09-25-2010 Council Work Session Packet

Home Browse Search

SWMP Completion September 10,2010 Page 2 7. Section 7 provides technical background for designing surface water management systems in Orono. 8. Section 8lists the goals and policies identified to address surface water management needs in the City. 9. Section 9 summarizes capital projects currently planned with known funding sources to implement the goals and policies listed in Section 8, as well as potential activities and funding mechanisms including the MCWDs modeling program, Orono's MS4 permits, and an identification of potential issues and corrective actions. The capital improvement program plan items institute a series of projects over the next 10 years to reduce Orono's phosphorus discharge. 10. Section 10 outlines the continued administration of this plan with respect to plan updates and amendments, as well as annual reporting requirements to Minnehaha Creek Watershed (MCWD). Items for Discussion Please particularly read through Chapter 9 of the SWMP, as it contains the implementation elements of the Plan. In order to meet MCWD requirements for phosphorus removal, a number of stormwater system improvement projects have been identified and placed in a 10-year CIP that is fairly ambitious, but necessary given that many of these projects were included in the 2002 SWMP CIP but never were accomplished, due to a variety of factors. Orono's Stormwater Utility generates approximately $135,000 per year, while the proposed CIP has an annual cost of $250,000-300,000. Options for making up this deficit may include limited increases to the stormwater utility rates, partnering with MCWD or others, and a more aggressive approach to pursuit of grant money. Additionally, note that while MCWD currently administers the Wetland Conservation Act (WCA) for Orono, proposed Water Resources Management Policy 8.Sa on page 90 of the SWMP indicates Orono will within the next 12 months consider the option of assuming administration of WCA responsibilities to ensure no net loss of wetland functions and values. This was discussed by Council in August 2009 (see Attachment E) and will be followed up by staff. Staff and Bonestroo have met with MCWD staff to discuss the issues noted in the comment letter of August 17 (Attachment B) and most of those issues are being addressed by providing additional information, text or maps. However, perhaps the most difficult issue to address is meeting the numerical phosphorus reduction goals established for Orono by MCWD. While the draft Phosphorus Reduction Plan (Attachment F) meets or exceeds the goals for the Long Lake Creek and Painters Creek subwatersheds, meeting the goals for the Lake Minnetonka Direct subwatershed is more difficult. This is due to most of that area being developed with relatively small lots and having short direct runoff patterns, limiting the opportunities for projects that are cost-effective in terms of pounds of phosphorus reduced per dollar expended. Because both the Long Lake Creek and Painters Creek subwatersheds ultimately drain to Lake Minnetonka, we have requested MCWD consideration in allowing credit toward Lake Minnetonka Direct for the excess reductions proposed for these two subwatersheds.