
LAG= 47. B MIN
i3 88
~ 68
4a
2.
a.,
,~- -------------
/
N
C'
!e
~
::
~
c:
~
.,
N
TINE (hour:!>)
I
~
I
I
I
I
1
I
II
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
'-
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
II
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
Data for Arden Hills
TYPE II 24-HOUR RAINFALL~ 5.90 IN
Prepared by Short Elliott Hendrickson Inc,
HvdroCAD 5.11 001264 Ie) 1986-1999 Applied Microcomputer Systems
Page 15
17 Jul 01
POND 2
Pond 2
Qin 217.8 CFS @ 12,08 HRS,
Qout~ 23.99 CFS @ 12.90 HRS,
VOLUME~ 15,21 AF
VOLUME~ 11.95 AF,
ATTEN~ 89%,
LAG~
49,3 MIN
ELEVATION AREA INC,STOR CUM, STOR STOR-IND METHOD
(FT) (AC) (AF) (AF) PEAK STORAGE ~ 19.71 AF
890.0 1.59 0.00 0.00 PEAK ELEVATION= 899,5 FT
895.0 2.00 8,98 8.98 FLOOD ELEVATION= 900.0 FT
896,0 2,28 2,14 11,12 START ELEVATION= 896 ,0 FT
898,0 2.46 4.74 15.86 SPAN= 10-20 HRS, dt=,l HRS
900.0 2,62 5,08 20,94 Tdet= 518.2 MIN ( . 83 AF)
# ROUTE
1 P
INVERT
896 ,0'
OUTLET DEVICES
24" CULVERT
n=.012 L=100' S=,Ol'/'
Ke=,5
Cc=.9
Cd=.6
POND 2 INFLOW & OUTFLOW
Pond 2
288
188
16B
STOR-IND NETI-OD
PEAK STOR= 19.71 AF
PE~K ELEU= 899.5 FT
^
dJ 1413
<,.
U 120
~
IBB
'"
o 8"
-J
U. 68
48
28
B,,\
Qln= 217.8 CFS
Daut= 23.99 CFS
LAG: 49.3 MIN
,- -------------
/ -------
/
N ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~
'"
N
TINE enouro)
Data for Arden Hills
TYPE II 24-HOUR RAINFALL= 5.90 IN
Prepared by Short Elliott Hendrickson Inc,
HydroCAD 5.11 001264 (c) 1986-1999 Applied Microcomputer Systems
POND 3
Pond 3
Page 16
17 Jul 01
Qin = 171,5 CFS @ 12,08 HRS, VOLUME= 11. 99 AF
Qout= 17,19 CFS @ 13 ,00 HRS, VOLUME= 8.46 AF, ATTEN= 90%, LAG= 55,3 MIN
ELEVATION AREA INC , STOR CUM,STOR STOR - IND METHOD
(FT) (AC) (AF) (AF) PEAK STORAGE = 21.48 AF
873,2 2,13 0,00 0,00 PEAK ELEVATION= 881.5 FT
878 .2 2,58 11.78 11,78 FLOOD ELEVATION= 883.2 FT
879,2 2.91 2.75 14,52 START ELEVATION= 879.2 FT
881. 2 3.11 6.02 20,54 SPAN= 10-20 HRS, dt=,l HRS
883.2 3.32 6,43 26,97
# ROUTE
1 P
INVERT
879.2'
OUTLET DEVICES
24 n CULVERT
n=.012 L=100' S=.Ol'/'
Cc=,9
Cd=,6
Ke=.5
POND 3 INFLOW & OUTFLOW
Pond 3
178
160
158
148
13B
f""< 120
f.I r 18
<+- 18a
u 98
~ 88
:3 78
o 68
~ 58
48
38
28
18
".\
STOR-IND METHOD
PEAK STaR= 21 .48 AF
PEAK ELElJ= 881 .5 FT
Dln= 171.5 CFS
Qout;;; 17.19 CFS
lAG= 55.3 MIN
/;-- -------------------
N ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~
'"
'"
N
TIME (houI'"':!I)
I
J
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
II
I
r
I
I
I
I
I
I
~
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
II
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
r
I
Data for Arden Hills
TYPE II 24-HOUR RAINFALL~ 5,90 IN
Prepared by Short Elliott Hendrickson Inc.
HvdroCAD 5.11 001264 (c) 1986-1999 Applied Microcomputer Systems
Page 17
17 Jul 01
POND 4
Pond 4
Qin 200.0 CFS @ 12.13 HRS, VOLUME~ 15.72 AF
Qout~ 21.41 CFS @ 13,16 HRS, VOLUME= 11,27 AF, ATTEN= 89%, LAG= 61.4 MIN
ELEVATION AREA INC,STOR CUM.STOR STOR-IND METHOD
(FT) (AC) (AF) (AF) PEAK STORAGE = 23.77 AF
873,6 2,13 0,00 0,00 PEAK ELEVATION= 882.6 FT
878,6 2,58 11,78 11.78 FLOOD ELEVATION~ 883.6 FT
879,6 2,91 2.75 14 ,52 START ELEVATION= 879.6 FT
881. 6 3.11 6,02 20,54 SPAN= 10-20 HRS, dt=.l HRS
883,6 3.32 6.43 26,97
# ROUTE
1 P
INVERT
879.6'
OUTLET DEVICES
24" CULVERT
n=.012 L=100' S=.Ol'/'
Ke=,5
Cc=,9
Cd=.6
POND 4 INFLOW & OUTFLOW
Pond 4
28.
".
188
178
168
15.
r"'. 1413
II) 138
4- 128
u 118
"-J 188
98
:3 B.
o 78
..J 68
"- 58
'8
38
28
18
'Ii5
STOR-IND METHOD
PEAK STOR= 23.77 AF
PEAK ELEU= 882.6 Fl
Gln= 288.0 CFS
Qou't= 21.4\ CFS
LAG= 61 .4 HIN
------------
,
/
!"
~
~
'"
N
~
!'!
':'
! ~
TIME (hou~.3
Data for Arden Hills
TYPE II 24-HOUR RAINFALL= 5.90 IN
Prepared by Short Elliott Hendrickson Inc.
HydroCAD 5.11 001264 (c) 1986-1999 Applied Microcomputer Systems
Page 18
17 Jul 01
POND 5
Pond 5
Qin 174.6 CFS @ 12,01 HRS, VOLUME= 10,61 AF
Qout= 22,93 CFS @ 12,33 HRS, VOLUME= 8.76 AF, ATTEN= 87%, LAG= 19.0 MIN
ELEVATION AREA INC,STOR CUM,STOR STOR-INn METHOD
(FT) (AC) (AF) {AF} PEAK STORAGE = 16.14 AF
918,0 1.44 0.00 0.00 PEAK ELEVATION= 926.7 FT
923,0 1.83 8,18 8.18 FLOOD ELEVATION= 928.0 FT
924,0 2,10 1.97 10.14 START ELEVATION= 924,0 FT
926,0 2,28 4,38 14,52 SPAN= 10-20 HRS, dt=.l HRS
928,0 2.46 4,74 19.26
# ROUTE
1 P
INVERT
924,0'
OUTLET DEVICES
24" CULVERT
n=,012 L=100' s=.ol'I'
Cc=,9
Cd=.86
Ke=.05
PONO 5 INFLOW & OUTFLOW
Pond 5
17.
".
15.
".
".
r; 120
II) 1113
lor lE1a
,:; 90
8.
'" 7.
g 68
u. 58
..
3.
2.
,.
.",
STOR-INO METHOD
PEAK STOR= 15.14 AF
PEAK ELEU= 926.7 FT
Qin= 174.6 CFS
Gout= 22.93 CFS
lAG= I 9 MIN
~
,
j
N
------
----------
---------
~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~
'"
N
TIME .(hour.)
I
J
1
I
I
I
I
I
I
II
I
I
I
I
I
I
~
I
I
~
I
I
I
I
I
I
..
I
I
I
I
I
t
I
r
I
Data for Arden Hills
TYPE II 24-HOUR RAINFALL= 5,90 IN
Prepared by Short Elliott Hendrickson Inc,
HydroCAD 5,11 001264 te) 1986-1999 Applied Microcomputer Systems
Page 19
17 Jul 01
POND 6 Pond 6
Qin 127,5 CFS @ 12,02 HRS, VOLUME= 7.74 AF
Qout= 17.20 CFS @ 12.57 HRS, VOLUME= 6.32 AF, ATTEN= 87%, LAG= 33.4 MIN
ELEVATION AREA INC,STOR CUM.STOR STOR-IND METHOD
(FT) (AC) (AF) (AF) PEAK STORAGE = 12.08 AF
880,3 1.11 0,00 0.00 PEAK ELEVATION= 888,6 FT
885.3 1.45 6.40 6,40 FLOOD ELEVATION= 890.3 FT
886.3 1.69 1.57 7,97 START ELEVATION= 886,3 FT
888,3 1.85 3,54 11. 51 SPAN= 10-20 HRS, dt=.l HRS
890,3 2.02 3.87 15.38
# ROUTE
1 P
INVERT
886.3'
OUTLET DEVICES
24" CULVERT
n=.012 L=100' S=.Ol'/'
Cc=.9
Cd=,6
Ke=.5
POND 6 INFLOW & OUTFLOW
Pond 6
12.
"8
".
~ 98
. B.
4-
u 78
6.
~ 58
-' 4.
LL
3.
28
,.
8",
STOR- IND METHOD
PEAK STOR~ 12.88 AF
PEAK ELEU::; 888.6 FT
Qln= 127.5 CFS
Gout: 17.28 CFS
LAG::; 33.4 HIM
/- ----------
I --___
/
N
~
'"
N
c:
~
~
!'
~
::
TIME Chour:::t)
Data for Arden Hills
TYPE II 24-HOUR RAINFALL~ 5.90 IN
Prepared by Short Elliott Hendrickson Inc,
HydroCAD 5,11 001264 (c) 1986-1999 Applied Microcomputer Systems
Page 20
17 Jul 01
POND 7
Pond 7
Qin ~ 204.1 CFS @ 12,26 HRS, VOLUME~ 19.94 AF
Qout~ 25,16 CFS @ 13 .52 HRS, VOLUME~ 13.88 AF, ATTEN~ 88%, LAG~ 75,8 MIN
ELEVATION AREA INC.STOR CUM.STOR STOR - IND METHOD
(FT) lAC) (AFI (AF) PEAK STORAGE ~ 26.23 AF
865.2 2,13 0.00 0,00 PEAK ELEVATION~ 875.0 FT
870,2 2.58 11. 78 11.78 FLOOD ELEVATION~ 875.2 FT
871.2 2.91 2.75 14.52 START ELEVATION= 871.2 FT
873,2 3,11 6.02 20,54 SPAN~ 10-20 HRS, dt~,1 HRS
875.2 3.32 6,43 26.97
# ROUTE
1 P
INVERT
871. 2'
OUTLET DEVICES
24" CULVERT
n~,012 L~100' S=,01'1'
Cd~, 6
Ke=.5
CC=.9
POND 7 INFLOW & OUTFLOW
Pond 7
28e
IBa
1Ba
r; 148
.
'+- 120
U
'--' lelE!
is S0
C 68
4a
2a
e..
STOR-IND METHOD
PEAK STOR~ 26.23 AF
PEAK ELEU= 875 FT
Qln.;: 204.1 CFS
Gcut:: 25. 1 5 CFS
LAG= 75.8 HIN
/
/
-------------
----------
~
~
~
~
C:
~
~
::
..
N
TINE (hour5)
I
~
I
I
I
I
I
I
..
I
I
I
I
I
,
I
,
I
I
~
I
I
I
I
I
I
.
I
I
I
1
I
I
~
I
Data for Arden Hills
TYPE II 24-HOUR RAINFALL= 5,90 IN
Prepared by Short Elliott Hendrickson Inc,
HvdroCAD 5,11 001264 (c) 1986-1999 Applied Microcomputer Systems
Page 21
17 Jul 01
POND 8
Pond 8
Qin 115.7 CFS @ 12.01 HRS,
Qout= 18,85 CFS @ 12.48 HRS,
VOLUME=
VOLUME=
7,01 AF
6.03 AF,
ATTEN= 84%,
LAG=
27,8 MIN
ELEVATION AREA INC.STOR CUM.STOR STOR-IND METHOD
(FT) (AC) (AF) (AF) PEAK STORAGE = 8.72 AF
873.1 ,81 0.00 0.00 PEAK ELEVATION= 880.7 FT
877.1 1.11 3,84 3,84 FLOOD ELEVATION= 882,1 FT
878.1 1.33 1.22 5.06 START ELEVATION= 878 ,1 FT
880,1 1.47 2.80 7,86 SPAN= 10-20 HRS, dt=.l HRS
882,1 1.62 3.09 10,95 Tdet= 423.2 MIN (,97 AF)
# ROUTE
1 P
INVERT
878,1'
OUTLET DEVICES
24 n CULVERT
n=.012 L=100' 8=,01'/'
Ke=,5
CC=,9
Cd=.6
POND 8 INFLOW & OUTFLOW
Pond 8
11.
I..
9.
~ B8
" 78
4-
u 68
~
::0 58
0 48
...J
lL 3.
2.
18
".i
STOR- I NO METHOD
PEAK STOR= 8.72 AF
PEAK ELEU= 880.7 FT
Qln= 115.7CF5
Qout.= 18.85 eFS
LAG= 27.8 MIN
I - ---
, -....._- ----
I --------
~ ~ :!: ~ ~ C: ~ '" '"
N
TIME (hour~)
Data for Arden Hills
TYPE II 24-HOUR RAINFALL= 5.90 IN
Prepared by Short Elliott Hendrickson Inc,
HydroCAD 5,11 001264 (c) 1986-1999 Applied Microcomputer Systems
Page 22
17 Jul 01
POND 9
Pond 9
Qin = 161. 2 CFS @ 12,21 HRS, VOLUME= 14.33 AF
Qout= 21,02 CFS @ 13 .28 HRS, VOLUME= 10,66 AF, ATTEN= 87%, LAG= 64,7 MIN
ELEVATION AREA INC.STOR CUM,STOR STOR - IND METHOD
(FT) (AC) (AF) (AF) PEAK STORAGE = 20,54 AF
901. 2 1. 83 0,00 0.00 PEAK ELEVATION= 910,1 FT
906.2 2.25 10,20 10,20 FLOOD ELEVATION= 911. 2 FT
907.2 2.55 2,40 12.60 START ELEVATION= 907,2 FT
909.2 2.74 5,29 17,89 SPAN= 10-20 HRS, dt=.l HRS
911.2 2,94 5.68 23,57
# ROUTE
1 P
INVERT
907.2'
OUTLET DEVICES
24" CULVERT
n=,012 L=100' S=.Ol'/'
Ke=.5
Cc=.9
Cd=.6
POND 9 INFLOW & OUTFLOW
Pond 9
16"
150
140
13"
120
" 110
LfI 188
t 98
~ 80
3 70
o 60
-' 50
u.. 40
38
28
18
0~
STOR-IND HETHOD
PEAK STaR= 28.54 AF
PEAK ELEU= 9113.1 FT
Qln= 161,2 CFS
Qaut= 21 .82 CFS
LAG= 64.7 MIN
,-
,
N
-------
--------
~
::
~
~
!::
~ ~
'"
N
TIME (hour~)
1
~
I
I
I
I
I
I
.
I
I
I
I
I
I
t
,
I
I
~
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
II
I
I
I
I
I
I
~
I
Data for Arden Hills
TYPE II 24-HOUR RAINFALL~ 5,90 IN
Prepared by Short Elliott Hendrickson Inc,
HydroCAD 5.11 001264 (c) 1986-1999 Applied Microcomputer Systems
Page 23
17 Jul 01
POND 10 Pond 10
Qin 108.3 CFS @ 12.02 HRS, VOLUME~ 6.60 AF
Qout~ 17.35 CFS @ 12.51 HRS, VOLUME~ 5.61 AF, ATTEN~ 84%, LAG~ 29,6 MIN
ELEVATION AREA INC,STOR CUM. STOR STOR-IND METHOD
(FT) (AC) (AF) (AF) PEAK STORAGE ~ 9.31 AF
873.8 .81 0,00 0.00 PEAK ELEVATION~ 882.1 FT
878,8 1.11 4,80 4,80 FLOOD ELEVATION~ 883.8 FT
879.8 1. 33 1.22 6.02 START ELEVATION~ 879.8 FT
881. 8 1.47 2,80 8,82 SPAN~ 10-20 HRS, dt~.1 HRS
883.8 1.62 3,09 11. 91
# ROUTE
1 P
INVERT
879,8'
OUTLET DEVICES
24" CULVERT
n~.012 L~100' S~.01'/' Ke=.5 Cc~.9
Cd~.6
POND 10 INFLOW & OUTFLOW
Pond 10
188
90
8a
~
. 7a
4-
u 60
~
5a
3
o ,.
..J
U. 3a
2S
18
SOl
STOR-IND METHOD
PEAK STOR= 9.31 AF
PEAK EL€U= 882.! FT
Qln::;; 188.3 CFS
Qout= 17.35 CFS
LAG= 29.6 HIN
I - ---
---
, --- -----
I
N ':' :! ~ ~ c: ~
~
Ol
N
TIME (hour~)
Data for Arden nills
TYPE II 24-HOUR RAINFALL= 5,90 IN
Prepared by Short Elliott Hendrickson Inc,
HvdroCAD 5.11 001264 (c) 1986-1999 Applied Microcomputer Systems
Page 24
17 Jul 01
POND 11 Pond 11
Qin = 100,7 CFS @ 12,08 HRS, VOLUME= 7.05 AF
Qout= 18,18 CFS @ 12.63 ERS, VOLUME= 6,01 AF, ATTEN= 82%, LAG= 32,6 MIN
ELEVATION AREA INC.STOR CUM.STOR STOR-IND METHOD
(FT) (AC) (AF) (AP) PEAK STORAGE = 9.68 AF
871. 3 ,83 0,00 0,00 PEAK ELEVATION= 879,7 FT
876.3 1.13 4,90 4,90 FLOOD ELEVATION= 880.3 FT
877.3 1.35 1.24 6.14 START ELEVATION= 877 .3 FT
879.3 1.49 2,84 8.98 8PAN= 10-20 HR8, dt=,l ERS
880,3 1.64 1.57 10,55
# ROUTE
1 P
INVERT
877,3'
OUTLET DEVICES
24 n CULVERT
n=,012 L=100' 8=,01'/' Ke=.5 Cc=.9 Cd=.6
POND I 1 INFLOW & OUTFLOW
Pond 11
,..
9.
6.
~ 7.
" 6.
4-
U
~ 5.
3 .a
0
..J 3.
u.
2.
I.
'\,\
STOR-IND METHOD
PEAK STOR= 9.68 AF
PEAK ELEU= 879.7 FT
Oln= 188,7 CFS
Gout.= 18.18 CFS
LAG= 32.6 HIN
,. --- ---
, --. --------
I
,
N ~ :: ~ ~ c: ~ ~ '"
N
TIME (hour:,)
1
J
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
II
I
I
I
I
I
I
~
I
I
~
I
I
I
I
I
I
.
I
I
I
I
I
I
r
I
Data for
Page 25
Arden Hills
TYPE II 24-HOUR RAINFALL= 5.90 IN
by Short Elliott Hendrickson Inc,
5.11 001264 (c) 1986-1999 Applied
17 Jul 01
Prepared
HvdroCAD
Microcomouter Systems
POND 12
Pond 12
Qin 178,5 CFS @ 12,08 HRS, VOLUME= 12,45 AF
Qout= 21. 96 CFS @ 12.80 HRS, VOLUME= 9,99 AF, ATTEN= 88%, LAG= 43,3 MIN
ELEVATION AREA INC.STOR CUM.STOR STOR-IND METHOD
(FT) (AC) (AF) (AFl PEAK STORAGE = 17,15 AF
878.7 1.44 0.00 0.00 PEAK ELEVATION= 887.8 FT
883,7 1. 83 8.18 8.18 FLOOD ELEVATION= 888,7 FT
884,7 2,10 1.97 10.14 START ELEVATION= 884.7 FT
886.7 2,28 4.38 14.52 SPAN= 10-20 HRS, dt=,l HRS
888.7 2.46 4.74 19.26
# ROUTE
1 P
INVERT
884,7'
OUTLET DEVICES
24" CULVERT
n=.012 L=100' s=,ol'I'
Ke=.5
Cc=,9
Cd~.6
PONO 12 INFLOW & OUTFLOW
Pond 12
".
"0
150
".
".
r. 128
If) 118
t 100
v 90
80
'" '0
g 60
"- 5.
4e
3e
2.
,.
e",
STDR-IND METHOD
PE~ STOR::: 17.15 AF
PEAK ELEU= 887.8 FT
Qln= 178.5 CFS
Qout= 21 .96 CFS
LAG= 43.3 HIN
~- ---------------
I ----__
,
N ~ ! ~ ~ ~ ~ ~
'"
N
TIME (hour~)
I
Arden Hills, MN
ARDENHILLSSWMP
19990408 19991031
removal efficiencies {%I VS. device and particle class
1 2 3 4 5
device POt P1O% p30% P50% PSD!!
1 Pond .0 84 _ 6 94.1 97.9 99,8
49 OVERALL ,0 84,6 94.1 97.9 99,8
removal efficiencies 1%) VS. device and water quali ty component
device tss tp tkn cu pb zn he
1 Pond 95,3 69,4 61.0 61. 0 87,8 61.0 87.8
I 49 OVERALL 95.3 69,4 61.0 61.0 87,8 61.0 87.8
I
I
I
I
I
II
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
r
I
I
case title Arden Hills, MN
case data file ARDENHILLSSWMP
~stor.m data file ave48_90.pcp
particle file NURP50.PAR
air temp file prov6988.tmp
I precipitation volume factor 1.000
number of passes through precip file = 2
dates <yyyymmdd> start = 19990101, keep = 19990401, stop
I
case notes:
Arden Hills SWMP
AARDENOIOl.OO
Arden Hills, MN
I
Pond P-2
other coefficients:
min. inter-event time (hrs)
maximum continuity error %
snowfall temperature (deg-f)
snowmelt temperature (deg-f)
snowmelt coef (in/degF-day)
soil freeze temp (deg-f)
abstraction factor for snowmelt
perv. load factor for snowmelt
imperv. load factor for snowmelt
growing season months
growing season
non-growing season
I
10
2.00
32.00
32.00
,0600
32,00
1. 000
LOaD
1. 000
5
1.40
,50
i
10
2,10
1.10
I
watershed 1
surface runoff device
percolation device
Pond p-2
1 Pond
o
I
watershed area acres
scs curve number (pervious portion)
scale factor for perv. area runoff load
__'mpe~~ious area data
'mpervious fraction
mpervious depression storage inches
impervious runoff coefficient
scale factor for particle loads
sweeping frequency times/week
sweeping efficiency scale factor
sweeping start date
sweeping stop date
57.600
61. 000
1. 000
swept not
.440
,020
1. 000
1. 000
,000
1.000
101.
1231.
I
mmdd
mmdd
-
device
1 Pond
type
1 pond
bottom elevation feet 890,000
I bottom area acres 1.590
permanent pool area acres 2.2BO
permanent pool volume ac-ft 11.120
perm. pool infiltration rate in/hr ,000000
flood pool area acres 2,620
I flood pool volume ac-ft 9,820
flood pool infiltration rate in/hr .000000
flood pool drain time hours .000
outlet orifice diameter inches 24,000
orifice discharge coefficient ,600
I outlet weir length feet .000
weir discharge coefficient .000
perforated riser height feet .000
number of holes in riser ,000
hole diameter inches ,000
I particle removal scale factor 1. 000
outlet: 1 infiltration routed to device: 0 OUT
outlet: 2 normal outlet routed to device: 0 OUT
outlet: 3 spillway routed to device: 0 OUT
I
swep t
.000
,020
1. 000
1. 000
19991031
-;,.,'..,.
"'<"
Arden Hills, MN ARDENHILLSSWMP
number of storms 50, date range = 19990408
interval 4959. hrs, duration = 444. hrs
rainfall 19.96 inches, snowmelt =
device = 1 Pond
type
pond
flow
acre-ft
40.19
40.20
,00
mass-balance term
01 watershed inflows
06 normal outlet
08 sedimen + decay
09 total inflow
10 surface outflow
12 total outflow
13 total trapped
14 storage increase
15 mass balance check
40,19
40,20
40,20
.00
.00
-.01
load removal efficiency
continuity errors: volume
9:J ,:J2 %,
- .01 ~,
19990408 199910:J1
199910:J1
.00 inches
variable = tss
load
1bs
14264.86
866.91
13:J11.87
cone
ppm
130,5826
7,9347
.0000
14264.86
866.91
866.91
U:J11. 87
86,07
,DO
130,5826
7,9:J47
7,9:J47
adjusted
load
93,32 %
,00 %
device = 1 Pond type = pond variable = tp
flow load
mass-balance term acre-ft 1bs
01 watershed inflows 40.19 43,77
06 normal outlet 40,20 14,06
08 sedimen + decay ,00 29,35
09 total inflow 40.19 43,77
10 surface outflow 40,20 14,06
12 total outflow 40.20 14,06
13 total trapped ,00 29,35
14 storage increase ,DO ,35
15 mass balance check -,01 ,00
load removal efficiency 67.06 >, adjusted 67.06 %
continuity errors: volume - .01 %, load .00 >
conc
ppm
,4006
.1287
,DODD
,4006
.1287
.1287
I
I
Arden Hills, MN
~removal efficienci~S
device PO%
1 Pond .0
49 OVERALL . 0
I removal efficiencies
device tss
1 Pond 93.3
49 OVERALL 93.3
I
I
I
I
I
I
II
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
ARDENHILLSSWMP 19990408 19991031
1%) vs. device and particle class
2 3 4 5
P10% p30% PSO% P80%
79.5 91.3 96.5 99.7
79.5 91.3 96.5 99.7
1%) vs. device and water quality component
t1' tkn eu pb zn he
67.1 59.0 59.0 86.0 59.0 86.0
67.1 59.0 59.0 86.0 59.0 86.0
I
case title Arden Hills, MN
case data file ARDENHILLSSWMP
~storrn data file ave48_90.pcp
particle file NURP50.PAR
air temp file prov6988.tmp
I precipitation volume factor 1.000
number of passes through precip file = 2
dates <yyyymmdd> start = 19990101. keep = 19990401, stop
I
case notes:
Arden Hills SWMP
AARDEN0101.00
Arden Hills, MN
I
Pond P-3
I
other coefficients:
min. inter-event time (hrs)
maximum continuity error %
snowfall temperature (deg-f)
snowmelt temperature (deg-f}
snowmelt coef (in/degF-daYi
soil freeze temp (deg-fJ
abstraction factor for snowmelt
perv. load factor for snowmelt
irnperv. load factor for snowmelt
growing season months
growing season
non-growing season
I
I
watershed 1
surface runoff device
percolation device
Pond P-3
1 Pond
o
I
watershed area acres
ses curve number (pervious portion)
__scale factor for perv. area runoff load
1mpervious area data
mpervious fraction
1rnpervious depression storage inches
impervious runoff coefficient
scale factor for particle loads
sweeping frequency times/week
sweeping efficiency scale factor
sweeping start date
sweeping stop date
I
I
device
1 Pond
type
I
bottom elevation feet
bottom area acres
permanent pool area acres
permanent pool volume ac-ft
perm. pool infiltration rate in/hr
flood pool area acres
flood pool volume ac-ft
flood pool infiltration rate in/hr
flood pool drain time hours
outlet orifice diameter inches :
orifice discharge coefficient
outlet weir length feet
weir discharge coefficient
perforated riser height
number of holes in riser
hole diameter inches
particle removal scale factor
I
I
feet
I
outlet:
outlet:
outlet:
1 infiltration
2 normal outlet
3 spill way
routed
routed
routed
I
r
I
10
2.00
32.00
32.00
.0600
32.00
1. 00 0
1. 000
1- 000
5
1.40
.50
10
2.10
1.10
mmdd
mmdd
46.700
61. 000
1. 000
swept not
.460
.020
1. 000
1. 000
.000
1. 000
101.
1231.
1 pond
873.200
2.130
2.910
14.520
.000000
3.320
12.450
.000000
.000
24.000
.600
.000
.000
.000
.000
.000
1. 000
to
to
to
device: 0
device: 0
device: 0
OUT
OUT
OUT
19991031
swept
.000
.020
1- 000
1- 000
I
Arden Hills, MN ARDENHILLSSWMP
number of storms 50. date range = 19990408
interval 4959. hrs, duration = 444. hrs
rainfall 19.96 inches, snowmelt =
19990408 19991031
19991031
~
.00 inches
device = 1 Pond type pond variable = tss
flow load cone
mass-balance term acre-ft Ihs ppm
01 watershed inflows 34 .07 12091.13 130.5826
06 normal outlet 34.07 496 .10 5.3569
08 sedimen + decay .00 11516.92 .0000
09 total inflow 34.07 12091.13 130.5826
10 surface outflow 34.07 496.10 5.3569
12 total outflow 34.07 496.10 5.3569
13 total trapped .00 11516.92
14 storage increase .00 78.12
15 mass balance check -.01 .00
load removal efficiency 95.25 %, adjusted 95.25 %
continuity errors: volume -.02 %, load .00 %
device = 1 Pond type = pond variable = tp
flow load cone
mass-balance term acre-ft 1bs ppm
01 watershed inflows 34.07 37.10 .4006
06 normal outlet 34.07 10.91 .1179
08 sedirnen + decay .00 25.75 .0000
09 total inflow 34.07 37.10 .4006
10 surface outflow 34.07 10.91 .1179
12 total outflow 34.07 10.91 .1179
13 total trapped .00 25.75
14 storage increase .00 .43
15 mass balance check -.01 .00
load removal efficiency 69.42 %, adjusted 69.42 %
continuity errors: volume -.02 %, load .00 %
I
I
I
I
I
I
II
I
I
I
I
I
1
I
,
I
I
case title Arden Hills, MN
case data file ARDENHILLSSWMP
~storrn data file ave48_90.pcp
particle file NURP5Q.PAR
air temp file prov6988.tmp
I precipitation volume factor 1.000
number of passes through precip file = 2
. dates <yyyymmdd> start = 19990101, keep = 19990401.
I
case notes:
Arden Hills SWMP
AARDENOIOl.OO
Arden Hills. MN
I
Pond P-4
other coefficients;
min. inter-event time (hrs}
maximum continuity error %
snowfall temperature (deg-f)
snowmelt temperature (deg-f)
snowmelt coef (in/degp-day)
soil freeze temp (deg-f)
abstraction factor for snowmelt
perv. load factor for snowmelt
imperv. load factor for snowmelt
growing season months
growing season
non-growing season
I
10
2.00
32.00
32.00
.0600
32.00
1. 000
1. 000
LOOO
5
1.40
_50
I
10
2.10
1.10
I
watershed 1 Pond P-4
surface runoff device 1 Pond
percolation device 0
I
watershed area acres
scs curve number (pervious portion)
scale factor for perv. area runoff load
lIimpervious area data
impervious fraction
impervious depression storage inches
impervious runoff coefficient
scale factor for particle loads
sweeping frequency times/week
sweeping efficiency scale factor
sweeping start date
sweeping stop date
58.000
61.000
1. 000
swept not
.350
.020
1. 000
1. 000
, .000
1. 000
101.
1231.
I
roIlrld
roIlrld
I
device
1 Pond
type
I pond
I
bottom elevation feet 873.600
bottom area acres 2.130
permanent pool area acres 2.910
permanent pool volume ac-ft 14.520
penn. pool infiltration rate in/hr .000000
flood pool area acres 3.320
flood pool volume ac-ft 12.450
flood pool infiltration rate in/hr .000000
flood pool drain time hours .000
outlet orifice diameter inches 24.000
orifice discharge coefficient .600
outlet weir length feet .000
weir discharge coefficient _000
perforated riser height feet .000
number of holes in riser .000
hole diameter inches .000
particle removal scale factor 1. 000
outlet: 1 infiltration routed to device: 0 OUT
outlet: 2 normal outlet routed to device: 0 OUT
outlet: 3 spillway routed to device: 0 OUT
I
I
I
I
r
I
stop
19991031
swep t
.000
.020
LOOO
1. 000
I
Arden Hills, MN ARDENHILLSSWMP
number of storms 50, date range = 19990408
interval 4959. hrs, duration = 444. hrs
rainfall 19.96 inches, snowmelt =
19990408 19991031
19991031
~
.00 inches
device = 1 Pond type pond variable = tss
flow load cone
mass-balance term acre-ft lb. ppm
01 watershed inflows 32_19 11425.85 130.5826
06 normal outlet 32.20 445.67 5.0926
08 sedimen + decay .00 10905.85 .0000
09 total inflow 32.19 11425.85 130.5826
10 surface outflow 32.20 445.67 5.0926
12 total outflow 32.20 445.67 5.0926
13 total trapped .00 10905.85
14 storage increase .00 74.32
15 mass balance check -.01 .00
load removal efficiency 95.45 %, adjusted 95.45 %
continuity errors: volume -.02 %, load .00 %
device = 1 Pond type = pond variable = t1'
flow load cone
mass-balance term acre-ft lb. ppm
01 watershed inflows 32.19 35.06 .4006
06 normal outlet 32.20 10.21 .1166
DB sediroen + decay .00 24.42 .0000
09 total inflow 32.19 35.06 .4006
10 surface outflow 32.20 10.21 _1166
12 total outflow 32.20 10.21 .1166
13 total trapped .00 24.42
14 storage increase .00 .43
15 mass balance check -.01 .00
load removal efficiency 69.66 %, adjusted 69_66 %
continuity errors: volume -.02 %, load .00 %
I
I
I
I
I
I
III
I
I
I
I
I
1
I
,
I
I
Arden Hills, MN
~removal efficienc~es
device poi
1 Pond .0
~ 9 OVERALL . 0
I removal efficiencies
, device tss
1 Pond 95.4
49 OVERALL 95.4
I
I
I
I
I
I
II
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
r
I
ARDENHILLSSWMP 19990408 19991031
1%) vs. device and particle class
2 3 4 5
PIO% P30% P50% P80%
85.1 94.4 98.0 99.8
85.1 94.4 98.0 99.8
{%I vs. device and water quality component
tp tkn eu pb zn he
69.7 61.3 61.3 88.0 61.3 88.0
69.7 61.3 61.3 88.0 61.3 88.0
I
case title Arden Hills, MN
case data file ARDE~rlILLSSWMP
~torm data file ave48_90.pcp
particle file NURPSO.PAR
air temp file prov6988.tmp
I precipitation volume factor 1.000
number of passes through precip file = 2
dates <yyyyromdd> start = 19990101, keep = 19990401, stop
I
case notes:
Arden Hills SWMP
AARDEN0101.00
Arden Hills, MN
I
Pond P-S
I
other coefficients:
min. inter-event time (hrs)
maximum continuity error %
snowfall temperature (deg-fl
snowmelt temperature (deg-fl
snowmelt coef (in/degF-day)
soil freeze temp (deg-fl
abstraction factor for snowmelt
perv. load factor for snowmelt
imperv. load factor for snowmelt
growing season months
growing season
non-growing season
I
I
watershed 1 Pond P-5
surface runoff device 1 Pond
percolation device 0
I
10
2.00
32.00
32.00
.0600
32.00
1. 000
1. 000
1. 000
5
1.40
.50
10
2.10
1.10
watershed area acres
scs curve number (pervious portion)
scale factor for perv. area runoff load
!It'mpervious area data
'ropervious fraction
_ impervious depression storage inches
impervious runoff coefficient
scale factor for particle loads
sweeping frequency times/week
sweeping efficiency scale factor
sweeping start date
sweeping stop date
I
I
device
1 Pond
type
= 1 pond
I
bottom elevation feet
bottom area acres
permanent pool area acres
permanent pool volume ac-ft =
perm. pool infiltration rate in/hr
flood pool area acres
flood pool volume ac-ft
flood pool infiltration rate in/hr
flood pool drain time hours
outlet orifice diameter inches
orifice discharge coefficient
outlet weir length feet
weir discharge coefficient
perforated riser height feet
number of holes in riser
hole diameter inches
particle r~oval scale factor
I
I
I
outlet: 1 infiltration
outlet: 2 normal outlet
outlet: 3 spillway
routed to device: 0
routed to device: 0
routed to device: 0
OUT
OUT
OUT
I
r
I
31. 400
61. 000
1. 000
swept not
.740
.020
1. 000
1. 000
.000
LOaD
101.
1231.
nundd
nundd
918.000
1. 440
2.100
10.140
.000000
2.460
9.120
.000000
.000
24.000
.600
.000
.000
.000
.000
.000
1. 000
19991031
swept
.000
.020
1. 000
1_000
Arden Hills, MN ARDENHILLSSWMP
number of storms 50, date range = 19990408
interval 4959. hrs, duration = 444. hrs
rainfall 19.96 inches, snowmelt =
device = 1 Pond
mass-balance term
01 watershed inflows
06 normal outlet
08 sedimen + decay
09 total inflow
10 surface outflow
12 total outflow
13 total trapped
14 storage increase
15 mass balance check
load removal efficiency
continuity errors: volume
device = 1 Pond
mass - bal ance term
01 watershed inflows
06 normal outlet
08 sedimen + decay
09 total inflow
10 surface outflow
12 total outflow
13 total trapped
14 storage increase
15 mass balance check
load removal efficiency
continuity errors: volume
type
pond
flow
acre-ft
36.85
36.85
.00
36_85
36.85
36.85
.00
.00
-.01
93.27 %,
-.02 %,
type =
pond
flow
acre-ft
36.85
36.85
.00
36.85
36.85
36.85
.00
.00
-.01
67.01 %,
-.02 %,
I
19990408 19991031
19991031
.00 inches
variable = tss
load
1bs
13078.37
801.42
12198.26
13078_37
801. 42
801. 42
12198.26
78.69
.01
adjusted
load
variable = tp
load
1bs
40.13
12.91
26.89
40.13
12.91
12.91
26.89
.32
.00
adjusted
load
cone
ppm
130.5826
8.0006
.0000
~
130.5826
8.0006
8.0006
I
I
93.27 %
.00 %
I
cone
ppm
.4006
.1289
.0000
I
.4006
.1289
.1289
I
67.01 %
_ 00 %
I
II
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
,
I
I
Arden Hills, MN
I removal eff~cienci~s
.deVice POt
1 Pond .0
I 49 OVERALL .0
removal efficiencies
device tss
1 Pond 93.3
49 OVERALL 93.3
I
I
I
I
I
I
III
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
,
I
ARDENHILLSSWMP 19990408 19991031
(%1 VS. device and particle class
2 3 4 5
PlOt P30% P50% P80%
79.5 91.2 96.4 99.7
79.5 91.2 96.4 99.7
1%1 VS. device and water quality component
tp tkn eu pb zn he
67.0 58.9 58.9 86.0 58.9 86.0
67.0 58.9 58.9 86.0 58.9 86.0
I
case title Arden Hills, MN
case data file ARDENHILLSSWMP
~storm data file ave48_90.pcp
particle file NURP50.PAR
air temp file prov6988.trnp
I precipitation volume factor 1.000
number of passes through precip file = 2
dates <yyyymmdd> start = 19990101. keep = 19990401,
watershed area acres
ses curve number (pervious portion)
scale factor for perv. area runoff load
lIimpervious area data
impervious fraction
impervious depression storage inches
impervious runoff coefficient
scale factor for particle loads
sweeping frequency times/week
sweeping efficiency scale factor
sweeping start date
sweeping stop date
I
case notes:
Arden Hills SWMP
AARDEN0101.00
Arden Hills. MN
I
Pond P-6
I
other coefficients:
min. inter-event time (hrs)
maximum continuity error %
snowfall temperature (deg-f)
snowmelt temperature (deg-fl
snowmelt coef lin/degF-day)
soil freeze temp (deg-f)
abstraction factor for snowmelt
perv. load factor for snowmelt
imperv. load factor for snowmelt
growing season months
growing season
non-growing season
I
I
watershed 1 Pond p-6
surface runoff device 1 Pond
percolation device 0
I
I
I
device ~ 1 Pond
type
I
bottom elevation feet
bottom area acres
permanent pool area acres
permanent pool volume ac-ft
perm. pool infiltration rate in/hr
flood pool area acres
flood pool volume ac-ft
flood pool infiltration rate in/hr
flood pool drain time hours
outlet orifice diameter inches
orifice discharge coefficient
outlet weir length feet
weir discharge coefficient
perforated riser height feet
number of holes in riser
hole diameter inches
particle removal scale factor
I
I
I
outlet: 1 infiltration
outlet: 2 normal outlet
outlet: 3 spillway
routed to
routed to
routed to
I
r
I
10
2.00
32.00
32.00
.0600
32.00
1. 000
1. 000
1. 000
5
1.40
.50
mmdd
mmdd
1 pond
880.300
1.110
1. 690
7.970
.000000
2.020
15.380
.000000
.000
24_000
.600
.000
.000
.000
.000
.000
1.000
device: 0
device: 0
device: 0
10
2.10
1.10
30.100
61. 000
1. 000
swept not
.590
.020
1. 000
1. 000
.000
1. 000
10L
1231.
OUT
OUT
OUT
stop
19991031
swept
.000
.020
1. 000
1. 000
I
Arden Hills, MN ARDENHILLSSWMP
number of storms 50, date range::: 19990408
interval 4959. hrs, duration = 444. hrs
rainfall 19.96 inches, snowmelt =
device::: 1 Pond
mass-balance term
01 watershed inflows
06 normal outlet
08 sedimen + decay
09 total inflow
10 surface outflow
12 total outflow
13 total trapped
14 storage increase
15 mass balance check
load removal efficiency
continuity errors: volume
device = 1 Pond
mass-balance term
01 watershed inflows
06 normal outlet
08 sedimen + decay
09 total inflow
10 surface outflow
12 total outflow
13 total trapped
14 storage increase
15 mass balance check
load removal efficiency
continuity errors: volume
type
pond
flow
acre-ft
28.16
28.17
.00
28.16
28.17
28.17
.00
.00
.00
93.34 '%,
-.01 %.
type =
pond
flow
acre-ft
28.16
28.17
.00
28.16
28.17
28.17
.00
.00
.00
67.12 %,
- .01 %.
19990408 19991031
19991031
~
.00 inches
variable = tss
load
1bs
9995 _ 64
605.17
9330.22
cone
pprn
130.5826
7.9050
.0000
130.5826
7.9050
7.9050
I
9995.64
60S.17
60S.17
9330.22
60.26
.00
I
adjusted 93.34 .
load .00 .
variable = tp
load cone
1bs pprn
30.67 .4006
9.84 .1285
20.5B .0000
30_ 67 .4006
9.84 .12B5
9.84 .1285
20.58
.25
.00
adjusted 67.12 %
load .00 .
I
I
I
I
11
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
,
I
I
Arden Hills, MN
~remcval eff~c~enc~es
device PO~
1 Pond .0
II ::':::~:fieiene~:s
device tss
1 Pond 93.3
49 OVERALL 93.3
I
I
I
I
I
I
It
I
I
II
I
I
I
I
,
I
ARDENHILLSSWMP 19990408 19991031
('I vs. device and particle class
2 3 4 5
PIO% P30% PSO% p80%
BO.O 91.2 96_2 99.6
80.0 91.2 96.2 99.6
1%1 vs. device and water quality component
tp tkn eu pb zn he
67.1 59.0 59.0 86.0 59.0 B6.0
67.1 59.0 59.0 86.0 59.0 B6.0
I
case title Arden Hills, MN
case data file ARDENHILLSSWMP
~storrn data file ave48_90.pcp
particle file NURP50.PAR
air temp file prov6988.tmp
I precipitation volume factor 1.000
number of passes through precip file = 2
dates <yyyymrndd> start = 19990101, keep = 19990401,
I
case notes:
Arden Hills SWMP
AARDEN0101.00
Arden Hills, MN
I
Pond P-7
other coefficients:
min. inter-event time (hrs)
maximum continuity error %
snowfall temperature ldeg-f)
snowmelt temperature (deg-f)
snowmelt coet (in/degF-day)
soil freeze temp (deg-f)
abstraction factor for snowmelt
perv. load factor for snowmelt
imperv. load factor for snowmelt
growing season months
growing season
non-growing season
I
10
2.00
32.00
32.00
.0600
32.00
1. 000
1. 000
1. 000
5
1.40
.50
I
10
2.10
1.10
I
watershed 1
surface runoff device
percolation device
Pond P-S
1 Pond
o
I
watershed area acres
scs curve number (pervious portion)
scale factor for perv. area runoff load
..mpervious area data
mpervious fraction
mpervious depression storage inches
impervious runoff coefficient
scale factor for particle loads
sweeping frequency times/week
sweeping efficiency scale factor
sweeping start date
sweeping stop date
77.800
61. 000
1. 000
swep t not
.300
.020
1. 000
1. 000
.000
1.000
101-
1231.
I
mrndd
mmdd
I deviee
1 Pond
type
1 pond
bottom elevation feet 865.200
I bottom area, acres 2.130
permanent pool area acres 2.910
permanent pool volume ac-ft 14.520
penn. pool infiltration rate in/hr .000000
flood pool area acres 3.320
I flood pool volume ac-ft 12.450
flood pool infiltration rate in/hr .000000
flood pool drain time hours .000
outlet orifice diameter inches 24.000
orifice discharge coefficient .600
I outlet weir length feet .000
weir discharge coefficient .000
perforated riser height feet. .000
number of holes in riser .000
hole diameter inches .000
I particle removal scale factor 1.000
outlet: 1 infilt.ration routed to device: 0 OUT
outlet: 2 normal outlet routed to device: 0 OUT
outlet: 3 spillway routed to device: 0 OUT
I
stop
19991031
swept
.000
.020
1. 000
1. 000
I
Arden Hills, MN ARDENHILLSSWMP
number of storms 50, date range = 19990408
interval 4959. hrs, duration = 444. brs
rainfall 19.96 inches, snowmelt =
device = 1 Pond type = pond variable = tp
flow load cone
mass-balance tem acre-ft lbs ppm
01 watershed inflows 37.01 40.31 .4006
06 normal outlet 37.02 12.07 .1199
08 sedimen + decay .00 27.83 .0000
09 total inflow 37.01 40.31 .4006
10 surface outflow 37.02 12.07 .1199
12 total outflow 37.02 12.07 .1199
13 total trapped .00 27.83
14 storage increase .00 .41
15 mass balance check -.01 .00
load removal efficiency 69.04 %, adjusted 69.04 %
continuity errors: volume -.01 %, load .00 %
device = 1 Pond
type
pond
flow
acre-ft
37.01
37.02
.00
mass-balance term
01 watershed inflows
06 normal outlet
08 sedimen + decay
09 total inflow
10 surface outflow
12 total outflow
13 total trapped
14 storage increase
15 mass balance check
37.01
37.02
37.02
.00
.00
-.01
load removal efficiency
continuity errors: volume
94.94 %,
-.01 %,
19990408 19991031
19991031
J
I
.00 inches
variable = tss
load
1bs
13136.91
580.18
12472.74
cone
ppm
130.5826
5.7663
.0000
13136.91
580.18
580.18
12472.74
83.99
.01
I
130.5826
5.7663
5.7663
I
adjusted
load
94.94 %
.00 %
I
I
I
I
II
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
Arden Hills, MN
~remova1
device
1 Pond
49 OVERALL
I
efhcienC1es
1
pOt
.0
.0
I
removal efficiencies
device tss
1 Pond 94.9
49 OVERALL 94.9
I
I
I
I
I
.
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
f
I
ARDENHILLSSWMp 19990408 19991031
{%I VS. device and particle class
2 3 4 5
PIO% p30% p50% P80%
83.7 93.7 97.7 99.8
83.7 93.7 97.7 99.8
I%} VS. device and water quality component
tp tkn eu pb zn he
69_0 60.7 60.7 87.5 60.7 87.5
69.0 60.7 60.7 87.5 60.7 87.5
I
~
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
.
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
{'
I
case title
case data file
storm data file ~
particle file
air temp file
~ Arden Hills LSWMP
~ ARDENH8. CAS
ave48_90.pcp
~ NURP50.PAR
~ prov6988.tmp
precipitation volume factor ~ 1.000
number of passes through precip file ~ 2
dates <yyyyrnrndd> start ~ 19990101, keep ~ 19990401, stop ~ 19991231
case notes:
Arden Hills LSWMP
Pond P-8
SEH# A-ARDEN0101.00
PROPOSED CONDITIONS
other coefficients:
min. inter-event time (hrs) =
maximum continuity error % =
snowfall temperature (deg-f) ~
snowmelt temperature (deg-f)
snowmelt coef (in/degF-day) ~
soil freeze temp (deg-f)
abstraction factor for snowmelt
perv. load factor for snowmelt ~
imperv. load factor for snowmelt =
growing season months
growing season ==
non-growing season
watershed ~ 1 P-8
surface runoff device = 1 P-B
percolation device = 0
10
2.00
32.00
32.00
.0600
32.00
1.000
1. 000
1.000
5
1.40
.50
watershed area acres
scs curve number (pervious portion)
scale factor for perv. area runoff load
impervious area data
impervious fraction
impervious depression storage
impervious runoff coefficient
scale factor for particle loads
sweeping frequency times/week :=
sweeping efficiency scale factor
sweeping start date
sweeping stop date
device ~ 1 P-8
type ~ 1 pond
feet ~ 873.100
bottom elevation
inches
mrndd ~
mrndd ~
~
~
~
~
~
10
2.10
1.10
24.000
61.000
1. 000
swept not
.350
.020
1. 000
1. 000
.000
1. 000
101.
1231.
swept
.000
.020
1.000
1. 000
bottom area acres ~ .810
permanent pool area acres ~ 1. 330
permanent pool volume ac-ft ~ 5.060
perm. pool inf il tra tion rate in/hr ~ .000000
flood pool area acres ~ 1.620
flood pool volume ac-ft 5.890
flood pool infiltration rate in/hr ~ .000000
flood pool drain time hours ~ .000
outlet orifice diameter inches ~ 24.000
orifice discharge coefficient .600
outlet weir length feet .000
weir discharge coefficient ~ .000
perforated riser height feet ~ .000
number of holes in riser ~ .000
hole diameter inches ~ .000
particle removal scale factor ~ 1. 000
outlet: 1 infiltration routed to device: 0 OUT
outlet: 2 normal outlet routed to device: 0 OUT
outlet: 3 spillway routed to device: 0 OUT
I
~
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
.
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
f
I
Arden Hills LSWMP ARDENH8.CAS
number of storms = 66, date range = 19990408
interval = 6423. hrs, duration = 611. hrs
rainfall = 22.84 inches, snowmelt =
device = 1 P-8
mass-balance term
01 watershed inflows
06 normal outlet
08 sedimen + decay
09 total inflow
10 surface outflow
12 total outflow
13 total trapped
14 storage increase
15 mass balance check
type = pond
flow
acre-ft
15.14
15.15
.00
15.14
15.15
15.15
.00
.00
.00
load removal efficiency =
continuity errors: volume =
device = 1 P-8
mass-balance term
01 watershed inflows
06 normal outlet
08 sedimen + decay
09 total inflow
10 surface outflow
12 total outflow
13 total trapped
14 storage increase
15 mass balance check
96.07 %,
-.03 %,
type = pond
flow
acre-ft
15.14
15.15
.00
15.14
15.15
15.15
.00
.00
.00
load removal efficiency =
continuity errors: volume =
70.82 %,
-.03 %,
19990408 19991231
19991231
.00 inches
variable = tSE
load
1bs
5482.59
220.65
5266.85
cone
ppm
133.2238
5.3601
.0000
5482.59
220.65
220.65
5266.85
-4.91
.00
133.2238
5.3601
5.3601
adjusted = 96.07 %
load .00 %
variable = tp
load cone
lbs ppm
16.74 .4067
4.88 .1186
11.85 .0000
16.74 .4067
4.88 .1186
4.88 .1186
11.85
.00
.00
adjusted = 70.82 %
load = .00 %
Arden Hills LSWMP ARDENH8 . CAS 19990408 19991231
removal efficiencies (%) vs. device and particle class
1 2 3 4 5
device PO% PlO% P30% P50% P80%
1 P-8 .0 89.1 94.2 97.5 99.8
49 OVERALL .0 89.1 94.2 97.5 99.8
removal efficiencies (%) vs. device and water quality component
device tss tp tkn Cll pb zn hc
1 P-8 96.1 70.8 62.4 62.4 88.7 62.4 88.7
49 OVERALL 96.1 70.8 62.4 62.4 88.7 62.4 88.7
I
J
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
.
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
--
I
I
~
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
.
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
l'
I
case title
case data file
storm data file
particle file
air temp file
= Arden Hills LSWMP
= ardenh9.cas
ave48_90.pcp
= NURP50.PAR
= prov6988.tmp
precipitation volume factor = 1.000
number of passes through precip file = 2
dates <yyyyrnmdd> start = 19990101, keep = 19990401, stop = 19991231
case notes:
Arden Hills LSWMP
Pond P-9
SEH# A-ARDEN0101.00
PROPOSED CONDITIONS
other coefficients:
min. inter-event time (hrs) ;
maximum continuity error %
snowfall temperature (deg-f) =
snowmelt temperature (deg-f)
snowmelt coef (in/degF-day)
soil freeze temp (deg-f) =
abstraction factor for snowmelt =
perv. load factor for snowmelt =
imperv. load factor for snowmelt =
growing season months =
growing season
non-growing season ;:;::
watershed 1 P-9
surface runoff device = 1 P-9
percolation device = 0
10
2.00
32.00
32.00
.0600
32.00
1. 000
1.000
1.000
5
1.40
.50
10
2.10
1.10
watershed area acres = 64.900
scs curve number (pervious portion) = 61.000
scale factor for perv. area runoff load = 1.000
impervious area data swept not swept
impervious fraction = .380 .000
impervious depression storage inches = .020 .020
impervious runoff coefficient = 1.000 1.000
scale factor for particle loads = 1.000 1.000
sweeping frequency times/week = .000
sweeping efficiency scale factor = 1. 000
sweeping start date nundd = 101.
sweeping stop date nundd = 1231.
device = 1 P-9
type = 1 pond
bottom elevation
feet 901. 200
I
bottom area acres = 1. 830
permanent pool area acres = 2.550
permanent pool volume ac-ft 12.600
perm. pool infiltration rate in/hr = .000000
flood pool area acres = 2.940
flood pool volume ac-ft = 10.970
flood pool infiltration rate in/hr = .000000
flood pool drain time hours = .000
outlet orifice diameter inches 24.000
orifice discharge coefficient = .600
outlet weir length feet = .000
weir discharge coefficient = .000
perforated riser height feet = .000
number of holes in riser .000
hole diameter inches = .000
particle removal scale factor 1.000
outlet: 1 infiltration routed to device: 0 OUT
outlet: 2 normal outlet routed to device: 0 OUT
outlet: 3 spillway routed to device: 0 OUT
J
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
.
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
..
I
I
~
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
.
I
I
I
I
I
I
f
I
Arden Hills LSWMP ardenh9 . cas
number of storms = 66, date range = 19990408
interval = 6423. hrs, duration = 611. hrs
rainfall = 22.84 inches, snowmelt =
device = 1 P-9
type
pond
flow
acre-ft
44.45
44.46
.00
mass-balance term
01 watershed inflows
06 normal outlet
08 sedimen + decay
09 total inflow
10 surface outflow
12 total outflow
13 total trapped
14 storage increase
15 mass balance check
44.45
44.46
44.46
.00
.00
-.01
19990408 19991231
19991231
.00 inches
variable = tss
load
Ibs
16096.62
795.99
15320.54
cone
ppm
133.2238
6.5870
.0000
16096.62
795.99
795.99
15320.54
-19.91
.01
133.2238
6.5870
6.5870
load removal efficiency = 95.18 %, adjusted = 95.18 %
continuity errors: volume = -.02 %, load = .00 %
device = 1 P-9 type = pond variable = tp
flow load cone
mass-balance term acre-ft Ibs ppm
01 watershed inflows 44.45 49.14 .4067
06 normal outlet 44.46 14.94 .1236
08 sedimen + decay .00 34.25 .0000
09 total inflow 44.45 49.14 .4067
10 surface outflow 44.46 14.94 .1236
12 total outflow 44.46 14.94 .1236
13 total trapped .00 34.25
14 storage increase .00 -.05
15 mass balance check -.01 .00
load removal efficiency = 69.70 %, adjusted = 69.70 %
continuity errors: volume = -.02 %, load = .00 %
Arden Hills LSWMP ardenh9.cas 19990408 19991231
removal efficiencies (%) vs. device and particle class
1 2 3 4 5
device PO% P10% P30% P50% P80%
1 P-9 .0 85.9 93.2 97.3 99.8
49 OVERALL .0 85.9 93.2 97.3 99.8
removal efficiencies (%) vs. device and water quality component
device tss tp tkn cu ph zn hc
1 P-9 95.2 69.7 61.4 61.4 87.9 61.4 87.9
49 OVERALL 95.2 69.7 61.4 61.4 87.9 61.4 87.9
I
~
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
.
I
I
I
I
I
I
:-
I
case title
case data file
storm data file =
particle file
air temp file
= Arden Hills LSWMP
= ardenhl0.cas
ave48_90 .pcp
NURPSO. PAR
= prov6988.trnp
precipitation volume factor = 1.000
number of passes through precip file = 2
dates <yyyyrnmdd> start = 19990101, keep = 19990401, stop = 19991231
case notes:
Arden Hills LSWMP
Pond P-l0
SEH# A-ARDEN010l.00
PROPOSED CONDITIONS
other coefficients:
min. inter-event time (hrs)
maximum continuity error %
snowfall temperature (deg-f)
snowmelt temperature (deg-f)
snowmelt coef (in/degF-day)
soil freeze temp (deg-f)
abstraction factor for snowmelt
perv. load factor for snowmelt
imperv. load factor for snowmelt
growing season months
growing season =
non-growing season =
watershed = 1
surface runoff device
percolation device
P-l0
= 1
= 0
P-l0
10
2.00
= 32.00
= 32.00
.0600
= 32.00
= 1. 000
= 1. 000
= 1. 000
= 5 10
1.40 2.10
.50 1.10
watershed area acres
seB curve number (pervious portion)
scale factor for perv. area runoff load
impervious area data
impervious fraction
impervious depression storage
impervious runoff coefficient
scale factor for particle loads
sweeping frequency times/week =
sweeping efficiency scale factor
sweeping start date
sweeping stop date
device = 1 P-l0
28.000
61.000
1. 000
swept not
.390
.020
1.000
1.000
.000
1. 000
101.
1231.
=
=
inches
=
mmdd =
mmdd =
type = 1 pond
feet 873.800
bottom elevation
swept
.000
.020
1. 000
1. 000
I
bottom area acres .810
permanent pool area acres = 1. 330
permanent pool volume ac-ft = 6.020
perm. pool infiltration rate in/hr = .000000
flood pool area acres 1.620
flood pool volume ac-ft = 5.890
flood pool infiltration rate in/hr .000000
flood pool drain time hours = .000
outlet orifice diameter inches = 24.000
orifice discharge coefficient = .600
outlet weir length feet .000
weir discharge coefficient = .000
perforated riser height feet = .000
number of holes in riser = .000
hole diameter inches = .000
particle removal scale factor = 1.000
outlet: 1 infiltration routed to device: 0 OUT
outlet: 2 normal outlet routed to device: 0 OUT
outlet: 3 spillway routed to device: 0 OUT
J
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
.
I
I
I
I
I
I
~
I
I
~
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
.
I
I
I
I
I
I
~
I
Arden Hills LSWMP ardenhlO.cas
number of storms = 66, date range = 19990408
interval = 6423. hrs, duration = 611. hrs
rainfall 22.84 inches, snowmelt =
device = 1 P-I0
type
pond
flow
acre-it
19.68
19.69
.00
mass-balance term
01 watershed inflows
06 normal outlet
08 sedimen + decay
09 total inflow
10 surface outflow
12 total outflow
13 total trapped
14 storage increase
15 mass balance check
19.68
19.69
19.69
.00
.00
.00
19990408 19991231
19991231
.00 inches
variable = tss
load
1bs
7127.36
335.99
6799.44
cone
ppm
133.2237
6.2788
.0000
7127.36
335.99
335.99
6799.44
-8.06
.00
133.2237
6.2788
6.2788
load removal efficiency = 95.40 %, adjusted 95.40 %
continuity errors: volume = -.02 %, load = .00 %
device = 1 P-I0 type = pond variable = tp
flow load cone
mass-balance term acre-ft Ibs ppm
01 watershed inflows 19.68 21. 76 .4067
06 normal outlet 19.69 6.54 .1222
08 sedirnen + decay .00 15.24 .0000
09 total inflow 19.68 21. 76 .4067
10 surface outflow 19.69 6.54 .1222
12 total outflow 19.69 6.54 .1222
13 total trapped .00 15.24
14 storage increase .00 -.01
15 mass balance check .00 .00
load removal efficiency = 70.02 %, adjusted 70.02 %
continuity errors: volume = -.02 %, load = .00 %
I
Arden Hills LSWMP ardenh9.cas 19990408 19991231
removal efficiencies (%) vs. device and particle class
1 2 3 4 5
device PO% P10% P30% P50% P80%
1 P-9 .0 85.9 93.2 97.3 99.8
49 OVERALL .0 85.9 93.2 97.3 99.8
removal efficiencies (%) V8. device and water quali ty component
device tss tp tkn eu pb zn he
1 P-9 95.2 69.7 61.4 61.4 87.9 61.4 87.9
49 OVERALL 95.2 69.7 61.4 61.4 87.9 61.4 87.9
J
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
II
I
I
I
I
I
I
-:
I
I
~
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
.
I
I
I
I
I
I
~
I
case title
case data file
storm data file =
particle file
air temp file
= Arden Hills LSWMP
= ardenh11. cas
ave48_90.pcp
= NURP50.PAR
= prov6988.tmp
precipitation volume factor = 1.000
number of passes through precip file = 2
dates <yyyymmdd> start = 19990101, keep = 19990401, stop = 19991231
case notes:
Arden Hills LSWMP
Pond P-ll
SEH# A-ARDEN0101.00
PROPOSED CONDITIONS
other coefficients:
min. inter-event time (hrs)
maximum continuity error %
snowfall temperature (deg-f)
snowmelt temperature (deg-f)
snowmelt coef (in/degF-day)
soil freeze temp (deg-f)
abstraction factor for snowmelt
perv. load factor for snowmelt
irnperv. load factor for snowmelt
growing season months
growing season :;
non-growing season =
10
= 2.00
32.00
= 32.00
= .0600
32.00
1.000
= 1. 000
1. 000
5 10
1. 40 2.10
.50 1.10
watershed = 1
surface runoff device
percolation device
P-ll
= 1
= 0
P-ll
watershed area acres
seB curve number (pervious portion)
scale factor for perv. area runoff load
impervious area data
impervious fraction
impervious depression storage
impervious runoff coefficient
scale factor for particle loads
sweeping frequency times/week =
sweeping efficiency scale factor
sweeping start date
sweeping stop date
28.000
61.000
1.000
swept not
.400
.020
1.000
1.000
.000
1.000
101.
1231.
=
=
=
=
inches
=
=
=
=
lTU1\dd
lTU1\dd
device
1 P-ll
type 1 pond
bottom elevation
feet = 877.300
swept
.000
.020
1.000
1.000
bottom area acres = .830
permanent pool area acres = 1.350
permanent pool volume ac-ft 6.140
penn. pool infiltration rate in/hr = .000000
flood pool area acres 1. 640
flood pool volume ac-ft = 4.410
flood pool infiltration rate in/hr = .000000
flood pool drain time hours = .000
outlet orifice diameter inches = 24.000
orifice discharge coefficient = .600
outlet weir length feet = .000
weir discharge coefficient = .000
perforated riser height feet .000
number of holes in riser .000
hole diameter inches = .000
particle removal scale factor 1.000
outlet: 1 infiltration routed to device: 0 OUT
outlet: 2 normal outlet routed to device: 0 OUT
outlet: 3 spillway routed to device: 0 OUT
I
~
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
.
I
I
I
I
I
I
~
I
Arden Hills LSWMP ardenh11. cas
number of storms = 66, date range = 19990408
interval = 6423. hrs, duration = 611. hrs
rainfall = 22.84 inches, snowmelt =
device = 1 P-11
mass-balance term
01 watershed inflows
06 normal outlet
08 sedimen + decay
09 total inflow
10 surface outflow
12 total outflow
13 total trapped
14 storage increase
15 mass balance check
type = pond
flow
acre-ft
20.19
20.19
.00
20.19
20.19
20.19
.00
.00
.00
load removal efficiency
continuity errors: volume =
device = 1 P-11
mass-balance term
01 watershed inflows
06 normal outlet
08 sedimen + decay
09 total inflow
10 surface outflow
12 total outflow
13 total trapped
14 storage increase
15 mass balance check
95.37 %,
-.02 %,
type = pond
flow
acre-ft
20.19
20.19
.00
20.19
20.19
20.19
.00
.00
.00
load removal efficiency ~
continuity errors: volume
69.99 %,
-.02 %,
19990408 19991231
19991231
.00 inches
variable ;;: tss
load
lbs
7310.12
346.43
6971.99
cone
ppm
133.2238
6.3123
.0000
7310.12
346.43
346.43
6971. 99
-8.31
.00
133.2238
6.3123
6.3123
adjusted 95.37 %
load = .00 %
variable = tp
load cone
lbs ppm
22.32 .4067
6.71 .1223
15.62 .0000
22.32 .4067
6.71 .1223
6.71 .1223
15.62
-.01
.00
adjusted = 69.99 %
load = .00 %
I
Arden Hills LSWMP ardenhll.cas 19990408 19991231
removal efficiencies (%) vs. device and particle class
1 2 3 4 5
device PO% PlO% P30% P50% P80%
1 P-ll .0 87.2 93.3 96.9 99.7
49 OVERALL .0 87.2 93.3 96.9 99.7
removal efficiencies (%) vs. device and water quality component
device tss tp tkn ell pb zn he
1 P-ll 95.4 70.0 61. 7 61. 7 88.0 61. 7 88.0
49 OVERALL 95.4 70.0 61. 7 61. 7 88.0 61. 7 88.0
J
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
.
I
I
I
I
I
I
~
I
I
~
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
.
I
I
I
I
I
I
~
I
case title
case data file
storm data file
particle file
air temp file
= Arden Hills LSWMP
= ARDENH12. CAS
ave48_90.pcp
= NURP50.PAR
= prov6988.tmp
precipitation volume factor = 1.000
number of passes through precip file = 2
dates <yyyymmdd> start = 19990101, keep = 19990401, stop
case notes:
Arden Hills LSWMP
Pond P-12
SEH# A-ARDEN0101.00
PROPOSED CONDITIONS
other coefficients:
min. inter-event time (hrs) =
maximum continuity error % =
snowfall temperature (deg-f)
snowmelt temperature (deg-f)
snowmelt coef (in/degF-day) =
soil freeze temp (deg-f)
abstraction factor for snowmelt =
perv. load factor for snowmelt =
irnperv. load factor for snowmelt =
growing season months =
growing season
non-growing season ~
watershed 1
surface runoff device
percolation device
P-12
= 1
= 0
P-12
10
2.00
32.00
32.00
.0600
32.00
1. 000
1.000
1.000
5
1.40
.50
watershed area acres =
5eB curve number (pervious portion) =
scale factor for perv. area runoff load =
impervious area data
impervious fraction
impervious depression storage inches
impervious runoff coefficient =
scale factor for particle loads
sweeping frequency times/week
sweeping efficiency scale factor =
sweeping start date mmdd
sweeping stop date rnmdd
device
1 P-12
type 1 pond
feet = 884.700
bottom elevation
10
2.10
1.10
43.700
61. 000
1. 000
swept not
.350
.020
1. 000
1.000
.000
1. 000
101.
1231.
19991231
swept
.000
.020
1.000
1.000
I
bottom area acres = 1. 440
permanent pool area acres = 2.100
permanent pool volume ac-ft = 10.140
perm. pool infiltration rate in/hr = .000000
flood pool area acres = 2.460
flood pool volume ac-ft 9.120
flood pool infiltration rate in/hr .000000
flood pool drain time hours = .000
outlet orifice diameter inches = 24.000
orifice discharge coefficient .600
outlet weir length feet = .000
weir discharge coefficient = .000
perforated riser height feet = .000
number of holes in riser = .000
hole diameter inches = .000
particle removal scale factor = 1.000
outlet: 1 infiltration routed to device; 0 OUT
outlet: 2 normal outlet routed to device: .0 OUT
outlet: 3 spillway routed to device: 0 OUT
J
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
.
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
..
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
.
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
Arden Hills LSWMP ARDENH12 . CAS
number of storms = 66, date range = 19990408
interval = 6423. hrs, duration = 611. hrs
rainfall = 22.84 inches, snowmelt =
device = 1 P-12
mass-balance term
01 watershed inflows
06 normal outlet
08 sedimen + decay
09 total inflow
10 surface outflow
12 total outflow
13 total trapped
14 storage increase
15 mass balance check
type = pond
flow
acre-ft
27.57
27.58
.00
load removal efficiency
continuity errors: volume =
device = 1 P-12
mass-balance term
01 watershed inflows
06 normal outlet
08 sedimen + decay
09 total inflow
10 surface outflow
12 total outflow
13 total trapped
14 storage increase
15 mass balance check
27.57
27.58
27.58
.00
.00
-.01
96.16 %,
-.03 %,
type = pond
flow
acre-ft
27.57
27.58
.00
load removal efficiency =
continuity errors: volume =
27.57
27.58
27.58
.00
.00
-.01
70.92 %,
-.03 %,
19990408 19991231
19991231
.00 inches
variable = tss
load
lbs
9982.88
395.52
9599.72
cone
ppm
133.2238
5.2769
.0000
9982.88
395.52
395.52
9599.72
-12.36
.00
133.2238
5.2769
5.2769
adjusted = 96.16 %
load = .00 %
variable = tp
load cone
1bs ppm
30.48 .4067
8.85 .1181
21. 62 .0000
30.48 .4067
8.85 .1181
8.85 .1181
21. 62
.01
.00
adjusted = 70.93 %
load = .00 %
Arden Hills LSWMP ARDENH12.CAS 19990408 19991231
removal efficiencies (%) vs. device and particle class
1 2 3 4 5
device PO% P10% P30% P50% P80%
1 P-12 .0 89.0 94.5 97.7 99.8
49 OVERALL .0 89.0 94.5 97.7 99.8
removal efficiencies (%) vs. device and water quali ty component
device tss tp tkn cu pb zn he
1 P-12 96.2 70.9 62.5 62.5 88.8 62.5 88.8
49 OVERALL 96.2 70.9 62.5 62.5 88.8 62.5 88.8
---------
I
J
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
.
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
II
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
Appendix E
Data from MPCA Lake Water Quality Assessment Program and MDNR Lakes Database
I
~
I
I
I
I
I
I
II
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
Lake Water Quality Database
~"
.".~~. '.
":c<"""
~
Minnesota Pollution
Control Agency
S~3r1
'"
Ind_
'.".t
(;103.,'0'
HWe
\~DNR>
L-...2:.
Exit the MPCA web
site and search the
DNR Lake finder for
information on this
lake.
r"-,"'-'
:.1111JJ
.......~ .- .- ,- ,- ,,~ "..
Full Secchi Disk data
1S
available on this lake
A lake water quality Assessment
was done on this lake in 1998.
This report may be available
electronically or in our MPCA
library. Please contact
steven.heiskary@pca.state.run.us
for furthur information.
Page I of3
Lake Water Quality Assessment Program
Lake Water Quality Database
Lake Location Information
Josephine Lake
DNR Lake ID number: 62-0057
County: RAMSEY
Location from nearest town: IN ROSEVILLE
This lake has a total surface area of 109 acres and has a
maximum depth of 44 feet with the mean depth being 11 feet
Josephine Lake is located in the CHF, North Central
Hardwood Forest ecoregion and the UMB, Upper Mississippi
river basin.
Swimming is Full Support (Marginal).
Lake Quality Information
HydroloJ;ic Unit Code: 07010206
Monitored or Evaluated: Monitored
degrees
minutes
seconds
decimal
degrees
450210 45.0361
930910 -93.1527
X Y
UTM 487949 498696'
A "zoom-able" map is also
available of this lake locatior
Alkalinity support - is the lake threatened by acid rain? FS
Alkalinity: 90 (parts per million - ppm)
Number of alkalinity readings used to calculate mean: 110
hrto'//,blR,OCR,tMe. mn ,,,/c,,i-hio/lkwnQRRpRrlF1l11 nl ?rp,r= 170Q
Rlilnl
Lake Water Quality Database
Page 2 on
Need Help? If you
need help
understanding the data
in this page full
supporting
documentation is
available on this data
or you may click on
the links in this page
to get specific
documentation.
Color: 13(Platinum-cobalt Units)
Number of Color Readings used to calculate color: 4
Mean total phosphorus: 37 (parts per billion - ppb)
N umber of total phosphorus measurements used to calculate
mean: 113
Mean chlorophyll-a: 8.4 (ppb)
Number of cWorophyll-a measurements used to calculate
mean: 109
Mean Secchi disk: 2.5 (meters)
Number of Secchi disk readings to calculate mean: 101
;(11~l)1\rll'phir.
Mi~flf:(1~,hk
F.lltmphir
HY11\'!n_"IIJr.n,\'r
Tropluc
~tu t~ IlJldE':'l:
T.iUlsparE!n.t).
r.m~
CMlJIl'op'!l)-ll~
(ppb"1
T{I'I:o.1!
Pho!:pnorus
(ppbj
-TraJlsp{;rf~CJ - Chlorophyll-il -Tlllall'hosplwrm
See the difference! Oligotrophic vs Hypereutropic
Carlson's Trophc State Index
based on TP=14A21N (fP)+4.15:
Carlson's trophic state index
based on GILA = 9.811n (CHLA)+ 30.6: 51
Carlson's trophc state index
based on SDM = 60 - 14.41 In (SDM):
Average of all available index
values:
trophic status alpha:
56
Learn about the
Carlson's Tro1;Jhic
S tate Index and
47 how
these values are
51 determined.
E
Lake Quality Ranking Information available
Percentile rank of TP concentration for that ecoregion: 62
Percentile rank of CHLA for that ecoregion: 72
Percentile ranking of TSI value based on all lakes in ecoregic
64
List of rankings for the North Central Hardwood Forest
ecoregion.
httn"/Ir1':lt.o;:a nf'q ~htp mn Ilco/f"'(yl_hinl1w-ufnQQ"Rp,Q.4'Hnl1 .....)?rF>('-17no
Rrllfl1
I
~
I
I
I
I
I
I
II
I
I
'I
I
I
I
I
I
~
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
.
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
Citizen Lake Monitoring Program Data
e
Minnesota Pollution
Control A{Jency
se"
I.
GIV)>"Y
..
Additional
Search
Lake water quality
data might also be
available for this lake
Page 1 of2
Citizen lake
Monitoring Program
Secchi Data from the Citizen Lake Monitoring Program. For
Josephine Lake
This following graph represents Secchi transparency data
collected by volunteers in the Citizen Lake-Monitoring
Program. All values are expressed in units of feet. Data
which has not been QAlQC (qualilty control) checked will
appear as il red verticle line representing a Secchi rope. The
long-term mean for this lake is represented by a horizontal
line on the graph.
Data for Josephine Lake
21
5 -
1-
10-
~~"
- Unl.'t:l"'ified
I I
2000 2001
,
...,
,
1997
I I
1998 1999
Average Secchi Reading (feet)
Average
Year Secchi
Reading
(feet) Click on the year at the
1978 3.0 left to get full
information about the
1996 8.3 data samples for that
year.
1997 7.0
1998 6.2 Average is computed by
the months June-Sept.
1999 6.8
. 2000 7.4
2001 11.0
hUp :11 data. pc a.state. mn. us! cgi -bin! clmpsearch. pI ?lakeID=62-0057
6/25/01
Minnesota DNR - Lake Finder: Lake Information Report
Page 1 of 3
Lake Information Report
Name: JOSEPHINE
Nearest Town: ROSEVILLE
Primary County: Ramsey
Survey Date: 07/22/96
Inventory Number: 62-0057-00
Public Access Information
Ownership
County
Type
Concrete
Description
COUNTY ACCESS IN PARK ON THE EAST SHORE OF THE LAKE OFF
OF LEXINGTON A VENUE.
Lake Characteristics
Lake Area (acres): 118.00
Littoral Area (acres): 81.00
Maximum Depth (ft): 44.00
Water Claritv (ft): NfA
POmiIlgntRmtQmSIJQ~tr"'t~: NfA
Abundance of Aquatic Plants: Nf A
Maximum Depth of Plant Growth (ft): NfA
Looking for DNR fish and wildlife management news? Get the latest information on-line with
the DNR's new Fish & Wildlife Today webzine. To be put on the e-mailinglist.click here.
Fish Sampled up to the 1996 Survey Year
Number offish per net
Species Gear Used Caught Normal Range Average Fish Normal Range
Weight (lbs) (lbs)
Black Bullhead Gillne1 11.5 5.2 - 56.2 0.46 0.2 - 0.5
Trap net 0.6 1.3 - 26.0 0.36 0.2 - 0.5
Black Cravvie Gill net 2.0 1.9- 18.0 0.10 0.1- 0.3
Trap net 1.8 1.8 - 18.1 0.45 0.2 - 0.3
Bluellill Gill net 16.0 NfA-NfA ND NfA-N/A
Trap net 32.6 6.5 - 59.6 0.09 0.1- 0.2
Common Carp Gill net 0.5 0.5 - 4.0 2.22 1.0" 3.2
Trap net 0.3 0.3 -2.6 2.42 2.0-4.5
Golden Shiner Trap net 0.4 0.2 - 1.4 0.03 0.1-0.1
Green Sunfish Trap net 1.0 0.3 - 2.0 0.02 0.1-0.1
Hybrid Sunfish Gill net 1.3 N/A-N/A 0.04 N1A-NfA
Trap net 5.4 N/A-N/A 0.06 N1A-NfA
LarJ!emouth Bass Gill net 2.0 0.3 - 1.1 0.95 0.4 - 1.5
Trap net 0.6 0.3 - 0.8 0.15 0.2 - 1.1
Northern Pike Gill net 13.0 2.5 -7.9 1.94 1.8-3.3
Trap net 0.8 N1A-N/A 2.07 N1A-N/A
Pumokinseed Sunfish Gill net 3.0 N1A-N/A 0.04 NfA-N/A
Trap net 5.1 0.8 - 5.3 0.04 0.1- 0.2
http://www.dnr.state.mn.us/perl/lk_survey.pl ?downum=62005700
6/25/01
I
J
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
.
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
~
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
II
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
Minnesota DNR - Lake Finder: Lake Information Report
Page 2 of 3
Snapping Turtle Trap net 0.1 NlA-N/A ND NlA-N/A
Walleve Gill net 1.5 0.5 - 3.5 2.08 1.1- 3.0
Trap net 0.3 0.3 - 1.2 2.27 0.8 -3.2
White Cranvie Trap net 0.1 0.4 - 4.6 0.95 0.2- 0.4
Yellow Bullhead Gill net 9.8 1.0- 6.9 0.37 0.4- 0.7
Trap net 5.9 0.8 - 5.0 0.38 0.4 - 0.7
Normal Ranges represent rypical catches for lakes with similar physical and chemical cha.racteristics_
Fish SJ_Qc.lq~d by Species for the Last Five Years
Year Species Age Number
1997 Walleye Fry 243,000
1998 Walleye Fry 993,000
1999 Walleye Fry 243,000
Minnesota Fish Consumption Advisorv 2000
New! Fish Advisory Ouestionnaire
LAKE
FISH SIZE (inches)
15-20 20-25 25-30
30+
SPECIES
5-15
Josephine
62005700
Ramsey Co.
o
Bluegill Sunfish
Northern Pike
Yellow Bullhead
o
~
~
~
Symbol Key
Mercurv * 0 ~ Cl .
Women of child-bearing age and young children
unlimited I meal/week I meal/month do not eat do not eat
Other Persons unlimited unlimited I meal/week 1 meal/month do not eat
PCBs 0 [] a;J IiiI .
All Persons unlimited 1 meal/week 1 meal/month 1 meal/2 months do not eat
Meal advice for PCBs assumes fat is trimmoo from the fillets andthe fillets are cooked in a way that allows fat to drain away.
Status of the Fishery (as of 07/22/96)
Bluegill were the most abundant species present, in numbers far above average for this type of lake.
Fish were small, with less than a fourth over 6.0 inches in length. Other sunfish species were present
in low numbers and were even smaller than bluegill. Black crappie numbers were on the low side of
normal for this type of lake. One-fourth of the fish captured measured 10.0 inches or more in length
with the longest measuring 12.1 inches.
http://www.dnr.state.mn.us/perlllk_survey.pl ?downum=62005700
6/25/01
Minnesota DNR - Lake Finder: Lake Information Report
Page 3 of3
Northern pike numbers were high, with less than a tenth ofthe fish measuring 25.0 inches or longer.
Largemouth bass numbers were high in nets but low in electrofishing. Fish were small, with the
longest measuring 14.3 inches. Walleye were captured for the first time in this lake. The fish were
from an accidental 1992 stocking and were between 15 and 20 inches in length.
Yellow bullhead were present in above average numbers while black bullhead were present on the
low side of average for this type oflake. Fish were of moderate size, with over a tenth at least 10.0
inches in length. Carp were captured in low numbers. Golden shiner numbers were low.
For Additional Information
Area Fisheries Supervisor:
Lake maps can be obtained from:
1200 WARNER ROAD
ST. PAUL, MN 55106
(651) 772-7950
Minnesota Bookstore
117 University Ave
St. Paul, MN 55155
(651) 297-3000 or (800) 657-3757
To order, use C1393 for the map-id.
General DNR Information:
.~NftWllp.~
116 ~, .
eJe: ' Q:
I
.
f
l
Toll-free: (800) 652-9093
Turn in Poachers (TIP):
DNR Information Center
500 Lafayette Road
St. Paul, MN 55155-4040
(651) 296-6157 or (888) MINNDNR
TDD: (651) 296-5484 or (800) 657-3929
E-Mail: info@dnr.state.mn.us
http://www.dnr.state.mn.us/perl/lk_survey.pl ?downum=62005700
6/25/01
I
~
I
I
I
I
I
I
II
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
.~
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
II
I
I
I
I
I
I
~
I
Minnesota DNR - Lake Finder: Water Level Report
Page 1 of 1
Lake name: Josephine
County: Ramsey
Water Level Data
Period of record: 08/03/1905 to 06/2012001
# of readings: 2696
Highest recorded: 885.7 ft (06/04/1942)
Highest known: 885.7 ft (6/4/42)
Lowest recorded: 881.5 ft (07/10/1926)
Recorded range: 4.2 ft
Average water level: 883.98 ft
Last reading: 884.7 ft (06120/2001)
OHW elevation: 884.4 ft
Datum: 1912 (ft)
Josephine - 62005700
686
~
.,
::: 885.25
"
.~ 884.5
.,
"
~ 883.15
W
6.,
1993 1995 1997 1999
Last 10 years of data, click to enlarge.
Download lake level data as: [dBase] [ASCII] (If you have trouble try right clicking on the download
link and choosing the "Save... As" option.)
Benchmarks
No benchmark information available.
DNRInformation Center
500 Lafayette Road
St. Paul, MN 55155-4040
drivinQ directions
Phone: 651-296-6157 or 888-MlNNDNR
TTY: 651-296-5484 or 800-657-3929
For DNR Info: info@dnr.state.mn.us
Site Comments: webmaster@dnr.state.mn.us
kDHR home
Contcnts@ 1996-2001 Minnesota Department of Natural Resources. All rights reserved.
http://www.dnr.state.mn.uslperl/lk_levels.pl ?id=62005700
6125/01
885.25
~
..,
""
~
c
3 884.5
..,
"
~
"
r;:j
883.75
Page 1 of 1 I
J
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
II
I
I
I
I
I
I
~
I
Josephine - 62885788
os.
..3
1992 1993 1994 1995 1996 1991 1998 1999 2000
http://.../lk_hydrograph.pl ?years= 1 0&width=400&height=300&id=62005700&name=Josephin 6/25101
I
~
I
I
I
I
I
I
II
I
I
I
I
I
I
~
I
Lake Water Quality Database
~
~
-=
Minnesota Pollution
Control Agency
S~h
I~
GIO~.;lry
rfWe
\~DNR>
~.
Exit the MPCA web
site and search the
DNR Lake finder for
information on this
lake.
Page I of 2
Lake Water Quality Assessment Pro gram
Lake Water Quality Database
Lake Location Information
Round Lake
DNR Lake In number: 62-0070
County: RAMSEY
Location from nearest town: IN NEW BRIGHTON
This lake has a total surface area of 122 acres. Round Lake is
located in the CHF, North Central Hardwood Forest ecoregion
and the UMB, Upper Mississippi, river basin.
Swimming is Full Support (Marginal).
degrees
minutes
seconds
decimal
degrees
I~
Full Secchi Disk data
1S
available on this lake
Need Help? If you
need help
understanding the data
in this page full
supporting
documentation is
available on this data
or you may click on
the links in this page
to get specific
documentation.
Latitude 450427 45.07417
Longitude 931036 -93.17667
X Y
UTM 486076 4991201
_ A "zoom-able" map is also
~1!11 available of this lake location
Lake Quality Information
Hydrologic Unit Code: 07010206
Monitored or Evaluated: Monitored
Mean total phosphorus: 40 (parts per billion - ppb)
Number of total phosphorus measurements used to calculate
mean: 7
Mean chlorophyll-a: 19.6 (ppb)
Number of chlorophylI-a measurements used to calculate
mean: 7
Mean Secchi disk: 1.1 (meters)
Number of Secchi disk readings to calculate mean: 3
httn'l/rl~t:::l n(":::\ d::ltp mn lld('(1-i_hin/1l-u/nOQ:"RPO~::1I11=<1l11 nl')rp.('~17?7
Rn/()l
Lake Water Quality Database
Page 20f2
nl~IJtUlp~Ur.
Mt'!lltJtn~J hi,:
E1JtlupflR-:
Hypl'n"lli'l~1 ~
~l' .,_
~fJ
~ J~,
:-U
t{l 6:'
-}D
,'. Jl'
Tcophic
Sl<J,te [l1de:x
J',iUlsparelllf)"
(m>
Cblomphyll~
(ppb'l
ri;,l1~i.l
Phosphorus
(ppb'j
-Transparency -Chlorophyll-a -Ta/(ll Phasp/1Oms
See the difference! Oligotrophic vs Hvpereutropic
Carlson's Trophc State Index
based on TP=14.42 IN (TP)+4.15:
Carlson's trophic state index
based on CHLA = 9.81 In (CHLA)+ 30.6: 60
Carlson's trophc state index
based on SDM = 60 - 14.41 In (SDM):
A verage of all available index
values:
trophic status alpha:
57
Learn about the
Carlson's Trophic
State Index and
59 how
these values are
59 determined.
E
Lake Quality Ranking Information available
Percentile rank of TP concentration for that ecoregion: 59
Percentile rank of CHLA for that ecoregion: 49
Percentile ranking of TSI value based on all lakes in ecoregion:
42
List of rankings for the North Central Hardwood Forest
ecoreglOn.
..
-=.::
I Search I Index I Glossary I Ask MPCA I Home I
If you have suggestions on how we can improve our service to you, please drop us anote.
If you have questions or problems, contact webmaster@oca.state.mn_lls
For more information about Minnesota, visit the Northstar Web site.
MPCA, 520 Lafayette Road. St. Panl, MN 55155-4194
Phone: 651-296-6300, 800-657-3864; 24-hour emergency number: 651-649-5451 or 800-422-0798
TTY: 651-282-5332, TTY 24-hour emergency number: 651-297-5353 or 800-627-3529
httn.llrJ~b nr~ d!=ltp mn 1l"lro-l_hin/lt..ulnQQPp!:l.n:;'1l11 ......1?rp.r---1777
R/""lf()l
I
~
I
I
I
I
I
I
II
I
I
I
I
I
I
~
I
I
~
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
.
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
Minnesota DNR - Lake Finder: Water Level Report
Page 1 of 1
lake name: Round
County: Ramsey
Water level Data
Period ofrecord: 05/14/1981 to 05/14/1981
# of readings: 1
Highest recorded: 889.29 ft (05/14/1981)
Lowest recorded: 889.29 ft (05/14/1981)
Recorded range: 0 ft
Average water level: 889.29 ft
Last reading: 889.29 ft (05/14/1981)
OHW elevation: 890 ft
Datum: 1929 (ft)
Not enough data for h~drograph.
Last 10 years of data, click to enlarge.
Download lake level data as: r dBase] [ASCI!] (If you have trouble try right clicking on the download
link and choosing the "Save .h As" option.)
Benchmarks
No benchmark information available.
DNR Infonnation Center
500 Lafayelle Road
St. Paul. MN 55155-4040
drivinl! directions
Phone: 651-296-6157 or 888-MINNDNR
TrY: 651-296-5484 or 800-657-3929
For DNR Info: info@dnr.state.mn.us
Site Comments: webmaster@dnr.state.mn.us
\t: DNR home
Contents @ 1996-2001 Minnesota Department of Natural Resources. All rights reserved.
http://www.dnr.state.mn.us/perlllk_levels.pl?id=62007000
6/25/01
Lake Water Quality Database
~...iW'
~
-
Minnesota Pollution
Control Agency
S~arl
,''''
I~d.."
.~
GI'?3."r)'
H@e
\~DNR>
~;
Exit the MPCA web
site and search the
DNR Lake finder for
information on this
lake.
r
Full Secchi Disk data
1S
available on this lake
Need Help? If you
need help
understanding the data
in this page full
supporting
documentation is
available on this data
or you may click on
the links in this page
to get specific
documentation.
Page 1 of 2
Lake Water Quality Assessment Program
Lake Water Quality Database
Lake Location Information
Valentine Lake
DNR Lake In number: 62-0071
County: RAMSEY
Location from nearest town: IN ARDEN HILLS
This lake has a total surface area of 60 acres and has a
maximum depth of 13 feet with the mean depth being 5 feet.
Valentine Lake is located in the CHF, North Central Hardwood
Forest ecoregion and the UMB, Upper Mississippi, river basin.
Swimming is Non-Supported.
degrees decimal
minutes degrees
seconds
450335 45.05972
931005 -93.16806
X Y
UTM 486751 4989595
""J:n A "zoom-able" map is also
available of this lake location
Lake Quality Information
Hydrologic Unit Code: 07010206
Monitored or Evaluated: Monitored
Alkalinity support - is the lake threatened by acid rain? FS
Alkalinity: 86 (parts per million - ppm)
Number of alkalinity readings used to calculate mean: 72
Mean total phosphorus; 102 (parts per billion - ppb)
N umber of total phosphorus measurements used to calculate
mean: 70
Mean chlorophyll-a: 31.2 (ppb)
Number of chlorophyll-a measurements used to calculate
mean: 72
Mean Secchi disk: 1 (meters)
ht-.......!JA....t-... .............. ('+.....t-o m.... ""I"'rr~ h~......111...n".....[)QD"",.."rn:::;'nll ......1'i..."'....._17'1t:.
on/ill
I
~
I
I
I
I
I
I
.
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
~
I
I
I
I
I
I
It
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
Lake Water Quality Database
Page 2 of2
N umber of Secchi disk readings to calculate mean: 37
OI~I]lmp!lir.
\-tj~nU1",hil'
EllU1lphJ.:
Hypl'!n""!J:llll~ ir
Tr']phir
~~ te [nd~
~u ).' ~I J~ .,~
TnlJJ:q.-,lXellll'j'
(m~
Cbl.Ol'Dphrllc-i'l
(pphJ
T01;1.I
PhtKphar-U5
('ppb}
-rrttllspauJlq -Chlorophyll.a -To/al Ph<lsphorlls
See the difference! Oligotrophic vs Hvpereutrovic
Carlson's Trophc State Index
based on TP=14.42 IN (TP)+4.15:
Carlson's trophic state index 64
based on CHLA = 9.81 In (CHLA)+ 30.6:
Carlson's trophc state index
based on SDM = 60 - 14.41 In (SDM):
Average of all available index
values:
trophic status alpha:
71
Learn about the
Carlson's Trophic
State Index and
how
these values are
65 determined.
60
E
Lake Quality Ranking Information available
Percentile rank of TP concentration for that ecoregion: 27
Percentile rank of CHLA for that ecoregion: 36
Percentile ranking of TSI value based on all lakes in ecoregion:
25
List of rankings for the North Central Hardwood Forest
ecoregion.
e
~
I Search I Index I Glossary I Ask MPCA I Home I
If you have suggestions on how we can improve our service to you, please drop us a note.
If you have questions or problems, contact webmaster@pca.state.mn.us
For more information about Minnesota, visit the l'iorthstar Web site.
MPCA, 520 Lafayette Road, 51. Paul, MI'i 55155-4194
Phone: 651-296-6300, 800-657-3864; 24-hour emergency number: 651-649-5451 or 800-422-0798
TrY: 651-282-5332, TrY 24-hour emergency number: 651-297-5353 or 800-627-3529
hHn"/lrt:::lt:::l nl"":::l QtMp TTln nclr(T;_h-in/lL--u!("lOQPp.';lflHll11 nl')rp.{'-17?.f\
Qnlfl1
Citizen Lake Monitoring Program Data
IJ)
-
Minlle$ota Pollution
Control Agency
SGh
I.
Gl.r:t
...
Additional
Search
Lake water quality
data might also be
available for this lake
Page 1 of 1
Secchi Data from the Citizen Lake Monitoring Program. For
Valentine Lake
Graph not available
Data for this lake has only been collected for one
year.
Average Secchi Reading (feet)
Year
Average
Secchi
Reading
(feet)
Click on the year at the
left to get full
information about the
data samples for that
year.
1976
Average is computed by
the months June-Sept.
1.1
.
I Search.1 Index I Glossary I Ask MPCA I Home I
If you have suggestions on how we can improve our service to YOll, please drop us a note.
If you have questions or problems, contact webmaster@oca.state.mn.us
For more information about Minnesota. visit the Northstar Web site.
MPCA, 520 Lafayette Road, St. Paul, MN 55155-4194
Phone: 651-296-6300, 800-657-3864; 24-hour emergency number: 651-649-5451 or 800-422-0798
TrY: 651-282-5332, TrY 24-hour emergency number: 651-297-5353 or 800-627-3529
http://data.pca.state.mn.us/cgi-binlclmpsearch. pi ?lakeID=62-0071
6/25/01
I
~
I
I
I
I
I
I
.
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
\t
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
.
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
Minnesota DNR - Lake Finder: Water Level Report
Page 1 of 1
Lake name: Valentine
County: Ramsey
Water level Data
Period of record: 06/01/1925 to 06/07/2001
# of readings: 2486
Highest recorded: 881.1 ft (07/03/1978)
Lowest recorded: 874.15 ft (09/21/1934) .
Recorded range: 6.95 ft
Average water level: 877.55 ft
Last reading: 878.85 ft (06/07/2001)
Datum: 1912 (ft)
Valentine - 62007100
"2
~
.0>
~ 880.7S
"
.~ 879.S
.0>
J!1
4J 878.25
W
"'7
1993 1995 1997 1999
Download lake level data as: rdBase] rASCm (If you Last 10 years of data, click to enlarge.
have trouble try right clicking on the download link and choosing the "Save... As" option.)
Benchmarks
Elevation: 881.66 ft Date Set: 01/01/1901 Benchmark Location
Datum: 1912 (ft) Township: 30 Range: 23 Section: 28
Description: Horizontal 60d spike 1.9' above ground in the S-SE side of a power pole, on east side
of old T.H. 10 at its intersection with C.R. Fro the W-NW (at Ramsey Co gage site). NGVD 1929
by MNIDOT 880.61.
DNR loformation Center
500 Lafayette Road
St. Paul, MN 55155-4040
drivinl! directions
Phone: 651-296-6157 or 888-MINNDNR
TIY: 651-296-5484 or 800-657-3929
For DNR Info: info@dnr.state.mn.us
Site Comments: webmaster@dnr.state.mn.us
It:DtUI. home
Contents@ 1996-2001 Minnesota Department of Natural Resources. All rights reserved.
http://www.dnr.state.mn.us/perlllk_levels.pl ?id=620071 00
6/25101
880.75
~
...,
""
~
c
.2 819.5
...,
;g
'"
-
'"
S18.2S
Page 1 of 1 I
J
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
.
I
I
I
I
I
I
..2
Valentine - 62007100
877
\~
1~~2 1993 1~9+ 1995 1996 1'97 1998 1999 2000
http://...Ilk_hydrograph.pl ?years= 1 0&width=400&height=300&id=620071 OO&name= Valentin 6/25/01
I
I
~
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
.
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
Lake Water Quality Database
~
;:..,;;....\.
.........
Minnesota Pollution
Control Agency
S";'J9fl
1"3><
GI63.;1'Y
Hi3e
\~ONR>
L.---..:::L'
Exit the MPCA web
site and search the
DNR Lake finder for
information on this
lake.
13
~
Page 1 of 2
Lake Water Quality Assessment Program
Lake Water Quality Database
Lake Location Information
Karth Lake
DNR Lake ill number: 62-0072
County: RAMSEY
Location from nearest town: IN SHOREVIEW
This lake has a total surface area of 15 acres. Karth Lake is
located in the CHF, North Central Hardwood Forest ecoregion
and the UMB, Upper Mississippi, river basin.
Swimming is Non-Supported.
degrees
minutes
seconds
decimal
degrees
Full Secchi Disk data
lli
available on this lake
Need Help? If you
need help
understanding the data
in this page full
suoporting
documentation is
available on this data
or you may click on
the links in this page
to get specific
documentation.
Latitude 450432 45.07556
Longitude 930907 -93.15194
X y
UT~ 488023 4991352
A "zoom-able" mao is also
available of this lake location
Lake Quality Information
Hydrologic Unit Code: 07010206
Monitored or Evaluated: Monitored
Alkalinity support - is the lake threatened by acid rain? FS
Alkalinity: 42 (parts per million - ppm)
Number of alkalinity readings used to calculate mean: 1
Mean total phosphorus: 80 (parts per billion - ppb)
Number of total phosphorus measurements used to calculate
mean: 2
Mean chlorophyll-a: 42.5 (ppb)
Number of chlorophyll-a measurements used to calculate
mean: 2
Mean Secchi disk: 0.7 (meters)
Number of Secchi disk readings to calculate mean: 2
httn'/lrI~t:q n(':l .;;:.htp. mn IT<.;:/ral_hinllln;vIlQQ'Rp.:qrlPnll nl?rp.("'-1711
~nlnl
Lake Water Quality Database
Page 2 of 2
()l~lli~llllitj;r.
\11'MII.n~' hk
HY11I1n''lIrJ:1'1ir.
f:llU1lphir.
Trophic
St;J.t;e [Jldex
l'r;msp.l1rRl'll"'j
i.m}
CblDt"oph)'ll-il
(ppb:1
TIJ'tll
Phosphor-us
(pph)
-Trtlllsp'tr(mc)' -Chlorophyll.,/ -Total Phosphorus
See the difference! Oligotrophic vs Hvpereutropic
Carlson's Trophc State Index
based on TP= I 4.42 IN (TP)+4.15:
Carlson's trophic state index
based on CHLA = 9.81 In (CHLA)+ 30.6:
Carlson's trophc state index
based on SDM = 60 - 14.41 In (SDM):
A verage of all available index
values:
trophic status alpha:
67
67
Learn about the
Carlson's Trophic
State Index and
how
these values are
determined_
65
66
H
Lake Quality Ranking Information available
Percentile rank: of TP concentration for that ecoregion: 35
Percentile rank: of CHLA for that ecoregion: 28
Percentile ranking of TSI value based on all lakes in ecoregion:
23
List of rankings for the North Central Hardwood Forest
ecoregion.
---
8
~
I Search I Index I GlOSSary I Ask MPCA I Home I
If you have suggestions on how we can improve our service to you, please drop us anate.
If you have questions or problems, contact webmaster@pca.state.mn_us
For more information about Minnesota, visit the Northstar Web site_
MPCA, 520 Lafayette Road. St. Paul, MN 55155-4194
Phone: 651-296-6300, 800-657-3864; 24-houremergency number: 651-649-5451 or 800-422-0798
TrY: 651-282-5332, TrY 24-hour emergency number: 651-297-5353 or 800-627-3529
httn'II..1>::tt'l rv''l C'tgtp mn 1lC'1,.....,.i_hin/l1-ulf,OQpp'lllHnll nl')rpr-lil 1
Qrl/()l
I
J
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
.
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
~
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
It
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
Minnesota DNR - Lake Finder: Water Level Report
Page 1 of 1
Lake name: Karth
County: Ramsey
Water Level Data
Period ofrecord: 10/11/1994 to 10/1111994
# of readings: 1
Highest recorded: 933.75 ft (10/11/1994)
Highest known: 935.35 ft
Lowest recorded: 933.75 ft (10/11/1994)
Recorded range: 0 ft
Average waterlevel: 933.75 ft
Last reading: 933.75 ft (10/11/1994)
OHW elevation: 934.95 ft
Datum: 1929 (ft)
. Not enough data for hydrograph.
Last 10 years of data, click to enlarge.
Download lake level data as: fdBase] fASCU] (If you have trouble try right clicking on the download
link and choosing the "Save ... As" option.)
Benchmarks
Elevation: 963.2 ft Date Set: 10/11/1994 Benchmark Location
Datum: 1929 (ft) Township: 30Range: 23 Section: 22
Description: top nut of hydrant. 150' SE of junction of Lexington Ave. and Amble Drive. City of
Arden Hills Datum has this TBM at elevation 964.51'
DNR Information Center
500 Lafayette Road
St. Paul, MN 55155.4040
driving; directions
Phone: 651.296-6157 or 888-MlNNDNR
TTY: 651-296.5484 or 800-657-3929
For DNR Info: info@dnr.state.mn.us
Site Comments: webmaster@dnr.state.mn.us
It:DNR home
Contents@ 1996-2001 !\tiinnesota Department of Natural Resources. AU rights res.erved.
http://www.dnr.state.mn.us/perIllk_levels.pl ?id=6200nOO
6/25101
Lake Water Quality Database
~
-=
Minnesota Pollution
Control Agency
S~@h
7'>
I~
Gl<i~~ry
H<;;3e
\~DNR>
~
Exit the MPCA web
site and search the
DNR Lake finder for
information on this
lake.
.l....-.T.
.. _L 1
1
.....- .- ,- ....
Full Secchi Disk data
1S
available on this lake
Need Help? If you
need help
understanding the data
in this page full
sUJ,JJ,Jortin~
documentation is
available on this data
or you may click on
the links in this page
to get specific
documentation.
Lake Water Quality Assessment Program
Lake Water Quality Database
Lake Location Information
Johanna Lake
DNR Lake ID number: 62-0078
County: RAMSEY
Location from nearest town: IN ARDEN HILLS
This lake has a total surface area of 230 acres and has a
maximum depth of 40 feet with the mean depth being 17 feet.
Johanna Lake is located in the CHF, North Central Hardwood
Forest ecoregion and the UMB, Upper Mississippi, river basin.
Swimming is Partial SUPJ,Jort.
i
_L
decimal
degrees
degrees
minutes
seconds
Latitude 450240 45.04444
Longitude 931015 -93.17083
X Y
UTM 486529 4987898
A "zoom-able" map is also
available of this lake location
Lake Quality Information
Hydrologic Unit Code: 07010206
Monitored or Evaluated: Monitored
Alkalinity support - is the lake threatened by acid rain? FS
Alkalinity: 82 (parts per million - ppm)
Number of alkalinity readings used to calculate mean: 109
Color: 17(Platinum-cobalt Units)
Number of Color Readings used to calculate color: 2
Mean total phosphorus: 41 (parts per billion - ppb)
N umber of total phosphorus measurements used to calculate
mean: 111
Mean chlorophyll-a: 13.3 (ppb)
Number of cWorophyll-a measurements used to calculate
httn./lrl';lb ni"-:l o;:'t<;\tJ::>. mn l"'/""<T1_h;"/1V\l1,,Q\<PpQrlPnll nl?..."",,-.-17f\Q
Page I of3
Qn/{'\1
I
J
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
.-
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
~
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
It
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
Lake Water Quality Database
Page 2 of 3
mean: 106
Mean Secchi disk: 2.2 (meters)
Number of Secchi disk readings to calculate mean: 73
Dl~t]lrllJ1hir.
\-h~lIlTJ\lhk
f,lliIJuphi.:
H:nll'!O'1IIfi",.,.1:
Trophii['
St.11e tndE'.:.'l
J: ~I ~' :;-[1
6IJ 6.'
TirillISVilrEJLl1"
I,m.!
Chl1l'll'Dpnyll-a
(ppbl
TtI'I<1I
Phosph.uru~
(lPpb)
-TranspareJicy -CIlt,'ropilyll-a -To/al PilospllOrllS
See the difference! Oli~otrophic vs Hvpereutropic
Carlson's Trophc State Index
based on TP=14.42IN (TP)+4.l5:
Carlson's trophic state index 56
based on CHLA = 9.81 In (CHLA)+ 30.6:
Carlson's trophc state index
based on SDM = 60 -14.41 In (SDM):
Average of all available index
values:
trophic status alpha:
58
Learn about the
Carlson's Trophic
S tate Index and
49 how
these values are
54 determined.
E
Lake Quality Ranking Information available
Percentile rank of TP concentration for that ecoregion: 56
Percentile rank of CHLA for that ecoregion: 61
Percentile ranking of TSI value based on all lakes in ecoregion:
55
List of rankings for the North Central Hardwood Forest
ecoreglOn.
~
-
I Search I Index I Glossarv I Ask MPCA I Home I
If you have suggestions on how we can improve our service to you, please drop us anote.
If you have questions or problems, contact webmaster@pca.state.mn.us
For more information about Minnesota, visit the Northstar Web site.
MPCA, 520 Lafayette Road, St. Paul, MN 55155-4194
Phone: 651-296-6300. 800-657-3864; 24-hour emergency number: 651-649-5451 or 800-422-0798
TrY: 651-282-5332, TrY 24-hoUI emergency number: 651-297-5353 or 800-627-3529
httn-/lrI:::lN n('5'l <:;:tMf'. mn n<:;:/(,CT1_hlnl1bXl(1q~Rf'_;:l{fPlll1 nl?r?r=17n:;;:
R/1tnl
Citizen Lake Monitoring Program Data
e
Minnesota Pollution
Control Ag:ency
e."
1.
GI."Y
~
Additional
Search
1!lke water quality
data might also be
available for this lake
Page 1 of 2
Secchi Data from the Citizen Lake Monitoring Program. For
Johanna Lake
This following graph represents Secchi transparency data
collected by volunteers in the Citizen Lake-Monitoring
Program. All values are expressed in units of feet. Data
which has not been QNQC (qualilty control) checked will
appear as a red verticIe line representing a Secchi rope. The
long-term mean for this lake is represented by a horizontal
line on the graph.
: :"" ,,' ':1."" '" .1.
1
, -
. -
a.
1986
,
1997
,
1993
,
HIM
,
.2000
Average Secchi Reading (feet)
Average
Year Secchi
Reading
(feet) Click on the year at the
1986 7.7 left to get full
information about the
1997 5.4 data samples for that
year.
1998 4.5
1999 5.0 Average is computed by
the months June-Sept.
2000 7.5
..
-
I SeaL<;l] I Index I Glossary I Ask MPCA I Home I
http://data.pca.state.Inn.us/cgi-binlcImpsearch . p I ?lakeID=62-007 8
6/25/01
I
J
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
-
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
~
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
.
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
Minnesota DNR - Lake Finder: Lake Information Report
Page 1 of 4
Lake Information Report
Name: JOHANNA
Nearest Town: ARDEN HILLS
Primary County: Ramsey
Survey Date: 06/30/97
Inventory Number: 62-0078-00
Public Access Information
Ownership
County
Type
Concrete
Description
County-owned access on the north side of the lake, double concrete plank
ramp.
County park on north shore in conjunction with boat access allows shore
fishing.
Fishing pier on northwest shore of lake.
County
Unknown
County
Unknown
Lake Characteristics
Lake Area (acres): 213.06
Littoral Area (acres): 95.93
Maximum Depth (ft): 43.00
Water Clarity (ft): N/A
Dominant Bottom Substrate: N/ A
Abundance of Aquatic Plants: N/ A
Maximum Depth of Plant Growth (ft): N/A
Looking for DNR fish and wildlife management news? Get the latest information on-line with
the DNR's new Fish & Wildlife Today webzine. To be put on the e-mailinglist.click here.
Fish Sampled up to the 1997 Survey Year
Number of fish per net
Species Gear Used Caught Normal Range Average Fish Normal Range
Weight (Ibs) (Ibs)
Black Bullhead Gill net 2.5 2.5 - 45.0 0.45 0.3 - 0.7
Trap net 1.4 0.7 - 25.7 0.38 0.3 - 0.6
Black Cravvie Gill net 25.5 2.5 - 16.5 0.14 0.1-0.3
Trap net 61.7 1.8-21.2 ND 0.2-0.3
Blue~ill Gill net 23.3 N/A-N/A 0.13 N/A-N/A
Trap net 97.8 7.5 - 62.5 ND 0.1-0.3
Bowfin (Dogfish) Gill net 0.7 0.2- 0.8 5.27 2.4 - 4.2
Trap net 0.6 0.4 - 1.3 5.49 2.3 -4.1
Common Carp Gill net 0.7 0.3.3.0 4.89 1.9-5.2
Trap net 0.7 0.4 - 2.0 2.95 2.6- 6.0
Golden Shiner Gill net 0.5 0.3 - 1.5 0.15 0.1-0.1
Green Sunfish Gill net 0.3 0.2 - 0.5 0.05 N1A-N/A
Trap net 1.3 0.2 - 1.3 0.05 0.1 - 0.2
Hybrid Sunfish Gill net 0.7 N/A-N/A 0.05 N/A-N/A
Trap net 1.6 N/A-N/A 0.06 N1A - N/A
http://www.dnr.state.rnn.us/perlllk_survey.pl ?downum=62007800
6/25/01
Minnesota DNR - Lake Finder: Lake Information Report
Page 2 of 4
Larf!emouth Bass Trap net 0.1 0.2-0.7 0.17 0.2- 0.9
Northern Pike Gill net 2.8 1.5 -7.3 5.15 2.0- 3.5
PumDkinseed Sunfish Gill net 1.0 N/A-N/A 0.10 N1A-N/A
Trap net 1.7 0.7 - 4.2 0.10 0.1 - 0.2
Ti2er Muskellunf!e Gill net 0.7 N1A-N/A 0.86 N1A-N/A
Trap net 0.1 N/A-N/A 0.36 N/A-N/A
Walleve Gill net 3.7 1.2 - 6.3 2.93 1.2- 2.7
Trap net 0.1 0.3 - 1.2 0.52 0.8 - 2.8
White Sucker Gill net 2.8 0.4 - 2.2 1.16 1.5 - 2.4
Trap net 0.7 0.2-1.0 2.48 1.6 - 2.8
Yellow Bullhead Gill net 0.3 0.5 -7.5 0.82 0.5 - 0.8
Trap net 0.2 0.9 - 5.7 1.17 0.5 - 0.8
Yellow Perch Gill net 92.0 2.0 - 27.9 ND 0.1- 0.2
Trap net 1.0 0.3 - 1.7 0.08 0.1- 0.2
Normal Ranges represent typical calches for lakes wj(h similar physical and chemical characteristics.
Length of Selected Species Sampled for All Gear for the 1997 Survey Year
Species
Black Bullhead
Black CraDvie
Blu..ill
Green Sunfish
Hybrid Sunfish
U1rJ!emou{h Bass
Northern Pike
Pumvkinseed Sunfish
TiJ!er Muskellunge
Walleve
Yellow Bullhead
y e/low Perch
Number offish caught in each category (inches)
0-5 6-8 9-11 12-14 15-19 20-24 25-29 >29
2 13 12 1 0 0 0 0
6 332 0 0 0 0 0 0
263 123 0 0 0 0 0 0
14 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
18 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
01000000
00013193
21 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
o 0 O. 3 2 0 0 0
o 0 2 2 8 11 0 0
00220000
77 115 0 0 0 0 0 0
For the record, the largest Lake Sturgeon taken in Minnesota weighed 94Ibs., 4 oz. and was
caught by:
Who: Kim Bengston, Hinckley, MN
Where: Kettle River, Pine County
When: 9/5/94.
Statistics: 70" length, 26.5" girth
Fish Stocked by Species for the Last Five Years
hup:/ /www.dnr.state.mn.us/perJ/lk_survey.pl ?downum=62007800
Total
28
338
386
14
18
1
17
21
5
23
4
192
6/25/01
I
J
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
--
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
.
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
Minnesota DNR - Lake Finder: Lake Information Report
Page 3 of 4
Year Species Age Number
1995 Wall eve Fingerling 592
1996 Tiver Muskellun"e Fingerling 348
1998 W alleve Fingerling 1,500
1999 Tifler MuskellunJ!e Fingerling 182
Minnesota Fish Consuml!tion Advisory 2000
New! Fish Advisorv Ouestionnaire
FISH SIZE (inches)
LAKE SPECIES 5-15 15-20 20-25 25.30 30+
Johanna Carp f]
62007800 Northern Pike 0 0 ~ ~ ~
Ramsey Co. Yellow Perch 0
Symbol Key
Mercurv * 0 ~ () .
Women of child-bearing age and young children
unlimited 1 meal/week 1 meal/month do not eat do not cat
Other Persons unlimited unlimited 1 meaVweek 1 meal/month do not eat
PCBs 0 f] Ii;;] Iiii .
All Persons unlimited 1 meal/week 1 meal/month 1 meal/2 months do not eat
Meal advice fOf PCBs assumes fat is trimmed from the fillets andthe fillets are cooked in a way that allows fat to drain away.
Status of the Fishery (as of 06/30/97)
Panfish dominated the net catches in 1997, with bluegill the most abundant and black crappie a close
second. One third of the bluegill were over 6 inches in length while all crappie were under 8 inches in
length. Yellow perch were also abundant, with none over 8 inches. A small number of pumpkinseed,
hybrid, and green sunfish were sampled, all small in size.
Largemouth bass numbers appear to be good, with a variety of sizes of fish present. Northern pike
numbers were fair, with a number of large individuals, the largest over 16 pounds. Walleye were
average in number, with nearly half over 20 inches in length. Several tiger muskellunge from the
1996 fall stocking were sampled, as well as one measuring 35.2 inches from the 1993 stocking.
Black and yellow bullhead numbers were low, with large individuals present. Carp numbers were
average. Several white sucker, dogfish, and golden shiner were sampled.
For Additional Information
http://www.dnr.state.mn.us/per1/lk_survey.pl ?downum=62007800
6/25/01
Minnesota DNR - Lake Finder: Water Level Report
Page 1 of 1
Lake name: Johanna
County: Ramsey
Water level Data
Period ofrecord: OS/22/1906 to 06/20/2001
# of readings: 2560
Highest recorded: 884.26 ft (01/08/1919)
Lowest recorded: 870.35 ft (07/21/1926)
Recorded range: 13.91 ft
Average water level: 876.8 ft
Last reading: 877.84 ft (06/20/2001)
OHW elevation: 878 ft
Datum: 1912 (ft)
Johanna - 62887888
.,.
.,
~ 678.25
"
o 877.5
:;:;
'"
~ 876.7S
j;J
.7.
,.."
1995
1997
1999
last 1 0 years of data, click to enlarge.
Download lake level data as: fdBase] fASCII] (If you have trouble try right clicking on the download
link and choosing the "Save ... As" option.)
Benchmarks
No benchmark information available.
Dl'-,'R Information Center
500 Lafayette Road
St. Paul. MN 55155-4040
drivinl! directions
Phone: 651-296-6157 or 888-MINNDNR
TrY: 651-296-5484 or 800-657-3929
For DNR Info: info@dnr.state.mn.us
Site Comments: webmaster@dnr.state.mn.us
\.,...
rI. .DNR home
Contents@ 1996-2001 Minnesota Department of Natural Resources. All rights reserved_
http://www.dnr.state.mn.us/perl/lk_levels.pl ?id=62007800
6/25/01
I
,J
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
.
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
.
I
I
I
I '"
'"
~
'"
'"
N
'"
I I
'"
c:
c:
'"
.c:
I 0
..,
I
~
~
~
:5-
~
~
---
'""'-
~
~ ~
~ ~
~ " ~
~ ,.: ~
... ... ~
~ ~ ...
~
(~j) uoq'='f'oaI3
,...,
~
V;
~
'"
'"
a
..c:;
0
>-,
II
"
8
'"
'"
~
0
0
00
....
0
0
l"'l
\0
II
"t:l
;Jd
0
0
'"
II
~
'"
..c:;
~
0
0
..,j-
II
,s
"t:l
.~
0 ~
0
" 0
,...,
0 II
0 '"
~ a
"
~ ;>,
0 c-.
~ P..
~ ..c
0 g.
~ ....
00
~ 0
0 {j
~ ;>,
~ ~l
~
~
-
~ 1:::
"
~ .!2<
~
'"
"
M ~
0
~
:;I "
~
~ "
~
'"
...;
~ .g
~ ~
0
~
~
::::
.&
~
..c:;
Lake Water Quality Database
~
~
~
Minnesota Pollution
Control Agency
-,
s""~"
I,,;M.
"J
Gl<?,~lry
."
HOM"le
""*-.;;/
\~DNR>
~
Exit the MPCA web
site and search the
DNR Lake finder for
information on this
lake.
10-
Full Secchi Disk data
~
available on this lake
Need Help? If you
need help
understanding the data
in this page full
supporting
documentation is
available on this data
or you may click on
the links in this page
to get specific
documentation.
Lake Water Quality Assessment Program
Lake Water Quality Database
Lake Location Information
Little johanna Lake
DNR Lake ID number: 62-0058
County: RAMSEY
Location from nearest town: AT ROSEVILLE
This lake has a total surface area of 18 acres and has a
maximum depth of 22 feet. Little johanna Lake is located in
the CHF, North Central Hardwood Forest ecoregion and the
UMB, Upper Mississippi, river basin.
Swimming is Non-Supported.
degrees
minutes
seconds
decimal
degrees
-',
Latitude 450209 45.03583
Longitude 931021 -93.1725
X Y
UTM 486395 4986941
A "zoom-able" map is also
available of this lake location
Lake Quality Information
Hvdrolol;ic Unit Code: 07010206
Monitored or Evaluated: Evaluated
Alkalinity support - is the lake threatened by acid rain? FS
Alkalinity: 100 (parts per million - ppm)
Number of alkalinity readings used to calculate mean: 1
Color: 80(Platinum-cobalt Units)
Number of Color Readings used to calculate color: 1
Mean total phosphorus: 280 (parts per billion - ppb)
N umber of total phosphorus measurements used to calculate
mean: 1
Mean Secchi disk: (meters)
Number of Secchi disk readings to calculate mean:
htto"/Irlf'lt:::l nr5l -:.tMt-" mn 1l,,/r:01_hin/lkwnQRRp,:;}nFllll nl?rpr=171A
Page I of2
Rlilf)l
I
J
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
.
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I Lake Water Quality Database
'-
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
.
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
Page 2 of2
()1~.Illlllpitir.
\~I'SlILn~lhil;
F.uil:l1lprm:
Hyp+"n'!!U"l"lll:
"Iro!lhk
St"<.Lte [ndex
~e
~ll
~l 4' "/J
IrJ .-
t .~
11<
f! ~
Tr..mspure.rt ry
f.ml
~- .j. IG 15);) 30 4J~} :?iJ IOJ I.:~)
Ch"J.aropnyll-<ll
(ppb'l
:0 15.::0 :::: 2-) ...[J ~,D tiO ~o tOJ I~O
T~I'I;j1
Phosphorus
(pph}
-Trallsparency -Cl1lorophyll-(1 -Total Phosphorus
See the difference! Oligotrophic vs Hvpereutropic
Carlson's Irophc State Index
based on TP= I 4.42 IN (TP)+4.15:
Carlson's trophic state index
based on GILA = 9.811n (GILA)+ 30.6:
Carlson's trophc state index
based on SDM = 60 - 14.41 In (SDM):
A verage of all available index
values:
trophic status alpha:
85
Learn about the
Carlson's Trophic
S tate Index and
how
these values are
85 determined.
H
Lake Quality Ranking Information available
Percentile rank of IP concentration for that ecoregion: 6
Percentile rank of CHLA for that ecoregion:
Percentile ranking of TSI value based on all lakes in ecoregion:
o
. List of rankings for the North Central Hardwood Forest
ecoregion.
8J\
.....
I Search I Index I GlOSSary I Ask MPCA I Home I
If you have suggestions on how we can improve our service to you, please drop us anote.
1f yon have qnestions or probiems, contact webmaster@pca.state.mn.us
For more information about Minnesota, visit the Northstar Web site.
MPCA, 520 Lafayette Road. St. Panl, MN 55155-4194
Phone: 651-296-6300, 800-657-3864; 24-hour emergency number: 651-649.5451 or 800-422-0798
TrY: 651-282-5332, TrY 24-hour emergency number: 651-297.5353 or 800-627-3529
httn-//rl:.:it;;t nC:l .';;:t:.tf'. mn Il.;;;:/rcri _hlnllk-\lilnqRR p_~nFll11 nl ?rpr~ 171 f..
IVl/() 1
Minnesota DNR - Lake Finder: Lake Information Report
Lake Information Report
Name: JOHANNA, LITTLE
Nearest Town: ARDEN HILLS
Primary County: Ramsey
Public Access Information
Ownership
Unknown
Type
Unknown
Lake Characteristics
Lake Area (acres): 18.00
LinQI~L6Le~ (acres): 12.00
Maximum Depth (ft): 28.00
YLa!~LCIl!IJJY (ft): N/A
Page I of 2
Survey Date: 08/06/84
Inventory Number: 62-0058-00
Description
NONE
Dominant Bottom Substrate: N/ A
AQ.!lmlllDCe of ~Huatic Plaut'>: N/A
Maximum Depth afPlant Growth (ft): N/A
Looking for DNR fish and wildlife management news? Get the latest information on-line with
the DNR's new Fish & Wildlife Today webzine. To be put on the e-mailinglist.click here.
Fish Sampled for the 1984 Survey Year
Number of fish per net
Species G.~!.1Ised Caught !"/ormlll R:mg~ Average Fish Normal Range
W_tJighl (Ibs) (Ibs)
Northern Pike Gill net 2.0 2.5 - 7.9 1.50 1.8-3.3
Comm(Jn Carp Gill net 14.0 0.5 -4.0 1.46 1.0- 3.2
Brown Bullhead Gill net 1.0 0.7 - 6.2 0.10 0.2-0.6
Black Craooie' Gill net 19.0 1.9 - 18.0 0.15 0.1- 0.3
Black Bullhead Gill net 14.0 5.2 - 56.2 0.07 0.2-0.5
Normal Ranges represent typical catches for lakes with similar physical and chemical characteristics.
Length of Selected Species Sampled for All Gear for the 1984 Survey Year
Species
Black Bullhead
Black Craooie
Brown Bullhead
Northern Pike
0-5 6-8
14 0
1 18
1 0
o 0
Number of fish caught in each category (inches)
9-11 12-14 15-19 20-24 25-29 >29
o 0 0 0 0 0
o 0 0 0 0 0
o 0 0 0 0 0
o 0 I I 0 0
http://www.dnr.state.mn.us/perl/lk_survey.pl ?downum=62005800
Total
14
19
1
2
6/25/0 I
I
J
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
.
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
.
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
Minnesota DNR - Lake Finder: Lake Information Report
Page 2 of 2
For the record, the largest Carp taken in Minnesota weighed 55 lbs., 5 oz. and was caught
by:
Who: Frank Ledwein, Annandale, MN
Where: Clearwater Lake, Wright County
When: 7/10/52.
Statistics: 42" length, 31" girth
Minnesota Fish Consumption Advisory 2000
New! Fish Advisorv Ouestionnaire
No fish consumption information is available for this lake. For more information, see the "General
Guidelines to Reduce Your Health Risk".
Status of the Fishery (as of 08/06/84)
BASED ON THE GILLNET CATCH ONLY, CARP, BLACK BULLHEAD, AND BLACK
CRAPPIES WERE FOUND AT ABOVE LOCAL MEDIAN LEVELS. BROWN BULLHEAD AND
NORTHERN PIKE WERE SAMPLED AT BELOW LOCAL MEDIAN LEVELS. YELLOW
BULLHEAD, LARGEMOUTH BASS, GREEN SUNFISH, PUMPKINSEED, BLUEGILL AND
HYBRID SUNFISH ARE KNOWN TO INHABIT THE LAKE FROM THE 1979 TEST
NETITING, AND 1/4
For Additional Information
Area Fisheries Supervisor:
Lake maps can be obtained from:
1200 WARNER ROAD
ST. PAUL, MN 55106
(651) 772-7950
Minnesota Bookstore
117 University Ave
St. Paul, MN 55155
(651) 297-3000 or (800) 657-3757
To order, use C2654 for the map-id.
General DNR lnfonnation:
Toll-free: (800) 652-9093
Turn in Poachers (TIP):
DNR Information Center
500 Lafayette Road
St. Paul, MN 55155-4040
(651) 296-6157 or (888) MINNDNR
TDD: (651) 296-5484 or (800) 65'7-3929
E-Mail: info@dnr.state.mn.us
http://www.dnr.state.mn.us/perl/lk_survey.pl ?downum=62005800
6/25/01
Minnesota DNR - Lake Pinder: Water Level Report
Page 1 of 1
Lake name: Little Johanna
County: Ramsey
Water level Data
Period of record: 08/05/1976 to 08/05/1976
# of readings: 1
Highest recorded: 878.28 ft (08/05/1976)
Lowest recorded: 878.28 ft (08/05/1976)
Recorded range: 0 ft
Average water level: 878.28 ft
Last reading: 878.28 ft (08/05/1976)
Datum: 1929 (ft)
Not enough data for hydrograph.
Download lake level data as: fdBase] [ASCU] (If you Last 10 years of data, click to enlarge.
have trouble try right clicking on the download link and choosing the "Save... As" option.)
Benchmarks
No benchmark information available.
DNR Information Center
500 Lafayette Road
St. Paul, MN 55155-4040
drivini! directions
Phone: 651-296-6157 or 888-MINNDNR
TrY: 651-296-5484 or 800-657-3929
For DNR Info: info@dnr.state.mn.us
Site Comment"): webmaster@dnr.state.mn.us
t:ONR home
Contents @ 1996-2001 Minnesota Department of Natural Resources. All rights reserved.
http://www.dnr.state.mn.us/perl/lk_levels.pl ?id=6200 5 800
6/25/0 I
I
J
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
.
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
~
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
.
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
Appendix F
Interim Strategy to Reduce Nonpoint Source Pollution to all Metropolitan Waterbodies
I
~
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
.
I
I
I
I
I
I
.INTERIl\II STRATEGY TO REDUCE
NONPOINT SOURCE POLLUTION
. TO ALL METROPOLITAN
WATER BODIES
Nay: 1, 1992
Jack Frost
Steven .Schwanlce
Metropolitan Council
MC3rs brk Centre, 230 E. Fifth St., St. Paul, MN 55101
Publication No. (,40-92-117
I
WATER QUALITY IMPLEMENTATION STRATEGY
SURFACE WATER MANAGEMENT
NONPOLNT SOURCE POLLUTION TO ALL METROPOLITAN WATERS
Summary of The Policy Issue
In 1990 the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) nnd the Minnesota Pollution Control
Agency (MPCA) agreed on a goal 10 reduce nonpoint source pollution in the Minnesota River by
40 percent [rom pre-1980 levels. The two agencies have set 1996 as the target dUle 10 ,Khicvc this
goal. To accomplish this goal, current land development nnd agricultural practices must be altered
to restrict nonpoint source pollutants from entering area water bodies. While tht: Minnesota River
may be an acute case o[watcr quality degradation due to nonpoint source pollution all water bodies
in the seven county area are impacted to some degree by human activities in both urban and rural
areas.
The Mississippi River,especially in the Spring Lake and Lake Fepin area, is severally impacted by
excessive algal growth. A major inter-state and [ederal study is currently being conducted to identify
the causes of the exce.~.~ive algal groweh. However, it is known that nut6enl~, nitrogen ;md
phospho!1.l.\, from whatever Source are the prime caU5e of excessive algal groweh. Both the State of
Wisconsin and the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency are attempting to get the MPCA to impose
phosphorus limits on the Metropolitan Pbnt in St. Paul as a means to reduce the algal growth. If
phosphorus limits are imposed On the Metropolitan Plant this could result in capital expenditures of
0580 to 360 million. Since phosphoru.s is [ound in surface wata runoff it may be more cost effective
to control nonpoint sources. of runoff and have a more benefieial impact on the river than by
controlling point sources of phosphorus.
To ~ddress the acute problems On the Minnesota River, the Council developed an interim strategy
for' communities in the Minnesota River basin. This strategy incorporated basic water quality
management practices that will improve the water quality of the area water hodies. During the public
participation proeess in developing these strategiC-', it became clear that these same interim strategies
were appropriate for all local governments in the seven county area. A consistent and equitable
policy is established to apply these strategies metro-wide.
The Problem
The, Metropolitan Council has documented an increase of nonpoint source polll1lion to area water-
bodies. These added pollutants reduce thc recreational value and accelerate the eutrophication o[
area water bodies. TIle increase of non point source pollutants to area water bodie$ can be traced
to two primary sources: land development nnd agriculture practices.., !..<lnd development or
urb2nization, generally incre<l5es both the volume of runoff as well as the concentration of pollutants
in the runoff. This happens with the conversion of land to hard surfaces and by the destruction of
wetlands. Detention ponds or artiticial depressions can help mitigate these imp~cls. The best
designed ponds, howcvcr, wili not rcduce thc increased volume of runoff following urbanization nor
will they totally remOve the additional pollutants follo<.ving urbanization. An inere:lSc in runoff
volume, total phosphorus and other pollutanls are the results of urban development.
I
J
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
.
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
~ Agriculture i.~ still the predominant land use in a Jarg~ ponion of the seven county area and a major
I contributor of nonpoint source pollutants. Nonpol.!1t source pollution from agriculture occurs as a
result of intensive land cultivation and husbandry practices and shows up in three basic forms: soil
erosion; agricultur~ suppkmen~ such as nutrients, pesticides and herbicide.i; and animal waste
I products. Each of these sources fill area water bodies smothering aquatic life, change the aquatic
environmcnt by limiting light penetration of the water, and result in 'the transmission of toxins to area
water bodics.
I
I
I
I
I
.
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
The T""1n Cities Metropolitan Area is fortunate to have an abundance of lakes and ri"e~. The.e
water bodies provide the area with recreational, aesthetic and educational benefits envied by other
parts of the United States. Preservation of these water bodies and the associated wildlife habitat is
a major compon~nt ot' the Council's pl~nning framework. Measures 10 preserve and enhance the
environment CAn he found in all of the.. Council's' major system and pcilicy plans. Policy 7 of [he
MDIF states that the Metropolitan Council:
supports the'maintenance of environmental quality throughout the region and will support
programs or strategies to maintain or improve the nalural environment (page 16).
Reducing non point souree pollution to area water bodies has a number of positive outcomes.
Reduced nonpoint ~ource pollution has an overall positive effect on the environment, improves the
water quality in lakes, wetlands and floodplains and allows for fi$hable and swimabk water bodies.
Water resource management ha$ historically focused on point sources such a.s wastewater treatment
plants and industrial facilities. Efforts to reduce pollution from point sources bas been effective.
Nonpoint source pollution abatement is the next challenge that must he addressed to ensure that
wat.er bodies in this metropolitan area are protected.
Exlsllng Leglslntlve and Polley Structure For Addressing the Nonpotnt Source PollulIon P.oblem
The Minnesota Legislature
Two pieces of legislation have been passed in the last decade that set a rramework for addressing the
nonpoint source pollution issue. However, it will take several years to put this framework in place
and will require local governments to extensively revise their surface water management plans and
nctivitie..,
Watershed planning legislation
rn 1982 legislation Willi passed requiring Watershed Management Organizations (WMO) to prepnre
watershed plans that nddrc<.<ed wat(:r quality issues. Under this legislation each WMO is to prepnre
a plan that states objectives and policies for wntec quality and identifies slternatives for improving
water quality and methods of implementation. These pbns are to be reviewed by the Metropolitan
Council 'in the same manner and with the same authority and effect as provided for the council's
review of the comprehensive plans of local government units' (Minnesota Statutes, section 103B.2~1
subd. 8 (1 <Y'.tO)). The Council is required to determine whether the watershed plan con[ont1$ with the
mllnngement objectives and t:lrget pollution IOilds staled in the COlJncil's waler resources plan
prepared pursuant to Minne.lota Statutes, section ~73.157.
Local government planning
As 0 p:1rt of the \\l1vfO planning proclCSS described under Minnesot3 Statutes. scction I03B.20l. cach
local government will be required to prepare a local woler management plan. capitol improvement
program and o[[jcin-J controls neces,;nry to implement the watcrshed plan. Asp'nrt of the local Water
manogcmcnt plan. the local government will need to define water quantity nnd qua lily protection
methocll oclc'luatc tQ meet pc"rfonnance standards cstablished in the walcrshcdj,lon. Local
government.< will also be required 10 omend their loco! comprehensive plans to reOeet tbe contents
o[ the wiltershed plan. Local govcmmen:s will have two years to amend thcir eumprehcn'ive plans
from the time the WMO planning proCeSS is complete. Under rules currently proposed by the Board
o[ Water and Soil Re50urces (BWSR), WlvlOs have until 1995 to COmplete their plans. The earliest
local governments are required to revise their compreheru;ive plans is 1997. It could lake set'era!
years beyond 1997 to implement local government plans.
The.\econd piece oflegislarion is Mjnne.~ola Statutes, section 473.157, that requires the Melropoliran -
Council to prepare a water resources plan that includes management objective.s ond t~rgel pollution
loads [or watersheds in the metropolitan arca. From this plan WMOs will advise local governments
of their target pollution loads. Local governments will revise theit stormwater management plans to
include implementation steps that assure the target pollution loads arc met.
The Metropolitan Council has set as a priority developing the tnrget pollution lo~ds for watersheds
tributary to the Minnesota River. 11,i., is a priority because of the urgency to meet the EPA/MPCA
reduction goal of 40 percent by \996. Target pollution loads [or Bevens. Carver, Chaska and Sand
Creek watcrsheds '!Iii! be de~eloped by 1992. Pollution loads [or other watersheds in the Minnesota
River Basin \vill be developed by mid.I993. TI,e Council will also be actively pursuing the
development o[ target pollution loads [or all watersheds in the Twin Cities Metropolitan Area.
The Minnesota POllution Control Agency
In accordance with the Clean Water Act, Section 319, the MPCA is- charged with developing a state-
wide strategy for addressing nonpoint pollution. This plan is a four year plan developed ill 1990 und
is periodically updated as new in[ormation becomes available. TIlis strategy both targets und
prioritizes problem areas and develops a management plan [or addressing these problem areas. The
management plan loob at both a voluntary and a regulatory approach to >!ddressing problems. The
state plan is also required to develop various approaches to funding problem solutions [rom federal
state and local sources:
The_ Board of Water and Soil Resources
The Board o[ \Vater and Soil Resourccs is the primary state agency responsible tor surface watcr
plonning and is the lead agency responsible [or carrying out many of the administrative aspects of tbe
recently passed Wetland Conservation Act o[ 1991, better known as the "no-net 10ss'legislation. TIle
acl provides landowners with three options [or preserving or enhancing wetlands: the wetland
preservation areas option; the pcrmanent wetbnd preservcs option; and the wetland establishment
and r~..$tora(ion program. If a land use prlletice requires_ the taking o[ a protected wetland the
Iegislalion requires a 1:1 and r. 2:1 mitigation of wetlands in rur"1 ,1nd urb<Jn arens respectively_
I
J
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
.
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
.
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
Wetland., perform essential hydrologic and watcr quality functions such n., lowering of IIood peaks,
providing interchange between surrace water and groundwater, and liltering and absorbing pOllutants.
Because of thest; functions, wetlands are critical for reducing nOn point source pollution to area lakes
and rivers.
The Metropolitan Council
In September, 1988 the Metropolitan Council adopted it.<; Water Resources .HallngCnlWI Wastelvater
Treatmwt and Handling Policy Plan (hereafter the policy pIon). Local governments wcre notified
of the policy plan conteot.<; in the April, 1989 systems statement and pursuant to thc Metropolitan
Land Planning Act, had nine months to amend their comprehensive plan.,. The need to reduce
non point source pollution, to espccinlIy the Minnesota River Basin, through regulating land
development is well documented in the Council's policy plan. However, because of the potential that
nonpoint pollution m~y impact MWCC wastewater treatment plants effluent limits in the future the
Council adopted Policy 1.1 of the Council's Wastewaler Treatment and Handling Policy Plan which
stntes:
(T]trealmel1l levels required for. wa.ltcwaler trentment plants in the metropolitan system
should dearly recognize the need to control both point and nonpoint SOurces of pollution
from within and oUL~ide the Metropolitan Area (p. 9).
The Council has activc::ly pursued the implementation of its policy to reduce nonpoint source
pollution to area w~ter bodie.~, The Couneil's policy plan outlines the responsibilities for
implementing policy 1-1. These include, but are not limited to:
1. working with watershed management organization~ (WMOs) and the MPCA on
monitoring and managing non point source pollution programs; and,
2. evaluating the efforts of WMOs and local governments to eontroloonpoint souree
pollution and their impnct on river water quality and effects on treatment plant
effluent limitl. (p. 10)
The Council ha, also used it., authority under the Metropolitan Land Planning Act of 1976 to review
and comment on comprehensive plan amendments and environmental reviews to implement its policy
on reducing nonpoinr source pollution. These comments have generally focused on the need to
reduce nonpoinr SOurce pollution and the possible tools that may be used to accomplish this task.
In addition to policy 1.1 of the Council's Waler Resources Managemem Plan, Part 1. the Council has
two other policies addressing the environmental effects of nonpoint source: pollution and water
quality. The Council's Wafer Resource! Managemenr.Plah, Part 3 states in policy 3-4 that:
The Council,through its numerous review and approval authorities, \vill preserve all protected
and unprotected natural watercourses .. including associated wetlands, channcls, floodplains
and shorelands '. to enhance waler quantity and quality and to prese[\'c their ecological
functioflj (pag~ 3.26);
Policy 3-6 of the same policy plan slMc>:
11.c Council, :n conducting its project ~pprov"l.~ and reviews, will protect the utility of the
region's water nnd related land resources and seek Iheirrestor:lIion, where needed. Any
action Ihn! threnlens the viability of the water and related resource will be negntivelv
reviewed (page 3-30).
Pmpcscd lntertm Stroteg}'
An i:1terim strategy i$ needed to address both the non point source pOllution issue and to implement
the Council's policy I-I of the Wastewater Trear;l1em al1d Handling Policy Plan, Parr 1, polieie. 3.4
and 3-6 of the Council's Water Resources Management Plan, Parr 3.
111e Council is commiltcu to worl"..ing '.vith \VMOs and local governm.ents Ihrough the planning
process outlined in Minnesota Statutes, section 1033.201. The Council also recognizes its
responsibility 10 prepare. and 'ldopt 3 Waler resources plan that includ", m2n2gemcnt ubjectives and
target poilu lion lands for watersheds in the metropolitan area pursuant 10 Minnesota Statutes, section
473.157. In order to prepare the plan the Council had to prioritize it.> work ~cherlule. Since the
Minnesota River has been identified as having an acute problem with nonpoinl source pollution this
area wiH be addressed first and form the framework for dealing with non point source pollution on
a metropolitan wide basis.
It ",ill take severnl years for the Council, WMOs 3nd local government.< to prepare nnd implemeot
the above referenced plans. In the interim, steps should be taken that ailows loc31 governmcnts and
WM:Os to take immediate action 10 reduce the adve",,, impnct.s of nonpoinl SOurce pollution on nrea
water bodies. As part of their planning efforts, local governments will need to adopt measures that
implement nonpoint f,ource pollution reduction stralegies. Local governmenl' will need to amend
existing Capital Improvement Plans ~nd local regulations to en.sure the financing ~nd fong-term
management 3nd maintenance of ponds and wctl,tnds receivingstormwater runoff. The Metropolitan
Council recognizes lhat implementation is an important issue for loco' government and for the: lung-
term effeCliveness of any effort to reduce nonpoint source pollution.
This interim strategy is a minimum thftl the Council ,viII accept as parl of any locnl goverument
comprehensive plan. It should be' recognized by ]pcnl. governments that mOrc comprehemivc
revisions to stormwaler plans may be required once the Council and WMOs complete their planning
under Minne~ota Statutes, .eclion 103B.201 and 473.157 in urder to meet water quality goals.
1. Local governments throughout the metropolitan area musl adopt design ~lnndards for
Oe\V stormwatcr ponds Ihat will reduce the contaminant loadings from surface water
runofL One set of design criteria Ihat is widdy .1Cceptcd if, rrom the National Urban
Runoff Program (NURP). Appendix A is attached and describes NURP designed
pond performance standards. 'The,e criteria, or similar specificaliofl.\ which arc
equally cffectiv~, should he incorpornted in the stormw3ter plao uf every local
government io the. metropolilan area. Allhe prcsent time, Ihis policy does not direct
the retrofitting of existing stormwfiter ponds.
2. Local governments in Ihe metropolitan arca must al.lo include in their stormw.!cr
plans the MPCA'.\ urban "best managcment practices: litled l'rOlcccillg Water Quality
in Urban Areas or nn equivnlcnl set of st3ndarcL>- These standards arc [0 be used for
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
.
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
..
I
I
I
I
I
I
7.
8.
9.
I
all new or redeveloped land development. These locnl governmenls must nlso notify
their re.,idenL, of ways 10 implement "bc..;t man~gemenl Jlrac'icc.~" and available
rescurcc:s, if additional information i.': needed.
3.
All local gO'lernm~nL\ in the metropolilnn aren must adopt the Depnnment of Nntural
Resourc,~ shoreland regulations as found in the Slate wide Slalldards ForM""agemefll
Of Shore/and Areas as prescribed by the timeline in (Minnesota Regulations Pam
6120.2500 - 6120.3900) nnd consistent with th~ DNR',; implementation strat~gy. Local
govcrnment~ should work with the DNR to determine the most effective wny to
implement the DNR's shoreland regulations.
4.
All local governmenl~ in the metropolitan arcn mu.\t. adopt as part of their
comprehensive plans and officinl conlrolsthe measures described in items 1 and 2 by
JntluMY 1. 1993. Ench local government should notify the affected Watershed
M~n~gement Organi:-:alions of its intentions to comply with items I ~nd 2.
5.
Nler January 1,1993, the Council m~y require modification of plan amendments that
involve land ust activilie.s that would generate surf~ce water runoff. unless the IOCol
government has ~dopted the interim measures described in items 1 through 3. The
Council will not reql1ire a plan modification regarding nonpaint source pollution if a
local goverIlmenl h~s adopted NURP standards ~nd MPCA's "best management
practices" by January 1, 1993 and is following the DNR's shareland reguLllion
implementation strategy.
6.
The Metropol;lar, Council will continue to develop t~rget pollution loads far ~Il
watersheds in the Twin Cities Metropolitan Area.
The Association of Metropolitan Municipalities will advise its member cities oC the
urgent need to implement wnoff and land m~n~gement pr?ctices that improve the
quality of direct and indirect runoff discharges to are~ water bodies.
The Mctropolitaa Council and the AssociatioIl of Metropolitan Municipalities will
work '...;Ih State of Minnesota agencies to reduce nonpoint source pollution to arca
water bodies ill Greater Minnesota.
The Metropolitan Council and the Association of Metropolitan Munil:ipulities will
monitor the effectiveness of the above-mentioned interim steps to address the
nonpoint source poIlu lion problem in the metropolitan area.
APPENDIX A
TYPICAL WET DETENTION POND
PERFDRMANCE
Suspended Solids
Oxygen Demand
. Total Phosphorus
Dissolved Phosphorus
Nitrate Nitrogen
Kjeldahl Nitrogen
Copper
Lead
Zinc
(\
OJ
20
40 60 80
PERCENT REMOVAL
I
100
I
I
I
I
I
I
II
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
~
I
I
I
I
I
I
.
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
Appendix G
Local Plan Requirements of Rice Creek Watershed District
I
~
I
I
I
I
I
SECTION 4
O&mC~SANDPOUcms
INTRODUCTION
The Rice Creek Watershed District's (RCWD) objectives and policies have been structured
into a framework for water resource management. This section outlines those objectives and
policies, and discusses them on a subwatershed basis. Strategies for management are
discussed briefly here and discussed in greater detail in Section 5.
The essential objective of the RCWD is to provide for the wise, long-term management of its
water and associate land resources. The term "management" embodies several implicit
functions including: planning, organizing, obtaining financial and staff resources, direction or
leadership, monitoring or review, control, coordination, reporting, and innovation.
I
at
I
Management is a continuing process which adapts to changing needs and ~cumstances and
which incorporates new knowledge within the expanding context of prior experience. Basic
to any effective management process is a consistent, overall policy which enunciates goals,
assigns relative priorities, and essentially defines the "mission." The plans, programs, and
specific actions which evolve from the basic policy are then continually redefined and refined
in response to the future changing environment (social, economic, and governmental).
I
I
I
I
Overall policy, as stated in the RCWD's Rules and Regulations, provides an impartial,
objective basis for developing effective plans and programs for water resources management.
Emphasis is placed upon "sound scientific principles" and "provident use of natural
resources." Overall RCWD policy is to moderate various competitive interests (e.g., of
conservationists; landowners and developers; municipal and county governments) so as to
realize the maximum long-term benefit to the RCWD's constituent municipalities, residents,
business, and agricultural interests.
Basic principles of RCWD policy should be 1) to evaluate most carefully all proposals which
involve irreversible and irretrievable commitments of water and associated land resources, 2)
to prevent or reduce adverse impacts upon these resources from proposed developments, 3) to
identify and analyze potential alternatives, and 4) to maintain a balanced relationship
between the shorter-term uses and the longer-term productivity of the RCWD's resources.
I
I
4-1
10/97
The RCWD will achieve its overall goals predicated upon facts and reason, and by closely
coordinating its plans and programs with other concerned governmental agencies at
municipal through state levels.
POllCY DEVELOPMENT
Using the general intent of MS 103B as a guideline and assisted by two advisory groups (the
Citizens Advisory Committee and Technical Advisory Committee), the RCWD Managers
defined and confirmed their policies and objectives. An important element in this process
proved to be the RCWD's social, physical, and biological diversity, which the final policies
needed to reflect. Foremost in this diversity is the presence of both urban and rural land
uses. The northern portion of the watershed has a rural character with development
occurring sparsely on large lots. The eastern portion of the watershed is developing in a
somewhat more dense manner, while the southwestern portion of the watershed already has
an urban character.
O&ffiC~SANDPOllCms
This portion of the Water Resource Management Plan will describe the objectives and
policies for water resources management in the RCWD through the year 2000. The first
three sections of the Water Resource Management Plan inventoried existing physical and
hydrologic conditions and described potential development to the year 2000. This inventory,
together with the general purposes of the Metropolitan Surface Water Management Act,
were used in determining first the water resource management objectives and second, the
water resource management policies for the District. These guiding objectives and policies
are shown in Table 4-1. The detailed management strategies of the District are contained in
Section 5.
Objective A: Minimize Public Expenditure to Control Runoff
The first objective is to minimize, to the greatest extent possible, public expenditures used in
controlling excessive runoff rates and volumes. This objective will be used to protect
downstream areas from hazards related to excessive volumes of runoff while considering
costs and benefits.
4-2
10/97
I
.~
I
I
I
I
I
I
..
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
~
There are two policies which relate to storage of runoff either on-site or off.site within the
RCWD. One states that generally, there is no need for runoff control through the planning
period. Another policy indicates that additional storage is needed presently or additional
storage will be required through the planning period. Each of the 84 subwatersheds modeled
in the RCWD's stormwater runoff study will be subject to one or the other of these two
policies. (The runoff policies are the only ones which are not tied into the 24 subwatersheds
used for the primary planning efforts of this plan.) The model was used to determine where
significant increases in runoff were expected due to development and also where additional
ponding would possibly have an adverse effect on the composite flood hydrograph.
I
I
I
I
I
I
The policy of the RCWD is to retain the present capacities of the existing drainage system.
This is done to reduce costs necessary for possible remedial measures dictated by improper
development. The RCWD has also identified a trunk drainage system as described in
Subsection 15 of Section 5.
Objective B: Improve Water Quality
II
I
The second major objective in the water management plan is to address water quality
problems. The purpose oithis objective is to improve the water quality oflakes, streams, and
wetlands thereby improving habitat for fish and animals and protect water quality for
drinking water purposes. In order to more fully describe this objective, five policies were
developed.
I
A policy of the RCWD is to reverse the upward trends observed in pollutants, especially
nutrients and sediment loadings, into most of the lakes within the RCWD. This can be done
through treatment or control of runoff quality. Minimum requirements have been set which
closely follow Metropolitan Council standards.
I
I
I
I
The RCWD has considerable experience and success with the use of natural wetlands to treat
runoff, particularly in the southwestern portion of the watershed. Therefore, a policy to
protect wetlands is viewed as an effective way to enhance water quality.
The northern portion of the watershed lies outside of the Metropolitan Urban Service Area
(MUSA) line, as delineated by the Metropolitan Council. Outside this line, wastewater
treatment is accomplished through individual wastewater treatment systems, primarily
septic tanks. The RCWD does not desire to directly regulate individual wastewater
I
4-3
10/97
I
treatment systems. However, as a third policy, the RCWD does encourage municipalities to
use the Minnesota Pollution Control Agency's Individual Sewage Treatment System
Regulations as a model for local control.
J
I
After evaluating water quality within the RCWD through the inventory process as described
in Section 3 of this plan, it was evident that there are several areas where water quality data
is sparse or nonexistent. The policy of the RCWD is to upgrade this water quality monitoring
system to identify potential problems and to develop water resource management strategies
and quality improvement projects based on this water quality information. tntimately, the
goals outlined in Table 4-2 are hoped to be achieved as a result of the implementation efforts.
I
One of the more important policies of the RCWD is to insure good water quality to
Minneapolis and St. Paul. The St. Paul water system draws some of its water from the
RCWD upstream of Centerville Lake. The Minneapolis water system takes most of its water
from the Mississippi River a short distance from the confluence of Rice Creek and the
Mississippi River. The watershed should be protected to insure that contamination does not
reach the St. Paul or Minneapolis systems.
I
I
I
I
I
The District has prioritized lakes on the basis of Trophic State Indices, recreational facilities,
and lake capability. Tier 1 lakes consistently support swimming use and are limited to
Turtle and White Bear. Tier 2 lakes are Johanna, Josephine, Spring, Clear, Bald Eagle,
Moore, Pine Tree, Island, Sunset, Silver, Centerville, and Golden, and are capable of
supporting swimming or have significant public uses. Tier 3 includes all DNR protected
lakes, wetlands, and watercourses not included in Tiers 1 and 2. Tier 4 represents any
remaining wetlands, stormwater basins, and conveyance systems. The classification by tiers
will be used to provide for varying retrofit standards, pretreatment, project commitments,
and prioritization of resources.
II
I
I
I
I
Objective C: Prevent Flooding and Erosion
I
The third objective of the RCWD is to prevent flooding and erosion from surface water flows.
This two-part objective has five associated policies.
I
It is the policy of the RCWD that there be no encroachment upon floodways that will reduce
capacities to expedite flood flows. It is also the policy of the RCWD to allow only structures
4-4
10/97
I
I
~
I
I
in the flood fringe that have been protected from high water either through floodproofing or
by other construction techniques.
One of the goals of M.S. l03B is to move surface water management toward local control.
Based on this goal, the RCWD will promote the local adoption of floodplain zoning ordinances
conforming to state regulations.
I
I
I
I
I
To protect water quality and preserve valuable soil resources, the RCWD has developed a
policy to minimize runoff velocities and maximize natural cover in accordance with rural and
urban Best Management Practices (BMPs).
To reduce sediment transport and control erosion on construction sites, the RCWD has set a
policy which states that a developer must provide all measures necessary to contain
sediment and control erosion.
Objective D: Promote Groundwater Recharge
II
I
I
I
A portion of the RCWD provides groundwater recharge to the Prairie du Chien-Jordan
aquifer and surficial aquifers. The Metropolitan Surface Water Management Act encourages
the recharge of surface water to groundwater aquifers. The policies of the RCWD encourage
this recharge and protect recharge areas from potential sources of contamination.
Groundwater recharge can occur in the area of floodplains. It is the policy of the RCWD to
restrict impervious areas within the floodplain in the recharge area of the Prairie du Chien-
Jordan aquifer or surficial aquifers.
I
Portions of the RCWD have experienced groundwater contamination. This groundwater
contamination generally resulted from improper disposal of hazardous substances. The
policy of the RCWD is to protect recharge areas from future sources of contamination.
I
I
Objective E: Protect and Enhance Fish and Wildlife Habitat and Recreation
The water resource management objective for the RCWD is to protect and enhance fish and
wildlife habitat and water-oriented recreation. The policies of the RCWD promote and
encourage coordination with the Minnesota Department of Natural Resources whose primary
I
4-5
10/97
responsibility is to protect and enhance fish and wildlife habitats and protect rare and
endangered .species.
The policy of the RCWD is to preserve wetlands which provide a habitat for game fish
spawning and wildlife. There are several areas within the RCWD that provide unique
habitats for wildlife management. The most unique of these is the Lamprey Pass Wildlife
Management Area in Subwatershed 1.
This planning document has previously identified as an important water management
objective the preservation of open space and natural wildlife areas which are an essential
part of the ecosystem. The RCWD Managers have no explicit responsibilities for developing
parks and open space or managing water-based recreation. However, there is a substantial
commonalty of interest, particularly with regard to the overall approach taken toward
"protection" of open space with many other units of government. For this reason, the policy
of the RCWD is to coordinate with the state, counties, and municipalities to enhance their
ongoing recreational programs which may be affected by water resource management
activities. More specifically, the Managers seek to assist in large scale efforts such as the
decommissioning of the Twin Cities Army Ammunition Plant and establishment of
greenways and buffers along the trunk drainage system.
Objective F: Provide for the Transition of Water Management to Local Units
One of the main purposes of the Metropolitan Surface Water Management Act is to transfer
water management responsibilities to local units of government. Surface water management
planning and regulations are currently done by watershed districts and state agencies.
When local surface water management plans are complete and approved by the RCWD, the
local unit of government will have the option of implementing their own regulatory
programs. The RCWD would prefer to retain their current regulatory role and have a
continuing responsibility to monitor and ensure implementation of local plans. This role is
explored further in Section 6 - Local Responsibilities.
IMPLEMENTATION PROCESS
It is not uncommon for unforeseen problems or opportunities to develop. The general
procedure by which Managers will consider potential implementation actions not addressed
in this management plan is as follows:
4-6
10/97
I
J
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
II
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
~
I
. District Managers refer issue to staff to compile background data, resource
setting, and applicable goals and policies.
. Staff presents recommended role for watershed district and identifies other
potential responsible parties or cooperators based on compatibility with District
goals and policies, priority ranking of the resource (lake tiers and trunk system),
and a measure of the number of District stakeholders impacted by the issue.
. If the Board of Managers detennines sufficient role exists for the District, a
conceptual project summary which addresses schedule, financing priority, and
additional data requirements will be prepared.
. Board considers the conceptual plan for potential plan amendment.
I
I
I
I
I
I
FUNDING POLICY
Policy
.
The District has a large array of funding methods ranging from special assessments to ad
valorem taxes. These methods are generally outlined within Minnesota Statutes Chapters
l03B, 103D, 103E and 429. Additionally, special legislation has been passed which is specific
to the Rice Creek Watershed District.
I
The Board of Managers will be guided in their funding decisions by a philosophy to:
I
I
I
I
I
. Utilize Districtwide ad valorem funding as the primary vehicle for completing
projects.
. Utilize special assessments or subwatershed taxing districts when highly localized
benefits will result
. Actively seek grants and project cooperators
. Conduct public hearings prior to ordering capital improvement projects
. Give priority to pursuing and co-funding projects which address water quality in
tier 1 and 2 lakes, result in rate control beyond District requirements in critical
rate control subwatersheds, and manage the trunk drainage system.
These six objectives and associated policies of the RCWD fonn the framework for water
resource management decisions. The following portion of the plan describes the objectives
and policies as they relate to specific subwatersheds.
I
4-7
10/97
TABLE 4-1
OBJECTIVES, POLICIES, AND OVERALL MANAGEMENT STRATEGIES
OBJECTIVE A: Minimize, to the greatest possible extent, the public expenditures
necessary to control excessive volumes and rates of runoff.
A.l
Policy:
Development to the year 2000 does not require fue need
for measures to control nmoffrate unless necessary b
prevent locaiized flooding.
ManaE"ement StrateE"V
a. Secure easements or other methods to control wetlands, ditches,
drainageways, floodplains, and stormwater retention areas as
part of the local water management plans for developing areas
and redevelopment area.
b. Restrict modifications where feasible to the outlet of all designated
storID.water retention basins that would result in the discharge
rate from these areas being increased.
c. Reduce runoff volumes by promoting safe infiltration practices.
A.2
Policy:
Provide for additional storage through the construction
of a comprehensive retention area or by on-site
ponding in fue absence of a comprehensive
locaJ/regional stormwater pian.
ManaE"ement StrateE"V
a. For each site, control the rate of runoff in conformance with
existing RCWD requirements. This will not be necessary if a
local water management plan has been approved and
satisfactorily implemented for the area.
A.3
Policy:
To t>-<ese.. ve fue capacities of fue pteseut drainage
system to accommodate future needs.
ManaE"ement StrateE"V
a . Maintain county and judicial ditches and manage the trunk
drainage system.
b. Regulate modifications and improvements of existing
drainageways that reduce the drainageway capacity.
OBJECTIVE B: Improve water quality.
B.l Policy:
Treat and/or control nmoffto enhance water quality b
reverse fue "Pwal.11 trends in pollutants, especially
nutrient and sediment loads.
4-8
10/97
I
J
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
.
I
I
I
I
IRI
I
I
~
I
I
I
I
I
I
.
I
I
I
I
I
I
TABLE 4-1
OBJECTIVES, POLICIES, AND OVERALL MANAGEMENT STRATEGIES
(Continued)
Manae-ement Strate!!V
a. In the absence of an approved and satisfactorily implemented
Local Water Management Plan, developers will provide the
following treatment measures for both new developments and
redevelopment of residential areas greater than 5 acres and
Industrial/Commercial areas over 2.5 acres.
1) NURP basin capable of removing coarse suspended sediment
from stormwater.
2) Skimming of oil and floatable materials from the discharged
stormwater for the I-year storm.
"
.3) Protect all wetlands in accordance with Rice Creek
Watershed District wetland policy.
b. Local Water Management Plans must be consistent with, but not
necessarily limited to, the three aforementioned items. Any
technique may be used if it can be demonstrated that the water
quality of public waters will be protected.
B-2 Policy:
To preserve wetlands which provide natural treatment
for nmoff.
Manae-ement Strate!!V
a. Protect all wetlands in accordance with Rice Creek Watershed
District wetland policy.
B.3 Policy:
To promote 1he local adoption of Minnesota Pollution
Control Agency individual wastewater treatment
system regulations.
Mana".ement Strate""
a. Require all individual sewage treatment systems to meet
requirements outlined in Minnesota Rules 7080
B.4 Policy:
To improve 1he water quality monitoring system for
identifying potential problems.
Manae-ement Strate!!V
a. Implement the Annual Rice Creek Watershed District
Monitoring Program.
I
4-9
10/97
TABLE 4-1
OBJECTIVES, POliCIES, AND OVERALL MANAGEMENT STRATEGIES
(Continued)
b. Provide additional special monitoring in areas identified by the
Board of Managers based on specific water quality proolem.
c. Coordinate and standardize monitoring with other levels of
government.
B.5 Policy:
To prated; drainage areas 1bat supply fue St. Paul and
Minneapolis water system from sources of
contamination.
Manae-effient Strate","
a. Require the District be advised of all site development activities in
which the storage and handling of hazardous materials will occur
and that storage and handling of such materials comply with all
State requirements. The District shall establish a procedure for
insuring its awareness of all contamination problems.
OBJECTIVE C: Prevent flooding and erosion from surface flows.
C.l Policy:
To prohibit enCl'O"("mnent that will reduce fue capacity
of floodways and In allow only structures in fue flood
fringe 1bat have been floodproofed cr 1bat are not
habitable structures.
Manae-effient Strate~
a. Prohibit encroachment in the floodway and allow only protected
structures in the flood fringe. Allow fill placement in only
RGWn-designated flood fringe areas. The amount of fill allowed
must comply with current state regulations.
Co2 Policy:
To establish l00-year flood levels based on critical
storm events.
Manae-ement Strate""
a. Complete floodplain studies for all areas of the RGWn.
C.3 Policy:
To promote fue local adoption of floodplain zoning
ordinances conforming In state regulations, as a
TI1;n;mum, to regulate floodplain development.
Manae-ement Strate""
a. .Maintain RCWD regulatory control until floodplain regulations
are adopted by local governmental units.
4-10
10/97
I
J
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
.
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
~
I
TABLE 4-1
OBJECTIVES, POLICIES, AND OVERAlL MANAGEMENT STRATEGIES
(Continued)
C.4 Policy:
To nlinhni'T.e runoff velocities and m~yjtni'T.e natural
coverin orderthat erosion be reduced.
I
I
Manae-ement Strate""
a. In the absence of an approved and implemented local water
management plan, the developer will provide the following on-site
treatment measures in both new development and redevelopment:
I
I
I
II
I
1) Minimize slopes.
2) Provide stabilized channels for stormwater runoff.
3) Incorporate energy dissipaters into stormwater management
features on-site if appropriate.
4) Encourage use of natural grass waterways 1n discharge
stormwater runoff from sites and to promote natural treatment
for stormwater runoff.
b. The local water management plan must be consistent with, but not
necessarily limited to, the four aforementioned items.
C.5 Policy:
To provide all measures necessary 10 contain
sediment and control erosion within construction
sites.
I
I
I
Manal!ement Strate""
a. In the absence of an approved and implemented local water
management plan, developer will provide the following on-site
treatment measures in both new development and redevelopment of
residential areas greater than 5.0 acres or industrial/commercial
areas over 2.5 acres.
1)
Provide and maintain
measures on construction
transported off-site.
erosion and sediment control
sites where sediment could be
I
I
2)
Utilize phased construction
minimize disturbance of
construction.
techniques, if appropriate, In
vegetation on-site during
3) Require scheduling and implementation of temporary cover
establishment over all construction site areas that are
. disturbed if the implementation of final cover establishment
. measures is delayed.
I
4-11
10/97
TABLE 4-1
OBJECTIVES, POLICIES, AND OVERALL MANAGEMENT STRATEGIES
(Continued)
b. A local water management plan must be consistent with, but not
necessarily limited to, the three aforementioned items. Other
techniques may be used if it can be demonstrated that the water
quality of runoff will be protected.
OBJECTIVE D: Promote groundwater recharge.
D.1 Policy:
To evaluate and control development of groundwater
recharge areas.
Manaecement Strate!!V
a. Prohibit the construction of impervious surfaces over areas
designated as floodplain recharge areas except for road
construction, trails, and other recreational improvements where no
altematives exist.
D.2 Policy:
To protect recharge areas from potential sources of
cont.$l:'I11in~tion..
Manaecement Strate!!V
a. Control developments with potential lo contaminate groundwater
recharge areas.
OBJECTIVE E: Protect and enhance fish and wildlife habitat and water recreation.
E.l Policy:
To promotetheadoption of local shoreIand ordinances
based on Department of Natural Resources
regulations.
Mana~ement Strate!!V
a. Maintain RCWD regulatory controls over shoreline management
unless municipality adopts and implements local shoreland
ordinances.
E.2 Policy:
To preserve wetlands that provide habitat for game fish
spawning and wildlife.
Mana~ement Strate""
a. Follow policies outlined in Sections A and B and maintain
communication with the Department of Natural Resources on all
land development activities that may compromise fish and wildlife
habitat in lakes or wetlands within the RCWD.
4-12
10/97
I
~
I
I
I
I
I
I
II
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
~
I
I
I
I
I
I
TABLE 4-1
OBJECTIVES, POLICIES, AND OVERALL MANAGEMENT STRATEGIES
(Continued)
E.3 Policy:
To coordinate with fue Department of Natural
Resources to enhance fish and wildlife habitats.
Manaf!ement Strate""
a . Consult with ihe Department of Natural Resources and other
appropriate agencies to identify opportunities to enhance fish and
wildlife habitat within the RCWD.
b. Incorporate fish and wildlife considerations in the design of water
retention and delivery systems and other management policies.
EA Policy:
To coordinate with fue Department of Natural
Resources to protect rare and endangered species.
Manaf!ement Strate""
a. Maintain communication with Department of Natural Resources
on all land development activities that may impact rare and
endangered species.
-
E.5 Policy:
I
I
I
I
I
I
To coordinate with counties and municipalities b
enhance water-based recreation.
Manaf!ement Strate""
a. Give priority to watershed projects fuat complement existing or
proposed state, regional, county, or local recreational facilities and
programs.
OBJECTIVE F: Provide for ihe orderly transition of appropriate water management
responsibilities to local units of government where feasible.
F.1 Policy:
F.2 Policy:
I
Encourage local units of government b administer
water m"n"gement regulatory functions upon
approval of a local waterm......gement plan that 1) is
in conformance with fue objectives, policies, and
",,,n"gement strategies outlined herein, 2) outlines
functions of hJlh fue RCWD and local unit of
government during fue transition period, and 3)
provides for accountable implementation of the water
resources "'''"''gement pIan.
The RCWD maintains fue right to approve plan
amendments and changes in local regulations. The
RCWD may withdraw local regulatory authority for
just cause.
4-13
10/97
TABLE 4.2
WATER QUALITY TSI GOALS
Goal Goal
Lake Avg Max Lake Avg Max
White Bear 47 50 Centerville 63 65
Turtle 48 50 Otter 66 70
Johanna 55 59 Golden 66 70
Oneka 56 59 Valentine 67 70
Josephine 57 59 Pike 67 70
Round (Ramsey) 58 65 Reshanau 65 70
Rondeau 59 65 Mud 69 75
Spring 60 65 Long (North) 69 75
Clear 61 65 Marshan 70 75
Bald Eagle 55 59 George Watch 72 75
Moore 61 65 Peltier 70 75
Pine tree 61 65 Crossways 73 80
Island 62 65 Baldwin 76 80
Rice 64 70 Howard 70 75
Sunset 65 70 Karth 65 70
Silver 62 65
4-14
10/97
I
J
I
I
I
I
I
I
-
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
~
I
I
I
I
I
I
--
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
SUBW ATERSHED OBJECTIVES AND POUCIES
This portion of the plan will discuss some of the major considerations in the development of
the objectives and policies for each of the 24 subwatersheds within the RCWD. In the
previous portion of the plan, objectives and policies were discussed in a general nature. This
section will present the policies applicable to each subwatershed. Table 4-2 is a summary of
the objectives and policies for each subwatershed.
Subwatershed I: Howard Lake
Policies:
A.3, B.I, B.2, B.3, B.4, B.5, C.I, C.2, C.3, C.4, C.5, E.I, E.2, E.3, E.4, E.5,
andF
This subwatershed totals approximately 10.75 sq mi. Major waterbodies include Howard,
Mud, and Clear Lakes.
During the inventory process for this plan, three major concerns were identified. The first
concern was the water quality of the lakes, the second was the effect of water quality on the
Lamprey Pass Wildlife Area, and the third was soil erosion primarily in agricultural areas.
Because of the large amounts of lake storage available in this subwatershed, additional
storage is not required. There is a need to clearly define drainage routes and attempt to
provide water quality ponding for runoff prior to entering the lakes. This will generally be
accomplished through use of vegetated swales and sedimentation basins within
developments.
The DNR believes rough fish are a major problem with water quality in Howard and Mud
Lakes and that wildlife habitat is being harmed by the lack of aquatic plants. The DNR is
currently formulating a management plan to control rough fish by manipulating water levels
and installing fish barriers.
Recent cooperative groundwater studies performed in the Forest Lake area have sought to
better define groundwater influences on Clear Lake. This information, combined with the
District's revised monitoring strategies, will help diagnose problem areas within the Clear
Lake watershed. Clear Lake was the subject of Clean Water Partnership Grant Applications
which were not successful in securing funding.
I
4-15
10/97
Subwatershed 2: I-35E
Policies:
A.3, B.1, B.2, B.3, BA, B.5, C.1, C.2, C.3, CA, C.5, E.1, E.2, E.3, E.5, and F
This subwatershed does not contain any lakes and is drained by numerous ditch systems in a
tributary area of 6.28 sq mi. The subwatershed has not historically been included in the
District's monitoring program and has experienced little development activity to date.
Through the inventory process, the primary concerns in water management identified for the
subwatershed were the lack of water quality monitoring data and the slow drainage of the
ditch system.
Baseline monitoring information was collected for this watershed as part of the
Centerville/Peltier diagnostic and feasibility studies. The District's permitting program will
continue to protect the large amounts of floodplain and wetland area within this
subwatershed. The District will also be inspecting the public ditch systems within this
subwatershed as part of the District's annual inspection program.
Subwatershed 3: Rondeau Lake
Policies:
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~F
This subwatershed covers approximately 12.76 sq mi. Lakes in this are include Columbus,
Crossways (Tamarack), and Rondeau.
Two water management concerns were identified through the inventory process. First, the
need to maintain the capacity of the large areas of floodplain and second, the need to address
water quality of the lakes in the subwatershed.
Because of the large storage available in this subwatershed and. also immediately
downstream, runoff rate control is not necessary as the storage will buffer any foreseeable
impacts of development.
Agricultural land use is dominant in this subwatershed. As part of the Upper Watershed
Improvement Project, cooperative programs with the Anoka SWCD will be explored to lessen
potential problems associated with agricultural runoff.
4-16
10/97
I
~
I
I
I
I
I
I
-
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
~
I
Subwatersheds 4 and 5: Hardwood Creek East and Hardwood Creek North
Policies:
A.3, B.l, B.Z, B.3, B.4, B.5, C.l, Co2, C.3, CA, C.5, D.l, Do2, E.l, E.2, E.3,
E.5, and F
I
I
I
This combined watershed totals 19.52 sq mi and contains Egg, Rice, Oneka, and Horseshoe
Lakes. The area is drained by Hardwood Creek (AnokalWashington Judicial Ditch No.2)
which is very flat and has limited discharge capacity. These subwatersheds have extensive
floodplain and wetland areas which are being preserved due to the low density development
occurring in this area located outside ofthe MUSA boundary.
I
I
I
The District has maintained several water quality monitoring stations in these
subwatersheds and also conducted intense monitoring during the Centerville/Peltier
diagnostic study. Several potential wetland restoration projects are being contemplated in
addition to the feedlot control practices to be implemented with the cooperation of the
Washington SWCD.
.
I
Subwatershed 6: Hardwood Creek West
Policies: .
A.3, B.l, B.Z, B.3, B.4, B.5, C.l, C.2, C.3, CA, C.5, D.l, Do2, E.l, Eo2, E.3,
E.5, and F
I
This subwatershed is approximately 8.71 sq mi in area. Horseshoe Lake is located in the
subwatershed but provides little .active storage due to its landlocked nature. Storm water
modeling indicates there will be a slight increase in flows from present day to year 2000
conditions. More significant increases in flow rates could Occur if the capacity of Hardwood
Creek channel is increased.
I
I
l
The Upper Watershed Improvement Project will seek to address agricultural land use in the
watershed and potential wetland restoration sites. A ferric chloride injection system is
contemplated at the mouth of this subwatershed. It is anticipated that low density
urbanization of this subwatershed may result in improved water quality relative to its
present land use.
I
I
.4-17
10/97
Subwatershed 7: White Bear Lake
Policies:
A.3, B.l, B.2, B.3, B.4, B.5, C.l, Co2, C.3, C.4, C.5, E.!, E.2, E.3, EA, E.5,
andF
This subwatershed is landlocked and drains approximately 18.04 sq mi. White Bear Lake
dominates the hydrology of the area by providing massive storage volume for the entire
subwatershed. White Bear Lake was the subject of a diagnostidfeasibility study cofunded
between the Clean Water Partnership Program and the Clean Lakes Program. The water
quality of White Bear Lake is very good and a protection plan is being devised with little
construction work proposed other than retrofitting of existing systems.
White Bear Lake has a small tributary drainage area relative to its surface area which tends
to keep the lake clean but subjects it to large variations in water levels during times of
drought. The DNR is undertaking a study to define groundwater interactions and a water
budget for the basin.
Because there are relatively large amounts of storage in this subwatershed, there is little
need for controlling runoff rate associated with development in this subwatershed. The
District will concentrate on intercity drainage matters only and continue water quality
ponding requirements.
Subwatershed 8: Bald Eagle Lake
Policies:
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
E.5, and F
This subwatershed drains approximately 13.35 sq mi. Bald Eagle Lake has a high capacity
outlet structure which drains into Clearwater Creek. During high water conditions, Bald
Eagle and Otter Lakes function as a single reservoir which helps moderate flows from this
area. Bald Eagle Lake had a diagnostidfeasibility study performed concurrently with White
Bear Lake through the Clean Water Partnership and Clean Lakes Programs. Several
wetland restoration projects and public information programs were contemplated for
improving the quality of Bald Eagle Lake. From the studies, it appears the directly tributary
watershed of Bald Eagle is a significant source of phosphorus loading.
4-18
10/97
I
J
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
.
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
~
I
Ramsey County maintains a water-based regional park at Bald Eagle Lake. Programs of the
District and counties should be coordinated in order to improve recreational opportunities
associated with the park.
I
Subwatershed 9: Clearwater Creek
I
I
Policies:
A.3, B.l, B.2, B.3, B.4, B.5, C.l, C.2, C.3, C.4, C.5, D.l, Do2, Rl, E.2, E.3,
E.5, and F
I
I
I
..
This subwatershed drains approximately 12.35 sq mi and has very little reservoir storage
available. In order to reduce potential flooding along the creek, the District emphasis will be
upon controlling projected increases in runoff rates from the southwestern portions of the
City of Hugo.
I
Downstream channel improvements contemplated by the City of Centerville will allow for
drainage at the lower end of this subwatershed to enter and leave this system prior to the
upper reaches of the Clearwater Creek watershed entering the area. This drainage area will
be addressed through the District's Upper Watershed Improvement Project which will
explore the use of sediment sealing, aeration, and land use improvement to improve the
water quality of Centerville and Peltier Lakes
I
Subwatershed 10: Lino Lakes
Policies:
A.3, B.l, B.2, B.3, B.4, B.5, C.l, Co2, C.3, C.4, C.5, D.l, D.2, E.l, Eo2, E.3,
. E.5, and F
I
I
I
I
Little intense development is anticipated within this 6.62 sq mi watershed through the year
2000. The subwatershed has been extensively ditched via public and private system and is
covered by large expanses of floodplain and wetland areas protected under the Wetland
Conservation Act. Runoff rate is therefore not a major concern, particularly in light of the
large amounts of storage available within the chain of lakes located in the city. Drainage
issues will therefore be of an intracity nature and best addressed by the city's local water
management plan.
I
4-19
10197
Subwatershed 11: Blaine
Policies:
A.3, R.l, B.2, B.3, B.4, B.5, C.l, Co2, C.3, C.4, C.5, D.l, D.2,E.l, Eo2, E.3,
E.5, and F
Blaine has currently seen scattered development throughout this 10.82 sq mi subwatershed.
Golden Lake is the only lake in this subwatershed and is located at the mouth. Large
amounts of storage are present within the flat floodplains and wetlands of this heavily
ditched subwatershed. Future runoff rates are not projected to increase significantly due to
the relatively low percentage of uplands scattered through the area. Water quality is a
concern as Golden Lake was the subject of a Clean Lakes Grant and several water quality
improvements have been implemented.
Subwatershed l2a: Peltier Lake
Policies:
A.3, B.l, B.2, B.3, B.4, B.5, C.l, C.2, C.3, CA, C.5, D.l, D.2, E.!, E.2, E.3,
E.5, and F
The tributary area of this subwatershed is approximately 4.6 sq mi and includes Peltier and
Centerville Lakes. The water quality of these lakes is poor but recently completed diagnostic
studies for the lakes indicate that Centerville has potential to be greatly improved.
The lakes form the upper end of the large reservoir situated in the middle of the District.
The lakes were created from low wetland areas by construction of the Peltier Lake Dam by
the St. Paul Water Utility. Large tracts of undeveloped property will remain around the
lakes due to the presence of Anoka County Regional Park and land ownership by the St. Paul
Water Utility. The improvement of these lakes for enhancement of water-based recreational
opportunity is one of the primary goals of the Upper Watershed Improvement Project which
the District is pursuing based upon the results of the Clean Water Partnership study.
4-20
10/97
I
J
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
III
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
~
I
I
Subwatershed 12b: Baldwin Lake
Policies:
A.3, B.l, B.2, B.3, B.4, B.5, C.l, C.2, C.3, C.4, C.5, D.l, D.2, E.l, E.2, E.3,
E.4, E.5, and F
I
I
This subwatershed totals approximately 19.15 sq mi and includes the entire Lino Lakes
Cham of Lakes. These lakes are George Watch, Marshan, Reshanau, Rice, and Baldwin.
Several additional DNR-protected waterbodies exist near this chain with the entire chain
functioning as one large floodplain during high flow conditions. The large amount of storage
provided in the chain will ensure negligible increases in runoff from above this area due to
future development.
I
I
I
This area is undergoing rapid development, however, District and city policies for protecting
floodplains and wetlands have helped to maximize preservation of natural areas and
prevention of flooding.
.
The Anoka Regional Park extends through this subwatershed and provides canoe and foot
trails through the lakes area. Water quality in these shallow lakes is generally poor and it is
hoped that implementation of the Upper Watershed Improvement Project will result in
higher quality headwaters for the area. The conversion of agricultural land use to
residential development may aid in recovery of these basins.
I
I
Subwatershed 13a: Turtle Lake
I
Policies:
A.3,B.l, B.2, B.3, B.4, B.5, C.l, C.2, C.3, CA, C.5, D.l, D.2, E.l, E.2, E.3,
E.4, E.5, and F
I
I
I
This subwatershed covers an area of approximately 1.3 sq mi. Turtle Lake is generally very
high quality and provides adequate storage for the small area tributary to it. Turtle Lake
was the subject of a Clean Water Partnership Grant Application to the MPCA which was not
approved. In the past several years, Turtle Lake has been subject to an obscure state law
which requires the Watershed District to administer a permit program for the nonessential
appropriation of water from it. Data from this program is being collected and could be used
by Ramsey County and the DNR in future studies which address the effects of the
discontinued lake augmentation program from Ramsey County wells.
~
I
4-21
10/97
Subwatershed l3b: Marsden Lake
Policies:
A.3, B.l, B.2, B.3, B.4, B.5, C.l, C.2, C.3, C.4, C.5, D.l, D.2, E.l, E.2, E.3,
E.4, E.5, and F
The Marsden Lake subwatershed covers approximately 2.28 sq mi. Marsden Lake is actually
a large DNR protected wetland complex located within the Twin Cities Army Ammunition
Plant boundary. Karth and Sunfish Lakes also exist in this subwatershed. Karth Lake is
landlocked; Sunfish Lake is used as a walleye rearing pond by the DNR. The low flow rates
from this subwatershed are not presently, or projected to be, a District conce~. However,
uncertainty over the long-range plans for the munitions plant property has led the District to
include this subwatershed in tbe policy area requiring full runoff rate control.
The District has worked with the U.S. Army to help manage excess treated groundwater
from on-going remediation efforts at the plant. These water management studies combined
with the Comprehensive Stormwater Management Plan for Ramsey County Ditch I,
prepared by the District, provide a large amount of reference material addressing existing
drainage conditions.
Subwatershed l3c: Upper Rice Creek
Policies:
A.3, B.I, B.2, B-3, B.4, B.5, C.I, C.2, C.3, C.4, C.5, D.l, D.2, E.I, E.2, E.3,
E.5, and F
This subwatershed covers approximately 11.3 sq mi and consists of numerous discharge
points to Rice Creek above Long Lake. This area has undergone intense development during
which the District has required full rate control measures to be implemented. The three-
phase modeling study performed by the District identified this general subwatershed area to
be a major concem for controlling stormwater runoff rates within lower Rice Creek.
The District has constructed an online sedimentation basin at the outlet for this
subwatershed which intercepts coarse sediment prior to entering Long Lake. This project
was constructed as part ofthe Clean Lakes Grant for the Long Lake Chain of Lakes and has
been maintained every five to seven years.
4-22
10/97
I
J
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
II
I
I
I
I
I
I
~
I
I
~
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
Subwatershed 14a: Lake Josephine
Policies:
A.3, B.l, B.2, B.3, B.4, B.5, C.1, C.2, C.3, C.4, C.5, E.l, E.2, E.3, E.5, and F
This subwatershed totals approximately 1.31 sq mi. The area tributary to the lake was
largely developed prior to formation of the District. Cooperative projects performed with the
City of Roseville as part of the Long Lake Chain of Lakes Grant enabled a large storm sewer
to be diverted from the lake into a wetland treatment area. This improvement has increased
the water quality of Lake Josephine and allowed for increased use of the Ramsey County
park facilities at the lake.
Subwatershed 14b: Lake Johanna
Policies:
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~F
.
I
I
I
I
I
I
This subwatershed totals approximately 4.25 sq mi. Numerous projects have been done in
the area tributary to Lake Johanna as part of the Long Lake Chain of Lakes Grant. Most
notably, Ramsey County Ditch 4 which drains the industrial and retail areas of Roseville has
been stabilized to prevent erosion of the channel and deposition of sediment within Johanna.
Additionally, the District constructed a new fishing pierllake outlet which greatly moderates
the once widely fluctuating lake levels. Shoreline erosion had been a large problem around
the basin.
Water quality of the lake is monitored annually by the Ramsey County Department of Public
Works. Little additional development is expected in this subwatershed and District policies
will be to promote retrofitting of stormwater quality measures where feasible.
Subwatershed 14c: Round Lake
Policies:
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~F
~
I
The Round Lake subwatershed extends over 0.83 sq mi. Round Lake is managed by the U.S.
Fish and Wildlife Service and has an adjustable outlet capable of providing large amounts of
storage. This subwatershed had a large amount of undeveloped land riparian to the lake.
Preliminary planning efforts indicate it will be commercial/industrial development area
4-23
10/97
which will require water quality ponding measures to treat water prior to discharging to the
lake.
Subwatershed 14d: Valentine Lake
Policies:
A.3, B.1, B.2, B.3, B.4, B.5, C.l, C.2, C.3, C.4, C.5, E.1, E.2, E.3, E.5, and F
Valentine Lake receives runoff from a 2.4 sq mi area which includes Highways 694, 51, and
10. Runoff rate control will be required due to the high density of development occurring in
this subwatershed. The lake receives significant amounts of untreated runoff from the
County Ditch 12 system although the ditch itself has been stabilized as part of the Long Lake
Chain of Lakes program. Numerous smaller ponds have been established within the
Highway 51/694 right-of-way and the Land O'Lakes corporate headquarters. Valentine Lake
is monitored by the Ramsey County Department of Public Works and will be the subject of
District inflow monitoring to diagnose sources of highest loadings.
Subwatershed 14e: E2 Wetland
Policies:
A.3, B.l, B.2, B.3, B.4, B.5, C.l, C.2, C.3, C.4, C.5, D.I, D.2, E.l, E.2, E.3,
E.5, and F
This subwatershed was comprised of a large restored wetland complex located southeast of
I-35W and 1-694. The subwatershed is hydraulically overloaded. An adjustable outlet
structure is used to moderate level fluctuations and capture initial spring runoff for
treatment in the wetland area. Beaver activity in both subwatersheds 14d and 14e has
resulted in unacceptable water level fluctuations in recent years. Detailed hydrologic
modeling was performed under the Lake Johanna watershed study and extended over all
subwatershed 14 areas.
Subwatershed 15a: Jones Lake
Policies:
A.3, B.1, B.2, B.3, B.4, B.5, C.1, C.2, C.3, C.4, C.5, E.l, E.2, E.3, E.5, and F
This area drains approximately 3.61 sq mi. Drainage through subwatersheds 15a and 15b
was documented in the Pike Lake watershed study completed prior to initiation of the Long
Lake Chain of Lakes Grant Program. The District performed project work to increase
4-24
10/97
I
J
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
II
I
I
I
I
I
I
~
I
I
~
I
I
storage available within Jones Lake to lower peak flood flows downstream in New Brighton.
As with most southem portions of the District, little development has occurred within this
subwatershed since the District was formed.
Subwatershed 15b: Pike Lake'
I
I
Policies:
A.3, B.1, B.2, B.3, B.4, B.5, C.1, C.2, C.3, C.4, C.5, D.1, D.2, E.l, E.2, E.3,
E.5, and F
.
This subwatershed contains Silver and Pike Lakes and drains an area of approximately 4.06
sq mi. This subwatershed was addressed by the Pike Lake hydrology study and had
extensive stabilization measures performed along Ramsey County Ditch No.2 in an effort to
alleviate problems with excessive runoff rate associated with development which occurred
prior to District formation. Silver Lake is a current concern of the District and is the subject
of joint efforts by the Cities of New Brighton, St. Anthony, Columbia Heights, and Ramsey
County to improve the watershed draining to the lake. The lake is subject to level
fluctuations which provides significant storage within this subwatershed. Preservation of
lesser storage areas has been encouraged by the City of New Brighton's Comprehensive
Stormwater Plan which has described numerous ponding areas to be preserved in the city.
I
I
I
I
District modeling efforts for this subwatershed tend to overestimate peak flow as these
numerous small retention ponds and their cumulative storage cannot be accommodated in
the large-scale modeling efforts undertaken by the District.
I
I
Subwatershed 16: Lower Rice Creek
I
I
I
Policies:
A.3, B.l, B.2, B-3, B.4, B.5, C.1, C.2, C.3, C.4, C.5, D.1, D.2, E.l, E.2, E-3,
E.4, E.5, and F
~
Little additional development is anticipated in this 7.35 sq mi area. The dominant
hydrologic feature is Long Lake which accepts flow from the three sectors of the watershed
and provides a single outlet for Rice Creek. After the flows converge at Long Lake, Rice
Creek provides a single drainage route down the relatively steeply sloped Rice Creek channel
to the Mississippi River.
I
4-25
10/97
Primary management objectives of the District are to prevent unacceptable erosion from
occurring within the numerous meanders and manage channel stability.
From a recreational perspective, large amounts of public lands are located along the creek
and at the Long Lake Regional Park. The Anoka CountylRice Creek Regional Trail System
continues through this subwatershed and the District will coordinate with the parks
departments of Ramsey and Anoka Counties to enhance the recreational opportunities
within this subwatershed.
There is a city swimming beach at Moore Lake in Fridley which was improved following a
Clean Lakes Grant administered by the city. Additionally, Spring Lake is used by the DNR
as a rearing pond but has had occasional winterkill problems.
Long Lake Chain of Lakes projects were conducted in the Long Lake basin to remove
sediments and to also treat sediments to reduce internal loading of phosphorus. Other
project work has included numerous bank stabilization projects and arlmini.tration of a bank
stabilization grant program described in the District's original 509 capital improvements
program. Also in the program is a description of a project for Locke Lake which is located
immediately above East River Road. The lake has been subject to sedimentation and has
had several attempts at initiation of the projects to remove sediment from the impoundment.
In an effort to better understand flood flows in Rice Creek, the District has installed
continuous flow gauges to aid in calibration of District hydrology models. Peak flows
observed in the creek have r;p-ely exceeded 700 cfs. Modeling data predicts a 100-year peak
flow of over 2,000 cfs. It is hoped that calibration of the hydrology models with the gauged
information will lead to more accurate representation of flows. District policies regarding
lower Rice Creek flooding is being formed during completion of the three-phase flood profile
study.
4-26
10/97
I
J
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
II
I
I
I
I
I
I
~
I
I;
~
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
.
I
I
I
I.
I
I Adop-ted 8/12/98
~
I
Rice Creek
~a-tershed
I>>is-tric-t
~
Eel
.
TABLE OF CONTENTS
GENERAL POLICY STATEMENT 1
Paqe #
RELATIONSHIP OF RICE CREEK WATERSHED DISTRICT
TO MUNICIPALITIES 3
RULE A:
RULE B:
1.
2.
3.
4 .
5.
6 .
7.
8 .
9.
RULE C:
1.
2 .
3 .
4.
S.
6.
RULE D:
1.
2.
3.
4.
5 .
RULE E:
1.
2 .
3 .
4.
5 .
DEFINITIONS 4
PROCEDURAL REQUIREMENTS 7
Application Required.
Forms.
Action by Board of Managers.
Issuance of Permits.
Permit Term.
Permit Assignment.
Permit Fees.
Performance Surety.
Other Permits and Approvals.
STORMWATER MANAGEMENT PLANS 11
Policy.
Regulation.
Design Criteria for Stormwater Management Plans.
Required Exhibits.
Platting or Easement Documents.
Exceptions.
EROSION CONTROL PLANS 17
Policy.
Regulation.
Design Criteria for Erosion Control Plans.
Required Exhibits.
Exceptions.
FLOODPLAIN ALTERATION 19
Policy.
Regulation.
Criteria for Floodplain Alteration.
Drainage Easements.
Required Exhibits.
i
-'~ .'
I
J
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
.
I
I
I
I
I
I
~
I
1
~
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
II
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
RULE F:
RULE G:
RULE H:
1.
2.
3 .
4.
5 .
RULE I:
1.
2.
3 .
4.
5.
RULE J:
1.
2.
3.
RULE K:
1.
2.
3.
RULE L:
1.
2.
3.
4.
WETLAND ALTERATION
23
1.
2.
3 .
4.
5 .
6.
Policy.
Regulation.
Criteria.
Local Government Unit.
Required Exhibits.
Exceptions.
BRIDGES AND CULVERT CROSSINGS
26
1.
2.
3.
4.
5.
Policy.
Regulation.
Criteria.
Required Exhibits.
Exceptions.
SHORELAND DEVELOPMENT
28
Policy.
Regulation.
Criteria.
Required Exhibits.
Exceptions.
DRAINAGE SYSTEMS
30
Policy.
Regulation.
Criteria.
Required Exhibits.
Exceptions.
APPROPRIATION OF PUBLIC WATERS
32
Policy.
Regulation.
Criteria.
ENFORCEMENT
Violation of Rules a Misdemeanor.
District Court Action.
Administrative Order.
33
VARIANCES
34
Variances Authorized.
Standard.
Term.
Violation.
ii
GENERAL POLICY STATEMENT
The Rice Creek Watershed District (District) is a political
subdivision of the State of Minnesota, established under the
Minnesota Watershed Law. The District is also a watershed
management organization as defined under the Minnesota Metropolitan
Surface Water Management Act, and is subject to the directives and
authorizations in that Act. Under the Watershed, Law and the
Metropolitan Surface Water Management Act, the District exercises
a series of powers to accomplish its statutory purposes. The
District's general statutory purpose is to conserve natural
resources through development planning, flood control, and other
conservation projects, based upon sound scientific principles.
As required under the Metropolitan Surface Water Management Act,
the District has adopted a Watershed Management Plan, which
contains the framework and guiding principles for the District in
carrying out its statutory purposes. It is the District's intent
to implement the Plan's principles and objectives in these rules.
Land alteration affects the rate, volume, and quality of surface
water runoff which ultimately must be accommodated by the existing
surface water systems within the District. The watershed is large,
201 square miles, and its outlet, Rice Creek, has limited capacity
to carry flows. Flooding problems already occur in the District's
urbanized areas along lower Rice Creek and other localized areas.
Land alteration and utilization also can degrade the quality of
runoff entering the streams and waterbodies of the District due to
non-point source pollution. Lake and stream sedimentation from
ongoing erosion processes and construction activities reduces the
hydraulic capacity of waterbodies and degrades water quality.
Water quality problems already exist in many of the lakes and
streams throughout the District.
Projects which increase the rate or volume of stormwater runoff can
aggravate existing flooding problems and contribute to new ones.
Projects which degrade runoff quality can aggravate existing water
quality problems and contribute to new ones. Projects which fill
floodplain or wetland areas can aggravate existing flooding by
reducing flood storage and hydraulic capacity of waterbodies, and
can degrade water quality by eliminating the filtering capacity of
those areas. .
In these rules the District seeks to protect the public health and
welfare and the natural resources of the District by providing
reasonable regulation of the modification or alteration of the
District's lands and waters to reduce the severity and frequency
of flooding and high water, to preserve floodplain and wetland
storage capacity, to improve the chemical, physical and biological
quality of surface water, to reduce sedimentation, to preserve
l
, .
I
, .
J
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
II
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
~
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
II
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
waterbodies' hydraulic and navigational capacity, to preserve
natural wetland and shoreland features, and to minimize public
expenditures to avoid or correct these problems in the future.
2
RELATIONSHIP OF RICE CREEK WATERSHED DISTRICT
TO MUNICIPALITIES
The District recognizes that the primary control and determination
of appropriate land uses is the responsibility of the
municipalities. Accordingly, the District will coordinate permit
application reviews involving land development with the
municipality where the land is located.
The District intends to be active in the regulatory process to
ensure that its water resources are managed in accordance with
District goals and policies. Municipalities have the option of
assuming a more active role in the permitting process after
adoption of a local water management plan approved by the District
and adoption and implementation of local ordinances consistent with
the approved plan.
The District will also review projects sponsored or undertaken by
municipalities and other governmental units, and generally will
require permits of the contractor for governmental projects
impacting water resources of the District. These projects include
but are not limited to, land development and redevelopment, road,
trail, and utility construction.
The District desires to serve as technical advisor to the
municipalities in their preparation of local surface water
management plans and the review of individual development proposals
prior to investment of significant public or private funds. To
promote a coordinated review process between the District and the
municipalities, the District encourages the municipalities or
townships to contact the District early in the planning process.
3
J'
I
J
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
II
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
'-
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
.
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
RULE A
DEFINITIONS
For the purposes of these rules, the following words have the
meanings set forth below.
References in these rules to spec~r~c sections of the Minnesota
Statutes include any amendments, revisions or recodification of
those sections.
Beds of protected waters - all portions of protected waters and
wetlands located below the ordinary high water level.
Best management practices (BMPs) measures taken to minimize
negative effects on the environment as documented in the Minnesota
Construction Site Erosion and Sediment Control Planninq Handbook
(MBWSR, 1988) and Protectinq Water Qualitv in Urban Areas (MPCA,
1989) .
Criteria - specific details, methods and specifications that apply
to all permits and reviews and that guide implementation of the
District's goals and policies.
Detention basin - any natural or man-made depression that stores
storm-water runoff temporarily.
Development - any proposal to subdivide land, any land disturbing
activity or creation of impervious surface, including but not
limited to, municipal road construction or improvement and
construction or reconstruction of stormwater conveyance systems,
except that plowing as part of an on-going farming operation shall
not be considered development.
District - the Rice Creek Watershed District established under the
Minnesota Watershed Law, Minnesota Statutes Chapter l03D.
Drainage system - a system of a ditch or tile, or both, to drain
property, including laterals, improvements, and improvements of
outlets.
Effective impervious area - area of land which is incapable of
either infiltrating rainfall or retaining runoff on site for a one-
year, twenty-four hour storm.
Equal encroachment
encroachment lines
stream are capable
flows.
a method of determining the location of
so that flood plain lands on both sides of a
of conveying a proportionate share of flood
Excavation - the displacement or removal of sediment or other
material.
4
Floodplain - the area adjoining a watercourse or natural or man-
made water basin, including the area around lakes, marshes and
lowlands, that is inundated during a lOa-year flood.
Floodway - the channel of the watercourse, the bed of water basins,
and those portions of the adjoining floodplains that must be kept
free of encroachment so that the lOa-year flood may be carried
without increasing the lOa-year flood elevation by more than 0.5
feet.
Floodway fringe - the area between the floodway and the boundary
of the laO-year flood.
Governmental project
governmental agency.
projects sponsored or paid for by a
Landlocked basin - a basin that does not have a natural outlet at
or below the lOa-year flood elevation, as determined by the 100-
year ten-day runoff event.
Low floor - the lowest level of a structure, usually the basement
or walk-out level.
Major drainageway - any drainageway having a tributary area of 200
acres or greater.
Municipality - any city or township wholly or partly within the
Rice Creek Watershed District.
NURP - Nationwide Urban Runoff Program (see Appendix) .
Ordinary high water level (OHW) - the elevation delineating the
highest water level which has been maintained for a sufficient
period of time to leave evidence upon the landscape. The ordinary
high water level is commonly that point where the natural
vegetation changes from predominantly aquatic to predominantly
terrestrial.
Parcel - any quantity of land capable of being described with such
definiteness that its location and boundaries may be established.
Person
association,
corporation,
Minnesota.
any natural
corporation,
state agency,
person, partnership, unincorporated
limited liability company, municipal
political subdivision of the State of
Public ditch - a county or judicial ditch over which the District
has jurisdiction, or a ditch or tile established, constructed, or
transferred to the District and over which the District has
jurisdiction under Minnesota Statutes Chapters 103D, 103E, or 103B.
5
I
J
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
II
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
~
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
--
I
I
I
I
I
I
~
I
Public waters all waters identified as public waters under
Minnesota Statutes section 103G.005, subdivision 15.
Public waters wetlands - all wetlands identified as public waters
wetlands under Minnesota Statutes section 103G.005, subdivision
15a.
Redevelopment - any proposal to subdivide or re-subdivide land, any
land-disturbing activity or creation of impervious surface on a
developed site.
Sedimentation basin a natural or man-made depression that
temporarily stores storm-water runoff for the purpose of allowing
a portion of the suspended solids in the runoff to settle out.
Setback - The minimum horizontal distance between a structure or
sanitary facility and the ordinary high water mark or between a
structure or sanitary facility and a road, highway, or property
line.
Shoreland zone - land. areas within 1,000 feet of the OHW of a
public waters lake or 300 feet of a public waters watercourse.
Standards - a preferred or desired level of quantity, quality, or
value.
Subdivision, subdivide - the separation of an area, parcel, or
tract of land under single ownership into two or more parcels,
tracts, lots.
Waterbasin - an enclosed natural depression with definable banks
capable of containing water, that may be partly filled with waters
of the state.
Watercourse - a channel that has definable beds and banks capable
of conducting confined runoff from adjacent land.
Wetland - any area identified as wetlands under Minnesota Statutes
section 103G.005, subdivision 19.
6
RULE B
PERMIT PROCEDURAL REQUIREMENTS
1. APPLICATION REQUIRED. Any person undertaking an activity for
which a permit is required by these rules shall, prior to
commencing work, submit to the District a permit application,
engineering design data and such other information and exhibits as
may be required by these rules. All permit applications must bear
the original signature of the landowner, or selected contractor for
governmental projects.
2. FORMS. Permit applications must be submitted on the form
provided by the District. Applicants may obtain these forms at the
District office.
3. ACTION BY BOARD OF MANAGERS. The Board of Managers shall act
within sixty days of receipt of a complete permit application. A
complete permit application includes all required information,
exhibits, fees and surety.
4. ISSUANCE OF PERMITS. The Board of Managers will issue a
permit only after applicant has satisfied all requirements for the
permit, has paid all required District fees, and the District has
received any required surety.
5. PERMIT TERM. Permits are valid for an eighteen month period
from the date of issuance unless otherwise suspended or revoked.
To extend a permit, the permittee must apply to the District in
writing, stating the reasons for extension. Any plan changes, and
related project documents must also be included in the extension
application. The District must receive this application at least
thirty days prior to the permit's expiration date.
6. PERMIT ASSIGNMENT. A permittee may assign a District permit
only upon consent by the Board of Managers to the assignment.
STANDARD. The Board of Managers may grant the assignment of
an issued permit if it finds the following conditions have been
met:
(a) The proposed assignee in writing agrees to
assume all the terms, conditions and
obligations of the permit as originally issued
to the permittee.
(b) The proposed assignee has the ability to
satisfy the terms and conditions of the permit
as originally issued.
(c) The proposed assignee is not changing the
project as originally permitted.
7
I
J
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
--
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
~
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
.
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
(d) There are no violations of the permit
conditions as originally issued.
(e) The Board of Managers has received from the
proposed assignee any required surety to secure
performance of the assigned permit.
7. PERMIT FEES. The District will charge the applicant permit
fees in accordance with the following fee schedule:
*Land Development Plans
Less than 10 lots
10 - 99 lots
100 or more lots
$250
$500
$750
*Final Site DrainaGe Plans
Less than 1 acre impervious surface
Greater than 1 acre impervious surface
$150
$500
BridGe or Culvert CrossinGs on Creeks,
Public Ditches, Malor Watercourses in the
District
Rice, Clearwater, Hardwood Creeks and
all Public Ditches
All other crossings
$500
$150
$500
*Streets and Utilities
Appropriation of Surface Water
$50
*All Other Permit Applications
$150
*An additional $500 fee will be charged to applicant if the
project involves a Wetland Replacement or Banking Plan, or a
crossing of Rice, Clearwater, Hardwood Creeks, or of a public
ditch.
PROCEDURE Ai'ID PAYMENT OF FEE. Applicant must submit the
required permit fee to the District at the time it submits its
permit application.
GOVERNMENTAL AGENCIES EXEMPT. The fees described above will
not be charged to the federal government, the State of Minnesota
or a political subdivision of the State of Minnesota.
8. PERFORMANCE SURETY.
(a) POLICY. It is the policy of the Board of Managers to
conserve the District's water resources by assuring compliance with
its rules.
8
Requiring a bond or other surety to secure performance of the
permit conditions and the District rules is an effective way to
conserve the District's water resources.
(b) PERFORMANCE SURETY REQUIREMENT. A cash surety in an
amount set forth below must be submitted to the District with each
permit application for the activities described below:
Description of Activity
1.
Site development with less than 5
acres of disturbed area
Cash Suretv Amount
$1,500
$2,500 if a detention
pond is required
$2,500
$3,500 if a detention
pond is required
$3,500 + $250 per ad-
ditional acre over 10
$3,500
$2,500 for single-lane
road or driveway
$5,500 for two~lane
or greater roadway
$3,500 for parallel
distances less than
500 feet
$5,500 for parallel
distances 500 feet or
greater
$3,500 for parallel
distances less than
500 feet
$5,500 for parallel
distances 500 feet or
greater
$250
$500 + $10,000 per
acre replaced
An applicant may submit a performance bond or an irrevocable
letter of credit to the District to secure performance of permit
2.
Site development with less than la,
but greater than 5 acres of disturbed
area
3.
Site development with greater than
10 acres of disturbed area
4.
Any alteration of Type III, IV, or
V Wetlands
5 .
Construction of a Public Ditch
Crossing
6 .
Grading activity within 100 feet
of Rice Creek or a Public Ditch
7.
Construction activity (sewer and
water line installation) in or along
Rice Creek or any Public Ditch
8 .
Wildlife pond construction and
shoreland improvement projects
9.
Wetland replacement plans governed
by WCA
9
, .'
I
J
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
.
I
I
I
I
I
I
~
I
I
~
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
.
I
I
I
I
I
I
~
I
conditions for activities for which the required surety amount as
determined above is in excess of $5,000. The performance bond or
letter of credit must be submitted with the permit application.
(c) FORM AND CONTENTS OF PERFORMANCE BOND OR LETTER OF
CREDIT.
(1) The performance bond or irrevocable letter of credit must
be in a form acceptable to the District and from a surety licensed
to do business in Minnesota.
(2) The performance bond or irrevocable letter of credit must
be in favor of the District and conditioned upon the performance
of the party obtaining the performance bond or letter of credit of
the activities authorized in the permit, and compliance with all
applicable laws, including the District's rules, the terms and
conditions of the permit and payment when due of any fees or other
charges required by law, including the District's rules. The
performance bond or irrevocable letter of credit must provide that
if the performance bond conditions are not met, the District may
make a claim against the performance bond or letter of credit.
(d) RELEASE OF PERFORMANCE SURETY.
Upon written notification from permittee of completion of the
permitted project, the District will inspect the project to
determine if it is constructed in accordance with the terms of the
permit and District rules. If the project is completed in
accordance with the terms of the permit and District rules and the
party providing the performance surety does not have an outstanding
balance .of money owed to the District for the proj ect, including
but not limited to unpaid permit fees, the District will release
the performance bond or letter of credit, or return the cash surety
if applicable.
9. OTHER PERMITS AND APPROVALS. It is the permit applicant's
responsibility to secure all permits and approvals that are
required by other governmental authorities, and provide the
District proof that applicant has submitted these permit
applications.
10
RULE C
STORM-WATER MANAGEMENT PLANS
1.
POLICY.
It is the policy of the Board of Managers to:
(a) Manage stormwater and snowmelt runoff on a regional
or subwatershed basis and promote natural infiltration
of runoff throughout the District to:
(1) Provide effective water quality treatment
and where possible provide such treatment prior
to discharge to surface waterbodies and
wetlands.
(2) Ensure that future peak rates of runoff
are less than or equal to existing rates.
(3) Maximize infiltration and control run-off
volume increase.
(b) Require stormwater facilities to be constructed on
individual sites where regional facilities are not
available.
2 . REGULATION. A permi t and
required under this rule for new
additions to an existing site.
stormwater management plan
development, redevelopment,
3. DESIGN CRITERIA FOR STORMWATER MANAGEMENT PLANS. Stormwater
management plans must comply with the following criteria:
(a) A hydrograph method based on sound hydrologic theory
must be used to analyze stormwater runoff for the design
or analysis of flows and water levels within and off the
project site.
(b) Stormwater runoff rates for the proposed project
must not exceed pre-project runoff rates for the critical
one-year or two-year and lOO-year frequency events.
(c) Regional detention basins will be utilized to manage
peak flow rates and meet water quality objectives where
possible. On-site detention basins will be utilized when
regional basins are not in place or are not feasible.
(d) Analysis of flood levels, storage volumes, and flow
rates for waterbodies and detention basins must be based
on the range of rainfall and snow melt durations which
produces the critical (highest) flood levels and
discharges.
(e) Detention basins must be designed to provide:
11
is
or
.
I
J
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
.
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
~
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
.
I
I
I
I
I
I
(1) An outlet structure to control the
one-year or two-year and lOa-year
frequency events to pre-project peak
runoff rates.
(2) An identified overflow spillway
sufficiently stabilized to convey
flows greater than the lOa-year
critical storm event.
(3) Access for future maintenance.
(f) Permanent sedimentation and water quality ponds are
required and must be designed to provide:
(1) Water quality features consistent
with NURP criteria and District wet
pond criteria (see appendix) .
II'"
A permanent wet pool with
storage. of at least equal to
runoff from a 2.5 rainfall over
area tributary to the pond.
dead
the
the
(3) An outlet structure capable of
preventing migration of floating
debris and oils for at least the
one-year storm.
(4) Access for future maintenance.
(g) The proposed project must not adversely affect water
levels off the site during or after construction.
(h) Storrnwater Management Plans under this rule must
conform with approved Municipal Stormwater Management
Plans.
(i) Outfall structures within wetlands and public waters
and public waters wetlands must incorporate a stilling-
basin, surge-basin, energy dissipater, placement of
ungrouted natural rock riprap or other devices to
minimize disturbance and erosion of natural shoreline and
bed resulting from stormwater discharges.
(j) All new residential, commercial, industrial and
other habitable or non-habitable structures must be
constructed so that the lowest floor elevations are a
minimum of two feet above the critical event lOa-year
high water elevation and are one foot above the overflow
elevation of nearby surface waterbodies wetlands and
stormwater basi~s.
12
I
Within landlocked basins, lowest floor elevations must
be at least one foot above the surveyed basin overflow
elevation.
(k) Development resulting in the creation of impervious
surfaces must explicitly address use of best management
practices (BMP's) to first limit the loss of pervious
area; and second, to infiltrate runoff which does occur
from impervious areas to the extent feasible considering
site-specific conditions. BMP's include the use of
vegetated swales, pond outlets perched above groundwater
levels, use of infiltration systems, roof drainage to
pervious areas, minimum of twenty percent pervious
surface, use of depressed/casual storage areas, and
minimization of the number and width of parking stalls
and use of deep-rooted native vegetation, and narrower
"rural section" roads.
The goal of these BMP's is to incorporate practices into
the design which are capable of infiltrating the
impervious surface runoff from the Mpls-St.Paul median
storm (0.34 inches) in seventy-two hours. Infiltration
volume will be calculated using the appropriate
hydrologic soil group classification and saturated
infiltration rate from the table below.
Hydrologic
Soil Group
Infiltration
Rate
Soil Textures
A
0.50 in/hr
0.25 in/hr
sand, loamy sand, or sandy loam
B
silt loam or loam
c
0.10 in/hr
sandy clay loam
D
0.03 in/hr
clay loam, silty clay loam,
silty clay, or clay
for Small Watersheds, SCS, June
Source:
1986.
Urban Hydrology
Infiltration area will be limited to the horizontal areas
subject to prolonged wetting.
Areas of permanent pools tend to
capacity overtime and will not be
infiltration practice.
lose infiltration
accepted as an
(1) Landlocked basins may be provided with outlets only
if they:
(1) Retain a hydrologic regime which complies
with District Wetland Alteration Rule F.
13
I
J
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
.
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
~
I
I
I
I
I
I
.
I
I
I
I
I
I
~
I
(2) Provide sufficient dead storage volume to
retain back-to-back 100-year, twenty-four-hour
rainfalls and runoff~
(3) Do not create adverse downstream flooding
or water quality conditions as a result of
increased discharge rate or volume, or other.
factors.
(m) All stormwater management structures and facilities
must be properly maintained in perpetuity to assure that
they continue to function as originally designed. This
maintenance responsibility must be assumed either by the
municipality's accepting the required easements dedicated
to stormwater management purposes, or by the applicant
executing and recording a maintenance agreement
acceptable to the District.
4. REQUIRED EXHIBITS. The following exhibits must accompany the
permit application. One set, full size; two sets, reduced to
maximum size of 11 "xl 7.."
(a) Property lines and delineation of lands under
ownership of the applicant.
(b) Delineation of the subwatershed contributing runoff
from off-site, proposed and existing subwatersheds on-
site, emergency overflows, and drainageways.
(c) Proposed and existing stormwater
location, alignment and elevation.
facilities'
(d) Delineation of existing on-site wetland, marshes,
shoreland and/or floodplain areas.
(e) Identification of existing and proposed normal, and
ordinary high and 100-year water elevations on-site.
(f) Identification of existing and proposed site contour
elevations related to NGVD, 1929 datum.
(g) Construction plans and specifications of all
proposed stormwater management facilities, including
design details for outlet control structures.
(h) Stormwater runoff volume and rate analyses for the one
and 100-year critical events, existing and proposed
conditions.
(i) All hydrologic,
computations completed
management facilities.
water quality, and hydraulic
to design the proposed stormwater
14
(j) Narrative addressing incorporation of infiltration
EMP's.
(k) Delineation of any ponding or flowage easements or other
property interest dedicated to stormwater management purposes.
5. PLATTING OR EASEMENT DOCUMENTS. Applicant must provide
platting or easement documents showing sufficient drainage and
pondingjflowage easements over hydrologic features such as
floodplains, storm sewers, ponds, ditches, swales, wetlands and
waterways. Structures and facilities subject to flood damage built
within the 100-year flood will have two feet of freeboard between
the lowest floor and the 100-year flood profile.
6. EXCEPTIONS.
(a) Rule C and its requirements will not apply to
development or redevelopment of individual sites less
than 2.5 acres in size for industrial, commercial, and
multi-unit residential, and less than five acres in size
for single-family residential, unless such development
or redevelopment:
(1) Is within the 100-year floodplain.
(2) Is within 1,000 feet of a public water or
protected wetland.
(3) Is within
Clearwater Creek,
public ditch.
of Rice Creek,
Creek, or of a
300 feet
Hardwood
(b) Rule C and its requirements will
construction of a single-family detached
isolated lot, unless such dwelling:
not apply to
dwelling on an
(1) Is within the 100-year floodplain.
(2) Is within 1,000 feet of a public water or
protected wetland.
(3) Is within
Clearwater Creek,
public ditch.
300 feet
Hardwood
of Rice
Creek,
Creek,
or of a
(c) Rule C and its requirements will not apply to
construction on individual lots within a residential
subdivision approved by the District, unless the activity
does not comply with the original development plan or has
been superseded by state law.
(d) The requirements of paragraph (f) of Section 3 will
15
I
J
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
.
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
~
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
.
I
I
I
I
I
I
~
I
be modified for redevelopment sites at which less than
fifty-percent of the total site area (including any road
right-of-way) will be disturbed, such that water quality
ponding will be required only for the areas being
disturbed.
(e) Subdivision of land which does not propose
construction of impervious surfaces or structures will
be exempt from the requirements of Section 3 and
paragraphs (c), (g), (h), (i) of Section 4. However, a
Rule C permit is required when such future development
does occur.
(f) Rate control criteria discussed in Section 3 may be
waived if the site discharges directly to a water body
with large storage capacity (such as a public water)
which has a time-to-peak elevation greater than that for
an on-site pond and the volume discharged from the on-
site pond is negligible, relative to the volume of runoff
entering the water body.
(g) The requirements of paragraphs (e) and (f) of
Section 3 may be waived for sites with total impervious
area of less than one acre, if infiltration BMP's have
been incorporated into the project to the maximum extent
possible.
(h) The requirements of paragraph (j) of Section 3 may
be waived for short-duration floods not associated with
regulatory (FEMA-FIS) floodplain. Low floor elevations
will not be allowed below the lOa-year water level, and
the two- foot freeboard requirement would apply to the
minimum building opening elevation. Additionally,
applicant must submit calculat'ions demonstrating the
duration of the flood event was sufficiently brief to
prevent saturation of the soil at the low floor.
(i) In cases where structures are proposed below the runout
elevation of land-locked basins, the low-floor elevation will
be a minimum of two feet above the high water level as
determined from an estimate of highwater levels determined
from the highest of either the lOa-year, ten-day runoff event
or back-to-back lOa-year, twenty-four-hour rainfalls. Aerial
photos, vegetation, soils, and topography will be used to
derive a "normal" water elevation for the basin for purposes
of computing the lOa-year elevation.
16
RULE D
EROSION CONTROL PLANS
1. POLICY. It is the policy of the Board of Managers to prevent
erosion of soil into surface water systems by requiring preparation
and implementation of erosion control plans for land disturbance
activities.
2. REGULATION. A permit and an erosion control plan is required
for new development, redevelopment, or additions to an existing
site.
3. DESIGN CRITERIA FOR EROSION CONTROL PLANS.
Plans must comply with the following criteria:
Erosion Control
(a) Natural site topography and soil conditions must be
considered to reduce erosion and sedimentation during
construction and after project completion.
(b) Site erosion and sediment control practices must be
consistent with recommendations of the Best Management
Practices identified in the Minnesota pollution Control
Agency's "Protecting Water Quality in Urban Areas," and
be sufficient to retain sediment on-site.
(c) Erosion and sediment control measures must be
installed prior to land altering activities and routinely
inspected and maintained by permittee during the project
until final turf and ground cover is established as
documented in "Protecting Water Quality in Urban Areas"
(MPCA, 1989). Permittee will inspect project sites after
every rainfall event exceeding 0.5 inches and implement
erosion and sediment control measures addressed as
needed. The project must be phased as best possible to
minimize disturbed areas and removal of existing
vegetation until necessary for proj ect progress. In
order to ensure that sediment is retained on-site, the
District Inspector may require the permit applicant to
provide additional erosion control measures where site
conditions warrant.
(d) Silt fences will be removed after all disturbed
areas have been permanently stabilized.
4. REQUIRED EXHIBITS. The following exhibits must accompany the
permit application. One set, full size; two sets, reduced to
maximum size of 11"x17."
(a) An existing and proposed topographic map which
clearly indicates all hydrologic features and areas where
grading will expose soils to erosive conditions. The
plan must also indicate the direction of all site runoff.
17
I
,.
J
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
.
I
I
I
I
I
I
~
I
I
'-
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
.
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
(b) Tabulation of the construction implementation
schedule.
(c) Name, address and phone number of party responsible
for maintenance of all erosion control measures.
(d) Identification of all temporary erosion control
measures which will remain in place until permanent
vegetation is in place. Examples include, but are not
limited to: Seeding with perennial vegetation, mulching,
sodding, silt fence, erosion control matting, and hay
bale filter barriers.
(e) Identification of all permanent erosion control
measures such as outfall spillways and riprap shoreline
protection, and their location.
(f) For projects over five acres of graded area,
documentation that the project applicant has applied for
a National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System (NPDES)
general permit from the Minnesota Pollution Control
Agency (MPCA).
(g) Tabulation of all earthwork cut-and-fill volumes and
computation of any floodplain volume and/or wetland area
changes.
5.
EXCEPTIONS.
(a) Rule D and its requirements will not apply to
development or redevelopment of individual sites less
than 2.5 acres in size for industrial, commercial, and
multi-unit residential, and less than five acres in size
for single-family residential, unless such development
or redevelopment:
(1) Is within the 100-year floodplain.
(2) Is within 1,000 feet of a public water or
protected wetland.
(3) Is within 300 feet of Rice Creek, Hardwood
Creek, Clearwater Creek, or of a public ditch.
18
RULE E
FLOODPLAIN ALTERATION
1.
POLICY.
It is the policy of the Board of Managers to:
(a) Protect the lives and property values of persons
occupying the flood plains.
(b) Enhance the floodplains' water resource values.
Water resource values are defined as those
characteristics which promote the natural moderation of
floods, maintain the streams' water quality, and provide
groundwater recharge.
(c) Promote the living resource values existing in flood
plain areas which include the protection of fish and
wildlife resources.
(d) Enhance the flood plains' significant cultural
values, which include preservation of open space, natural
beauty, areas for scientific study, outdoor education,
and recreation.
2. REGULATION. No person may alter or fill land below the 100-
year flood elevation of any public water, public water wetland or
other wetlands without first obtaining a permit from the District.
For permitting purposes the District is divided into Flood Plain
Management Sector A and Sector B. These sectors aid in applying
management principles which reflect the hydrologic importance of
flood plain across the District.
3. CRITERIA FOR FLOODPLAIN ALTERATION.
permittinq Requirements for Flood Plain Manaqement Sector A
Sector A contains those subwatersheds where the percentage of flood
plain to total area is twelve percent or less, and the topography
in terms of a generalized slope condition is predominantly greater
than twelve percent. Flood Plain Management Sector A includes
subwatershed 4,S,7,8,13a,14a,14b,14c,14d,14e,15b and 16.
(a) Construction of impervious areas within flood plain
areas will not be allowed within the designated
groundwater recharge areas for the Prairie du Chien-
Jordan formation except for road construction, trails,
and other recreational improvements.
(b) To protect water quality and the conveyance capacity
of the flood plain, the District will not permit site
development which would involve the outside storage of
soluble, toxic,. or buoyant materials. Examples of
19
I
J
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
.
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
\t
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
.
I
I
I
I
I
I
~
I
acceptable flood plain uses include open space, golf
courses, and parking surfaces located outside of
designated recharge areas with less than six inches of
flooding occurring over the surface.
(c) Encroachment within the 100-year flood plain may
occur if all the following conditions exist:
(1) The flood
encroachment is
flood plain
encroachment
required) .
plain storage volume after
equal to or greater than the
storage volume prior to
(compensatory storage is
(2) This encroachment does not lie within the
floodway and does not result in a violation of
the District's Wetland Alteration Rule F.
(3) Construction or
flood damage will
elevation of two feet
profile.
development subj ect to
have a minimum floor
above the lOa-year flood
(4) Any structures, facilities, or embankments
within the flood plain will be capable of
passing the lOa-year flood without increasing
the elevation of the 100-year flood profile or
creating excessive velocities as determined by
the District Engineer.
Permittinq Reauirements for Flood Plain Manaqement Sector B
Sector B contains those subwatersheds where the percentage of flood
plain to total area is greater than twelve percent, and the
topography is characterized by a general slope condition of
predominantly less than twelve percent. Flood Plain Management
Sector B includes subwatersheds 1,2,3,G,9,10,11,12a and 12b.
(a) Construction of impervious areas will not be allowed
within the designated groundwater recharge areas of the
Prairie du Chien-Jordan formation except for road
construction, trails, and other recreational
improvements.
(b) To protect water quality and the conveyance capacity
of the flood plain, the District will not permit site
development which would involve the outside storage of
soluble, toxic, or buoyant materials. Examples of
acceptable flood plain uses include open space, golf
courses, and parking surfaces located outside of
designated recharge areas with less than six inches of
flooding occurring over the surface.
20
(c) Encroachment may occur in the flood plain areas of Flood
Plain Management Sector B if all the following conditions
exist:
(1) The encroachment lies within the floodway
fringe area of the lOG-year flood plain in
those areas where floodway has been identified,
or in the absence of an established floodway,
compensatory (live) storage is excavated.
(2) The encroachment does not result in
increasing the lOa-year flood profile within
the floodway portion of the flood plain by more
than 0.5-foot or create velocities exceeding
2.5 feet/second or as determined by the
District Engineer.
(3) The encroachment does not violate the
principle of "equal encroachment."
(4) The
violation
Rule F.
encroachment does not result in
of the District's Wetland Alteration
(5) Structures and facilities subject to flood
damage built within the 100-year flood will
have two feet of freeboard between the lowest
floor and the lOa-year flood profile.
4. DRAINAGE EASEMENTS. Applicant will provide drainage and
flowage/ponding easements over flood plain areas inundated during
the 100-year flood and drainage easements within 100 feet from the
centerline of Rice Creek, Hardwood Creek, Clearwater Creek, and
Ramsey County Ditch #2, within fifty feet of the centerline of
county and judicial ditches, or within twenty-five feet of the
centerline of any major drainageway of the District.
5. REQUIRED EXHIBITS. The following exhibits must accompany the
permit application. One set, full size; two sets, reduced to
maximum size of 11"x17."
(a) Site plan showing property lines, delineation of the
work area, existing elevation contours of the work area,
ordinary high water elevation, and regional flood
elevation. All elevations must be reduced to NGVD (1929
datum) .
(b) Grading plan showing any proposed elevation changes.
(c) Preliminary plat of any proposed land development.
(d) Determination by a professional
engineer or
21
I
J
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
.
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
qualified hydrologist of the local 100-year flood
elevation before and after the project.
I
I
I
I
I
I
--
I
I
I
I
I
I
(e) Computation of change in flood storage capacity
resulting from proposed grading.
(f) Erosion Control Plan.
(g) Soil boring results if available.
22
I
RULE F
WETLAND ALTERATION
1.
It is the policy of the Board of Managers to:
POLICY.
(a) Achieve no net loss in the quantity, quality, and
biological diversity of Minnesota's existing wetlands.
(b) Increase the quantity, quality,
diversity of Minnesota's wetlands by
enhancing diminished or drained wetlands.
and biological
restoring or
(c) Avoid direct or indirect impacts from activities
that destroy or diminish the quantity, quality, and
biological diversity of wetlands.
(d) Replace wetland values where avoidance of activity
is not feasible and prudent.
2. REGULATION. No person may fill, drain, excavate or otherwise
alter the character ofa wetland without first obtaining a permit
from the District.
3. CRITERIA.
(a) The Minnesota Wetland Conservation Act, as amended,
and the rules implementing the Wetland Conservation Act
as set forth in Minnesota Rules chapter 8420, as amended,
are incorporated as part of this rule and govern draining
or filling of wetlands within the District.
(b) Excavations in wetlands for the purposes of wildlife
enhancement must comply with the criteria described in
the General Desiqn Consideration for Wildlife Pond
Construction and Wetland Alterations, included in the
appendix of these rules.
(c) Wetlands may be used for stormwater storage and
treatment only if applicant demonstrates that the
excavation will not adversely affect the function and
values of the wetland, and will not substantially
increase sediment load, tributary area, or water level
fluctuations. The District will use the MPCA report,
Guidance for Evaluatinq Urban Stormwater and Snowmelt
Runoff Impacts to Wetlands to assist it in evaluating
potential impacts.
(d) Other activities which would change the character
of a wetland must demonstrate that the quantity, quality
and biological diversity of the wetland will not be
diminished, as evaluated using a wetlands functions and
values assessment system.
23
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
II
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
II
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
(e) For wetland alterations not regulated by WCA,
functions and values diminished as a result of the
alteration, must be replaced at a ratio of one-to-one.
4. LOCAL GOVERNMENT UNIT. The District intends to serve as the
"local government unit" for administration of the Minnesota Wetland
Conservation Act, unless a particular municipality in the District
has elected to assume that role in its jurisdictional area.
Notwithstanding the above, the District will continue to require
wetland alteration permits under this rule.
5. REQUIRED EXHIBITS. The following exhibits must accompany the
permit application. One set, full size; two sets, reduced to
maximum size of 11"X17."
(a) Site plan showing:
(1) Property lines and corners and delineation
of lands under ownership of the applicant.
(2) Existing and proposed elevation contours,
incl uding the existing runout elevation and
flow capacity of the wetland outlet, and spoil
disposal areas.
(3) Area of the wetland portion to be filled,
drained, excavated or otherwise altered.
(b) Complete delineation of the existing wetland (s) ,
supported by the following documentation:
(1) Identification of the delineation method
used in accordance with the 1987 Manual.
(2) Identification of presence or absence of
normal circumstances or problem conditions.
(3) Basin classification using the Cowardian
method and Circular 39.
(4) Wetland data sheets, or a report, for each
sample site, referenced to the location shown
on the delineation map. In each data
sheet/report applicant must provide the
reasoning for satisfying, or not satisfying
each of the technical criteria and why the area
is or is not a wetland.
(5) A delineation map showing the size,
locations, configuration and boundaries of
wetlands in relation to identifiable physical
characteristics, such as roads, fence lines,
24
waterways, or other identifiable features.
(6) The location of all sample sites and
stakes/flags must be accurately shown on the
delineation map. Delineations submitted by
applicants will normally be field-verified by
District staff. Applicants must leave stakes
in the field to aid review of the site.
Wetland delineations should be performed during
the normal growing season for this area of the
State of Minnesota (May 1 October 15).
Delineations performed outside this time frame
mayor may not be permitted, depending on
potential wetland impact in relation to the
entire development or project.
(c) A replacement plan, if required, outlining the steps
followed for the sequencing process and including
documentation supporting the proposed mitigation plan.
(d) A wetland functions and values assessment comparison
before and after project.
(e) An Erosion Control Plan.
6. EXCEPTIONS. Clearing of vegetation, plowing or pasturing in
a wetland as part of an existing and on-going farming operation
will not require a permit under this rule unless the activity
results in draining or filling the wetland.
25
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
II
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
.
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
f
I
RULE G
BRIDGE AND CULVERT CROSSINGS
1. POLICY.
the capacity
needs.
It is the policy of the Board of Managers to preserve
of the present drainage systems to accommodate future
2. REGULATION. No person may construct, improve, repair or al ter
the hydraulic characteristics of a bridge profile control or
culvert structure on a creek, public ditch or major watercourse in
the District, without first obtaining a permit from the District.
3. CRITERIA. Crossings must:
(a) Provide equivalent hydraulic capacity as existing
condition.
(b) Retain existing navigational capacity.
(c) Not adversely affect water quality.
(d) Represent the "minimal impact" solution to a
specific need with respect to all other alternatives.
(e) Allow for future erosion, scour, and sedimentation
considerations.
4. REQUIRED EXHIBITS. The following exhibits must accompany the
permit application. One set, full size; two sets, reduced to
maximum size of 11"x17."
(a) Construction details showing:
(1) Existing and proposed flow line (invert)
elevations.
(2) End details with flared end sections,
wingwalls and/or riprap (energy dissipaters) .
(3) Size and description of structure.
(4) Emergency overflow elevation and route.
(b) Construction schedule.
(c) Narrative describing construction methods.
(d) Erosion Control Plan.
(e) Computations of watershed area, peak flow rates and
elevations, and discussion of potential effects on water
levels above and below the project area.
26
5. EXCEPTIONS.
(a) Criteria 3(a) may be waived if the applicant can
demonstrate with supporting hydrologic calculations: 1) the
need for an increase in discharge rate in order to provide for
reasonable surface water management in the upstream area, and
2) that the downstream impacts of the increased discharge rate
can be reasonably accommodated and will not exceed the
existing rate at the municipal boundary.
27
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
.
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
,
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
.
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
RULE H
SHORELAND DEVELOPMENT
1. POLICY. It is the policy of the Board of Managers to promote
the adoption of local shoreland ordinances based on Department of
Natural Resources regulations.
2. REGULATION. In those cities which have not adopted state-
approved shoreland ordinances, the District requires a permit for
development, grading or filling within the shoreland zone of public
waters lakes and streams.
3. CRITERIA. A permit applicant for development, grading or
filling within the shoreland zone of public waters lakes and
streams must comply with the following setback criteria.
(a) Structure Setback Criteria.
structures on lots is controlled in
class of public waters as follows:
The placement of
accordance .with the
(1) For natural environment waters, at least
200 feet from the OHW for lots not served by
public sewer and at least 150 feet from the
ORW for lots served by public sewer.
(2) For recreational development waters, at
least 100 feet from the ORW for lots not served
by public sewer and at least seventy-five feet
from the OHW for lots served by public sewer.
(3) For general development waters, at least
seventy-five feet from the ORW for lots not
served by public sewer and at least fifty feet
from the ORW for lots served by public sewer.
(b) Sanitary Facilities Setback Criteria. Septic tank
and soil absorption systems must be set back from the ORW
in accordance with the class of public waters as follows:
(1) For natural environment waters, at least
150 feet.
(2) For recreational development waters, at
least seventy-five feet.
(3) For general development waters, at least
fifty feet.
Soil absorption systems will not be allowed in
the following areas:
28
(1) Low swampy areas or areas subj ect to
recurrent flooding.
(2) Where the highest known groundwater table,
bedrock, or impervious soil conditions are
within four feet of the bottom of the system.
(3) Where ground slope creates a danger of
seepage of the effluent on the surface of the
ground.
4. REQUIRED EXHIBITS. The following exhibits must accompany the
permit application. One set, full size; two sets, reduced to
maximum size of 11"x17."
(a) Site plan showing building setback from the ordinary
high water elevation.
(b) Erosion Control Plan.
5. EXCEPTIONS.
The requirements of Section 3 and
Section 4 above will not apply to
they are not used for habitation,
sanitary facilities.
of paragraph (a) of
boathouses provided
and do not contain
29
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
II
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
II
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
. RULE I
DRAINAGE SYSTEMS
1. POLICY. It is the policy of the Board of Managers to regulate
new construction, improvement or repair of public or private
drainage systems (open and tiled) for the following purposes:
(a) To preserve the capacities of drainage systems to
accommodate future needs.
(b) To improve water quality and prevent localized
flooding.
2. REGULATION. No drainage system may be constructed, improved
or repaired without first obtaining a permit from the District.
3. CRITERIA. A permit applicant for construction, improvement
or repair of a public or private drainage system must:
(a) Comply with all federal, state and District wetland
protection rules and regulations.
(b) Demonstrate that such activity will not adversely
impact down stream water quality or quantity.
(c) Provide stable channel and outfall.
(d) Demonstrate concurrence with regional pond or subdivision
drainage plans approved by the District, if applicable.
(e) Retain a hydrologic regime which complies with
District Wetland Alteration Rule F.
(f) If drainage system is proposed to outlet a
landlocked basin, provide sufficient dead storage volume
to retain back-to-back 100-year, twenty-four-hour
rainfalls and runoff.
4. REQUIRED EXHIBITS. The following exhibits must accompany the
permit application. One set, full size; two sets, reduced to
maximum size of 11"x17."
(a) Map showing location of project and tributary area.
(b) Existing and proposed cross sections and profile of
affected area.
(c) Description of bridges or culverts required.
(d) Narrative and
impacts and affe.cts
project area.
calculations describing wetland
on water levels above and below the
30
S. EXCEPTIONS. The Board of Managers may waive the requirement
of a permit under this rule for repair to a drainage system if the
applicant proposes to repair a tiled system of less than fifty feet
in length, and where such repair would not alter the invert of the
system.
31
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
-
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
RULE J
APPROPRIATION OF PUBLIC WATERS
1. POLICY. It is the policy of the Board of Managers to regulate
the appropriation of public waters as follows.
2. REGULATION. A permit from the District is required for the
appropriation of water from:
(a) A public water basin or wetland wholly within
Hennepin or Ramsey County which is less than 500 acres
in surface area.
(b) A protected watercourse which has a drainage area
of less than 50 square miles.
3. CRITERIA. A permit applicant for appropriation of public
waters as described above must complete and submit to the District
an appropriation checklist. The appropriation checklist form may
be obtained from the District office.
32
RULE K
ENFORCEMENT
1. VIOLATION OF RULES IS A MISDEMEANOR. Violation of
rules, a stipulation agreement made, or permit issued by the
of Managers under these rules, is a misdemeanor subj ect
penalty as provided by law.
2. DISTRICT COURT ACTION. The District may exercise all powers
conferred upon it by Minnesota Statutes Chapter 103D in enforcing
these rules, including criminal prosecution, injunction, or action
to compel performance, restoration or abatement.
these
Board
to a
3. ADMINISTRATIVE ORDER. The District may issue a cease and
desist order when it finds that a proposed or initiated project
presents a serious threat of soil erosion, sedimentation, or an
adverse effect upon water quality or quantity, or violates any rule
of the District.
33
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
RULE L
VARIANCES
1. VARIANCES AUTHORIZED. The Board of Managers may hear requests
for variances from the literal provis~ons of these rules in
instances when their strict enforcement would cause undue hardship
because of circumstances unique to the property under
consideration. The Board of Managers may grant variances where it
is demonstrated that such action will be in keeping with the spirit
and intent of these rules.
2. STANDARD. In order to grant a variance the Board of Managers
must determine that:
(a) Special conditions apply to the structure or land
under consideration that do not apply generally to other
land or structures in the District.
(b) Because of the unique conditions of the property
involved, undue hardship to the applicant would result,
as distinguished from mere inconvenience, if the strict
letter of the rules was carried out. Economic
considerations alone shall not constitute undue hardship
if any reasonable use of the property exists under the
terms of the District's rules.
(c) The proposed activity for which the variance is
sought will not adversely affect the public health,
safety, welfare, will not create extraordinary public
expense, will not adversely affect water quality, water
control, drainage in the District.
(d) The intent of the District's rules is met.
3. TERM. A variance shall expire one year after the date it is
granted, unless implemented by applicant within that one year
period.
4. VIOLATION. A violation of any condition set forth in a
variance shall be a violation of the District rules, and shall
automatically terminate the variance.
34
These Rules of the Rice Creek Watershed District were duly adopted
by the Rice Creek Watershed District Board of Managers on
August 12, 1998.
//'
-------- - /. - ( //
./"/ / /C.../ /:. - :: /)
. . ~4e??-~~;C~/~-'d / ~/,
~ Andrew J. Cardinal, Sr., Secretary
i/
Board of Managers of the
RICE CREEK WATERSHED DISTRICT
35
I
J
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
(
I
,
I
('
.ri
- /'1
~ /,
c::: 'I
lLJ (I,
t~ 11
"-
lLJ
lLJc:::
'i"<<:
f:::j
""0
<'-.J
"'-J
1'-,,-
i "
t3
<
c:::
o
t;;
lLJ
:0..
~
....,j
I-
a""
Lulu
Q.-
c...:::::
<<:Cl
C:::Lu
701
I
I
I I
c::: I
G: c I
01- Q I-
a Lu Lu c...
c::: e.:,CO.....
< <( -
"" C:::""01 I
"'" -<('<
- <5'-.J""
-
~ Iii 01 :S
-(.,).......
C;-'c.-':
k. "" Lw~<:~
<<:
01 0 C:::~c~
a f:: <01 c... Lu
~ lLJ k.
"" 01<(Qk.
"'" ....,j "" "" I
C .:::,<
'-" ....,j ~01001
lLJ lLJ <vi
'-.J ~ a= I-t;c:::_
"" ~Lu<(,-
"'" f- ",,0 I-k.,<:", I
<: Cj ""'~ (..H'"_(.)I"
lLJ ~l.uo~
I- '-" Ck. ....,j c:::~
<: C:: It....~ :::::
- lLJ ....,jo ~Lw':2
:s ::;;: I-e.:, Lj "::;..-: I
... lLJ :::'"" -~CQ
I- 0_ [G6i~:::
k. I-
"" lLJ-
lLJ 0 -:::, -UJ .........1./1
....c. c::~8Lw
01 :::: i-a: I
Lc; f- <:(3- ~,-.,LulL..
g: = -c:.~
0 lLJl- <( =<:: :::::
:-: ~ lLJe:: =""'k.'-
c,....
.". ~~ ~\/) t.w I
i:: e.:,,,,,Lu~
"" CO 01 e::av,tJ
:s S? lLJl- ~j:::~-..
.... '"'" -
I- ... '-.J<: "'":e:: UJ =
~ <:UJ 01lLJ - I
is "",[G <( ,....""
Q. lw~r-Q
~ 01 c:;e:: C:::01>-f::
-Q. "",,,,,co",,,
"'" a
~ lLJ lLJi2 ",,81;3[G
e:: ""'I=: ....,j
<<: ~01 CQ :::'l..u
~ c::: 0
- ~c :::'L::g::<.::
2i
Q. <: >-::....,j ~~~~
0 lLJ :;:""
....,j
01 <J:l -- .
.. . .
I
~'"
~:---'j
t<r
, i I.JJ.CGP . ~~:)
: I 1......\
' i , - 'G 'i) 7 I ~',
. 1 I dDO...., Iii'. _"\
'I---. i f-;'y
I I /1 I t;
I .! j~ I r
'GJI ~ )
1 Lli!. 01 r
-JI Cl j
0, <<:
0, U,j;
c..., ClI
-Ji VI
-J <<:'
U,j -I
[G ti:'
-J 01
e::1""i /
<I
lLJ
~I i
21 i /
(
IGL:j
ICje::
r'
I
I i":";
I OjO
r
J
:::;, .
OJ...,
':1~'-v
""'0..
~-;-..a
-'/'1: i)f
1\ /1
I v I
I
I,
I
I
LJ
COMPOUND WEIR
,. BEE.'iiVE
i CASTING
~ .- SKiMME,Y
, " ~ l~ [/ TFlASH RACK
I '
I
rBULKHEAO OR
I ORIFICE PLATE
I
I
I
= I~ sill
'--ANTI-SEE?
COLLAR
RI SEFI
I
lblhm .
=:!!~I
I~SXIMMER
\
I \, "
ORIFiCE
1-.... I;;...~.......~...
~ 1:~4..,...,... ,E
'i=:, E
'111....:11 I"it E EANTI-SEEi=> ~
Sf DE Vf EIN COLLAR
.'
,
I
I
I
~
II
~\I
, I
, I
I '
tx
WE/Fr WITh ORIFiCE.
BEE.'iIVE ~
CAST/NG '
::!J~~GF\!""'" -,
'-."-.. ...'~' \
SF." "V'Y
,-_I ri \
1
OV"~FfOW ~ ~A~~:
-' - //1 i \\\ - _,.!_
"mE~ I I ~"-
~ I 0 I
I 0~~'IIEII I li~I' It::
I :rr~ :I~ ~I_t
~I 'JE'=:i1t:: 'N~'..o:-==>~
I 1.- .r""I II ....c_.
~.~ = wL~R
O 01 ~'C~ INI"'-" r,s-.o
I Ii r I C I I r1 rr, LI i
BOLTED --,
if:/'l' rY i~ ~ 'H-! IT-
r~ I I
'-11----31
ANTI-SEE.=>'/
COLLAR
TOP VfE#
. CONCRETE OIJTLET
I
I
'J
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
r
c:i
""c
aLu
Q..~
f-~
""~
Lu~
~G)
<;:V)
Lu~
~~
.q:,.q:
C::~
a
l<..V)
~
~
-.....
Gf-
6c .
C::"">-.
Q...q:~
a... ""a
.q:c.o
_V)
'""V)Lu
c.oLuV)
i;)Ca
LuQQ..
QLu~
QC::Q..
t)Lu :s -.J
0<;:
Lu
LuC::""
c.o a
c.o.q:f:;
:::'..q:
V)~::::;
_ac::
~""a
V)V)lc.
..--::::
~~V)C::
QJ::::::O
""i-:~l<..
<:::(
~
1
1
1
t:;
a
Q..
Lu
ct:
.q:
:::,
o
V)
'"'
C::
a
""
.q:2
c::""
~t;
l<..Lu
ol<..
V)"'J
Q
""l<..
LuO
Lul
~I
Q..I
t;:;l
~I
I
.q:
-Lu
Q, ~
- ~."
- .q: c::
~~c
-=:"lLJ't;
~~~
r--~::::
~ .q: tJ>
- c:
Lu C::-
u~-g
.q::'-~
-.J:::::~
a...ll....~
-.J=<
-.J:;:,
~~~
L1~""
",,-.q:
_=<:Cl:J
l
"
"'iT>?T 1
I L~ I
Ii II
I'
r i'v-!;r;I--r
I (t~: .i
I' I' ::::
I ,I =<:
I I: ~i
I i ~
i~
~~
Lu
-.J
.q:
c..:
V)
2
f-
a
S ""
Lu
---
~
<:
-<::(,
-11
Cl.[
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
------------- \
i --~2U I
, ') 'E1l!
~ ' 'IE
-..: '!-J..;
"
I
,
~
\
-
I
I
I
I
I
I
~
I
I
I
I
I
I
8
<t.
"-'
"-'
1I1
,
i=::
<:
~
~~ ~~ )
~1I1
-..J~ C::
<t.~ "-' \
a:: ':< '2;1 ~
lLJ~ ~
en- -J
:::a~ j'
::0 a
-J~ ~
a ~ ~ \
::: ~ ~ ~.
<~ i::: )
l.tJ:::: I <.:
~~ l..... ':
~
~
(
-l
l.u
it
-J
a
""-
a
Q.
""-
C.cl
(;;
l.u
a
I
~
"
'<:
CS '"
: -
,','\j "..q:
-::: Q: (J
l.u"-'
Q1-C:::
1---JC.cl
- - (J
:.....l1....~
I
)
-
-
'21--
:::ct:
<:l.u
-':.
:::;<:
-
l2~s
""-l.ua
-i--J
:.u
aden
""-l<r
l.uo::",
~i3ll..
lcJ~a
I
------
r
<t.
~
-J
0::
l.u
:::.
a
~
""-
:::::
-
~
"..
~
: J
..--
I
~3:lj
i=::a
t.J-J
lcJ"-
~Ll..
Cla
-
-
~
a
en
a
<:
a
<t.
(
\
I -J
lcJ Ci
-J V)
~2~
~<:en
a-a::
lcJ'-.Ji:2
"'a:l-1
lcJCl:lCs
2~23
~,
::<'
-
-
-,
~.
;.-")!
~.
::<
:::::
~
~
. ,
'-.J
a:
Cl:l
'<:
Ll..
lcJ
-J
~
~
~
C.cl
')
lcJ
-.j
c:;
V)
9
,....
I--
a
'::.:(""-
I
'::.:(
<
C)
~
U
Llj
lr)
GENERAL DESIGN CONSIDER-\TIONS FOR
WILDLIFE POND CONSTRUCTION A..'1D WETlAND .-U.TER-\TIONS
The Rice Creek Watershed District has reviewed information from the U.S. Army Corps of
Engineers and the Minnesota Department of Natural Resources on the design and
construction of wildlife ponds. The RCWD recommends that the foilowing considerations be
incorporated, to the greatest possible extent. when constructing wildlife ponds or working
within wetland areas.
SIZE: The wildlife pond should be at least L'4 acre in surt-ace area
size, although larger ponds (up to 1 acre) are preferred.
SHORELINE CONTOUR.: It is recommended that a variable (rather than an even-
sided) shoreline be constructed. This will increase the
amount of shoreline per unit area thereby creating isolated
areas conducive for waterfowl usage.
BOTIOM CONTOUR: The bottom contour should be varied to promote the growth of
emergent vegetation. A 50% open water and 509'., veget.aove
cover (including the emergent vegetation around the shoreline)
will provide the greatest diversity of wildlife species. Water
depth should be about 12 t.Q 18 inches in the shallow area of
the basin and about 3 to 4 feet ma."'Cimum in the deepest
areas. .
SIDE SLOPES: The upland side slopes towards the pond should range from
3:1 to 10:1. The pond bottom side slope should be 8: 1 to
12:1.
BUFFER ZONE: It is important to re-establish and maintain an upland
vegetative buffer .one around the perimeter of the wildlife
pond to provide nesting habitat and filter runoff. Mowing of
upland areas should be avoided. if possible. until August 1 t.Q
protect nesting areas and allow for brood dispersal.
BOTIOM "'L-\TERIAL: If possible, topsoil should be placed on the bottom of the
basin to provide a more suitable base for aquatic vegetative
growth. In addition, "muck:" from an existing wetland should
be added to the topsoil. providing a "seed" for a beneficial
biological aquatic community to be established.
DREDGED SPOILS: All dredged spoils from pond excavation activity will need t.Q
be placed above the existing 100-year flood elevation for the
site. Erosion control measures such as silt fences and/or
staked hay bales will need to be provided around the spoils.
The spoils should be placed within a diked upland area to
allow the spoils to dewatar into the soil.
I
.
I
I
I
I
I
I
~.
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
\
w
z
o
N
c::
W
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
,
-,
~
-
~
2
..
~
<
::::
'.' ......
- -
=-
::::::..
::::~
,. ~
--:
-
-
-
u
"-
-
-
c;j
'"
1.0
;0
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
II
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
Appendix H
State of Minnesota Rules Governing Local Stormwater Management Plans
I-I
~
I]
,]
,]
I]
.]
I]
.
.]
.]
J
I
I]
11
,J
1
J031l.2J5 UJCAL WATER J\IANAGEMENT I'LANS.
Sulxfivision 1. Hcqu,ircmcDL (a) Aflcr the walcrshcd plan is approved and adoplcd, or
amended, pur::;.uant (0 ~~l~m l03B.~ J. the !~I govemmen! units having (and U:')C planning
and regulatory responslblhly for tcmlory wHllIn the watershed shall prcp.uc or cause 10 hi:
prepared a local wa[cr.managcmcnt plan, C3pital improvement program. and official controls
as. nr:C(:SS<!rr 10 bring local waler management in In confonnancc with [he watershed plan
wlthm the time period prescribed in the implementation program of the watershed plan and,
as nccess.ary. shall prepare or c;m,"iC to be prepared amendments 10 Ihe local comprehensive
plan.
. (b) Each town within the counties of AnoKa, Carver, Dakota, Scott, and Washington au.
lhonzed by general or special Jaw 10 plan and regulate the use of land under sections 462.351
to 46.2.364 shall by resolution determine whether 10 prepare the local water management
plan Itself or to delegate all or part of the prr::paration of the plan '0 (he oounly.
.(79 WA'JDt M.ANNING AND PROJECT IMI'l..EMEN'D\I10N JOJB.2JS
(c) Towns wilhin counfies thai have adopted comprehensive plans applicable to the
town must use county preparation of their plan 10 the maximum extent possible.
Subd. 2. Contents~(a) Each local plan, in the degree of detail required in lhe watershed
plan, shall:
(1) describe existing and proposed physical environment and land use;
(2) define drainage areas and the volumes, rates, and paths of stormwater runoff;
(3) identify areas and elevations for stonnwater storage adequate to meet perfonnance
st.andards established in the watershed plaD~
(4) define water quality and water qualily protection methods adequate to meet perfor-
mance standards established in the watershed plan;
(5) identify regulated areas; and
(6) set forth an implementation program, including a description of official controls
and, as appropriate, a capital improvement program.
(b) The board of waler and soil resources shall adopt rules establishing minimum local
plan standards and a model environmental management ordinance for use by local govern-
ment units in implementing local water plans. The standards apply to plan amendments made
to conform to changes in tbe watershed plans that are adopted under the board rules required
by section 103B.231, subdivision 6.
Subd, 3. Review. After consideration but before adoption by tbe governing body, each
local unit shall submit its water management plan to the watershed management organization
for review for consistency with the watershed plan adopted pursuant to seclion 1038231. If
the county or counties having territory within the local unit have a state-approved aDd locall y
adopted groundwater plan, tbe local unit shall submit its plan to the counly or counties for
review. The county or counties have 45 days to review and commenl on the plan. The orga.
nizatioD shall approve or disapprove the local plan or pans of the plan. The organization shall
have 60 days to complete its review; provided, however, that tbe watershed management or.
ganizatioD shall, as part of its review, tak.e into accounl the comments submitted to it by the
metropolilan council pursuant to subdivision 3a. If the organization fails 10 complete its re.
view within the prescribed period, the local plan shall be deemed approved unless an exten.
sion is agreed to by the local unic
Subd. "3a. Review by metropolitan council. Concurrently with its submission of its lo-
cal water management plan to the watershed management organization as provided in subdi.
vision 3, eacb local unit of government shall submit its water management plan to the metro-
politan council for review and commenl by lbe council. The council shall bave 45 days 10
review and comment upon the local plan or parts of tbe plan with respect to consistency with
the council's comprehensive development guide for lhe metropolitan area, The counciJ's
45-day review period shall run concurrently with (he 6O-day review period by the waterahed
management organization provided in subdivision 3. The metropolitan council shaH submit
ils comments 10 the watershed management organization and shall5(:nd a copy of its com.
ments to the local government unit. If the metropolitan council fails to complete its review
and mak.e comments to the watershed managemenl organization within lhe 45-day period,
the watershed management organization shall complete its review as provided in subdivision
3.
Subd. 4. Adoption and implementation. Afler approval of the local plan by the orga-
nization, lhe local government unit shall adopl and implemenl its plan within 120 days and
shall amend its official controls accordingly within 180 days.
Subd. 5. Amendments. To the extent and in tbe manner required by che organizalion. an
amendments to local water management plans shall be submillcd 10 the organization for re-
view and approval in accordance with lhe provisioll..o; of subdivisions 3 and 3a for the review
o[plan.<;.
History: 1990 c391 orl2 .rl2; 1990 c 601521; 1995 cl76 s 1-3; 1995 c 184511
I
---------------- -------------
-'
J
.
J
]
]
]
]
]
]
] .
]
]
]
]
1
J
J
OJ .
8410.0150
B. The executive director shall determine whether
there is a basis for a complaint before reporting the complaint
to the board. The executive director shal~ ensure that the
affected organization is notified of the complaint and given an
opportunity to respond to the allegations before determining
whether there is a basis for the complaint.
c. If the executive director determines there is a
basis for the complaint, the complaint shall be reported to the
board. The affected organization shall be given an opportunity
to appear before the board at the time the complaint is reported
to it and respond to the allegations in the complaint. The
complainant shall also be given an opportunity to appear.
D. After having the complaint reported to it, and
after providing an opportunity for the organization and the
complainant to be heard by it, the board shall decide whether to
order a state financial or performance audit of the organization.
SA: MS s 103B.IOl; 103B.211; 103B.231; 103B.227
HIST: 17 SR 146
CONTENT OF LOCAL PLANS
8410.0160 GENERAL STRUCTURE.
Each local plan must, at a mInImum, meet the requirements
for local plans in Minnesota Statutes, section 103B.235, except
as provided by the watershed management organization plan under
part 8410.0110, subpart 3. Each local plan must include
sections containing a table of contents; purposeiwater resource
related agreements; executive summary; land and water resource
inventory; establishment of goals and policies; relation of
goals and policies to local, regional, state, and' federal plans,
goals, and programs; assessment of problems; corrective actions;
financial considerations; implementation priorities; amendment
procedures; implement~tion program; and an append~x. Each
community should consider including its local plan asa chapter
of its local comprehensive plan. Each local plan shall be
adopted within two years of the board's approval of the last
organization plan that affects local units of government.
SA: MS s 103B.IOl; 103B.211~ I03B.23I; 103B.227
HIST: 17 SR 146
8410.0170 STRUCTURE.
Subpart 1. Purpose. Each local plan must have a section
entitled "Purpose" outlining the purposes of the water
management programs required by Minnesota Statutes, sections
103B.205 to 103B.255.
Subp. 2. Water resource management related agreements.
Appropriate water resource management related agreements that
have been entered into by the local community must be outlined,
including joint powers agreements related to water management
that the local community may be party to between itself and
19
I
~
I
I
I
I
I
I
.
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I -J
~
I ]
I ]
I ]
I J
I ]
I ]
II
I ]
'j
~ )
~'1
t
)
~]
t]
.-
I
8410.0170
.
watershed management organizations, adjoining communities, or
private parties. Available information concerning these
agreements in general conformance with the content of joint
powers agreements for organizations as outlined in part
8410.0030 must be included.
Subp. 3. Executive summary. Each plan shall have a
section entitled ttExecutive Summaryl' that generally summarizes
the content of the local plan in a manner similar to that
required for organization plans under part 8410.0050.
Subp. 4. Land and water resource inventory. Each local
plan must contain a composite land and water resource inventory
containing all relevant data from organization plans affecting
it consistent with the data required by part 8410.0060.
Subp. 5. Establishment of policies and goals.. Each local
plan must state specific goals and corresponding policies
related.to the purpose of these plans, be consistent with the
policies and goals of the organization plans within the city or
township, and address the relation of the local plan to the
regional, state, and federal goals and programs outlined in part
8410.0070.
Subp. 6. Assessment of problems. Each plan must contain a
summary assessment of existing or potential water resource
related problems, including those identified in organization
plans that affect the community. The problem assessment must be
completed for only those areas within the corporate limits of
the community and meet the same content requirements as those
outlined for organization plans under part 8410.0080, subparts 1
and 2.
Subp. 7. Corrective actions. Each local plan shall
describe nonstructural, programmatic, and structural solutions
to the problems identified in subpart 6. The mandatory actions'
for organization plans outlined in part 8410.0100,. subparts 1 to
6, shall be considered except that actions must be limited to
those that can be implemented at a local level. All corrective
actions must be consistent with the organization plans having
juriSdiction in the municipality or township.
Subp. 8. Financial considerations. Each local plan must
contain an analysis of the financial impact of implementation of
the proposed regulatory controls and programs identified under
subpart 7. The analysis must include, at a mi"nimum, the
following items:
A. the estimated cost of adoption and enforcement of
local controls and standards for the local municipality;
B. the estimated annual cost of implementation of
other specified programs to each local municipality~
C. a discussion of local ability to fund adoption of
and enforcement DE local controls and standards, implementation
of other specified programs, and capital improvements, including:
(1) levy limit constraints;
(2) effect on other city funding needs;
.
.
20
J
J
]
]
]
]
]
]
]
]
]
]
]
]
]
]
]
-
~
.
8UO.0170
.
(3) establishment of watershed management taxing
districts;
(4) creation of stormwater utilities; and
(5) monetary impact against homes or farmsteads
in affected community;
D. the impact on the local municipa11ty of local
implementation of each capital improvement project component if
ad valorem financing is used; and
E. a summary of grant funding that would likely be
available to fund water management projects and programs.
Subp. 9. Implementation priorities. Each local plan must
prioritize implementation components to make the best use of
available local funding and prevent future water management
problems from occurring to the maximum practical extent. Local
plans must prioritize organization plan implementation
components in line with organization priorities as outlined
under part 8410.0120 only for implementation components that
must be facilitated by the local municipality or township.
Subp. 10. Implementation program. Each local plan must
outline required implementation components that apply at a local
level. These components shall be consistent with the required
plan components outlined for organization plans under part
8410.0130. Official local controls must be enacted within six
months of adoption of the local plan.
Subp. 11. Amendment procedures. Each local plan must
contain a section entitled "Amendments to Planll containing the
year the plan extends to and establishes the process by which
amendments may be made. The amendment procedure shall conform
with the plan amendment procedure outlined in t~e organization
plans that affect the community. Local plan amendments must be
forwarded to each organization affected by the local plan
amendment for review and approval before adoption.
Subp. 12. Submittal and review. After consideration and
before adoption, the local plan shall be submitted to all
affected organizations for review according to Minnesota
Statutes, section 103B.235. Each local unit of government must
also notify affected organizations within 30 days of adoption
and implementation of the plan, including the adoption of
necessary official controls.
SA: MS s l03B.I01; 103B.211; 103B.231; 103B.227
HIST: 17 SR 146
.
8410.0180 DETERMINATIONS OF FAILURE TO IMPLEMENT.
Subpart 1. Applicability. This part applies when a plan
is not being implemented for a watershed either because no
watershed management organization exists, because the
organization has not adopted an approved plan, or because the
approved plan is not being carried out.
Subp. 2. Establishing cause. Before the board's
involvement in determinations of whether a plan is being
21
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
.
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
-.
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
._-........
'.
I
I
I
I
I
I
Appendix I
Water Quality Source Controls
I
..
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
.
I
I
I
I
I
I
~
I
~
;.....
u ;...
~~
;g~
.....~
W\O
e.l:i0\
",0'0
.- -
frr-r
..
~ .;:
ooc,
-~
..
..
....
-
r.IJ
.....
o
>;
....
'"
E
E
:::l
rr.
u
'"
0.
~ ~ .~ en
00:2
~ "@ ~
..c::
u
....
'"
..
en
..
....
:::l
-
'"
....
..
:::
"'"
<::
.2
-
'"
'0
<::
..
E
E
o
u
..
~
-ci
"
"
'OJ
'"
>.
!,!
<:;
'u
<.::
';.;
"
<Ii
,~
"
"0
"
~
'"
c
"
"0
.;;;
"
'"
ti<
""
.., ';;j"
;;
"0
."
~
~
eiJ ~
c: E
'a -
" e
~ c
~ 0
"
i':'
'"
"
0'
'"
'"
c:
'0.
"
~
'"
*
'"
/;' i::
-go .D
at) 5
~ .g ~
[ e In ;9
V) .U 10 ~
.~_ t:!:-2 ~ f'
- t.= ;> ~ .
U ";i e.: g::
..g > c.. ~ 4.)
OOL:O~
.... E bO ~ t::
e 's ~ .D
~ ~
3.=:-* ~
~~~ ;e
~ ~ .
~o
o ~ 0 p..
Z >. ~f-o
,,:='0
" '" "
v;"'O~
...."'O~
~ go
.."""
j~.
~ u 0
t:: 2 I;o'J
&H:2
~~~
c
"
..2
"0
0.
c:
c
'"
"
<.::
'"
..
';;;
"
.S<
~
"
u
c
o
U
1::
o
0.
"
0::
"
"
'"
"
'"
;>
UJ
I- :l
~ .~
o U
0.. t":!
UJ 0..
'"
-I s;,
..: ::E
Z M
tI:: '"
.
"
"
t:
~
"
'"
~
-5
'~
"
;>
.;;;
"
"
.5
>.. .
.a :;>
"0 .-
. ~ ~
~.={j
" c: >.
OIJuo:--,
C'u u a
:a 1.: >.. "'0
-=,,'O"i> B
;>.....
.5 (; ': c::
VJ :> ~ <<.)
o 0 _ >
.- E - U
a " "
c ~ 0 d
o "'" ..0 >
~:Eo~
r.n a C It)
:! U'I C 1..0
.g"tU ~~
'" -_o~o
;> 0
1-0 ~ C c
.2 "tt 2 ~
~1f')o-5
'"5 II ~
r.n~~~
e 0..'-
" ~
" -
,. Ii
VI 'J::
c;E
" "
'i:: "'0
'" c:
<.f.I -B <:a
"E
a:
:<i
"
>.
~
"
"'-
"
"
.~
***~~
O~oo--
>.>.>.>.>.
Q 0 0 0 U
C C C C C
o V ill (} U
'u 'w '(3 'G 'u
t;:t;::::t.=lClO::
................ ilM................
UJUJUJUJUJ
0.0 0.0 00 eo OJ)
c c c c c
'5. 'a' 'a' "c.. '0..
4,) v 10 0 U
'1) 0 U 0 cu
,. ,. ,. ,. ,.
Cl)C,ljC/.JCI)CI)
"0
:;
o
.c
~
-g '0
'" "
4.) ~
~'O
';:( ...,
02:
Ci.~
0."
"'...
~
.- "
~ ;;
" "
'u (;
;; >
'0 4.)
l.:9
~'O
" "
'"~
c "
'a...,
" ,-
" -
,..g
"
-is E
" "
t:.c
~ -
~~
o '"
" ;;
0"0
;; "
~<.::
:9 '(3
U-~ 8-
. ~
Vi ~
c '::;;
.S
E!
'6
:J
c "
o ;r.
0. "
". "
-g~:Jh ~
<n C ~
:g '~'fr E
o ~ "
::E15~
..
~
~
"
."
;.::
<
'"
-::;
..;
'"
"
;>,
~
"
0.
"
u
.~
."
-
~
~
~
~
]
.~
~
..::.
~
~
.s
~ 10
.2 :g
c; ~
0.
"
~
"
~ u
.~
0.
~
"
" ~
~ j
~
"
'"
~
~
. . .
..~
u ....
.... '"
- '"
o~
(JJ~
u
z
E
" d
-;;
'"
-
"
g
~
"
~
~
"
~
~ .g
o c
U
~ .9
'" "
'" ;>
"'0 ~
" "0
1:: ~
o
0.
~
;::
1)
"
0'
"
.:::
-= ii
.~ ~
~
~
g
"
'c
..
~
o
"
:g
""
'"
o
a.",
" "
~ .~
'" OJ
:u "C
o.~
:ii[ii
;> "
o 0
E ~
" '"
0:: ~
.c:
"
"
6
>.
] '5
-5. ...c
>.~
"" J \-0
_~ bJ) 0
" " ,.
~ ~ ~'2
\-0 '" ..... CI% C
o 0.0 4) L'l
g.-:: U ~
J:l: Q
Ol)
c:
'0
"0
"0
"
~
o
"
~
~
*0
o
'"-0..
~~~
co c
.., '" '"
'"-0..0..
.~c.i'
.,.~
i~ "f'
. H.:;;
O'~ ~
~"19 <:
g
.::!
'"
0(
--"
~
1;
~
~
'"
"
"
-5
"
~
.c;
~
'"
"
l.... -;; ::l
39~
u: ....... ~
5.. 0
E ~
o ~
~ ('l 0
-u ....... ,~
<.:: 0
" -;;
" ;>
" 0
.a 6
o "
Z '"
"
c:
Ol)
"
0.
'"
;;;
.c
U
..:
u
>.":
3= " :;:
"iii
~ ~ ~
~ .:: ~
~ ~ v
::E U al
>.
"0
'"
~
'"
t""--
'"
>.
"0
"
Vi
c
.2
;;
C
"
6
"
u
o
c:l
6
'"
6"0
e
0..
u U
N N
V) V)
" "
00
'e
'"
0..
"
N
'"
"
u
.~.~.~ .~
Q.,lJ,..~CL..
u 0
N N
Vje:;)
" "
'TI'O
.g
tz
"i1
t
~
-~
'E
i:
...
~
~
~
~
"
"""
j
~
o
c:
.;;;
.c
U
.;
-a.
::E
. . . . .
~
"
"
"iii
>
":
'"
u
"
Ul
:;
..:'!
"
c:l
6
'"
I;;,
o
~
'"-
"
~
"
o
Cl
S(:
1
..i:
"
~
"
"
E
~
"
c:
"
..
co
.s
~
~
;,
~
C.
."
."
"
.j
~
~
,
-
c::
0.;''''
~
..
~
"
"<?
.;;[:'fi'i,III:..:.mrolr:ll
I
nil' !TlOX! i11ll'orfa/lt inpu! !o lhe lawtl is knmvlcdK{'.
J
I
Toward a Low Input Lawn
By: Carole Ann Barth, Center for Watershed Protection
While many hom~owncrs <.In.: I;oncerncd with
stretlm quality, many also have a funda-
mental self-interest in retaining an ::J.ltmc-
tive, densc and green lawn-regardless of the inputs of
lime, money, fertilizer. pesticides and water needed 10
.sustain it. Afterall. a well-manicured l~wn has undeni~
able aesthetic appeal 10 mi.1ny residents. Thercforc. on~
ur the key challenges of any public outreach progmm
is to convince roughly h.)lf of our homeowners that it
is possble to grow asharp looking lnwn with low inpuls
(and not greatly increase the amount
of labor expended to maintain it).
This article sets forth some braod
principles to guide homeowners to-
ward a low input lawn. Togehter with
the accompanying Lawn Care Field
Guide found at the end of this issue, it
provides a starting point fordesigning a more effective
outreach program to achieve this goal.
The most important input to the low input lawn is
knowledge. Efficient management is based on a rudi-
memary understanding of soil properties, local cli-
mate, and the growing requirements, of selected grass
species. With this understanding of region;)1 condi-
tions, it is relatively simple to'select ilppropriate grass
species and lo give the lawn what it needs at (he proper
time. Without [his understanding, large amounts of
grass st:cd, !"t:rtiliz~r. p~sticiLies, water, and time: may
he wasted. This article presents the management tech-
niques ncedcd for a low input lawn in eight key steps:
rr-"_;>:"<7:~~h,:::i:1h..~:..li.~
Traditional lawn care sharply
increases demands on water
supply and landfill capacity.
.m::-:...s,,~".."'*~~~~1JfI~~
Step 1. Lawn conversion
Step 2. SDil building
Step~. Grass selection
Step 4. Mowing and th~lh:h management
Step 5. Minimal fcrtiliz:ltion
Step 6. W~~d conlrol and tolerance
SLep 7. Int~grateJ pest ll1anagemL~nt
Step~. S~nsihlc: irrigati{ln
Tht.:'sL: slLps. Sllllllllariz~d in Tahk' I, :1're inlcndcd (ll
pmvid~ a framcwork fnr Lh.... homeowner inll.:rcstct! in
rL:dLlcillg I;IWII inpuls. ^ C~)IltillllUlll of managelllenL
opliolls is prt'SClllcd within C~lt;h st~p, :llIowing Ihe
JIOlllCIIWllCf lPIlI:lh' [ht..: trallsililJlllu :1 low illjHll lawll
hy gr;ldll,ll st:I~t:S. This arlid\.' (:llld lhe aCl.olllp:lIlying
LIWII Car~ FiL'ld (;llidt:) c:H1 ;llsn he u-scd as;\ s[;lrljJ1~
I
point ror designing :a bcltcr Clllllll1Ullity ollln:;IL'h'l'r\!-
gram to promote the low input lJWI1,
I
Community benefits of the low,input lawn
Armt from th~ir presumed hendll in r~dlh.:iflg
nutrient and peslicide runoff, low input lawns prm id\.'
other ecollomic henefits (0 a communily-in\"'luJIllg-:
. Reduced summer waler dem;]nJ
. Preservation of landfill capJcity
. Reduced cost for management of public lands.
Some of these benefits have been quantified, others
are a matter of common sense.
I
I
I
Reduced summer water demand
Low input lawns that use waler con5~rv:J.lion tc-ch.
niques, can sharply reduce demands on water fC--
sourL.es during pl.:riods of drought. During a rc-,....t:'nt
California water shortage. it \\ias estimated thaI 30-
50% of all residential wmer use- went ru lanJs....:lping
(Foster 1994). Lawn wJtcring was es(imLll~J Iv a;,:-
count for 60% of summt;r water use in Dalbs. Tcxas
(Jenkins 1994). As a result. mnny WestC"rn munil;'ipali-
ries now offer rate rebmes to homeowne-rs imph:mcnt-
ing walL::r c:fficient lands~:1ping (.'(,cr.is....~lpingl.
Changing w~lcring t~dlnil]U!:s and rcpth..ing W;l-
ler-Jel1l~lnJjl1g plallt~ with Will~r-etTi(lC'nl anu IUL:ally
adapted DnL$ can rcdu1.:e water use by :O-43'.~;' ,Ftl$[a
(994), Even in humid Atlant;l. Georgia, cakubtiulls
showecJ that mainlcnam:c :mJ wah:r.sayings \\'~lLlIJ pal
for thL::' cost of slIch rctfillitting in only llm:c yt:'~lr..;
(Foster 1994). Full cunv~rsion 10 x~ri$C:lrin~ li.c..
growing turf solely with [h~ a\':1il~lhk r~linr;lll supply)
can easily 1,;ut water use by 50.00% (Elster 19'-)--t and
Ellcsfon 1992),
I
.
I
I
I
I
I
Onc of the lirs[ prinL'ipks of x...'riscaping i;-; hl
reJuce turf coverage on the lawn. ^~ ;\ gClh:r;ll ruk.
grass consulTles eight units of watcr. Irl.'cs ,,-.\lll~Ull1':
fj Vl.: unit:.; or wa{e[, and shruhs ;1IHI ~nHlI\d \:pVI.'r;o;
CIIJlSlll1ll.: l"iHlrunits Il!"willl'rt!-\lsl....r Iq,q)..\ ,)11': :l<':l~'
lawll CllnSUlllCS lip In a h~dr llIi1Jilln g~1I1'i11s ,ll" w;lh:f ~I
SlIIIIIJll'l' in SlIlIlC rqdlll1s 01"111.... ~'\lulltr~ ~.kllk ill.'; I 1}ln)
A well,~h;ltkd bwn, hll\\"'\'l'r, uscs lip llIudl 10,"
....IlILll.l' \V;llL'r Oll :l hll[. Sllllll,\ ,I." tl1.m ;11I IlII."lJ;ld,.,1
[;lWlI (Fns[\."r 19\).1).
I
~
. , :: ' ~
,.... ,
I
I
-~-
..
I
Step 1: Lawn conversion
. Table 1. Eight key steps toward a low Input lawn
I
I
Step 2: 5011 building
I
I
I
Step 3: Grass selection
I
.
Step 4: Mowing and thatch
management
I
Step 5: Minimal fertilization
I
I
Step 6: Weed control and
tolerance
I
I
Step 7: Integrated pest
management
I
Step 8: Sensible Irrigation
Convert lawn areas Into groundcover, trees, shrubs, or meildow plantlngs.
For a Jowinput approach. replace the grass underneath mDture trees with
groundcover. For an even lower input approach, examine your lawn for
potential conversion areas and plant groundco.....ers. trees. shrubs, or
perennials in all areas where grass is hard to grow. For the lowest input
approach, use turf only where it is the best plant to fulfill a particular
function, such as providing a children's sports area,
Provide a strong foundation for the lawn. For a low input lawn, get a soil
test to determine the soil's pH and fertility. You may not need to add any
lime or fertilizer to your lawn. For a lower input lawn, test for soil
compaction. Can you sink a screwdriver into the ground without pounding
or is the soil compacted? If the soil is compacted, aerate with a hand corer
or mechanical aerator. For the lowest input lawn, examine the soil's
texture- neither extremely sandy soils nor extremely heavy clay soils make
for good lawns. Next count earthworms-if none can be found in a square
foot of soil, there's a problem. A healthy soil community has over 10 per
square foot. With this basic understanding of soil acidity, fertility, compac.
tion. texture, and earthworms, one can build soil that supports dense,
healthy turf.
Choose the type of grass that will be easIest to grow. For a lowinput lawn,
select hardy grass species adapted your the region's climate. For a lower
input lawn, select named grass varieties to meet your specific needs. For
the lowest input lawn, try the new low-input slow.growing or dwarf grass
mixes.
Mow to the right height at the right time, and recycle clippings. For a low'
input lawn, leave clippings on the lawn to provide nutrients and moisture.
For a lowerinput lawn. set mowing height as high as possible_ Forthe lowest
input lawn, adjust mowing height and frequency during the growing season
and monitor thatch levels.
Give the lawn what It needs but don't overfeed. For a low input lawn.
recycle clippings and (in the right season) apply commercial fertilizer at half
the recommended rate; avoid weed and feed formulations and don't
fertilize if rain is imminent. For a lowerinput lawn. fertilize as above but use
encapsulated nitrogen or an organic product instead-and fertilize only if
soil tests show it's needed. For the lowest input lawn, substitute home
generated compost for commercial organic or encapsulated products.
Establ1sh a realistic tolerance level for weeds and use least toxic control
methods to maintain It. For a low input lawn use least toxic weed control
methods such as: cultivation, solarization, flaming, mowing, or herbicidal
soap. For a loweriflput lawn, grow strong healthy grass and it will crowd out
weeds, For the lowest input lawn, broaden your Qefinition of "lawn- to
include weeds that perform desirable functions.
Establish a realistic tolerance level for pests and use. least toxic control
methods to maintain It. For a low input lawn, use least toxic control
methods such as removing ortrapping pests, introducing biological control
agents, or apply least toxic chemical controls such as insecticidal soaps.
For a lowerinput lawn, grow strong, healthy grass that can resist attack; For
the lowesr input lawn. use cultural controls to prevent infestation, protect
natural predators, and add beneficial soli microbes.
Practice water conserving landscaping techniques. For a low input lawn,
water infrequently, in the early morning, but soak the lawn well. For a lower
Input lawn, water only when the lawn definitely needs it, and calibrate
sprinklers. For the lowest input lown, accept that the grass may not be
green year round,
I
.... .
-)'-.:.
.;:*Wli:.~r.H~r;Ii
I
Pn',\"cnmrioll of laudfill capacity
Yard wastes (dippings, fanen Icavl,;s, trimmings,
imJ uprooted wecch) can m<lkc up 20.25% of house-
hold gnrhagc (Kolh I ~(1), A one <ll:rc lawn generates
;Jlrnost six tons of grass clippings a year, or nearly a
thousand bags worth (Jenkins IY94). Jt is estimated
thnt YJrd waste fills up 10.50% of the nation's landfills
(Jenkins 1994). Although grass clippings decompose
rapidly on the lawn, they often persist for a long time
in landfills. In 19& I the city of PIano, Texas, inSlilu[cd
a program thnt encouraged residents to leave clippings
on home lawns to provide nutrients <lnd moisture,
Knoop and Whitney (1989) reponed the results: The
city saved $60,000 in disposal costs in the tirst year,
even though the number of households served in,
creased 12% over the same period. Residents parlici-
pating in the program saved $22,000 in plastic bag
purchases. In 1989, it was estimated that Fort Worth,
Texas could save about $200,000 in annu<ll disposal
costs if all homeowners stopped bagging grass clip-
pings, By 1991,34 states had enacted restrictions on
yard waste dumping or were debaling such laws (EPA
1991). In Seattle. an education program encouraged
urban citizens 10 compost yard and food wastes. About
5,300 tons of yard waste were removed from disposal
annually, for a net savings of $378.000 (EP A 1991).
Reduced cost for management of public lands
Integrated pest management (a pest control ap~
proach that minimizes pesticide use) is an excellent
investment on public lands. Raup and Smith (1986)
reported that integrated pest management (lPM) re.
duced community p~st management costs by 22%,
even though more pests were controlled under the new
progrnm. The use of expensive chemicals to control
weeds can also be substanti<ll1y reduced, Simply chang-
ing mowing height can, by itself, reduce weed levels by
over 50% (Alliance for the Chesapeake Bay 1994).
Finally, convening lawns to plantings which require
(ess intensive maintenance can also generate savings,
In Maryland, a program to landscape highway inter-
changes allowed the state to reduce mowing by 10%
for a $300,000 savings (Rod bell 1993).
Stees Toward the Low Incut Lawn
""'d' .. '. ":..,.,.- .....-.,-:'...i..'.....-;... .-,'
'Step 1: Lawn ConverslonQh<.(.'.",,;"',;{':.,
'''',>,:' ,;'~\ ,,'_-~: ,', :':~"'-:- . 'i/-_,- '~,:;.~;~"'~i(ii<:,:--:; ""-,', "", ",~-,:
;:";-;(Convert I awn' ;-n~eas;~~nt'o" grouridcaver,- trees,
:slm.b;,"(ir,'mead~w.;'pIfml~ngs~'.F6r a ;[ow~: in"put ap-
.....'''-.: '. ,>.,-,.' ". _ ..; --.:. ,,_~, '. ~,':'. "ll":". ,.,.,." ",.' ,,' '. ".' '-,~',o. . - . ,
proac~, replace the grass underneath'l1ihturetrces \vith
groundc9ver. Foran:e_ven ,[o_Wf:r.,ill~ut.~ppto~ch, ~xam-
ine yo~r bwnfo~ pot~riti~lconvedonare~sand plant
'g~oU"h-dc~)'vers, :i~~_e~;' sh;~b178? peren_riTals1Irl'all' areas
. w ge~e:~: g;,"+~s'il_h'rird ,to :g~'6:w.;_.- For :tBcj;j"wrs t.; input
approacli,'-~se__turf ~nly:whci~j_t",!s'-th~'b€~t plant .to
fulfiila ,particular: function, such "as. jifovidiilg a
. children's' sports area, .
}Jow Mrcc:h 1.L111'f! ,\'houltllJe COf{V('ftl'J?
iJ
I
Mo:-;t lawns have arc~,... that ;lfc not wlted 10 grass
gruwlh, These inchllk frost pockeLs, cxposcJ an.::;\s,
dense Shillk. stCl:p slopes, anu wet. boggy areas, \Vhilc
it i:-; possihle 10 grow grass in any of these areas, highl:r
inpuls of fcrlililer and/or waler arc needed III COmpl:ll-
sate for inhospitahk r.:onditions, In addition. thc:sc
"reas may he difficult to safely muw, Even in moue rate
terrain. lawns <:IUU up lo largc maintenJncc invest-
Ill~nts. The: avcr;Jge: homcowncrspc:nus 40 hours a ycar
simply mowing, so a large lawn may take about as
much time as the traJitional family summer v<lcation
(Schultz I ~H9), Les;:; lawn results in 1C:::lS work. Tltc:
shape of an area should ;)Iso be considered, since small.
edge areas suo:.:h as narrow strips or tight corners can be
difficult to mow, water, and fertilize evenly. For lawns
with the same surface area, water use rises as (he
perimeter increases (Ellefson 1992). Converting lawn
edges to less intensive plantings is a particularly effec~
tive strategy for reducing inputs.
Once a lawn area has been targeted for conversion,
alternative plantings must be selected. Existing
flowerbeds or groupings of trees and shrubs can simply
be expanded. or groundcovers can be used to replace
grass. Another option is to establish plantings that
mimic native plant communities such as forests, mead-
ows, and wetlands, In addition, some areas of the lawn
can be converted into mulched beds.
I
I
I
I
I
I
'.
~Step~:\SOI[BJllding
....:...'. -'",'",".... " --", '- -"
'!,f};tt~1-r,r~\7jdea 's~iong "foundatio~ fo~ the Iawri,;' For a
':;lq'';' iiipudawn; ge'ta soillesl todete'ririine the soil.s pH
~$kc!;fei'\TIitY.,:Wum~y,notfneedlo'addany. lime or
~_",:-"'.ii.>." ./-".y.._____~-'>-'....'..,..., .' . ..'~
'fertilizer.to youdawi1.'For alowednput lawn, test for,:
.}soil compat?tion." Can you sink a screwdriver into the
:'ground:withoutpounding or is the soil compacted? If
'the.:sojLi~,compacted.aerate with a hand corer or
,.m,,"haniC:i.1aerator. FOrthelowesiinput lawn, exam.
"ine'thesoil:s~teXture~~eiiHerextremely sandy. soils
'. nOrex~en1ely heiivy do.r-solIs ritake for good lawns;
Next counreanliwoi-ffi~;"if:l\()ne can be found in a
s<i.iiarefpol of soil. ther.'s. ti problem. A healthy soil
~commiiiiily has over 10 persquarefoot. With this basic
understanding of soil' oddity, feniiity, c~""paction,
tex'lure. and earthworms, one can build soil that sup-
ports dense, healthy, lurf.
I
I
I
I
I
The first step in hllilding gllod soil i:-; to lak~ a ~oil
le~l to dctcflllinc pH and fertiliLy, Soil slwuld be h.:s{cd
~VL'ry threc ycars. wilh cilhl.'r ;lll inl.:xpl.'llsi\'1.' test kil
pUH.:hast;d at ;1 g;irdcll l'l'lHl..'"f or a s.nil s;\lllpk 1(.'::->ll.'d hy !
the local Coopl:ralive E.\tl:llSion ScrviCl: (found 10 1111.'
nlue Pages). ^ suil ll';';[ is I.'ssential [n ~ktcrll1il1l'
whdhcr any fcrtili/.cr or liml.' is actually nl'l'~kd. Til..:
flexl step ill suil builtJillg is 10 h'::SI I'm l,,'llIlIP:U.:llllJ\,
COlllp:1Cliflll keeps ~lir. \V~Hcr alld 11111fll'nl.'i IrOlll
enll'ring the ~oiL <. 'Illllp;l~'t~'d Sllils h;I\'~' kss lllilruhi,d
I
256
:. :...
I
I
"il':T;1mf~I'':'h~r.H':W
~
I
;Ktivily. SlliJ ICl1lpt'ralurc~ also increase. so gr:lss in
~.tll1l]1;lc.:ll.'d soil 111:1)' be 1-1 J dcglYCS !loller (SdlUllz
jl.)X<)}. (jras.'> grown in l"OmpaCll'd soib alsll has shal-
lower roOls. II1nrc (11:11ch, and is gcncr;llly wcaka. To
I.'hc,k forconfpaction. try li1 sink a sl:rcwdrivcrinto the
ground without pounding. If the screwdriver doesn't
c:lsily pCI1l'trilLc the soil, aerate with:\ hand c{)n~ror rent
a mechanical aerator. Sometimes acr..llion is alllhar is
nccJc~ to turn a problem lawn inlo a thriving bwn.
To cnlllplctc the soil :lnalysis. it is necessary 10
uclcrminc soil texture .and count earthworms, Two
simrlc methods are U!'icd La determine texture. In the
first,;1 soil sample is mixed with waler und the propor-
tion of settled soil components (day, s~nd, ctc.) arc
meL1sured. In the second. OJ hnndful of moist .soil is
CLlIlCCled and squeezed through the fist. Gcrshuny
1 (1993) gives instructions for both tests. Neither ex-
tremcly sandy soils nor extremely hcavy cby soils
make for good (3wns, so it may be necessary to :Idd
i organic matter.
Earthworms are only part of lhe critical soil life
community. but they are a good indicator species. If
none are found in a square foot of soil, [his may indicate
o problem with soil texture. A healthy soil community
has over 10 worms per square foot (Gershuny 1993).
\Vilh this basic understanding of soil acidity, fertility,
compaction. texture, and earthworms, 'one can build
soilthar supports dense and healthy turf.
I
I
I
I
I
I
.
I
Step 3: Grass Selection
Choose the type of grass that will be' easiest to: .
grow. For a low input lawn, select hardy grass species.
adapted totheregion'sc1imate.Fora lower input lawn.... ,;;;
select: named:: grass varieties to meet your specific
needs. For~~/owest input i.~'Wn. tiy,~e newlo~-inpu~ i.
slow-growing or dwarf grass mixes~ ,..' -
'<:>i:i'
I
I
Which Grass?
I
All grasses are nO[ created equal. Most of us realize
that bananas trees cannot be grown in the upper Mid.
west because Lhey are not adapted to the wjnterclimatc
or Iheshort growing seasOn. And yet, many homeowners
try 10 grow bluegrass which is best suited to thc cool,
rainy climate of England, Since hluegrass is a shallow.
rooLeu ~nd fast growing grass, it is prone to dry out vcry
quickly in a hot or dry summer. It makes beLter sense
to choose <.l more deeply-rooted grass (such ns tull
fescue) or one that is adapted to drier conLlilions (such
us huffalograss). Gr<.lss seleclj(Jn :.Jlsll needs Lo rcneCI
winter conditions. Warm se<Json grasses such as I.oysi<.l
go dormant (lurn hrown) in cold weather. They come
(Jul of dormancy when the weatber is above 50dcgrccs,
illlU gnJW besl when tIle temperalure js hel ween ~{} ;:Ind
9) degrees. Cool se'-l~mn grasses sucll as fine It.:scucs
will SI;IY grcl'"11 through the winlCf hut gu Jurlllant in Ihe
~lll]HlICr. They gflJW h<..:~;t in fJ{J-75 degree 1L:lllperU-
I
I
I
lures, The [lnited Slates has ht't'!! dividL,t! inlll six
majllr grass growillb l,tllll'S ;IS ....1 II IWII in Figure I, .J'liesl.:'
:I.ones help ~lIidl' the SL:kl,ti(ll1 of Ille gr:lss species lwst
adi:lptcd 10 lllc h)I.:,,1 clill\:lh; (Sl;C Tlhlc 2),
Once a grass species has heen selected. il is impnr-
tant to sc[el'! !he p;lrticular variety that suits the unique
.sile c.::ondilitms and lII<1illtcn;l1lc.::c n.'quircl1lents or the
!:lwn. ^ wide range or cultivars (I.:'ul. il~.'Il.IJ.::?,::.wmn""~~~~11'i\l]l!iIt\U1.~~1:;:;:~W.UIlJ".J:::::::..~
tivatctl v<lrietics) is now avail;lhlL:.
Cullivars have bccn developed for
particular t.:har;H,;Il;ristics such as
Shildc toler;:mce or improved disease
resistance. Rcccnl developments in-
clude slow. growing orcvcn dwarf cultivars and grasses
th:tt require less fertilizer and water. Others havc hcen
dcvcloped with endophylcs, fungi that enable the grass
to resist surface-feeding insects including aphids, cut-
worms, chinch hugs and sod wehwonns. Cultivars are
given names such as AURORA hard fescue or PRAI-
RIE buffalograss, A named cultivar also means lhat the
seed or sod is certified to be true to type. See the Lawn
Care Field guide for a lisl of sources and consult
Cooperative Extension to learn more about locally-
adapted cultivars.
Selection of grasses
should reflect the condition
of the growing zone.
ilr.m\l.;1:;.:.\mlnLF.d~JmJUll~~...:.!~U'i.:.1
_..:c:"<'. 'c, .'.' ..',".,.,'.'.', ,
'sfe~ 4;Mo~inlatlll.Thatch Mariagement
. ".. ,. ,,",:.,,' ,'" " , . , ~, ,
1\1ow to the rigllthcighf,;ai the ~.dght time1 nnd
"'r~cycIe clipping~,..F'or a [o>>,iinputJa\oYn. I,eave c1ip-
;pings on th~)awn to~prov~d~,nulrients;and moisture.
For a lower input lawn, set mowing height as high as
~:\po~sible~ Fqr: the..lowtf!srinput ]awn,,:~~just mowing
h.eight and' frequency, during the growing season and
,moriitor thatch. levels;
,>;;.:
Figure 1.: Grass zones of the U.S. and examples of suitable grasses
(adopted from Bucks 1.99S and Schultz 1.989)
PERENNIAL RYEGRASS
7h~ liy~ IJraB [<HieS olllJlI Ullihuj Slafc.$ ct(.. I. I,~~ ,V()r!lJ~rHf;
2. lilt! Soulll.. 3. !IlIlP!aif1$.: <"\. !II~ :i()uli'lw~sl: and =-. l/1e N,)rf.'oresf
ond Iyplccl l)l"ass sp6ciru suil~d 10 1I>t! dilluetll IOn'H.
~ Repr6st!tnls 11'It!t ~"7ransll"on .~on~-
-;. .;
0-'
..':Jf
";r;F.1(lr{~:J~~1r;:jhw
I
J
I
Table 2: General comparison of grasses
Drought Dfseaso Insect Heat Cold Growth
Typ. Tolerance Resistance Resistance Tolerance Tolerance Rat.
Cool Season Grasses
Kentucky medium medium medium fair excellent medium
bluegrass
Perennial medium fair fair fair good fast
ryegrass
An. good good good poor excellent slow
fescue
Tall good good excellent medium fair fast*
fescue
Warm Season Grasses
Zoysia- excellent good good excellent medium slow
grass
Bermuda excellent fair good excellent poor fast
grass
Centipede poor good good good very poor slow
grass
St. Augustine fair medium medium good very poor fast
grass
Prairie Grass
Buffalo- excellent fair good good good slow
grass
* except for dwarf varieties which are medium to slow-growing
I
I
I
I
I
I
.
I
Figure 2: lower anatomy of the grass plant
(adopted from Schultz 1989)
STOLON
~...
, (
Grasscycling-Lerting Clippings Lie
Grass is unusual in [hat it does not grow from th~ tip
but from the crown, near the soil line (see Figure 2).
Mowing cuts off the oldest part of the plant. thus the
plant can' tolerate repeat~d cropping. Traditional
lawncare practices call for faking and removing clip-
pings. which were thought 10 promote thatch and
disease. In fact. leaving clippings on the lawn is bcneti-
ciat, so long ~lS the Inwn is frequently 1110'W~U. Clip-
pings provide nutrients and moisture. Res~archcrs at
lhe University of Conneclicut Agricultural St:Hion
met..! mdioactive nitrogen to tr:u:k the f:llC of applit:d
nutrients when clippings are recycleu. They founJ that
within a week, most of the nitrogen rmllllhl~ dippings
was incorporaled into new gra::-:s growlh. After tlm:c
yt':lr:->, nearly HO'rr! of the :lpplicd nilfl)gcn had 11('(:11
n:wrnctl to the lawn Ihrntl~h Ihe dipping:, lSdnllll.
Il)~N). ThL; ROlbh: Instilult' Rl.:'sl'an:h Ccma riHll1d
that an a~rc of c1ipril1~s pnwides an an..r:\~t: of 235
pOtllllls or nitrogen ;wd 77 pound_" Ilf plh1sphnrus cad\
YL':lr (M~ycr [905). Clippin~s als"l n.'I\ll"l1 Hwislllf..: In
(hL' gr;v.;s, which helps pnl1Ccl :Igainsl dfl)lI~lll: :md
ellcit/Ill, \~l1ich hdps kCl']1 lllL' snil 11'1)111 ~l'11111':': tllll
acid.
~l.D~
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
.~~III:..'r.lr.1~
Figure 3: Mowing height nffects turf density and root length (adopted from Ferrarn 1.992)
~
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
.
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
Healthy grass
How Low to Mow?
Mowing height is critically important. Traditional
lawncare looks to the close. cropped putting green as
the ideal turf. Unfortunately, close mowing can weaken
the grass and expose the grass crowns to sunburn. It
also exposes the soil to sunlight. which may encourage
weed seeds to germinate. Keeping grass taller will
actually shade out weeds. reducing them by more than
50% (Alliance forthe Chesapeake Bay 1994),Mowing
taller also encourages thicker turf and deep roots (Fig-
ure 3). Many grasses spread through stolons (shoots
that run along the ground and producea newplanlat the
tip) or rhizomes (underground horizontal stems that
produce new plants).
Since the blade tips contain chemicals that inhibit
side shOOlS, mowing can stimulate the growth of sto-
lons or rhizomes. However. turf trials at Purdue Uni.
vcrsity found the spread of grass varies with mowing
height. After 22 weeks, a freshly.sceded lawn that was
mowed (0 3/4 inch height covered 42% of its plot. 1n
conlra!it. a lawn mowed to 3 inches covered 80% orits
plot (Schultz 19H9). Mowing high cncourngcs deep
roots hcc.:ausc with more leaf surf<lcc. the grass plants
;.In; ;lhk tu manufacture Inure foou. Researchers at the
MJchig~m Agricuhur.:!l Station found. closely cropped
grass (I inch mowing hcight) hnJ less rool growth and
...IIIJlll regrowth, as weB as fewer lateral siems (Schultz
J l}X9). T...hk J gives gt.:nera] JlIowing heights for
,hfkrcnl grass srecics.
Mowed too close
Mowing Frequency and Thatch Management
Mowing frequency is also important. Mow too
much or 100 often, and (he grass can be damaged. To
keep the grass healthy. it is recommended that no more
than one-third of the leaf be cut at a
time. While following the "one~third"
rule may mean mowing more fre.
quently, it does not necess.arily mean
spending more lime behind the mower.
This is due to the fact that grass grows
at different rates throughout the year. ;mmm.~\\llJ.JI\lm'l'II\\lh~~
When the grass is growing rapidly. it may be necessary
to mow twice a week. At other times, mowing twice a
month may be sufficient.
Lastly, homeowners should learn how to recognize
and measure thatch; too much thatch (over 1/2 inCh) is
a sign of unhealthy grass, poor maintenance, andJor
compacted soil, Thatch is a brown, straw-colored layer
between the green grass and the soil. A small thOll.:h
layer is actually helpful, it functions like mulch in a
Dower-bed to conserve moisture and block weeds.
When thatch is deep it may keep water. air and nutri-
ents. from rel.lching (he grass roots. Sh..lllow watering,
ovcrlcrtili7.ation and close mowing flll can increasc {he:
thatch lnyer. Practicing low input lawncare and aeral-
ing the soil can prevent exccssive thatch build-up. If
thatch nuild-up has occured and sprinkle compost llver
(he lawn (a practice called top dn:ssing) and acr;111; to
encourage Ihatch decomposilion.
:nttmI'G':'l'.o~A>>.."'\UJJ.l\i\\\I""'\"n'~/.'>:o.,~
Keeping grass tall (3 inches
or higher) can prevent
weed germination and
lead to better root growth.
Watershed Protection Techniques _ Vol. 2, No.1_ Fall 1995
259
I
.~Wll~~r.~~
, . " >.' '.~ ': . :.',1 .~. "'~;: ..-
Step 5: Minimal Fertilization'"".. n ;.< ;.,,;A,,"
I . ,,' , (".:', "F""':"':' "",';,"',";.>''',:!:.'",,
Give the lawn wbatit needsbu't dOll'i overfied."
For a low input lawn,:recycleclippiiigs and (irl thl'righi,
season) apply commercial fertilizer at half the recom'.
mended rate; avoid weed and.fe.cd formulatiori~a'nd
don't. fertilize Jf rairi-i's 'immi'nent.' For a..lower;inp~t::;
lawn, fertilize as above but 'Us'e encapsulated niU'oge'n,
or an orgam.' c product ins.tead--'and fcrtiiizc only if soli.'
tests show.; 'it' s ,needed"F9ritbe; l~l\'est )nputJai\'ii"
substitute' h6rile:generated.' ';QrnposCfoc !comm"feW i'
~~~:~~~,I~__~~:~~2~l~fJ~??~~t~:~f.~~~t~~;~ii;3;:~i,~1:':;.~:;.~.~.;';l~~~!
How Much to Apply?
The Lawn Care Field Guide lists regional resources
[h~t provide recommended fertilization rates for spe-
cific grass species. The ilctual amount
required by a particular lawn may. how.
ever, be much less than the standard
recommended rate. According to the
Northern Virginia Soil and Water Con-
servation District a good rule of thumb
iS!o use halfofwhal you think you need
or half of the manufacturer's recom-
mended applicmion, and never more than 44 Ibs.lacrc
in a single application, This advice recognizes that
grasscycling can easily provide about half the required
nu[ricnrs to the lawn. It also recognizes that it is better
,1"",,~...,....\,ll'BI,"\~...I~\I\;"\\,IIJI))\'''V',~
Organic fertilizers that break
down slowly are an excellent
option for fertilization.
>ld'''''''~'''''I--1..'\Nm,,:,,',"ln'Jl'''l-nl''''V/I''.l\~l'jl'I'~
Table 3: General mowing heights (In inches)
Cool weather Hot Last
Species and/or shade weather mow
Kentucky 2.5 3.0 2.0
bluegrass
PerennIal 1.5 2.5 1.0
ryegrass
Ane 1.5 2.5 1.0
fescue
Buffalo- 1.5 2.5 1.0
grass
Tall 2.5 4.0 2,0
fescue
Zoysia- 0.5 1.a 0.5
grass
Bermuda 0.5 1.0 0.5
grass
Centipede 1.0 2.0 1.0
grass
St. Augustine 2.0 3.0 1.5
grass
to unJcrapply (sinl:c :Idditijlnal rCfliliz~rean always he:
applicJ in the future) than 10 ove:rarrly ;lOtI risk uam-
age to the gfjlSS and runoff or leaching of ~xccss
nutrients. The surest way to apply Ihe right .lmount is
to get <.l soil tcst, and Ihen ft:rtilizc only when the kSI
indiealcs nitrogen is nccucu.
J
I
Whefllo Apply'
Table 4 indjc~te.s thc appropriate season filr fertill.
zation by region and grass type. Cool season grasses
ore best fertilized in the foil. when their rools orc
actively growing and top growth has ceased, Warm
season grasses are best fertilized in several sm~:lit dosc:s
during the summer. (Summer grasses maintain root
growth during wann weather,) Fertilizing in the wrong
season wastes money as much of that fertilizer goes
unused (and increases the risk of stream po(Jutionl.
Moreover. fertilization in the wrong season can either
stimulate the growth of weeds or grass growth ill the
wrong time, For example, spring fertilization of cool
season grasses usually gives broad leaf weeds aheadstart
in competing with grass, while summer fertilization
may weaken the grass and increases waler needs.
I
'1
I
I
I
What 10 apply?
It is best to use an encapsulated formulation or an
organic fertilizer rather than inorg::wic forms to mini-
mize nutrient IC<lching. Encapsulated fertilizers 3re
conted to release nutrients more gradually_ In leaching
column tests. Alva (1992) found tho[ losses of oil three
major nutrients (nitrogen, phosphorus, and potassium)
were strongly reduced w.ith controlled-release fertil-
izer blends. Lawn fonnulations with encapsulated nj.
trogen are often labeled "WIN" for woter insoluble
nitrogen.
Organic fertilizers are also a good choice, as they
break down more slowly than traditional chemical
fertilizers. In addition, composted organ.ic fc:niHzers
contain active microorganisms and humus_ Humus not
only helps build soil texture. but its complex organic
compounds can buffer soil. The Connecticut Agricul-
lUral Experiment Station in New Haven has been
comparing vegetable plots treated with compost ~\g;linst
plots treated with inorg~mic ferliliz.:r. R~sults from the
first 12 years ~how th<lt compost-only lr~~lment had
similar yields and increased organi.: mailer :mu \vat~r
retention (Long 1994). Italy's Soil lvJicfIJbiology C~n.
ler found that eomposting could sharply incrc:lsc desir-
able soil microorganisms (Lnng 1995.1).
f)is~:lse symptoms may also be kSSt"ncd Wlll1 Of-
gank fcrtilil.ers. For eX;lmplt:, rCSL":\n:hefS a[ r>,lidllgan
Stale UnivCfsily found th:H hhJL~grass bwns [ft.,';\Il:J
with organic fertilizL"rs suffl..'n:d less disl..';\sC [h;ln l~lWI1S
(cealed willi t:hcmic.d rerliii.C\:r.s tL1)ng 1I.N5 b).
I
i.
,
I
I
! I
I
I I
I I
I I
I
I I
I
I
I
I
i
I
I
I
I
2GO
; - ;.
I
I .~illi:.'filr.l~
It. Table 4: General regional maintenance calender
1
January- Aprll- July- October-
RegIon March May June August September December
Humid Midwest and Remove dead Start new Northern Do not water in If needed, Cleanup and
Northeast material and lawns, reseed grasses may July: it pro- fertilize after rake-up
winter debris or resod start to go motes grub active top-.
dormant growth and the growth has
spread Df stopped;
disease apply lime.
Start new
lawns, reseed
or resod.
Humid South Resod. res prig, Start new If needed, If needed, If needed, Mow the first
or replug; jf lawns. partial fertiHzer partial fertilizer fertilize winter fall of leaves
needed apply dose. dose. grasses. into the lawn.
lime
Plains Remove dead Mow often, but Northern Do not water in It needed, Lower mower
material and set blades high grasses may July; it pro- fertilize height to 2
winter debris start to go motes grub inches for the
dormant growth and the last cut of the
spread of year
disease
Southwest Plant new If needed, This is the last If needed. Mow high to It needed,
[awns partial fertilizer month lawns partial fertilizer shade out fertilize winter
dose for should be dose for crabgrass grasses
summer planted summer
species species
Northwest Remove dead Remove Monitor weed The grass will Start new If needed,
material and excess thatch and grub levels slow down, so lawns, reseed fertilize
winter debris mow less often or resod
I
I
I
I
1
I
.
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
".:. -,.' ,'" ' , ',-, ';:-:,:;'~_!-:'--
Step 6: WeedC~r~ol,~rd ,ToJerarc~.r~;;;X{}i;~,)
-', -....', -, _;~"_ ,"",' ,-:~ -'_'''''','' ''Y:, , ' "~,Co,',:';" '"-:\,''' ':',"",',__ _,:,---.,,?,_&:,~
Establish a;reallstic to]erailce.leYelfri!:;~~~d.~j
and use least' toxic~ controi'methods'to'ma"iti~iri,rt.'::'
'- ", - -', '- ,,' --".- >..' ':,' . --, :",- ,,',,; "-''':-:, -. , ^ :~,' ,,' ""',;,,:,
For:a low input.-i.awn::1ise.least to~ic:~iw'eed';~6n~?l'
methods.' such 'ils:"cultivation, . solarization; flaming;.
mowing; or herbicidal soap. For a lowerInpui-I3wnl
grow strong healthy graSs and it will crowd out ",,,edi;
For the Iowesl input lawn. broaden your definitio'n: of
"lawn" to in~ludeweeds that perform desirable func.
tions.
What is a Weed?
"Weeds" go in and oul of f3shion. For example,
clover was for many years an ingredient of premium
bwn seed mix[ures. Once a herbicide was available [0
kill clover, however, clover was no longer dcsir<lhle.
Indeed, many oflhe weeds lhat are decried in lawn cart
guides were once the mainstay~ of the kitchen garden.
Everyone has [0 decid_e for themselves which weeds
they can Jive with, and which must be controlled. The
lraditionallawncare approach ofprevenlive pre-emer-
gent weed control, however, is certainly wasteful and
expensive, and may well contribute to the herbicide
levels found in urban streams.
How Many Weeds Make Too Many?
Personal preference will dictate how many weeus
should be tolerated. A lawn that is ] 0% weeds may
appear to he weed-free, and even a lawn with 20%
weeds can provide Lln altraclive:, consistenlly green
appcaranL:c. To gel <.In objeclive measure of how we-cdy
a lawn is, a simple transeCL counL can be performed.
This is done by stretching a hose or string diagonally
across the lawn. While walking along the line, look.ll
the planls in front of your lOcs. For each step, f(~l:ord
weed or grass. Repeal the process on {he other diagonal
(forming an X) and then add up how many grasses
Watershed ProtectIon Techniques . Vol. 2. No.1. Fall 1995
~t)l
.t:T:141Il:.":'\11r,J~
versus weco." wcre found. The ll;st 1..:.ln be rereatcu al
regular intcrv..lb to monitor the effectivcncss of weed
control efforts. Whatcver the sclcl:tcd tolerance level,
it should be realistic. Forcxnmple, zero weed tolerance
is prohably un~1lt:lin;lhlc in the long run.
Whar {{God are wer:Js?
Weeds can tcll a lot about soil conditions. For
example. sedges indicate poorly drained soil. Wild
mustards arc asign of comp<lctcdsoil or soil with.1 hard
cruslo Field peppergrass appears in alkaline soils. Dai.
sies show poor fertility, while lamb's quartcr could
indicate the opposite. Ifcloveris common in your lawn
(and you didn't plant it) it indicatcs that nitrogen levels
may be low. Since the clover fixes nitrogen, it can do
well in areas where the grass may go
hungry. Dandelions are especially
common in lawns with acid surface
soil.
.IH."...,....'\,..".\"""""-;...,U..Jl'.'lJll..I'.,VI,?~1l1lTI!R':'\r""'~
A lawn with
zero weeds is
not attainable.
Composting weeds that have been
removed by hand can take advantage
of desirable weed qualities. Most
weeds help feed the compost pile. but plants like
dandelions provide a special service. Called dynamic
accumulators, they reach deep into the soil for essential
elements. Traditional lawncare often recommends a
feeding of iron to green up the lawn (not surprising
since excess phosphorus can lead to iron deficiency).
Instead. common weeds such as dandelion. chick~
weed, plantain, purslane. and lamb's quarter Clln be
used for iron accumulation.
.1<1.\ .....,o""'\vH,\lU.17t",~I'\I~\Al\I\~~\...VI/l!"~I\.n'" .\,~~
Many weeds also attr3ct beneficial insects if al-
lowed to flower. These insects need pollen or nectar in
addition to the protein they get from consuming pests.
For ex.ample, ladybugs feed on dandelion pollen and
clover. In early spring, when not much is blooming,
dandelions can be a very important food source for
overwintering ladybugs, Predatory WilSpS take ad van.
tage of chickweed, while mustard attracts a variety of
beneficial insects. Thus, weeds,in the lawn can actually
help plants in surrounding vegetable and Hower beds.
Of course, insects aren't the only ones that find
weeds appetizing. Some of the most common weeds
are uncommonly nutritious for people. Before im-
ported greens were available YC:lr-round. these plants
served an important dietary function.
Leasr.roxic \Veed cOlllrol
There are four tct:lmiques 10 least toxic wecd con-
trol: cultivation. solarization, mowing. and hcrbieitbl
soap. Cultivation means physically weeding. :IIHI tl}L'n
.seeding. \Yhile it seems like a lut or work, there :Ire
many devices available (() make weeding t:;lsicr. (n allY
C,lSC, no lIliuter how wc('ds arc n::lllovcLl, the resultill~
han.: spots should always be leveled ;md n:-sl.'edolltl
prevellt weeds i'rom reOl.:curring. Solarizalillll involves
(,;{)vering a wcedy polIch with hlack plastic for ;1 few
days In shade out the weeus while !Laving the ,gr;l:'s
intat:!. If an ;!rea is completely infested. dear plastic
t:an be used 10 "t:Dok"the weeds (and thcir seeds in 111t:
ground) for several weeks. Gra.:>s t::.1n tht:n he re.
cstahli.shed in thc resultant clc<lrcd patch. In addition to
selling mowing height:) to shude uut growing \vl.:t:ds.
mowing lhe tops of tall WCCd5 will wC:lkcn the P];:lIHS
and t:ut down on .:>ecd formation. He-rhicidal sO;lfls t:an
be used to spot trcal weeds, but keep in mind '!ht:y ,Ire-
toxic to all plants they touch. Hcrbir.;idal soaps usu;llly
break down in 48 hours.
.While all four lcasHoxic control techniques ;m:
preferable to blanket herbicide applications, weed pre.
vcntion is an even better option. The best de fensc
against weeds ,is vigorous, heailhy grass. If the
homeowner follows the eightsreps in this article weeds
will not nann ally be a problem,
Finally, a lawn can be more [han a green carpet. It
can include nttractive flowers and liVIng fertiliur
factories. It enn supplement the vegetable harvest and
encourage beneficial insects to take up residence. Such
a lawn is both more interesting and more functional
than the traditional gr;lss monoculture lawn. Some call
it a "wild lawn" or a "flowery meade". \Vhile it is
indeed wilder than a traditional lawn, it is still low
growing and morc fannal in appeJ.f:lI1ce th<ln a mea.dow.
In the wild lawn, many so-called weeds become part of
lhe design.
~tep ::, Integ~ated pe~t management
'Yi(EstribliSiiiirealislidoler.iicelevel for pests and
."use ~~a~t toxic:c~ntrol methods to maintain it. For a
;.low inpu~ hlwn;use least toxic' c'antrol methods such as
removing" 'or trapping' pe'sts. introducing biological
. ' .
cqntr91 agents, or apply leastloxic chemical controls
/'su~.h ;a~ ~p~ecdci~bl so~p~;'fP(~]p.;~er;input la~vn. grow
strong..healthy grasst.halchn.resist attack: For the
Jbl~eS(i~put I~wn, us'cfphysf9'liI-'controls to prevent
'.:... :,...~, '.: . ." .. .,. ,c-" : ,;' .., ': .",-. 'Y'''''.':. <:: .:~,..,:. : . ;
'infestation, protect natm-a!predators, and add benefi.
':~I~f~oi1.'~icrob~s~ :>~t,.~::;;'<'~l'" ,.'l .
What is integrated pest numagemenr?
The best defense against pes[s is hC:llthy. vig\)HllIS
grass. T.lbk: 2 compares m~ljor grass types ft)r insect.
resistance. Cultivars spcci:\l1y dcvdop.::tl for insect or
disease rcsi~tanc~ :1re :l1so :\vaibhlc. \Vhe:n more \.."01\-
trol is nee-ded, Inlegratcd Pest r-..lanagcmell{ lIPM) Lan
cnntrol pests witll i',lr r,.:-wcr pt.'slit:idcs lhan IC1Jili\}11~1I
bWllcan:. The I PM apprnadl L'Ollsist:; (If rour steps 111:11
:m.: tah:n hefore any pt.'SI it.ide is used:
I. An"uro,.c lit'S. i{lt'lItilicllion and monitoring.
To :;cln:1 thL" right l.'\llllrul, i[ i:-i nL.:(~'ss~II'Y to kill'\'.'
IhL" "good" hllgs frnl1l the. ..had" tl1\t.'S. :lIld k;lrtl
their lik.cyL'lcs. h\ft':Cllllpk. irhp:lllt'St: hct.tk:-
.; .~,
..U-'-
I
IJ
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
.;(;f:JlI11:.,r.U;j~
;lppcar in your lawll and you pay aucntion to Ihcir
lHHnbcrs. Y{lU call gel all idea or the ~ize or the
,!:n1h POPUblioll hl come. Porc\Varncd i~ fore-
armed.
2. Evaluation of risk. Unlike lhe "see and spr;lY"
;Ippro;tch, lPM c::t:lolishes action thresholds. For
example, if Japanese Beetle grubs might be a
problem in spring or fall, dig a onc foot square
plot (2-3 inches dccp) :::md simply count the grubs.
lrmorc lhan 6-8 grubs per square foot arc prcst'nt,
L'ontrol may be needed.
3. Physical! cultural controls. For example, adult
hpancse Beetles can easily be h::mdpickcd and
destroyed.
4. Biological controls. Encourage predators and
parasites to take up residence. For example, car-
dinals eat Japanese beelles. If birds are attracted
with a nesting si{e, water, and winter food, they
will be ready for duty when the beetles come.
Beneticial nematodes can be introduced to attJck
[he grubs_
I
I
I
I
I
I
How carl pest damage be prevented?
MOS11awn diseases are caused by fungi, and they
are most likely to occur under particular conditions of
temperarure and humidity. Thus. an important part of
prevention is learning which diseases tend to occur
during which seasons_ Selecting resistant grasses, wa~
termanagement, fertility management, mowingl thatch
management, and aeration are all important in disease
prevention. For example, dull mower blades tend to
tear the grass, and the resultant ragged cut allows
disease organisms easy entry. Having a mixture of
lawn grasses also increases disease resistance,
One method of both prevenling and treating lawn
diseases is to increase the numbers of beneficial soil
microbes. These microbes, which Qut-compete the
disease organisms, are found in aged cornpostpiles and
com posted tree bark. They are also available in some
commercial organic fertilizer products. Least toxic
chemical treatments include plant-derived products
like ncem oil or garlic oil as well as fungicidal soaps.
For a thorough discussion of integrated pest manage-
ment for lawn diseases and pests, consult a reference
such as Olkowski. Daar, and Olkowski (1991),
I
1
I
I
1
I
St~}.8:'~S ~'~~~~~~~~R~~!?mi~~S~~7~lf~~;?}~.:,j-~r~j~~~}{
:' Practlci!,\farer1c6iisffITiii'~niif{dS'8":i'rt' :;'te~l1~':
.' ,..".:".-..,.:.."',.,-.A}..,.........'.,.:.J}'... .g:'.,.,/'l.{',.-<....,p.~_:_,.~.t..--:.".,.J''''t
niques., For albw iripinla.,,:ni..vat~r infre'li1i:hlly;in.tIie:~
earl y ,roOming; iiufiS'oalC;1h~'I~V{ nMeif:iPor)lli loWer);
in pulla;vn!w"rlir'?njy}h~rr\h~li~H::de:fi.ijl'\~1f':io/~i
i l. and~al ibrat,esp.rl oJ{] eisii;(!i,iJi"to/i:eHlii'p~~~Wii~:';
acee 'filial' lfie~' .'1ffi'tP\'a:~'.~;btgtet;l1"""'1~'itrlif~~
p; ,... ,gr .. .,. Y...q . ;.' ". .Y<i,.u;"~""r,,i'.~
.:,: .: ..;r.'c~/; ,~;;ej.'l',::;[~:_ ;:< :;:;~.:~.":.t~;..::'\~..i::.L1~.tiJ:~:..'~j;}~,,Y1~
I
ErririL:nllawn irri~:llioll is nul well lInd~rslood hy
most homeowners. Of[cn, Ihe lawn is ~i"cn a lig.ht
walcring whenever the weather is dry. This appro;\C;h
may do marc harm lb:m good. .since the water never
penetrates ol;low the top few inl:hes or soil. Such
shallow frequent watering leOlJs to shallow rooled.
fragile gr<lss. II is much better to water less often hut
morc deeply_ Also, wl1tcring in the early morning
avoids wasting water Ihrough evaporation.
At the other extreme, SOllle homeowners inst,lil an
nutomalic system nnd water whether {he lawn needs it
or not.lllis ovcrwatering lends tocxccssive (OP growth,
weakens the grass, requires frequent
mowing. and sets the stage for dis-
ease ta flourish. Overwatering alsa
can leach away nitrogen even with.
out overfertilization (see Technical
Nole 56), Inslead, the goal should be
to water only when the lawn really
needs it.lffoatprints can be seen after
walking across the lawn, it may be a signal to water.
Sprinklers should be carefully calibrated in inches of
water per hour to determine the time required to wet the
soil to a depth of six inches. In times of drought, it is
necessary to make up the difference using a general
rule of thumb of one inch of water every 7 to 10 days
(or water until it reaches a desired soil depth of 6-]8
inches). Be sure not to apply water faster than the
ground can absorb it, or runoff may be crealed. Lastly,
water harvesting techniques such as sloping walkways
toward turf areas or extending downspouts into the
ground can be used to promote runon and make more
'efficient use of rainfall.
Finally. it should be kept in mind that it is not
natural for lawns to stay green year-round in most parts
of the country. Since grass grows from the crown
instead of the tip. the planllets (he leaves go dormanl
in order to survive a droughL Though brown..crunchy,
and to an appearances dead,lhe lawn will revive when
cooler temperatures and wetter weatherretufTI_ Drought
should be regarded as a natural seasonal event. like
trees losing leaves in the Fall. Homeowners lhat resist
the urge to water save on water bills and get a welcome
break from mowing chores.
;rn:N\l::i:\ill.l~..:um\!!)~~E;Tl~T"';''''~..1EI.ID
Sensible irrigation rates can
reduce the potential that nitrate
flushes through the soil and
into the groundwater.
~~\ol..llii\,~\,~.,..\l,.~;:';7:\1r\t""'::..'I:JX;J
Helping communities move toward {he low input lawn
The accompanying Lawn Care Field Guide gives
exnmpJes of publications intended to help homeowners
move toward the low input lawn within their region of
the country. The field guide is divided into the six
major grass zones of lhe United Stales. Mi.loy of the
publications included in the guide Iwvc used a variety
of wchniques to educale thl.: public; ahout low inrut
lawn C<lre including: voluntcerOulre~lch progri.lms such
as master g<lrdencrs. newsletters or bill inserts, :mu
demonstration g.lrdcns. An approjJch thaI is bcginnlllg
Watershell Protection Techniques _ Vol. 2, No.1_ fall1S95
263
.~(rr{:i.:.1"il~[;w
I
10 receive more ath.:ntion is working directly with lawn
and garden product retailers 10 provide infomwtion at
the point of s;J.lc.
There arc also .several successful cXi1mplcs of city
Of fedcfi11 agencies that have df.i1matically changed
management practices on public lurf through compre-
hensive worker education, In effect thc::;c <1gencies
g;J,ve <Ill grounds keepers and land mafl<lgers a h<lsi<..:
understanding of Ihe ecologici11 principles which un-
derlay their work. If you are aware of effective lech-
niques for homeowner educi1lion, please share them
with otherTechniqu!sreaders. Such experience will be
important as more and more localities ask individual
citizens to help control nonpoint sources in developed
areas.
References
Alliance for the Chesapeake Bay. 1994. Conservation
Landscaping: A Homeowner's Guide Alliance for
the Chesapeake Bay. 6pp.
Alliance for the Chesapeake Bay. Environmentally-
Sound Landscape Management for the Chesapeake
Bay.7pp.
Alva. A.K. 1992. Differential leaching of nutrients
from soluble vs. controlled release fertilizer. Environ.
Mgmt. 16(6): 769-776,
Bucks, C. 1995. The Right Grass; a Great Lawn
Organic Gardening. 42:5 38,42
EPA 1991. Seattle Tilth Teaches City-Dwellers to
Compost. Reusable News. EPA Office of Solid
Waste and Emergency Response, Fall 1991: 3-4
Ellefson.C., T. Stephens. and D. Welsh I 992,Xeriscape
Gardening. Macmillan. New York. New York 323
pp.
Ferrara, M. 1992. Plant a Low.Maintenance Lawn.
Organic Gardening. 39:246-50
Foster, R.S. IlJ94. Landscaping thOlt Saves Energy ;llld
Dollars. Glohc Pequot Press. Old Soyhrook. CT.
224 pp.
Gcrshuny, G. 1993. Start with (he SoiL Ro<..Ialc Press.
Emmaus. PA. 274 pp.
lenkin::;, V.S. 1994. The Lawn - A History of an
American Obsession. Smilhsonion Institution
Press. Washingtnn, DC 246 pp.
Knoop W. and Whitney R. 19~~ DOIl't B;lg It L1Wll
C<lre Plan. Texas Agricultural Extension Servin:.
Fort WOrlh. TX 52 pp.
Kolb, J.A. IY91 Puget Sound book. Morine Sciene'e
Society of [he Pacific Northwest. Port Townsend.
W A. 47pp.
Long, C. 1995.(a) Compost Tea Confirmed! Organic
Gardening, July-August 1995: 16-17
Long, C. 1995.(b) Small Ground. Organic Gardening.
42:321
Long, C. 1994. Compost Forever! Organic Garden,
ing. 41:7 18
Mattern, V. 1994. Don't Weed 'Em - Eat 'Em.
Organic Gardening. April 1994: 70-74
Meyer. S. 1995. What do You Feed a Hungry Lawn?
Organic Gardening, May-June 1995:46,48 .
Olkowski, W.. S. Daar, and H. Olkowski IY91. Com-
mon-Sense Pest Control. Taunton Press. Taunton.
CT. 715 pp.
Raupp. M.J. and D.C. Smith 1986 Economic and
Environmental Assessment of an Integrated Pest
Management Program forComrnunity.owned Land.
scape Plants. 1. Econ. Emomol. 79: 162~ 165
Rodbell, P.D, 1993. Planting Partnerships Down .he
Road. Urban Forests April-May 19Y3: 18
Schultz. W, 1989. The Chemical-Free LaIVn- The
Newest Varieties and Techniques to Grow Lush.
Hardy Grass. Rodale Press. Emmaus. PA. IY4 pp.
Westbrnok. W. 1994. Grow the Right Grass for Your
Region. Organic Gardening. 41:762-65
I
I
I
I
I
I
.
I
I
I
I
I
I
2G4
I
I
~
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
.
I
I
I
I
I
I
~
I
Appendix J
Pond Design Standards
I
'-
I
1
I
I
I
I
I
.
I
I
I
I
I
I
r
I
Appendix J: Pond Design Standards
Water auality Treatment
Subd. 1. Development that is not tributary to an existing regional treatment pond is required to
employ best management practices to treat storm water discharge.
Pond Construction
Subd. 1. Above Normal Water Elevation
The following criteria will be followed for pond construction above the normal water elevation. For
pond construction below the normal water elevation, refer to Pond Restoration and Nutrient Trapping
Pond Design Standards on the following pages. This area of the pond will more than likely be the
pond area flooded during a storm up to a 100- year duration.
. Maximum 3 Horizontal to 1 Vertical (3H: I V) side slopes.
. Proper access for maintenance, operations, and inspection.
. Emergency overflow above the lOO-year design storm high water elevation.
Subd. 2. Nutrient Trapping Pond Design
Newly constructed detention basins shall provide additional storage volume below the outlet to allow
for reasonable accumulation of sediment. Where sedimentation is considered to be a continuous
problem, access to the area to allow for sediment removal is required.
General Criteria
The following general criteria should be used when designing the sediment pond:
. For basins intended to have permanent water levels, a minimum of 4 feet of standing water (dead
storage depth).
Maximize the separation between inlet points and outlets to prevent short-circuiting of storm
flows.
. A 10:1 slope for the first 10 feet from shore, then 3:1 maximum slope.
. Proper access for maintenance, operations, and inspection.
Size
Nation-wide Urban Runoff Program (NURP) ponds will be designed with standing water or dead
storage for pollutant removal. The total phosphorus removal efficiency for each pond or pond
network must fall in the 65-70 percent range. Storm water treatment can be provided via a single
pond which meets the design and treatment criteria or an onsite network of interconnected ponds. If
an onsite pond network is used, the overall pollutant removal efficiency for the network must meet
the criteria.
I
~
I
I
I
I
I
I
.
I
I
I
I
I
I
~
I
The recommended pond design criteria in order of importance are as follows:
Permanent Pool
(1) The permanent pool is important because it provides storage and treatment of runoff during
and between storm events. Permanent pool volume should be greater than or equal to the
volume of runoff resulting from a 2.5-inch rainstorm under complete watershed
development. This value has been derived from design criteria developed in Nation-wide
Urban Runoff Program (NURP), with a 25 percent increase in volume to allow for roughly
25 years of sediment accumulation. This sizing rule provides a mean hydraulic residence
time of about 15 days.
(2) To promote settling and provide space for sediment accumulation, the mean depth of the
permanent pool (volume/surface area) should be greater than or equal to 4 feet. This
constraint may be infea~ible for small ponds (<approx. 3 acre-feet in volume, see below),
where mean depths of 3-4 feet may be used.
(3) To prevent development of thermal stratification, loss of oxygen and nutrient recycling from
bottom sediments, the maximum depth of permanent pool should be less than or equal to 10
feet.
(4) To promote plug flow behavior, the ratio of maximum length to maximum width (LJWc)
should be greater than or equal to 3. Expected performance is less sensitive to the
length/width ratio than to volume or depth. This constraint may be infeasible for some site
plans or for small ponds.
In such situations, baffles may be installed to isolate the inflow area from the remainder of
the pond. A desirable alternative (for all pond sizes) is to construct tow or more separate
ponds in series with a total volume equal to that specified above Item (1).
(5) For safety purposes and to provide suitable habitat for rooted aquatic plants, the bench width
should be at least 15 feet and the bench slope should not be steeper than 10: I (horizontal
vertical). The bench slope begins at the normal pool elevation and includes lower elevations
until the minimum length criteria is met.
(6) To provide stability, the side slopes below the bench should not be steeper than 3 feet
horizontal to I-foot vertical. Shallower slopes may be appropriate, depending upon soil
engineering properties. Shallower slopes are more feasible for larger ponds.
(7) A fore bay to provide the settlement of sand-sized particles shall be provided at the pond
inlet(s).
I
'-
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
.
I
I
I
I
I
I
~
I
Private Storm Water Facility Maintenance
Subd 1. All private storm water facilities shall be maintained in proper condition consistent with the
performance standards for which they were originally designed. All settled materials from
ponds, sumps, grit chambers, and other devices, including settled solids, shall be removed
and properly disposed of when the pond has lost 50% of its dead storage volume. No private
storm water facilities may be approved unless a maintenance plan is provided that defmes
who will conduct the maintenance, the type of maintenance and the maintenance intervals,
along with a signed agreement regarding the maintenance.
I
'-
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
/11
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
Appendix K
Rainfall Frequency Atlas for the Midwest
I
~
I
I
I
I
I
I
, I
-
,-
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
L J _C:;"
'-~
~. /.:]/ "'.
. -1", r-' 2- . ~~V c?" ',' "" '.' . .
L Yr- '..fi . ~
'~:JJY ~;'-J 1-:1-LF} if'w ..~'i~~ .
" ~): r-r-., C:::IJd as 41-J
~L ~ 4 ......W5 "s1.J '.' .' fT .J
7 r ~ _,9~ \ fT..(~ ; -H--tsr~ 1 '
(-+1 '2 r-r-r3~-i-JTL L~~ . ..' '\1", J-,S'( r-
L~~ I i I ~ ';-.', a 1., 1'+10P/;" . ~
.,\ ~ : I ~ ~ 6 -4 1 rt' / I / -; ~
< ( I _J....-J.,( \ - 2 .,..-r 1 H- ..1 V '. ~
tT7 .1 ~ U - - J1' 2 3r1VZY I-i:
" I a I I 9..l,' ',- I T ~ ~
Ll I / I I -rY1 rl)::.h I 1'l- -;:. It-F15
~r r-'--. ".r./' 4 _5--;r T !-4- ~5
- 1 r,-l r-::-r- I' ~ f-( 4:- 5....t-l .Ie- ~?10 r
^ /'1"<.., -, ~I- aT" ....!t";,
\ ~::-2-{..., r- Sf'Ll' 7 "1,
I jJ 7- U~jJ 9 trI LYi-9J7-l.
J ~ ,I,..r, L - I 7L -~ ,r',-cr'A..y'
_3-~ ~h >-.t: - 91.,1( I ...~-:<.~1" }
- - j- I H - /11" IJ...[,,\ D
- _'-H 1"'1 . < ,''''- r J.' T'i;, -i"\ Y:::. ,!,r
,/ .L4 10..... ~ ~2;:;-'V w,n)
~r-4 1-'" ~ r?1~.J 1'1'''5.. )I.J
- J ~ J. T r~ t-,2-; \.J.< .i:r \ro/
20
Figure 1. Climatic sections tor the Midwest
I
Table 6. Sectional Mean Frequency Owrlbutloos ror Storm Periods or 5 Mlnole1to 10 Days J
and Recurrence Intervals or 2 Months to 100 Years In MlootJOla
I
Sectional code (su figure 1 on page 4)
01 - Northwest 06 . East Central I
02 . North Central 07 - SOUlhwest
03 - Northeast 08 - South Central
, 04 - West Central 09 - Southeast I
05 - Central
. ,
.. ." .. '.
,
RainfaU (inchss for given fI1CUfT9fJC8 interval I
Section Duration 2.monrh 3-month 4-month tHnonlh 9-month I.year 2.year 5-year 1o..Yflar 25-year 5().year I G"O-year
01 1 Q.day 1.53 1.84 2.12 2.50 2.87 3.12 3.83 4.89 5.80 6.97 7.88 8.75 I
01 5-day 1.27 1.53 1.73 2.00 2.30 2.50 3.11 4.11 5.01 6.12 7.05 7.94
01 72-hr 1.11 1.30 1.47 1.70 Ul6 2.13 2.70 3.61 4.43 5.55 6.41 7.27
01 "46-hr 1.03 1.20 1.34 1.55 1.78 1.94 2.42 3.25 4.05 5.13 5.91 6.70
01 24-hr 0.94 1.09 1.20 1.39 1.57 1.71 2.16 2.94 3.69 4,57 5.41 6.11 I
01 16-hr 0.89 1.03 1.13 1.30 1.48 1.61 2.03' 2.76 3.47 4.30 5.09 5.74
01 12-hr 0.82 0.95 1.04 1.21 1.37 1.49 1.88 2.56 3.21 3.sa 4.71 5.32
01 6-hr 0.70 0.62 0.90 1.04 1.18 1.28 1.62 2.20 2.77 3.43 4.06 4.58
01 3-hr 0.60 0.70 0.76 0,68 1.00 1.09 1.38 1.88 2.36 2.92 3.46 3,91 I
01 2-hr 0.54 0,63 0,69 0.80 0.91 0.99 1.25 1.71 2.14 2.65 3.14 3.54
01 1-hr 0,44 0.51 0.56 0.65 0.74 0.80 1.02 1.38 1.73 2.15 2.54 2.87 ~..
01 3Q-min 0.35 0.40 0.44 0,51 0.58 0.63 0.80 1,09 1.37 1.69 2.00 2.26
01 15-min 0.25 0,29 0.32 0.37 0.42 0.46 0.58 0.79 1.00 1.23 1.46 1.65
01 1O-min 0,20 0.23 0.25 0,29 0.33 0.36 0.45 0,62 0.77 0,96 1.14 1.28
1 S.min 0.12 0.13 0,15 0.17 0.19 0.21 0.26 0.35 0.44 0.55 0,65 0.73 -
02 1 Q.day 1.67 2.01 2.32 2.73 3.14 3.41 4.15 5.08 5.61 6.84 7.68 8.52
.02 5-day 1.35 1.61 . 1.82 2.11 2.43 2.64 3.27 4.14 4,84 5.86 6.71 7.57 I
02 72-hr 1.24 1.45 1.64 1.90 2.19 2.38 2.90 3.84 4.31 5.28 6.10 6.96
02 46-hr 1.14 1.33 1.48 1.72 1.98 2.15 2.68 3.38 3.97 4.86 5.62 6.45
02 24-hr 1.07 1.24 1.36 1.57 1.78 1.94 2.41 3.06 3.58 4.39 5.10 5.88
02 lS-hr 1.00 1.16 1.27 1.47 1.67 1.82 2.27 2.88 3.37 4.13 4.79 5.53 I
02 12-hr 0.93 1.08 1.18 1.37 1.55 1.69 2.10 2.68 3.11 3.62 4.44 5.12
02 6-hr 0,80 0.93 1.02 1.18 1.34 1.46 1.81 2.30 2.68 3.29 3,82 4.41
02 3-hr 0,68 0.79 0.87 1.00 1.14 1.24 1.54 1.96 2.29 2.81 3.26 3.76
02 2.hr 0.62 0.72 0.79 0.92 1.04 1.13 1.40 1.77 2.08 2.55 2.96 3.41 I
02 1-hr 0.50 0.58 . 0.64. 0.74 0.84 0.91 1.13 1.44 1.68 2.06 2.40 2.76
02 3u.min 0.40 0.46 0.50 0.58 0.68 0.72 0.89 1.13 1.32 1.62 1.89 2.18
02 1S-.min 0.29 0.33 0.36 0.42 0.46 0.52 0.65 0.83 0.97 1.19 1.38 1.59
02 10-min 0.23 0,26 0.29 0.33 0.38 0.41 0.51 0.84 0,75 0.92 1.07 1.23 I
02 5-min 0,13 0.15 0,16 0.19 0,21 0.23 0.29 0.37 0.43 0.53 0.61 0.71
03 1 D-day 1.66 1.99 2.30 2.70 3.11 3.38 4.04 4.82 5.41 6.28 6,96 7,58
03 5-day 1.36 1,62 1.64 2.13 2.45 2.66 3,24 4.0S 4.69 5,54 6.16 6.57 I
03 72-hr 1.19 1.39 1.57 1.82 2.10 2.28 2,83 3.57 4.16 4.96 5.53 6.09
03 48.hr 1.09 1.28 1.42 1.65 1.90 2.06 2.54 3.21 3,74 4.49 5.06 5,63
03 24.hr 1.05 1.22 1.34 1.55 1.76 1.91 2,31 2.88 3.36 4,08 4.54 5.20
03 16-hr 0,99 1.15 1.26 1.46 1,66 1.80 2,17 2,71 3,16 3.64 4.36 4.69 I
03 12-hr 0,91 1.06 1.16 1.34 1.53 1.66 2.01 2.51 2.92 3.55 4,04 4,52
03 6,hr 0.79 0,92 1,00 1,16 1.32 1.43 i.73 2.16 2.52 3,06 3.48 3.90
03 3,hr 0.67 0,76 0,65 0,99 1.12 1.22 1.48 1.84 2,15 2.61 2.97 3,33
03 2,hr 0,61 0.71 0,76 0,90 1.02 1.11 1,34 1.67 1.95 2,37 2,69 3.02
03 l,hr 0,50 0.58 0,63 0,73 0.83 0,90 1,09 1,35 1.56 1.92 2.18 2.44
03 30.min 0.39 0,45 0,50 0.58 0,65 0.71 0,65 1.07 1,24 1.51 1.72 1.92
lS.min 0,29 0.33 0,36 0.42 0.48 0.52 0,62 0,78 0,91 1.10 1,25 1.40
10-min 0.22 0.26 0,26 0.32 0,37 0.40 0.49 0,60 0.71 0,86 0,97 1,09
S-min 0.13 0,15 0,16 0,19 0,21 0.23 0,26 0,35 0.40 0.49 0,56 0,62
130 I
I
.\t Table 6. Continued
I Rainfall (inchss) for givsn f9CUfTtH1ctJ in/efV8/
Section Duration 2-month 3-monlh 4-monllr 6-month 9-month I.y.st 2.y.st 5-y6at IO-y.st 25-y.st 5O-y.st tOO-year
I 04 lO-day 1.70 2.04 2..35 2.77 3.18 3.46 4.18 5.21 6.08 7.25 8.17 9.07
04 5-OOy 1:45 1.73 1.96 2.27 2.61 2.84 3.38 4.20 4.92 6.03 7.05 8.20
04 72-11r 1.27 .1.49 1.69 1.96 2.25 2.45 2.93 3.62 4.26 5.22 6.11 7.06
04 4i>-hr 1.16 1.38 1.53 1.78 2.04 2.22 2.65 3.28 3.83 4.64 5.38 6.23
I 04 24-hr 1.12 1.30 1.42 1.64 1.87 2.03 2.40 2.95 3.42 4.19 4.83 5.57
04 li>-hr 1.05 1.22 1.34 1.55 1.76 1.91 2.26 2.77 3.21 .3.94 4.54 5.24
04 12-hr 0.97 1.13 1.24 '1.43 1.63 1.77 2.09 2.57 2.98 3.65 4.20 4.85
04 6-hr 0.64 0.97 1.06 1.23 1.40 1.52 I.SO 2.21 2.57 3.14 3.62 4.18
I 04 3-hr 0.71 0.83 0.91 1.05 1.20 1.30 1.54 1.89 2.19 2.68 '3.09 3.56
04 2-hr 0.65 0.76 0.83 0.96 1.09 1.18 1.39 1.71 1.98 2.43 2.SO 3.23
04 1-hr 0.52 0.61 0.66 0.77 0.87 0.95 1.13 1.39 '1.61 1.97 2.27 2.52
04 3Q-min 0.41 0.48 0.52 0.51 0.59 0.75 0.89 1.09 1.27 1.55 1.79 2.06
I 04 15-min . 0.30 0.35 0:38 0.45 0.51 0.55 0.65 O.SO 0.92 1.13 1.30 . 1.50
04 '.1Q..min 0.24 . 0.28 0.30 ,0.35 0.40 0.43 0.50 0.52 0.72 0.88 1.01 1.17
04 5-min . 0.13 0.15 0.17 0.19 0.22 0.24 0.29 0.35 .0.41 0.50 0.58 0.57
I 05 1 D-day .1.75 2.12 2.44 2.87 3.30 3.59 .4.19 5.43 6.24 7.34 8.25 9.23
05 5-OOy 1.45 .1.74 1.97 2.28 2.52 2.85 3.51 4.43 5.18 6.21 '7.09 8.02
05 72-11r 1.31 1.53 1.73 2.01 2.31 2.51 3.05 3.81 4.45 5.40 6.22 7.10
05 48-hr 1.22 1.43 1.59 1.64 2.12 2,30 2.76 3.48 4.05 4.88 5.59 5.37
- 05 24-hr 1.15 1.34 1.47 1.70 1.93 2.10 2.54 3.17 3.68 4.43 5.03 5.72
05 18-hr 1.08 1.25 1.38 1.50 1.81 1.97 2.39 2.98 3.46 4.15 4.73 5.38
05 12-hr 1.01 1.17 1.28 1.48 1.58 1.83 2.21 2.75 3.20 3.85 4.38 4.98
05 &-hr 0.85 1.00 1.10 1.27 1.44 1.57 1.90 2.38 2.75 3.32 3.77 4.29
- - 05 3-hr 0.74 0.85 0.94 1.09 1.23 1.34 1.53 2.03 2.36 2.84 3,22 3.55
05 2,hr 0.57 0.78 0,85 0.99 1.12 1.22 1.47 1.64 2.13 2.57 2.92 3.32
- 05 1-hr 0.54 0.53 0.59 0.80 0,91 0.99 1.19 1.49 1.73 2.08 2.36 2.59
,~ 05 3O-min 0,43 0,50 0.55 0.83 0.72 0.78 0.94 1.17 1.36 1.64 1.86 2.12
I 05 15-min 0.31 0.35 0.40 0,46 0.52 0.57 0.59 0.86 0.99 1.20 1.36 1.54
05 1o-min 0.24 0.28 0.31 0.35 0.40 0.44 0,53 0.57 0.77 0.93 1.06 1.20
05 5-min 0.14 0.15 0.17 0.20 0.23 0.25 0.30 0.38 0.44 0.53 0.60 0.59
I 06 1 D-day 1.83 2.21 2,54 2.99 .3,44 .3.74 4.53 5.51 6.23 7.16 7.90 8.68
06 5-OOy 1.55 1.85 2.09 2.42 2.79 3.03 3.86 4.50 5.15 6.11 6.86 7.59
06 72-hr 1.37 1.61 1.82 2.11 2.43 2.64 3.16 3.85 4.41 5.19 5.85 6.59
06 48-hr 1.28 1.50 1.57 1.94 2.23 2.42 2.89 3.53 4.03 4.74 5.36 5.02
06 24-hr .1.22 1.42 1.55 1.80 2.04. 2.22 2.65 3.23 3.59 4.35 4.88 5.45
I 06 18-hr 1.15 1.34 1.46 1.59 1.92 2.09 2.49 3.04 3.47 4.09 4.59 5.13
06 12-11r 1.06 1.24 1,35 1.55 1.78 1.93 2.31 2.81 3.21 3.78 4.25 4.75
06 6-hr 0.91 1.06 1.15 1.34 1.53 1.66 1.99 2.42 2.77 3.26 3.86 4.10
06 3-hr 0.78 0.91 0.99 1.15 1.31 1.42 1.70 2.07 2.36 2.78 3.12 3.49
I 05 2-hr 0.71 0.83 0.90 1.04 1.19 1.29 1.54 1.87 2.14 2.52 2.83 3.17
05 l-hr 0.57 0.57 0.73 0.84 0.95 1.04 1.25 1.52 1.73 2.04 2.29 2.57
05 SQ-min Q.45 0.52 0.57 0.55 0.75 0.82 0.98 1.20 1.37 1.51 1.81 2.02
06 15-min 0.33 0.38 0.42 0.49 0.55 0.60 0.72 0.87 1.00 1.17 1.32 1.47
I 05 lD-min 0.25 0.30 0.33 0.38 0.43 0.47 0.56 0.58 O.77i 0.91 1.02 1.15
06 5-min 0.15 0.17 0.19 0.22 0.25 0.27 0.32 0.39 0.44 0.52 0.59 0.65
I
I
131
I
Table 6. Concluded J
RalnlilH (Inch..) far glVtln r9CVlTOffoo IrrtllrvaJ I
Section Duration 2-manlJl 3-manlJl 4.month 6-manth 9-mcmth I.yoar 2.year 5-yesr I(}.yo., 2>yo., so.yoar lOO-ysar
07 1 O-<fay 1.88 2.27 2.61 3.07 3.53 3.84 4.51 5.45 6.18 7.25 9.20 9.13 I
07 5-day 1.59 1.90 2.15 2.49 2.86 3.11 3.72 4.53 5.18 8.17 7,03 9,02
07 72-hr 1.44 1.68 1.90 2.21 2.54 2.78 3.24 3.98 4.57 5.50 5.93 7.13
07 48-hr 1.30 1.52 1.69 1.98 2.25 2.45 2.92 3.60 4.18 5.04 5.74 6.48 I
07 24-hr 1.24 1.45 1.58 1.83 2.08 2.26 2.69 3.32 3.81 4.55 5.20 5.94
07 18-hr 1.17 1.36 1.48 1.72 1.95 2.12 2.53 3.12 3.58 4.28 4.89 5.58
07 12-hr 1.08 1.28 1.38 1.60 1.81 1.97 2.34 2.89 ' 3.31 3.98 4.52 5.17
07 6-hr 0.93 1.08 1.18 1.37 1.55 1.69 2.02 2.49 2.86 3.41 3.90 4.45 I
07 3-hr 0.80 0.93 1.01 1.17 1.33 1.45 1.72 2.12 2.44 2.91 3.33 3.80
07 2-hr 0.72 0.84 0.92 1.06 1.21 1.31 1.56 1.93 2.21 2.64 3,02 3.45
07 l-11r 0.58 0.66 0.74 0,86 0.98 1.08 1.26 1.50 1.79 2.14 2.44 2.79
07 3Q-min 0.46 0.54 0.59 0.66 0.77 0.84 1.00 1.23 1.41 1.58 1.92 2.20
07 15-min 0.34 0.39 0.43 0.49 0,56 0,61 0.73 0.90 1.03 1.23 1.40 1.60 I
07 lll-min 0.26 0.30 0.33 ; 0.38 0.43 0.47 0.56 0.70 0.80 0.96 1.09 1.25
07 ,~5-min 0.15 0.17 0.19 '.0.22 . 0.25 0.27 0.32 0.40 0.46 0.55 0.62 0.71
08 lCl-day 1.86 2.24 2.56 3,04 3.50 3.80 4.59. 5.67 6.52 7.80 8.47 9.16 I
08 5-day 1.55 1.85 '2.09 :2.42 2.79 3.03 3.71 4.66 5.43 6.38 7.72 8.43
06 72-11r 1.37 1.60 1.81 2.10 2.42 2.63 3.22 4.06 4.77 5.67 6,43 7.06
08 48-hr 1.27 1.49 1.66 1.92 2.21 2.40 2.93 3.68 4.30 5.14 5.82 6.38
08 24-hr -
1.20 1.40 1.53 1.77 2.01 2.19 2.68 3.36 3.95 4.66 5.28 5.85
08 18-hr .1.13 1.32 1.44 1.67 1.90 2.06 2.52 3.18 3.71 4.38 4.96 5.50
06 12-hr 1.05 1.22 1.34 1.55 1.76 1.91 2,33 2.94 3.44 4.05 4.59 5.09
06 B-hr 0,90 1.05 1.15 1.33 1.51 1.64 2.01 2.54 2.96 3.49 3.96 4.39
08 3-hr 0,77 2.53 3.74 - -
0.90 0,96 1.13 1.29 1.40 1.72 2.16 2.96 3.38
'8 2-hr 0.70 0.81 0.69 1.03 1.17 1.27 1.55 1.96 2.29 2.70 3.06 3.39
I 1-11r 0.57 0.66 0.72 0.83 0,95 1.03 1.26 1.59 1,86 2.19 2.45 2.75 -
J8 3Q...min 0.45 0.52 0.57 0.66 0.75 .0.81 0.99 1.25 1.46 1.72 1.95 2.16 -
06 15-min 0.32 0.36 0.41 0.48 0.54 0.59 0.72 0.91 1.07 1.26 1.43 1.58 I
08 lO--min 0.25 0.29 0.32 0.37 0.42 0.46 0.56 0.71 0.63 0.96 1.11 1.23
06 5-min 0.14 0.17 0.18 0.21 0.24 0.26 0.32 0.41 0.47 0.56 0.63 . 0.70
09 .1Cl-day 1.69 2.28 2.62 3.09 3.55 3.66 4.81 5.93 6.72 7.70 8.42 .9.10 I
09 5-day 1.63 1.95 2.20 2.55 2.93 '3.19 3.95 4.89 '5.55 6.36 7.01 7.63
09 72-11r 1.42 1.67 1.86 2.18 2.51 2.73 3.48 4.35 4.97 5.74 6.30 6.83
09 48-hr 1.33 1.56 1.73 2.01 2.31 2.51 3.15 3.94 4.52 5.24 5.81 6.43
09 24-hr 1.24 1.45 1.56 1.83 2.06 2.26 2.94 3.55 4.08 4.75 5.25 5.76 I
09 18-hr 1.17 1.36 1.46 1.72 1.95 2.12 2.67 3.34 3.84 4.47 4.93 5.41
09 12-11r 1.08 1.26 1.38 1.60 1.81 1.97 2.47 3.09 3.55 4.13 4.57 5.01
09 6-11r 0.93 1.06 1.16 1.37 1.55 1.69 2.13 2.66 3.06 3.66 3.94 4.32
09 3-hr 0.80 0.93 1.01 1.17 1.33 1.45 1.82 2.27 2.61 3.04 3.36 3.69 I
09 2.hr 0.72 0.84 0.92 1.06 1.21 1.31 1.65 2.06 2.37 2.75 3.04 3.34
09 1-hr 0.58 0.68 0.74 0.86 0.98 1.06 1.33 1.67 1.92 2.23 2.47 2.71
09 30-min 0.46 0.54 0.59 0.68 0.77 0.84 1.05 1.31 1.51 1.76 1.94 2.13
09 15-min 0.34 0.39 0.43 0.49 0.56 0.61 0.77 0.96 1.10 1.28 1.42 1.66 I
09 lQ...min 0.26 0.30 0,33 0.38 0.43 0.47 0.60 0.75 0.86 1.00 1.10 1.21
09 5-min 0.15 0.17 0.19 0.22 0.25 0.27 0.34 0.43 0.49 0.57 0.63 0.69
I
132
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
..........
---
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
r
I
Appendix L
City of Arden Hills Agreements with RCWD and Neighboring Communities
I
~
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
.
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
Appendix M
Example Agreement (regarding Stormwater Management Practices
Water Quality Treatment Pond)
1
~
I
I
I
I
I
I
.
I
1
I
I
I
I
I
EXAMPLE AGREEMENT
(REGARDING STORM WATER MANAGEMENT PRACTICES
WATER QUALITY TREATMENT POND)
I. THIS AGREEMENT made this day of _, 200_ by and among the City of
Arden Hills, Minnesota (hereinafter referred to as the "City") and, , a
corporation (hereinafter referred to as " ") with
reference to the following facts and circumstances:
A. (*)
situated in the City of
(Le~a])
(*) CAPS
(hereinafter referred to as the "Subject Property").
is the fee owner of certain real property
, legally described as follows:
(
)
B. As a condition of its approval of the development for the Subject Property, the City of Arden
Hills has required that the parties hereto enter into an agreement, which makes provision for
the maintenance of the Storm Water Management Practice located within the boundaries of
the Subject Property as the same is described and depicted in those certain construction plans
drawn by , approved by the City and constructed by
. The Storm Water Management Practice is located in the
platted drainage and utility easement in
C. The parties hereto desire to set forth their agreement with respect to the maintenance of the
Storm Water Management Practice and the costs of such maintenance.
II. NOW THEREFORE, in consideration of the foregoing facts and circumstances, and for other
good and valuable consideration, the receipt and sufficiency of which is hereby acknowledged, the
parties hereto hereby agree as follows:
A. For the purposes of this Agreement, maintenance of the Storm Water Management Practice
shall mean the annual inspection and certification by a qualified individual that the pond i,
functioning in accordance with the approved plans and, if necessary, the periodic dredging of
the silt buildup in the Storm Water Management Practice as necessary to maintain function,
a.<> established for the Storm Water Management Practice in the construction plans and to
maintain the proper operation of the treatment function of the Storm Water Management
Practice.
B. (*) shall be solely responsible for
the maintenance of the Storm Water Management Practice, and shall bear all costs of such
maintenance, until such time as (hereinafter referred to as the
"Association") is activated pursuant to Article Section
, of the Declaration of Covenants for
whereupon the Association shall bear the sole responsibility for such maintenance and shall
bear all costs of such maintenance. If (*) , or after its incorporation,
I
~
I
I
I
I
1
I
I
.
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
the Association, does not undertake the necessary maintenance within 30 days of notification
by the City, or within 30 days provide the City with a schedule for undertaking the necessary
maintenance, the City may undertake such maintenance, and the costs reasonably incurred by
the City for performing such maintenance shall be reimbursed to the City within 30 days by
the party responsible for such maintenance and, if the responsible party does not timely
reimburse the City, then the City may recover its costs by levying a special assessment
against all single family house lots in the Subject Property, each lot to bear an equal share.
c. (*) , as present owner of the Subject Property, for
itself and respective successors and assigns, hereby waives any statutory right which it may
have to contest any such assessment by the City of its maintenance costs on the basis of the
benefit to portions ofthe Subject Property.
D. Notwithstanding anything contained in this Agreement to the contrary, in the event the city
shall establish a policy for maintenance by the City of Storm Water Management Practices
located elsewhere in the City of Arden Hills, Minnesota under which policy the costs of such
maintenance are to be paid either out of general City revenues or by collection of utility or
service fees or charges, then any owner of any portion of the Subject Property shall be
entitled to petition the City for the inclusion of the Storm Water Management Practice under
such maintenance program, and the City shall consent to such request and thereupon
authorize the termination of this Agreement. The recording of a certified copy of the
Resolution of the City Council of the City which sets forth the consent and authorization
described in the foregoing sentence shall serve the terminate this Agreement, without further
action on the part of any party hereto.
E. The terms and conditions of this Agreement shall be binding upon, and shall insure to the
benefit of, the parties hereto and their respective successors and assigns.
III. IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the parties hereto have caused this document to be executed as of
the day and year first above written.
THIS INSTRUMENT DRAFTED BY
.
.
.
CITY OF ARDEN HILLS, MINNESOTA
SPECIAL CITY COUNCIL MEETING, PAVEMENT MAGEMENT MEETING
AUGUST 13,2001
6:30 P.M. - ARDEN HILLS CITY COUNCIL CHAMBERS
CALL TO ORDER/ROLL CALL
Pursuant to due call and notice thereof, Acting Mayor David Grant called to order the
special City Council meeting at 6:37 p.m.
Present:
Acting Mayor David Grant, Councilmembers Beverly Aplikowski, Gregg
Larson, Lois Rem, City Administrator Joe Lynch, City Engineer Greg
Brown, BRW, and Recording Secretary, Nancy CZ1l:jkowski.
Absent:
Mayor Dennis Probst.
DISCUSSION
Mr. Lynch explained the handouts, which were maps of the street ratings, the types of streets,
and whether or not the streets had curbs. He stated it appeared that the streets in highest distress
were located in the southeast. He noted the northeast segment streets were in the best shape. He
added he was surprised that most of the curbing was bituminous and that there was quite a bit of
no curb streets. He stated the issue was how to determine which streets to improve and what do
they do about agreed upon street standards.
Councilmember Larson stated it would be valuable to see whether it was concrete curb,
bituminous curb or no curb. Councilmember Rem concurred.
Councilmember Grant stated the language implies that striping should exist on city streets. He
noted he did not want to see the city's streets striped. Councilmember Larson concurred. He
noted he thought striping was for collector streets and not typical streets.
Councilmember Grant stated how they defined collector streets was an important issue. He
notcd a road could be designated MSA and not be a collector. He added this should not be an
arbitrary distinction. Councilmember Larson concurred.
Councilmember Rem stated they should discuss how they deal with roads based on their existing
width.
Councilmember Grant stated if a road had existing curb and gutter they would not remove it to
widen or narrow an existing road unless it was substandard.
Councilmember Larson stated if a street were wider than the standard, they would not make it
narrower.
Councilmember Aplikowski stated her concerns about narrowing the intersections of any city
streets. Councilmember Larson concurred it would not always be appropriate.
.
.
.
ARDEN HILLS CITY COUNCIL ~ AUGUST 13, 2001
2
Councilmember Grant stated the public works staff would like a b style curb so they would have
a straight edge to follow and on cul-de-sacs they would probably prefer the lower curb. He noted
they should be asked for their opinions. He added public works should not drive the decisions,
but the Council should be aware of that information when they make the decision.
RECESS
At 7:31 p.m., Acting Mayor Grant recessed the meeting and reconvened the regular
meeting in the City Hall Council Chambers.
r .
,I. ,Ii d f}-
/I :'(\~ , :. /."),/1
,,/ lL'I:'01 )h{,,,,,
David Grant
Acting Mayor
NOTICE OF MEETINGS
The next Pavement Management Meeting will be held Monday, August 27, 2001 at 6:30 p.m. at
the Arden Hills Council chambers.