2001-01-04_AgendaPacket - Laserfiche WebLink

Home

One of the weaknesses in the plan is that the plan does not specifically address through identified projects, the need o retrofit and re-design the stormwater systems in the fully developed areas. Pretreatment of stormwater runoff prior to discharging to major water resources and valued wetlands is critical to maintaining the integrity of those valued water resources. This plan has the opportunity and responsibility to address this issue and identify areas where retrofitting can occur in the more developed areas. Page 4-5 states that the leaf compost facility in the Lake Owasso watershed may be a source of phosphorus to the lake and that the city of Roseville should address this issue in their local water plan. Council staff is highly supportive of having either the GLWMO provide water quality treatment at this facility or having the GLWMO requiring the city to provide some treatment prior to discharge offsite and ultimately to Lake Owasso. Page 4-19 discusses the need for more effective erosion and sediment control programs as part of Roseville's and Shoreview's local water plans. The GLWMO plan should provide adequate direction to the two cities to ensure both cities adopt consistent standards. Page 4-22 discusses the current wetland classification systems used by Shoreview and Roseville. Wetland regulations have changed since the time the city plans were developed and adopted. The plan indicates that the cities are responsible for any wetland plans and assessments. The GLWMO needs to work closely with the two cities to identify watershed specific guidelines for the cities to use in revising their wetland classification systems Goals and Policies The plan has 7 general goals: 1. Manage regional water quality issues, with emphasis on the recreational lakes in the watershed. 2. Manage intercommunity stormwater runoff, flooding and other water quantity issues. 3. Keep regulations at the local level -the GLWMO will not administer a permit program. 4. Develop the policies to be implemented by the cities that are needed to protect GLWMO's water resources. 5. Reduce, to the greatest practical extent, the public capital expenditures necessary to control excessive volumes and rates of stormwater runoff while pursuing the goals and policies of the plan. 6. Provide a mechanism to assess performance of the GLWMO and the member cities toward achieving the goals stated in the watershed plan. 7. Provide member cities with useful information about the GLWMO, its activities, and water resource management. The plan then includes further goals and policies for the water quality of lakes and ponds; stormwater runoff quality, rates and volumes; erosion and sediment control; wetland management; recreation, habitat, and. shoreland management; education and public involvement; and groundwater. Overall the goals are good. The plan suggests that the GLWMO expects the cities to implement most of the policies and goals at a local level. One of the strengths of the plan is inclusion of measurable water quality standards for lakes and ponds. To accomplish the water quality goal for lakes and ponds, the GLWMO established a new classification system for the waterbodies and determined the respective roles of the GLWMO and the cities in water quality management. The lake and pond classification system does a good job of establishing quantifiable goals that can be measured. The plan sets the framework to have measurable goals such as a goal for total phosphorus less than 45 ppb and Carlson TSI index no greater than 55 for Category 1 waterbodies. The GLWMO will be responsible for monitoring, tracking and implementing lake management actions as needed for all inter-community water resources. The GLWMO will still need to monitor the city's role in the managing the remaining water resources.