Laserfiche WebLink
. It is the City's intent to contribute <br /> the dollar amount identified in Table 9.2 and receive the reductions in Table 9.3; `����F��� ��`� <br /> .The City understands that the MCWD Subwatershed <br /> Plans assign separate phosphorus load reduction goals for the MCWD and the LGUs and that. <br /> where specific projects and associated phosphorus reductions are identified as part of the MCWD's <br /> contribution toward meeting a reduction goal, additional phosphorus reductions would need to be <br /> achieved in order for the City to receive credits. <br /> It is the intent of the City to meet the phosphorus reduction requirements; however, this likely <br /> will not be feasible without partnering with the watershed on one or more projects. If the City is <br /> unable to meet the phosphorus reduction requirements with these two projects the City will <br /> commit to working with MCWD on other potential projects to ultimately meet the phosphorus <br /> reduction requirements or identify other projects the City could do. <br /> Under CIP-11, Orono proposes to contribute to a MCWD identified project from the Painters <br /> Creek Subwatershed Plan —the South Katrina Marsh Improvements.The City proposes to <br /> contribute $100,000 to this project in exchange for 50 Ib/yr phosphorus reduction credit for the <br /> contribution. <br /> . The Painters Creek Subwatershed Plan identifies a phos�horus reduction <br /> goal of 384 Ib/yr,therefore, the City would be able to contribute to and receive credit for any <br /> reductions beyond that amount. <br /> CIP-12, the Long Lake Creek Corridor improvements, represents a contribution to a suite of <br /> watershed identified projects from the Long Lake Creek Subwatershed Plan. These potential <br /> projects occur along the creek corridor from Long Lake south to Tanager Lake and include <br /> wetland and stream restorations and the creation of treatment ponds. Orono proposes <br /> contributing approximately $60,000 for at least 20 Ib/year phosphorus credit.This contribution <br /> could go toward either the restoration activities or toward phosphorus reductions achieved by <br /> the two proposed treatment ponds, LLC-48 or LLC-51, beyond MCWD's goal of t,v#ic-I�eget�e� <br /> 72 Ib/year��►ert�." <br /> Please let me know if this makes sense and if you are comfortable with this,or similar, language. Because additional <br /> project elements and additional opportunities for phosphorus reductions can often be identified during the feasibility <br /> phase of a project, I believe that this is a reasonable approach for the City to take. <br /> There is one other minor revision that should be made under the second paragraph of section 9.4 and in Table 9.1.The <br /> Lake Minnetonka basins should also include Browns, Carmens, Crystal, East Upper, and Lafayette. <br /> After you have had a chance to review the above language,feel free to call me with any questions. I will be working on <br /> pulling together a summary of the plan to send out to the Board this Thursday or Friday, so I will try to get in touch with <br /> you before then to make sure you are comfortable with these changes. <br /> Thank you, <br /> Becky Houdek <br /> MCWD Planning Technician <br /> 18202 Minnetonka Blvd. <br /> Deephaven,MN 55391 <br /> 952.471.0590 x229 <br /> www.minnehahacreek.orq <br /> 2 <br />