HomeMy WebLinkAbout87-013
~
,
.
.
STATE OF MINNESOTA
COUNTY OF RAMSEY
CITY OF ARDEN HILLS
RESOLUTION NO. 87-13
RESOLUTION CONCERNING RICE CREEK WATERSHED DISTRICT
WATER RESOURCES MANAGEMENT PLAN
WHEREAS, the Rice Creek Watershed District has prepared a water
resources management plan as required by Chapter 509 of the Laws of Minnesota
of 1982; and
WHEREAS, as part of said law such plans are to be sent to any
city within the district for comment as part of the overall review process; and
WHEREAS, such planning needs to be undertaken in a practical,
cost effective, and achievable manner; and
WHEREAS, the City of Arden Hills has reviewed this plan and finds
it to be generally acceptable in many aspects with the exception that there are
areas of potentially very serious impact on the city. Said area being set
forth in Exhibit A entitled RICE CREEK WATERSHED WATER RESOURCES MANAGEMENT
PLAN, CITY COMMENTS.
THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED, that the City of Arden Hills hereby
advises the Rice Creek Watershed District that it finds the Water Resource
Management Plan to be generally acceptable with the exception of several areas
of potentially very serious impact as follows and more explicitedly detailed in
Exhibit A:
1.
Water quantity implementation approach.
2. Water quality protection approach.
3. Overall management of the Rice Creek trunk itself.
4. Duplication of effort with other agencies.
5. High implementation cost.
6. Ditch modification restrictions.
BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED, that the Clerk Administrator of the City
of Arden Hills is hereby instructed to send this resolution expressing the
City's serious concern to the Rice Creek Watershed District before March 1,
1987.
1987.
Passed by the Arden Hills Council this 23rd day of February,
;;:::
ll../ ,4..p:,~'f./,,~'7t"dv!r~.J
Robert L. Woodburn, Mayor
. (SEAL)
(
atricia J. M rison
Clerk Admin1strator
.
EXHIBIT A
RICE CREEK WATERSHED WATER RESOURCES KAHAGEMENT PLAN
CIn COMMENTS
1. ITEM
Management implementation strategy concerning water quantity (Page V-15l.
PROBLEM
The Management Plan states -The local water management plan must
demonstrate that for a 100-year return frequency rainfall event, the rate
of storm water runoff leaving the municipality will not exceed the rate
storm water runoff leaves the municipality in its undeveloped condition.-
This strategy creates a much higher goal than the current strategy of
required new development to have storm water runoff rates equal to the
existing condition.
Developed municipalities will have difficulty attaining this goal in a cost
effective and environmentally sound manner. Municipalities will need to
purchase additional land for ponding.
.
Trying to reduce outflow rates from a muncipality is a laudable idea, but it
is too idealistic.
CIn POSITION
The management implementation strategy concerning water quantity should
require cities to maintain the existing storm water runoff rates as
established per the TR-20 model results referred to on Page 111-26 of the
Management Plan. New developments and redevelopments shall have storm
water runoff rates equal to the existing condition. If opportunities are
available, redevelopments shall have storm water runoff rates equal to
undeveloped condition.
The problem
concisely.
problems .
statement in the plan should be more detailed and stated more
The plan shall then recommend a solution to the identified
2. ITEM
Water quality protection and pretreatment approach (Page V-1Bl.
PROBLEM
.
Water quality control and/or pretreatment objectives are too stringent. It
will be difficult to achieve from an effective environmentally and fiscally
sound approach.
.
Quality control and/or pretreatment before all protected waters and
wetlands is impractical. Present RCliD rules permit use of public wetlands
as a method of pretreatment.
CIn POSITION
The RCWD plan should identify and prioritize which of the water resources
are of greater public benefit. Sometimes it may be necessary to permit
trade-offs to provide protection of a greater public benefit. Use of an
existing wetland may be the most practical and cost effective method of
pretreatment to protect the more significant resource a of downstream lake.
The plan must be flexible to recognize and permit quality control and/or
pretreatment methods which protect the most critical resource.
3. ITEM
Overall management strategy of the Rice Creek trunk storm sewer system
(Page V-5).
PROBLEM
.
The plan as submitted does not identify existing district trunk problems
nor establish a program or commitment by the Rice Creek Watershed District
governors to correct and manage the problems.
CIn POSITION
a. The Rice Creek Watershed District Management Plan should use the TR-20
computer run on the existing development and projected year 2,000 water
quantity conditions. Any development or redevelopment within the
district would then be required to satisfy the existing condition in
water quantity design.
b. The plan should then specifically address the identified flooding,
erosion, and quantity problems providing the time frame for identifying
the most economical and cost effective solutions.
c. The Rice Creek Watershed Management Plan must then identify the
trunk system within the district (recommended outline attached).
This trunk system then becomes the specific responsibility of the Rice
Creek Watershed Board of Governors for correcting and managing in the
plan. Provisions should be incorporated that provides for the district
governors to coordinate and facilitate maintenance, repair, and
construction of improvements for non-mainline trunk projects involving
two or more muncipalities, if requested.
4.
ITEM
.
Responsibilities of regulatory agencies and how these agencies will
interface with Rice Creek Watershed District (Page V-46).
.'
.
.
.
PROBLEM
Proposed Rice Creek Watershed Plan and proposed Plan Implementation Budget
aay reflect duplication of activities in areas relating to regulation,
planning, enforcement, and oapital expentitures of ourrent agency programs
inCluding the following agencies and ourrent program.
a. DNR--wetland management, shoreland protection, flood plain management,
ground water protection and fisheries management.
b. PCA--septic system regulation.
o. SWCD--sediment/erosion oontrol.
d. LCD (Lake Conservation District)--water quality monitoring, lake
improvements.
e. HIlD/water--potable water supply lIBIlagement autborities.
CITY POSITION
RCWD Board should reevaluate and clearly define its role relating to water
quality/quantity matters to insure that RCWD programs and resultant
expenditures do not duplicate current activities of other agencies more
qualified to deal with specific water quantity or quality issues. Final
RCWD Plan should contain an Implementation Plan Budget and list of
Management Strategies that have been carefully reviewed by each agency to
insure current programs and expenditures are not duplicated. When local
units of government must work directly with affected agencies to meet
atatutory requirements or atandards, RCWD need not he involved in review
capacity.
5.
ITEM
High expenses to implement the plan (Page V-59 and VII-5).
PROBLEM
The plan includes levels of expenditures for the period of 19B6 through
1990 which are too high for the benefit received and do not adequately
take into account the impact these increased costs will have on the
property owners. The plan is not well focused to solve identified
criticall problems and prioritize the available resources to address such
problems. City oosts to complete the local plan by the January 1, 1990
deadline will be unnecessarily high due to the short time available.
CITY POSITION
The level of expenditures should be reduced. The schedule to achieve the
goals ahould be extended to better match the ability of the property
owners to pay for the work and to reflect a more realistic timetable for
accomplishment after the plan is finally approved. The expenditures
should give priority to and better focus on the serious problems of the
watershed. The deadline for the local plan to be completed should be
changed to three years after the overall Water Resource Management Plan is
approved by the State Water Resources Board and oopies given to the city.
, .
.
.
.
6.
ITEM
Public ditches preserved as open channels (Page V-22).
PROBLEM
Open channels are desirable from the standpoint of vater storage,
groundwater discharge, and treatment. However, in some unchanged areas,
retaining ditches as open channels will be impractical and uneconomical
for development and detremental to tbe health safety and welfare of the
community.
CITY POSITION
That the Rice Creek Watershed District plan provide for the replacement of
open channel ditches with enclosed drainage system where conditions
warrant.