Loading...
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.
Home
My WebLink
About
Untitled
AI • 0 MIDDLE ST. CROIX RIVER WATERSHED MANAGEMENT ORGANIZATION A 1380 West Frontage Road, Hwy 36 Phone: 651-275-1136, ext. 22 rr 1 Stillwater, MN 55082 Fax: 651-1254 D 4 A Joint Powers Watershed Management Organization composed of ten St. Croix Valleys '04 Communities that was established under State Statute 103E to cooperatively manage water ,' W, .0 resources within the watershed. 1 Pl'` AGENDA Regular Meeting of the Middle St. Croix Watershed Management Organization December 9,2004 1. Call to Order 2. Approval of Minutes IL-PRegular Board Meetings are held at 7:00 PM a) October 7, 2004 Minutes �'--- Washington Conservation District Office Valley Ridge Mall 3. Treasurer's Report(Anders Hansen) 1380 West Frontage Road,Hwy 36 �.. Stillwater,MN a) Report of Savings Account, Assets (Q-p ,P1.7) 1 661fiic b) Approve payment of bills 4. Old Business 4``` v� Perro Pond Project-Ed Cain 91 l r Z to eti ,,,di Watershed Management Plan-Comment responses 4 Levy Authority St. Croix River Bridge Crossing Project/Highway 36 Update 61 V(`? X McKean's Square Irrigation Well 4.3Y- 7 24, o. , 5. Ney Business Financial Audit e& 7— . C(") Lake Gage c) Administrator's Reporti0, i /5iitiot f_51 6. Other Agenda Items / . 57 k 7. Adjourn 4' or g4i Middle St. Croix Watershed Management Organization MEMBER COMMUNITIES: Afton,Bayport,Baytown Township,Lakeland,Lakeland Shores,Lake St.Croix Beach,Oak Park Heights,St.Mary's Point,Stillwater and West Lakeland Township MIDDLE ST. CROIX RIVER WATERSHED MANAGEMENT ORGANIZATION �y 1380 West Frontage Road, Hwy 36 Phone: 651-275-1136, ext.21 °" R Stillwater,MN 55082 Fax: 651-1254 D A Joint Powers Watershed Management Organization composed of ten St. Croix Valley NIP Communities that was established under State Statute 103B to cooperatively manage water resources within the watershed. LETTER OF TRANSMITTAL DATE: December 2,2004 TO: Middle St.Croix River Watershed Management Organization FROM: Melissa Lewis RE: December 9,2004 Meeting Packet WE ARE SENDING: Via Mail: X Courier: Fax: Agenda Item DESCRIPTION 1 Agenda—December 9,2004 MSCWMO meeting Minutes 2 Draft minutes for the October 7,2004 Board meeting Approved minutes for September 9,2004 Board meeting Old Business Comments for the Water Management Plan 3 MSCWMO legislative taxing authority—Cindy Weckwerth,Washington County,Oct 22,2004 Taxing authority legal review—Mark J.Vierling and MN Dept.of Revenue,January 25,2002 Cut and Cover Concept Review—T.H.36 from Rick Arnebeck,MNDOT,Oct 8,2004 McKean's Square Irrigation Well—Eric Johnson,OPH,Nov 11th,2004 New Business 4 Memo regarding lake gage monitoring—Travis Thiel,WCD Nov 30`h,2004 Correspondence not distributed Date Sender Item Oct 23,2004 City of Oak Park Heights Notice of Public Hearing on Nov 4th,2004—Kowalski's Market Oct 23,2004 City of Oak Park Heights Notice of Public Hearing on Nov 30th,2004—Site improvements to Washington County Government Center Please call me with any additional agenda items or agenda changes at 275-1136,ext.22. Sincerely, Melissa Lewis Cc: Betsy Vance,Recording Secretary Charlie LeFevere,Kennedy&Graven Konrad Koosmann,WCD City of Oak Park Heights(Agenda and Minutes Only) City of Stillwater(Agenda and Minutes Only) Jeff Davis,SEH(Agenda and Minutes Only) Middle St. Croix Watershed Management Organization MEMBER COMMUNITIES: Afton,Bayport,Baytown Township,Lakeland,Lakeland Shores,Lake St.Croix Beach,Oak Park Heights,St.Mary's Point,Stillwater and West Lakeland Township MIDDLE ST. CROIX RIVER WATERSHED MANAGEMENT ORGANIZATION 1380 West Frontage Road, Hwy 36 Phone: 651-275-1136, ext. 22 e Stillwater, MN 55082 Fax: 651-1254 D A Joint Powers Watershed Management Organization composed of ten St. Croix Valley Communities that was established under State Statute 103E to cooperatively manage water resources within the watershed. September 15, 2004 Todd Clarkowski, P.E. Area Engineer Mn/DOT, Metro District 1500 West County Road B-2 Roseville, MN 55113 Dear Mr. Clarkowski, Middle St Croix Watershed Management Organization has a high level of interest in the proposed St. Croix River Crossing Project. As you may know, MSCWMO is in the process of completing a new watershed management plan. The final bridge-crossing alternative that is selected will be reviewed and held to the requirements of the watershed management plan of the MSCWMO at the time the alternative is submitted to the MSCWMO for review. MSCWMO will defer comment until more detailed plans are available for review. Please continue to send all correspondences regarding pertinent issues of this project to us. In addition, the MSCWMO requested information earlier this year concerning the proposed change in drainage relating to this project. More specifically, the MSCWMO would like to know the total acres of land proposed to drain directly into the St. Croix River at a single point compared to the acres of land that currently do not go to this single point. This information has not been provided to the MSCWMO to date. This single drainage point into the St. Croix raises many concerns that the MSCWMO may not approve. Also, the assumptions that MNDOT is proposing for calculating stormwater runoff are inconsistent with the current and future MSCWMO rules. Finally, the MSCWMO wants to make sure that the Project is consistent with the recommendations of the North Washington Groundwater Study. Please call me with any questions at(651)439-3754. Sincerely, 67, J McPherson President, MSCWMO Cc: MSCWMO Representatives Washington County PHE Middle St. Croix Watershed Management Organization MEMBER COMMUNITIES: Afton,Bayport,Baytown Township,Lakeland,Lakeland Shores,Lake St.Croix Beach,Oak Park Heights.St.Mary's Point,Stillwater and West lakeland Township 4/20/20044:18 PM John Walz House Fiscal Analysis (651)296-8236 2004 House Capital Budget AGENCY Strat Gov House Comm House # Project Title Fund Score Prior Gov's Rec Comm Rec Priority. Cap Invest. Coua 308 309 GRANTS to POLITICAL SUBDIVISIONS 310 Buffalo Lake Maintenance Garage/Street Repair GO $ 635 $ 635 econ med $ 635 Renville 311 Colin Powell Youth Leadership Center GO $ 4,230. $ 6,350 econ high $ Hennepin 312 Lewis and Clark Rural Water System GO $ 2,000 $ 2,000 econ med $ - Lincoln/Pipes 313 Roseau Infrastructure Repair and Improvements GO $ 10,000 $ 13,160 econ high $ 10,000 Roseau 314 Regional Adult Detention Facilities GO $ - $ 40,000 ud neutra $ statewide 315 North Central Correctional Facility GO $ $ 6,000'ud neutra $ 6,000 Cass 316 Rochester Public Safety Training Center GO $ - $ 627 ud neutra $ 627 Olmstead 317 Rice County Jail GO $ - $, 10,550 ud neutra $ - Rice 318 Blue Earth Fire and Police Station GO $ - $ 642 ud neutra $ - Blue Earth • 319 County Courthouse Capital Grants GO $ - $ 10,000 ud neutra $ • - statewide 320 Sauk Center Minimum Security GO $ - $ 4,000 ud neutra '$ - Steams 321 Hopkins Haz-mat Training Center GO $ - $ 500 ud neutra -$ - Hennepin 322 HCMC Crisis intervention Center Expansion GO $ - $ 1,400 HHS12 $ - Hennepin E:323 Bayport Sewer System GO $ - $ 1,550 econ high $ 1,550 Washington 324 St Stephen Water System GO $ - $ 7,021 econ high $ - Steams 325 institute for Nanotechnology GO $ $ 600 econ high $ 600 Fillmore 326 Biotechnology and Health Science Facilities GO $ - $ 40,000 econ high $ - statewide • 327 Wastewater Treatment Maximum Daily Load Gran GO $ - $ 25,000 econ high $ - statewide 328 Phalen Boulevard GO $ - $ 4,000 econ med $ 2,000 Ramsey 329 Minnesota Planetarium GO $ - $ 24,000 econ med $ - Hennepin 330 Ordway Renovation GO $ - $ 10,000 econ med $ - Ramsey • 331'Lowry Avenue Corridor GO $ - $ 5,000 econ med $ 1,200 Hennepin 332 Laurentian Energy Authority GO $ - $ 2,500 econ med $ - St Louis 333 East Phillips Cultural and Community Center GO $ - $ 3,500 econ med $ - Hennepin • 334 Walker Community Center GO $ - $ 200 coon med $ - Cass 335 Central Iron Range Sewer District GO $ - $ 1,600 econ med $ - St Louis 336 Sears Site Cleanup GO $ - $ 5,000 econ med $ - Hennepin 337 Two Harbors Wastewater - GO $ - $ 1,571 econ med $ 1,071 Lake 338 Crookston Emergency Riverbank Protection GO $ - $ 3,500 econ med $ 2,000 Polk 339 Little Falls Pine Grove Zoo GO $ - $ 812 econ med $ - Morrison 340 JD Rivers Urban Agriculture Center GO $ - $ 2,500 econ med $ - Hennepin 341 Heritage Park Empowerment Zone GO $ - $ 9,625 econ med $ - Hennepin 342 Raspberry Island&Upper Landing GO $ - $ 5,000 econ med $ - Ramsey 343 Virgin District Heating System GO $ - $ 5,000 econ med $ - St Louis 344 Contaminated Site Cleanup South St Paul GO $ - $ 3,000 econ med $ 500 Dakota 345 Great River Shakespeare Festival Theater GO $ - $ 125 econ med $ - Winona 346 Askov Wastewater Treatment GO $ - $ 2,215 econ med $ 1,215 Pine 347 Olivia Ag Innovation Center GO $ - $ 2,000 econ med $ - Renville 348 Broadband Infrastructure Grant GO $ - $ 2,000 econ med $ - statewide 349 Duluth Sanitary Sewer Overflow GO $ - $ 4,950 econ med $ 4,950 St Louis 350 Bruentrup Farm Restoration GO $ - $ 150 coon med $ 100 Ramsey ' 351 Burnsville Water Treatment GO $ - $ 6,000 coon med $ 2,000 Dakota 352 Itasca County Training and Technology GO $ - $ 2,000 coon med $ - Itasca 353 University Research Park GO $ - $ 9,000.econ med $ - Hennepin 354 Shubert Theater GO $ - $ 10,000 coon med $ - Hennepin 355 Biomass Community Energy Center GO $ - $ 1,000 con neutn $ - statewide • 356 Duluth DECC GO $ - $ 3,331 con neutn $ - St Louis 357 Heritage Hjemkomst Center Repair GO $ - $ 1,000 con neutn $ - Clay 358 River Fiats Interpretive Facility GO $ - $ 1,000 con neutn $ - Dakota 359 Como Park Zoo GO $ - $ - $ 300 Ramsey 360 361 Total $ 16,865 $ 301,614 Total $ 34,748 7 411 4111 • } r Wisconsin Department of Natural Resources. Additional information regarding the 0 regulatory authority of the NPS can be found at: http://www.nps.gov/sacn/pdfs/Final_St_Croix_CMP_EIS.pdf or http://www.nps.gov/sacn/management/plannindocs.html Table 4.1 Existing Local Ordinances Stormwater Grading/Erosion Control Wetlands Rate Control, Erosion mid Setbacks Water (various Sediment (Building/ Steep Slope Quality magnitude Volume Control Plan Septic),Min Building Direct Stormwater Wetland Standards storms) Control Required Where Low Floor Prohibition ProhibitedII Setback/Buffers • • ' - • �. �� a'''‘o,,°1-,;as • if Bayport NO 2,10,100 year NO Off * Not>18% Yes WCA NO,16.5 feet leaves site a ., aivr Lake St Croix NO NO NO >10,000 sq ft NO Not>18% NO WCA NO Beach �` ,i'' ' > e t' , ' . • ' � ,n �_:,. .ili ;. Lakeland Shores NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO , P' - a ' Anti _i,_',./„,,,,,,,,;;:-, int A �1 e�'�'�" � i#4 yyE St.Ma 's Point NO NO NO NO NO NO NO WCA NO ',:z...2-1,-al a 1(}€f00 \ 3 � sR a€ 9 >— 5O\footset(a�5 West Lakeland NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO .Townshi ° lakes l u, e 1, x 6/ \ SVG''- q \ ..\ W', n t�3 a-, o!! • '4't „.. €x t1°/-25 •:1• z• \ 4/ v l 4a i z� 10, .0€? az' /� or t 4 _ •k 1 1'SOBlttff ditional, ou /3 ' \ "5'' '%: 1 444% 301v1F c f \ % y 170-250 1.5,10,100 WWI) ppb year Yes >50 cu yids NO >5,000 sq ft or MLF--2'100yr Yes WCA NO/25-150 feet ° ,111, � � F E VB\]) , , „lc,.\ �� NILE-2'. 1QOyr es WCA /165 Rivet's edge: Slope town-100 ft, preservation �y�(y rural-200 ft. zone:>12% 0. r 1�ati ql let' NO NO NO BhifIlme'town slope,no NO NO NO llwerway 40 ft rural structures, residential-100 grading,or ft conservatio filling;40 ft district-200 ft setback Adak Park Heights is in the process of adopting a Wetland Ordinance,at this time it has not yet been adopted 13—Vol ume control required only if the nmoffcreated is greater than provided for in the Stormwater management Plan C=Most communities defer to the Wetland Conservation Act(WCA)for any wetland filling issues Middle St. Croix Watershed Management Organization 45 4/6/2004 • • Nationwide Urban Runoff Program(NURP) The Environmental Protection Agency(EPA) sampled and studied urban runoff on a large scale throughout the United States. The final report of this study,Results of the Nationwide Urban Runoff Program: Volume 1 —Final Report,presented the results and a statistical analysis of those data(EPA, December 1983). The NURP standards that were developed allowed for the treatment of runoff from pervious areas for water quality concerns. Specific standards vary over the country but all of them are in place to achieve treatment of stormwater runoff to remove particulates and other contaminants. For example, the City of Stillwater requirements regarding NURP are that drainage plans"must include water quality treatment provisions, at a minimum, meeting NURP pond standards (phosphorous removal efficiency of at least sixty-five percent, capacity of 2.5 inches, 24-hour storm, with twenty-five percent increase for sediment.)" Stormwater detention facilities constructed in the city must be designed according to the NURP Wet Basin Design Criteria and the Urban Best Management Practices as reflected in the MPCA publication "Protecting Water Quality in Urban Areas," (http://www.pca.state.mn.us/water/pubs/swm-coverpg.pdf). • • Middle St. Croix Watershed Management Organization 46 4/6/2004 • • 5.0 District-Wide Goals and Policies Watershed management plans provide a means for communities to develop and implement programs and regulations to insure that future development and landuse activities will occur within an overall design for the watershed. This section of the plan presents goals and policies that pertain to either the entire MSCWMO or to large portions of the MSCWMO. General information is presented, including water quality concepts. The goals and objectives in this section provide the conditions that are being sought through the water management planning process. The policies will provide the framework in which local communities will prepare or update their local water management plans, or accept this plan by reference. MSCWMO will monitor the adoption of the plan within each member community to ensure that the plan is implemented. 5.1 Water Quality 5.1.1 Key Water Quality Concepts • Water quality is impacted to the greatest degree by stormwater runoff. Stormwater runoff • collects pollutant-laden sediments that drain into the lakes, wetlands, and streams of the watershed,rather than filter through the ground; thus decreasing water quality. This non- point source of pollution is considered the leading source of water pollution in the United States. Stormwater contains a variety of constituents that can negatively impact the quality of receiving waters. Phosphorus and nitrogen accelerate eutrophication of surface waters and increase surface algal scum, algal blooms, water discoloration, and depressed oxygen levels. Stormwater carries heavy metals, oils and grease from roads and parking lots and toxic organic compounds from herbicides,pesticides and wood preservatives. It carries fecal coliform that may impair recreational and harvesting uses of receiving waters and sediments that degrade aquatic habitats. Stormwater runoff from land development projects present significant concern with respect to water quality protection. Roadway construction, increased pavement and other hard surfaces associated with land development, as well as agricultural practices,have meant increased problems with stormwater runoff. Development of a site increases the pollution threat to down-gradient waters by increasing both the intensity of use and consequently the generation of pollutants in most cases. Development also increases the flow volume and peak flow rates of the site, which increases the potential for erosion and sedimentation. Sedimentation reduces the effectiveness of natural pollutant control mechanisms such as on-site infiltration to groundwater and vegetative filtering subsequently increasing the overall pollutant loading of the site. 5.1.2 Water Quality Goals The water quality goal of the MSCWMO is to protect or improve water quality in the Middle St. Croix watershed through the treatment and control of stormwater runoff. Best Middle St. Croix Watershed Management Organization 47 4/6/2004 • • Management Practices (BMPs) will be used to mitigate the negative impacts from stormwater runoff generated on development sites and agricultural lands. BMP's will be applied to achieve the following in preferential order: 1.)prevent runoff from occurring, 2.) retain water and infiltrate it on-site to largest extent possible, and 3.)hold water in a detention pond water to reduce the amount of nutrients leaving the site. BMP's including but not limited to grassed waterways, infiltration trenchs,bioretention ponds, and others will be encouraged. 5.1.3 Existing Water Quality Regulatory Framework Many other units of government in addition to the MSCWMO have a role in managing the water quality of the watershed. Local city and county ordinances are summarized in Table 4.1. Additionally, the MPCA is charged with implementing the NPDES Phase II program that impacts water quality. Additional information about NPDES Phase II can be found in section 4.2,pg. 44. 5.1.4 Proposed Policies and Performance Standards Regarding Water Quality Policies 1. Direct discharge of stormwater to wetlands and all other water bodies without water quality treatment is prohibited. 2. Sources of water pollution shall be identified through data collection and corrected through the application of BMPs. 3. Performance standards will rely largely on control of peak flows as a means to prevent an increase in stormwater pollutant concentrations from the pre-development state. 4. Site design practices that may have only a minor impact on peak flow or flow volume, such as the use of buffer strips along receiving waters and drainage swales, will.be used to achieve compliance with the water quality performance standard. 111,1111111111111111111.1114% . All new developments and re ev pments shall use proven Best Management Practice techniques (as listed in MPCA document"Protecting Water Quality in Urban Areas") to remove coarse grained sediments and other contaminants from stormwater runoff before leaving the site or discharging to wetlands,ponds, lakes, and streams. Trash and floatable debris skimming devices shall be placed on the outlet of all on- site detention basins to provide. These devices can consist of baffled weirs, submerged outlets or other such measures. A permanent pool ("dead storage") volume below the principal spillway(normal outlet) shall be provided which is greater than or equal to the runoff from a 2.0-inch 24-hour storm over the entire contributing drainage area assuming full development. 2. No increase in rate of runoff leaving the site from pre-development to post- development conditions generated by the 2-, 10-, and 100-year rainfall. 3. An erosion and sediment control plan must be submitted and approved for all projects disturbing greater than ten-thousand square feet. Middle St. Croix Watershed Management Organization 48 4/6/2004 • cu'(Aiv\ Low, ,A-A. 4. Lowest floor elevations of structures built adjacent to stormwater ponds and other water bodies must be a minimum of two feet above the 100-year flood elevation. 5. Construction is prohibited on slopes greater than eighteen percent. 6. Construction is prohibited within forty feet of the bluffline. 7. Direct discharge of stormwater to wetlands and all other water bodies without water quality treatment as outlined in Per. Std. #1 is prohibited. Uh150-, rnur"- • 5.2 Water Quantity ( \\, 5.2.1 Key Water Quantity Concepts Control of peak flow is the most important means to prevent downstream flooding,limit \ sedimentation and protect the physical integrity of downstream watercourses. Roadway ' - .._- construction, increased pavement and other hard surfaces associated with land development have meant increased problems from stormwater runoff, which must be managed and controlled to prevent downstream flooding. Stormwater runoff presents significant concern with respect to water quantity. 5.2.2 Water Quantity Goals The water quantity goal of the MSCWMO is to reduce the peak runoff to protect downstream locations and; therefore,the public capital expenditures for flood control. Peak runoff will be reduced by, first,promoting infiltration where the water falls and secondly,by appropriately designed detention facilities to attenuate the peak flows and (P./ 1 `1 provide of localized infiltration. Controlling peak runoff will also help with protecting water quality. The MSCWMO feels that excessive flow and flooding is the responsibility of each unit of government to correct. 5.2.3 Existing Water Quantity Regulatory Framework A number of other units of government in addition to the MSCWMO have a role in managing the water quantity and stormwater runoff of the watershed. Local city and ( �1.) county ordinances are summarized in Table 4.1. Additionally, the MPCA is charged with implementing the NPDES Phase II ��\W program which impacts water quantity issues. Additional information about NPDES r r Phase II can be found in section 4.2,pg. 44. G 5.2.4 Proposed Policies and Performance Standards Regarding Water Quantity OP Fundamental to nearly all of the stormwater management ordinances is the requirement that development not increase peak flow from a site. Policies Middle St. Croix Watershed Management Organization 49 4/6/2004 • • 1. All hydrologic studies shall analyze the 2-, 10- and 100-year rainfall event, with the critical duration defined as that event causing either the highest water surface elevation or the largest peak discharge in an area or both. Any study must use consistent methodology for the pre-development and post-development landuse conditions. 2. Newly developed or re-developed areas will be limited to the pre-development or existing rate of runoff or to a rate within the capacity of downstream conveyance systems, and no increase in the volume or rate of runoff from newly developed areas will occur in where natural outlets do not exist. In sub-areas of a landlocked watershed, development shall not increase the predevelopment volume or rate of discharge from the sub-area for the ten-year return period event. 3. Developers must secure any flowage easements that would be required to accommodate the stormwater management facilities. These easements will be granted up to the 100-yr flood level. 4. The MSCWMO shall adopt a floodplain regulation consistent with the Washington County Floodplain Regulations. 5. The MSCWMO will establish 100-year flood levels on the areas ponds, lakes, and streams. Performance Standards 1. No increase in rate of runoff leaving the site from pre-development to post, development conditions generated by the 2-, 10-, and 100-year rainfall. 2. Lowest floor elevations of structures built adjacent to stormwater ponds and other water bodies must be a minimum of two feet above the 100-year flood elevation. 3. Buffer zones of twenty feet of undisturbed vegetation shall be maintained between all water bodies (wetland, stream, lake). The buffer requirement will apply only to sites that have been (1) subdivided on or after[date of plan adoption]; or(2) subject to a new primary use for which a necessary rezoning, special use permit or variance has been approved on or after [date of plan adoption]. 5.3 Erosion and Sediment Control 5.3.1 Key Erosion and Sediment Concepts Erosion and subsequent sedimentation down-slope caused several unintended negative effects on downstream uses. Sediment smother fish larvae and eggs by covering the coarser substrate that fish typically use to spawn. Sediment induced turbidity reduces light penetration of water,hinders sight-feeding fish and increases the cost of providing drinking water. Sedimentation reduces water quality for recreational uses, lowers the value of adjoining lands, and increases public costs to maintain waterways and stormwater conveyances. Soil particles carry nutrients, trace metals and hydrocarbons into receiving waters and foster algae and weed growth. Runoff from construction sites is the largest source of sediments in urban areas undergoing development such as the MSCWMO. Uncontrolled runoff from agricultural crop production also can contribute greatly to sedimentation problems. Middle St. Croix Watershed Management Organization 50 4/6/2004 • 411, A vegetative buffer adjacent to a stream, lake or wetland serves a number of purposes critical to the protection of that water resource and is considered an integral part of that protection. Buffers moderate flow rates of stormwater runoff into receiving waters, stabilize banks and shorelines, filter nutrients and sediments from runoff,provide habitat, and visually screen aesthetically unappealing uses. Buffer width is the most important determinant of buffer effectiveness; soils, slope, and the types and condition of plant communities within the buffer also are relevant to buffer function. 5.3.2 Erosion and Sediment Goals The erosion and sediment goal of the MSCWMO is to prevent erosion and subsequent sedimentation from surface runoff within the watershed on construction sites; agricultural lands; and along stream banks, lakeshores, and roadsides. To achieve this MSCWMO will: (1)promote methods that prevent erosion, (2)intercept eroded material before it leaves the site, (3)provide sedimentation basins or other areas for sediment to be safely controlled. 5.3.3 Existing Erosion and Sediment Control Regulatory Framework Many units of government in addition to the MSCWMO have a role in managing erosion and sediment control of the watershed. .Local city and county ordinances are listed in Table 4.1. Additionally, MPCA is charged with implementing the NPDES Phase II program which requires erosion and sediment control for all construction sites of 1 acre or greater. Additional information about NPDES can be found in section 4.2,pg. 44. 5.3.4 Proposed Policies and Performance Standards Regarding Erosion and Sediment Control Policies 1. The MSCWMO shall encourage and monitor proper erosion and sediment control throughout the watershed to prevent,siltation and sedimentation of streams, lakes, wetlands, and other areas of the watershed. 2. Both temporary(during construction) and permanent(long-term) erosion control will be required on newly developed or redeveloped land in MSCWMO with a disturbance of 10,000 square feet or greater. 3. Agricultural lands will be exempt from an erosion and sediment control plan. However,buffer strips will be required around water bodies and drainage ways. Performance Standards 1. All new developments and redevelopments shall use proven Best Management Practice techniques (as listed in MPCA document"Protecting Water Quality in Urban Areas")to remove coarse grained sediments and other contaminants from stormwater runoff before leaving the site or discharging to wetlands,ponds, lakes, and streams. Trash and floatable debris skimming devices shall be placed on the outlet of all on- site detention basins to provide. These devices can consist of baffled weirs, submerged outlets or other such measures. A permanent pool ("dead storage") volume below the principal spillway(normal outlet) shall be provided which is Middle St. Croix Watershed Management Organization 51 4/6/2004 • • greater than or equal to the runoff from a 2.0-inch 24-hour storm over the entire contributing drainage area assuming full development. 2. No increase in rate of runoff leaving the site from pre-development to post- development conditions generated by the 2-, 10-, and 100-year rainfall. 3. An erosion and sediment control plan must be submitted and approved for all projects disturbing greater than ten-thousand square feet. 4. Construction is prohibited on slopes greater than eighteen percent. 5. Construction is prohibited within forty feet of the bluffline. 6. Buffer zones of twenty feet of undisturbed vegetation shall be maintained between all water bodies (wetlands, streams, lakes). The buffer requirement will apply only to sites that have been (1) subdivided on or after [date of plan adoption]; or(2) subject to a new primary use for which a necessary rezoning, special use permit or variance has been approved on or after [date of plan adoption]. Agricultural activity is exempted from the requirements of these performance standards, provided that a natural vegetation buffer of twenty feet or greater is maintained along each watercourse. 5.4 Wetlands 5.4.1 Key Wetland Concepts . Wetlands provide many important benefits, a fact that becomes only more apparent as wetland numbers have dwindled. These benefits include: storage area for excess water during times of flooding, filtering of sediments and nutrient before they enter lakes, rivers, streams, and the groundwater, fish and wildlife habitat,public recreation, and commercial uses. Wetlands are divided into eight types depending on their characteristics,primarily the amount and frequency of water retention and the typical vegetation. These wetland types are defined in Appendix C. A vegetative buffer adjacent to a stream, lake, or wetland serves a number of purposes critical to the protection of that water resource and is considered an integral part of it. Buffers moderate flow rates of stormwater runoff into receiving waters, stabilize banks and shorelines, filter nutrients and sediments from runoff,provide habitat and visually screen aesthetically unappealing uses. Buffer width is the most important determinant of buffer effectiveness; soils, slope and the types and condition of plant communities within the buffer also are relevant to buffer function. 5.4.2 Wetland Goals Wetlands are valuable natural resources and will be protected in a manner consistent with the Wetland Conservation Act. 5.4.3 Existing Regulatory Controls The Wetland Conservation Act(WCA), enacted by the Minnesota Legislature in 1991, aims for a no net loss of wetlands. The law regulates draining and filling wetlands and, if wetland loss is unavoidable, requires replacement. Although the WCA is the most Middle St. Croix Watershed Management Organization 52 4/6/2004 • 410 comprehensive law regulating wetlands, there are additional regulations and regulators listed below. Local city ordinances regarding wetlands are listed in Table 4.1. Board of Water and Soil Resources The Board of Water and Soil Resources (BWSR)provides technical assistance and oversight in administering the Wetland Conservation Act. One member of the Technical Evaluation Panel is a from BWSR and provide input in wetland determinations,banking, and violations. Minnesota Department of Natural Resources Minnesota DNR Conservation Officers enforce the WCA; they have the authority to issue cease and desist orders to stop work on a project,replacement orders to require replacement of lost wetland area, and restoration orders requiring that the disturbed wetland be restored. Violation of an order is a misdemeanor. In addition, a permit from the Minnesota DNR is necessary for work in most type three, four, or five wetlands that are at least ten acres in size in unincorporated areas and two and one-half acres in incorporated areas. .U.S.Army Corps of Engineers The Corps of Engineers (COE) is responsible for regulating impacts to wetlands and navigable water at a federal level. The COE must issue a permit for all wetland filling or excavating,under Section 404 of the Clean Water Act. If a Section 404 permit is required, than an applicant must also obtain a Section 401 permit from the MPCA; this is to ensure that no activity conducted under a section 404 permit degrades water quality. Washington Conservation District While the Washington Conservation District(WCD) does not have regulatory control over wetlands,the WCD is a resource agency for additional wetland information and evaluation. Many communities within the MSCWMO rely on the WCD for technical assistance regarding wetlands. 5.4.4 Proposed Policies and Performance Standards Regarding Wetlands All wetlands contained in the Wetlands Inventory shall be afforded the maximum protection consistent with the policies of the MSCWMO. Policies 1. Permits shall be obtained from appropriate regulatory authorities before any work is started in or near a wetland. 2. All alternatives shall be thoroughly considered, documented, and justified to avoid wetland impacts; all projects shall be designed with minimal need for wetland impact. The pre-existing quality of the wetland will be considered as alternatives are considered. Wetlands immediately adjacent to DNR protected waters should only be impacted as a last option. Middle St. Croix Watershed Management Organization 53 4/6/2004 • • 3. The effect of bounce from stormwater input will be evaluated as per MPCA guidelines. 4. Significant changes to the hydrology of the wetland, (i.e. changes to the outlet elevation or changes to contributing drainage area) are not allowed. 5. Concerns of the public and the project's neighbors will be considered and they will be informed before any project begins. Performance Standards 1. All new developments and redevelopments shall use proven Best Management Practice techniques (as listed in MPCA document"Protecting Water Quality in Urban Areas")to remove coarse grained sediments and other contaminants from stormwater runoff before leaving the site or discharging to wetlands,ponds, lakes, and streams. Trash and floatable debris skimming devices shall be placed on the outlet of all on- site detention basins to provide. These devices can consist of baffled weirs, submerged outlets or other such measures. A permanent pool ("dead storage") volume below the principal spillway(normal outlet) shall be provided which is greater than or equal to the runoff from a 2.0-inch 24-hour storm over the entire contributing drainage area assuming full development. 2. No increase in rate of runoff leaving the site from pre-development to post- development conditions generated by the 2-, 10-, and 100-year rainfall. 3. An erosion and sediment control plan must be submitted and approved for all projects disturbing greater than ten-thousand square feet. _4. Lowest floor elevations of structures built adjacent to stormwater ponds and other water bodies must be a minimum of two feet above the 100-year flood elevation. 5. Construction is prohibited on slopes greater than eighteen percent. 6. Construction is prohibited within forty feet of the bluffline. 7. Direct discharge of stormwater to wetlands and all other water bodies without water quality treatment as outlined in Per. Std. #1 is prohibited. 8. Buffer zones of twenty feet of undisturbed vegetation shall be maintained between all water bodies (wetlands, streams, lakes). The buffer requirement will apply only to sites that have been (1) subdivided on or after [date of plan adoption]; or(2) subject to a new primary use for which a necessary rezoning, special use permit or variance has been approved on or after[date of plan adoption] 5.5 Education 5.5.1 Current Education and Outreach Program The MSCWMO does not currently have an education program. General public knowledge of the MSCWMO is limited and confusion exists over the purposes and extent of the WMO. Developing an education program will increase the public's knowledge of the WMO, increase their understanding of natural resources and water resource management, and will lead to better natural resource decisions and protection. Improved communication and outreach with the landowners of the MSCWMO will decrease potential for misunderstandings of management decisions. Middle St. Croix Watershed Management Organization 54 4/6/2004 • • 5.5.2 Education Goals The education goals of the MSCWMO are broad based, but with the understanding that meeting these goals will result in better individual land use decisions and greater natural resource protection. The MSCWMO believes that awareness of resource issues, understanding of those issues, and skills to protect those resources, can lead to positive changes in land use management. The MSCWMO goals include: 1. Increase communities' (stakeholders')understanding and awareness of the MSCWMO and its Mission. 2. Increase stakeholders' knowledge and understanding of the MSCWMO functions and the rationale behind them. 3. Keep stakeholders informed of the MSCWMO activities. 4. Increase stakeholders' knowledge and understanding of: a. Water quality. b. Water quantity c. Wetlands. d. Natural resource protection. 5. Foster pride in the resources of the MSCWMO • The target audiences for the MSCWMO education program include: watershed residents, •government officials and staff, students and teachers, consultants, and developers. MSCWMO is entirely within Independent School District 834. The area includes five public elementary schools, one private K-5 school, and one private K- -school. Middle and high schoolstudents attend either Stillwater or Oakland Junior High and Stillwater High. School outside the MSCWMO. 5.5.3 Proposed Policies, Standards, and Criteria Regarding Education :Recognizing the limited budget of the MSCWMO,the education and outreach strategy will focus on a limited number of achievable objectives. The three key•objectives of this plan are: Communicate and educate through local newspapers. • Community newspapers include: Stillwater Gazette, St. Croix Valley Press, and the South Washington County Bulletin. • Focus articles on MSCWMO activities and natural resource stewardship will be sent to these publications when applicable. • MSCWMO will work with these publications on developing a recurring natural resource/water resource column(similar to Outdoors column). • Meets education goals 1-4. Communicate and educate through the member communities' newsletters. • Provide MSCWMO communities with information about MSCWMO activities, meetings, etc. for their newsletters. • Provide MSCWMO communities with natural resource stewardship articles for their newsletters. • Which communities have newsletters to include? Middle St. Croix Watershed Management Organization 55 4/6/2004 O • Meets education goals 1-3. Technical fact sheets—BMPs for a single lot • Create fact sheets for: infiltration, habitat,runoff, erosion control, construction BMPs, retrofitting existing developments, etc. with the MSCWMO name. • Provide fact sheets to relevant stakeholders. • Include rules relationship on fact sheet when rules are developed. • Meets education goals 1, 3, and 4. In addition to the strategies mentioned above, the MSCWMO recognizes many other education strategies are available and that these programs may be managed more efficiently and effectively through coordination with other water management organizations. The MSCWMO may develop the following programs, either independently or in collaboration with other organizations, when funding becomes available: • Workshop and/or seminar program for developers, consultants, local officials and staff, potientally in coordination with NEMO (Nonpoint source pollution Education for Municipal Officials) • Have regular communication with each community's planning advisory board • Watershed/WMO newsletter • Presentations and/or presence at regularly held LGU meetings • Annual watershed tour • Award program for good stewardship • Website • Annual watershed event: Washington County Fair display • Demonstration sites of BMPs • Volunteer water quality monitoring programs 5.6 Groundwater The growing demand for groundwater for drinking water supplies, irrigation, industrial, and commercial uses along with the increased detection of groundwater contamination focuses attention on this resource in Washington County and in the Middle St. Croix watershed. Groundwater and surface water systems do not necessarily coincide with surface water divides or boundaries; therefore, groundwater protection efforts, to be most effective, should be coordinated at the county or regional level. The MSCWMO cannot successfully plan for or control activities outside its boundaries, which ultimately could have a detrimental impact on the groundwater resource it is dependent upon. In addition, management of groundwater is not a mandated Water Management Organization function. However, MSCWMO will work to further the goals, objectives, and implementation actions of the 2003-2013 Washington County Ground Water Plan as adopted by the Washington County Board of Commissioners on December 16, 2003. The following implementation actions were listed for Watershed Districts and Watershed Management Organizations: 1.) Develop and adopt policies on the quantity of water used in areas where existing wells and/or groundwater dependent natural resources could be negatively impactged Middle St. Croix Watershed Management Organization 56 4/6/2004 S by overuse of groundwater. Negative impacts include reduced flow to surface water bodies,lowering of lake or wetland levels,or interference with other wells 2.) Provide education to citizens and public officials on the inter-relation of surface and groundwater quality and quantity;the value of and need to protect groundwater recharge areas and wetlands;and implementation of best management practices and low-impact development and redevelopment strategies to protect groundwater resources. 3.) For all new developments and redevelopments,adopt rules controlling stormwater runoff volume and establish performance standards based on issues identified in water resource plans,inventories or studies,and on available scientific literature. • Middle St. Croix Watershed Management Organization 57 4/6/2004 . • 6.0 Implementation 6.1 Prioritize Problems The four most important issues for the MSCWMO identified by the Board and citizens of the watershed are runoff and stormwater, erosion and sediment control, wetlands, and education. The first three of these issues are interconnected as they are all impacted by development in the watershed. Education is a key component to address the other 3 issues. 6.2 Management Programs 6.2.1 Joint Powers Agreement To achieve and maintain compliance with the water management system and land use controls, local units of government will refer projects to the MSCWMO for investigation, comments, and recommendations regarding the proposed activity. The MSCWMO will review the performance of the local units of government; and monitor the status of the local plan, current water problems, and the need for local plan amendments. The role of the MSCWMO with local units of government was established with the philosophy that existing local units of government would be the primary regulator of activities of concern, but where issues affected more than one unit of government the MSCWMO maintains a coordinate and dispute resolution role. The MSCWMO review process will be incorporated into existing city and township review processes, which is more efficient than permitting. Each community will refer projects to the MSCWMO to determine if full review is necessary by the review standards listed in this plan. Member communities will not grant building permits until MSCWMO review has occurred. All projects regardless of whether public or private can be reviewed under this scenario. Full MSCWMO review will be required for the following: 1. Any project disturbing greater than ten thousand square feet. 2. All major subdivisions. Major subdivisions are defined as subdivisions with four or more lots. 3. Any project with wetland impacts and any project with grading within the wetland/public water buffer or within 40 feet of the bluffline. 4. Any project impacting the nature (quantity' or quality) of drainage between member communities, 6.2.2 Administration At this time, no hiring of MSCWMO staff is anticipated. Administration of this Watershed Management Plan and its policies will be performed through a service contract. Supervision of the administrative services will be through the MSCWMO Board. Administrative services will include review: of activities for performance standards, Board meetings, Board meeting minutes, educational programs, and other Middle St. Croix Watershed Management Organization 58 4/6/2004 • activities as requested by the Board. Legal, Accounting, and Engineering services will also be contracted for on a bi-annual basis. 6.3 Implementation of Performance Standards Performance Standards will apply to development within the Middle St. Croix watershed and focus on stormwater management, erosion and sediment control, and wetland protection. The performance standards listed in Table 6.1 will apply to activities listed below: quare feet. 2. All majors ivisions are defined as subdivisions with 4 or 3. An • -- = any project with grading within the "- sr •]1wit • ._ iatsa: 1 -- • •- 1 - .(A4 _ surface that, in J Redevel a pervious surface is :1e and •' envious surf one acre or five Middle St. Croix Watershed Management Organization 59 4/6/2004 r • Ta i le 6.1 Perform. • ta dards MSCWMO Priority Concerns Water Water Erosion and Performance Standard Quality Quantity Sedimentation Wetlands 1 All new developments and redevelopments shall use sediment basins or other proven techniques to remove coarse grained sediments and other contaminants from stormwater runoff before leaving the site or discharging to wetlands, ponds, lakes, and streams. (See MPCA document "Protecting Water Quality in Urban Areas") 2 No increase in rate of runoff leaving the site from pre-to post-development conditions generated by the 2-, 10-, and • 100-year rainfall. • • 3 An erosion and sediment control plan must be submitted and approved for all projects disturbing greater 10,000 square feet. 4 Lowest floor elevations of structures built adjacent to stormwater ponds and other water bodies must be a minimum of 2 ft. above the 100-yr flood elevatio • n is prohibited on slopes > 6 nstruction is prohibited within 40 ft. of the bluffline. 7 Direct discharge of stormwater to wetlands and all other water bodies without water quality treatment is prohibited. 8 Buffer zones of 20 feet of undisturbed vegetation shall be maintained all water bodies (wetland, stream, lake). The MSCWMO Board has the power to waive any performance standard if the waiver is determined not to have . • - si -• - '•• • •• e:-/1 r 14 (Liter e. Middle St. Croix Watershed Management Organization 60 4/6/2004 • • 6.4 Information and Education Program The MSCWMO will submit an annual report that includes a financial statement, work accomplishments, and goal implementation to Washington County. This document will also be provided to each of the member communities, and residents of the MSCWMO by request. The MSCWMO will meet the education goals listed in Section 5 on the following schedule: Table 6.2 Information and Education Timetable and Expenses Task 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 Annual Plan $500 $500 $500 $500 $500 Newspaper Articles $200 $200 $200 $200 $200 Newsletters $500 $500 $500 $500 $500 Technical Fact Sheets $1500 $200 $200 $200 $200 Dollar amounts are estimated and include time and materials. • 6.5 Data Collection Program •• The MSCWMO proposes the following projects be implemented as a part of a data collection program: Integrated Water Quality Monitoring Program A comprehensive summary of the monitoring efforts in the Middle St. Croix watershed has been completed for this plan, and these resources will be used to develop an overall water quality monitoring program for the future. This program will include baseline monitoring, coordinating; collecting, and compiling data; acquiring equipment; and database management and maintenance. Volunteer monitoring will be incorporated into the MSCWMO Data Collection Program whenever feasible. The MSCWMO recognizes that volunteer can collect reliable, meaningful data that should be used by in watershed planning and decision-making; and that volunteer monitoring programs promote watershed stewardship by engaging, involving and educating volunteers in natural resource management. Contour Mapping Data Contour mapping of the Middle St. Croix watershed was acquired for this plan, and digital two-foot topographic data will be purchased from Washington County for use in watershed, subwatershed, and drainage delineation. This high-resolution topographic data will be valuable for the evaluation of future developments and projects in the watershed. Gully Inventory Middle St. Croix Watershed Management Organization 61 4/6/2004 411 The MSCWMO will inventory and map both the active and stable gullies of the watershed using methods developed by the Washington Conservation District. Active gully erosion along tributaries that outlet directly into the St. Croix River or are located in steeply rolling areas where crop production and construction do not normally take place contribute to surface water pollution. These gullies can be large non-point pollution sources to the St. Croix River. This inventory will document the location and the quantity of material that is being eroded and the amount that is ultimately transported to the St. Croix River. Wetlands Inventory Wetlands greater than one acre were inventoried and classified in the 1986 MSCWMO Water Resources Inventory(Appendix C). Future evaluation of the watershed's wetlands will include more detailed wetland boundary determination, and further classification and values. Lilly Lake TMDL TMDL or Total Maximum Daily Load is a determination of the amount of nutrient or contaminant loading a given water body can sustain meet the Clean Water Act Standards for that body of water. The MPCA has declared Lilly Lake to be on the impaired water list. The TMDL study will allow nutrient management and budgeting'analysis for the surrounding subwatershed andwill assist in future landuse conservation projects to be performed to improve the water quality of this impaired body of water. The target start date for the project will be 2007. It is intended that the City of Stillwater will undertake this study as the lake is and most of the drainage area is within Stillwater. 6.6 Studies and Capital Improvement Projects All capital improvement projects will be funded by the communities that directly benefit from the project. The State of Minnesota Storm Sewer Project Phase III will be completed in 2004-2005. The project will provide a safe and outlet of Perro Pond and the Perro Pond watershed to the St. Croix River. The project will be the final stage in a piping system through the city of Bayport. Upon completion of the project,regular flooding that occurred in Bayport and in Oak Park Height's will be alleviated. This project was sponsored by the MSCWMO and funding was provided by the State of Minnesota, through the 2002 bonding bill. 6.7 Financing Approaches 6.7.1 Current Approach Through the current Joint Powers Agreement the MSCWMO funding comes from fees paid by the member communities. All communities fund administration of the MSCWMO; large expenditures are funded by those communities receiving a direct benefit. The MSCWMO would prefer an ad valorem taxation process, as it is fairer to the member communities in the MSCWMO and other watersheds. Middle St. Croix Watershed Management Organization 62 4/6/2004 I i • . The MSCWMO Joint Powers Agreement states that the portion paid by each community is determined in the following way: 1. 40%is determined by amount of land area of a community as a percentage i of the land area of the entire watershed. eel 14,' 2. 20%is determined by the tax capacity of a community's area in the 6 ' watershed as a percentage of the tax capacity of the entire watershed. 3. 40%is determined by the population of a community's area in the watershed as a percentage of the population of the entire watershed. r In summary, the amount paid is based forty percent on land area, forty percent on Nf � population, and twenty percent on tax base for the area of the community within the i 1 to watershed. The MSCWMO uses the Washington County Standardized Chart of L 1, p Accounts for WMOs to track its revenues and expenditures. 6.7.2 Future Approach \1 Inherent inequalities exist in the current funding approach of each member community supporting the MSCWMO through their general fund. The MSCWMO will rectify these inequalities in one of two ways: either through special legislation granting the MSCWMO taxing authority, or through the member cities and townships creating special taxing districts for the areas within both the city or township borders and the borders of the MSCWMO. The main difficulties with either of these approaches are both approaches add another layer of taxes to the community, and questions arise of accountability when an appointed board is granted taxing authority. Despite these difficulties, the feeling of the MSCWMO is that taxing authority or taxing districts are a more equitable way to fund the WMO than through general funds. Additionally, the MSCWMO Board, although appointed, is appointed by the member communities and exists though a Joint Powers Agreement; these factors mitigate the difficulties discussed here. --- ing, the 41 ► u w s, for l:F'°. „,. ... . ,. ,. _ _ gyp a j► able 6.3 Finance Implementation Plans, Completion Dates, and Costs 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 Task Introduce bill Implement review to gain levy fees schedule to authority charge developers Est. Cost $5,000?? $5,000??? Levy Budget $40,000 $40,000 $35,000 $35,000 $35,000 Total Budget $45,000 $45,000 $45,000 $45,000 $45,000 Middle St. Croix Watershed Management Organization 63 4/6/2004 Minnesota Rule 8410. Page 1 of 2 Minnesota Rules, Table of Chapters Table of contents for Chapter 84.1.0 8410.0090 ASSESSMENT OF PROBLEMS. Each plan must contain an assessment of existing and potential water resource related problems using a combination of analysis of land and water resource data collected under part 8410. 0060 and through the identification of existing or potential problems by residents or local, regional, or state agencies. During the development of the assessment, the watershed management organization shall request a brief assessment of existing problems affecting the organization from the plan review authorities, the Department of Transportation, and the Department of Agriculture based on data, plans, and other documentation in their possession. The organization should solicit comments from residents and local officials in the watershed district for information about problems that may be primarily local in nature. The organization's assessment shall include a discussion of the relationship of locally identified problems to problems identified by the plan review authorities, provided the information is received within 45 days of the organization's written request. The assessment of existing and potential problems as determined by the organization must, at a minimum, include the following topic areas: A. specific lakes and streams with water quality problems; B. flooding and stormwater rate control issues within and between communities; C. impacts of water quality and quantity management ?-1 ," practices on recreation opportunities; D. impacts of stormwater discharges on water quality and fish and wildlife resources; E. impact of soil erosion on water quality and quantity; F. general impact of land use practices and, in particular, land development and wetland alteration on water quality and water quantity; G. the adequacy of existing regulatory controls to manage or mitigate adverse impacts on public waters and wetlands; H. the adequacy of programs to: (1) limit soil erosion and water quality degradation; (2) maintain the tangible and intrinsic values of natural storage and retention systems; and http://www.revisor.leg.state.mn.us/arule/8410/0090.html 12/3/2004 Minnesota Rule 8410.0090 Page 2 of 2 • 410 (3) maintain water level control structures; I. the adequacy of capital improvement programs to correct problems relating to: (1) water quality; (2) water quantity management; (3) fish and wildlife habitat and public waters and wetland management; and (4) recreational opportunities; and J. future potential problems that are anticipated to occur generally within a 20-year period based on growth projections and planned urbanization identified in local and regional comprehensive plans. The assessments must include a discussion of the relationship between locally identified problems and the problems and goals identified in county, regional, state, and federal plans that are brought to the attention of the organization. STAT AUTH: MS s 103B. 101; 103B.211; 103B.231; 103B.227 HIST: 17 SR 146 Current as of 10/13/97 http://www.revisor.leg.state.mn.us/arule%8410/0090.htm1 12/3/2004 • • Washington County Sales Receipt Survey and Land Management DATE SALE NO. 14949 62nd Street N. 12/13/20041 19936 P. O. Box 6 Stillwater, MN 55082-0006 (651) 430-6875 www.co.washington.mn.us/mgmtsrvy/mgmtsrvy SOLD TO PAYMENT METH... REP CASH bjw ITEM DESCRIPTION QTY RATE AMOUNT A/Ctr/P 11x17 1 8.50 8.50T Sales Tax 6.50% 0.55 It was a pleasure doing business with you. Total Paid: $9.05 • 4 i ‘4 PrfAll c-7 , . • • 4 Washington :,__ Conservation District 1380 W Frontage Road, Hwy 36, Stillwater, MN 55082 Tel: 651-275-1136 Fax: 651-275-1254 MEMORANDUM TO: MSCWMO Board Members FROM: Bob Fossum RE: Attorney LeFevere's comments on 2nd Generation WMP DATE: May 13, 2004 Attorney LeFevere had several wording changes which have been included additionally there were 5 major substantive comments regarding the performance standards. I am requesting a board decision on whether to incorporate those comments into the draft WMP. Sec. 5.1.4, Per. Std. #6 Construction is prohibited within forty feet of the bluffline. (Remove, deals with aesthetics not water management) Sec. 5.1.4, Per. Std#8 Buffer zones of twenty feet of unmowed natural vegetation shall be maintained upslope of the delineated wetland edge of all water bodies (wetlands, streams, lakes). The buffer requirement will apply only to sites that have been(1) subdivided on or after [date of plan adoption]; or (2) subject to a new primary use which causes a change in runoff characteristics or disturbance of vegetation,for which a necessary rezoning, special use permit or variance has been approved on or after [date of plan adoption]. Sec. 5.4.2, Policy#2 Newly developed or re-developed areas will be limited to the pre-development or existing rate of runoff or to a rate within the capacity of downstream conveyance systems,which ever is less, and no increase in the volume or rate of runoff from newly developed areas will occur in where natural outlets do not exist. In sub-areas of a landlocked watershed, development shall not increase the predevelopment volume or rate of discharge from the sub-area for the ten-year return period event. Sec. 6.3, Performance Standard Trigger#4 Redevelopment on a site of 5 acres or more,where pervious surface is disturbed and final impervious surface, in aggregate, exceeds one acre or five percent of a site. Trigger curb around parking lot,pad for picnic table, (more than 1000 square feet of pervious surface) Page 60, Variance/Waiver Process Use waiver language from other WMO's/WD's (see attached Shingle Creek language) Supervisors:Louise Smallidge,Chair • Gary Baumann,Secretary • Tom Meyer,Treasurer • Jane Krentz • Tom Armstrong,Jr. • • The revised timeline for the WMP (as of 5/12/04) is as follows: Distribute to communities for review. (June) Make changes based on communities input(Early July) Distribute for formal 90-day DRAFT review(Late July-- Early October) MSCWMO response to comments (October-November) Public Hearing on Plan(November) Distribute for formal 45-day FINAL review(December—Early January) MSCWMO makes final changes (January-- February) Submit to BWSR for approval, 90-day(February—April) Adoption by MSCWMO Board(April) Supervisors: Louise Smallidge,Chair • Gary Baumann,Secretary • Tom Meyer,Treasurer • Jane Krentz • Tom Armstrong,Jr. May-11-04 03:10 From-Kennedy & Graven +6123379310 T-633 P.002/002 F-919 • • a' 7. WETLAND MITIGATION SECURITY DEPOSIT. A project review applicant under these rules in a municipality where the Commission is the LGU shall provide a security to assure that the replacement plan is followed. The amount of the security shall be calculated on a case-by-case basis based on the estimated cost of construction, follow up and contingency. The security may also include an amount determined by the Commission to be sufficient to protect the public in the event the replacement plan does not succeed. 8. DEPOSITS. The Commission will maintain an accounting for all deposits made under this Rule. No interest will be paid to applicants for funds held in deposit. RULE K-VARIANCES I. WHEN AUTHORIZED. The Commission may grant variances from the literal provisions of these Rules. A variance shall only be granted when in harmony with the general purpose and intent of the Rules in cases where strict enforcement of the Rules will cause practical difficulties or particular hardship, and when the terms of the variance are consistent with the Commission's water resources management plan and Minnesota IStatutes, chapter 103D. I 2. HARDSHIP. "Hardship" as used in connection with the granting of a variance means the land in question cannot be put to a reasonable use if used under the conditions allowed by these Rules; the plight of the applicant is due to circumstances unique to the land and not I created by the applicant; and the variance, if granted, will not adversely affect the essential character of the locality and other adjacent land. Economic considerations alone shall not constitute a hardship if a reasonable use for the land exists under the terms of these Rules. Conditions may be imposed in the granting of a variance to insure compliance and to protect adjacent land and the public health and general welfare of the Commission. I 3. PROCEDURE. . An application for a variance shall describe the practical difficulty or particular hardship claimed as the basis for the variance. The application shall be accompanied with such surveys, plans, data and other information as may be required by the Commission to consider the application. 4. VIOLATION. A violation of anycondition imposed in the A po granting of a variance shall be a violation of these Rules and shall automatically terminate the variance. 41, ��V __ ___ �'" RULE L-ENFORCEMENT ~- 1. ADMWISTRATION. These Rules shall be administered by the Commission, The Commission shall consider applications required under these Rules and determine whether such applications should be approved, approved with conditions,or denied. Such determination shall be communicated to the member city in which the project lies and to the applicant. Shingle Creels and West Mississippi Watershed Menagemen,Commissions Page 25 Rules and Standards laauory,2003 0 rig' 1. . _ MIDDLE ST. CROIX RIVER WATERSHED MANAGEMENT ORGANIZATION 1380 West Frontage Road, Hwy 36 Phone: 651-275-1136, ext.22 e c Stillwater, MN 55082 Fax: 651-1254 ° f` A Joint Powers Watershed Management Organization composed of ten St. Croix ValleyMr ' '',,. Communities that was established under State Statute 103B to cooperatively manage water ' resources within the watershed. AGENDA Regular Meeting of the Middle St. Croix Watershed Management Organization October 7,2004 ,..),l Call to Order FLU PJ 'J Approval of Minutes a) September 9, 2004 Minutes Regular Board Meetings are held at 7:00 PM Washington Conservation District Office 7 Treasurer's R ort Anders Hansen tValley gMall � � ) 1380 West Frontage Road,Hwy 36 Stillwater,MN Report of Savings Account, Assets .,e , Approve payment of bills 4. Old Business (AAA J° ,p oc-' (0}/ MLCCS Presentation—Jaen Thatcher, WCD odIA) ' a) St. Croix River Bridge Crossing Project Update l' ,, b) Watershed Management Plan a. 60 day review extended b. Groundwater implications to the plan. 1 " , c. How to respond to comments Mb, I �� 5. New Business �+ `"� go,,,...:,„ imov 0--- i� `r�„`tom /4,64(9K" ) h c, 6. Other Agenda Items g wv4So— Vall 7. Adjourn ' �y� Pl��( , .1,./by ev{lki, dV JO 4 6"13 u"1\ 41 goof 3 iag) dilloOd&r VI‘ r g) cllj L1 ctkii„,,, 91)/ii As) O ;,,N k Po ei on f tit/ .-, a� fid'434%4'4 �/1,3.." 0, 4 4 tAt6iAlii Midd St. Croix atershed Management Organization AMBER COMMUNITIES: Afton,Bayport,Baytown Township,Lakeland, ear' Sillies,Lake St.Croix Beach,Oak Park Heights,St.Mary's Point,Stillwater and West Lakeland Township • ci sss I Ve12-uv (iiC: - ( U f (1561-&-(,/\ (2Dis,3 iks4, hicam- ci (cam c A Ae, mud, gps i* .Do g%55 Nom Au - L 1 45 Lw4K pviAAAJ-1`) d„,,Y, ! 1 e:)Nt v 5„„,70/A4-, ri or rima fr.) 6,&.) vww� 1,0 10--65PA)-* 0-4AP j'44 pet, NivtA- Ch4-1 Andor N � • MIDDLE ST. CROIX RIVER WATERSHED MANAGEMENT ORGANIZATION i\ „Irs 1380 West Frontage Road, Hwy 36 Phone: 651-275-1136, ext.21 Stillwater, MN 55082 Fax: 651-1254 A Joint Powers Watershed Management Organization composed of ten St. Croix Valley IMP , Communities that was established under State Statute 103B to cooperatively manage water resources within the watershed. LETTER OF TRANSMITTAL DATE: September 30,2004 TO: Middle St. Croix River Watershed Management Organization FROM: Melissa Lewis RE: October 7,2004 Meeting Packet WE ARE SENDING: Via Mail: X Courier: Fax: Agenda Item DESCRIPTION 1 Agenda—October 7,2004 MSCWMO meeting Minutes 2 Draft minutes for the September 2,2004 Board meeting Approved minutes for August 12,2004 Board meeting 3 Old Business St. Croix River Crossing comment letter to Todd Clarkowski Correspondence not distributed Date Sender Item September 14,2004 Eric Johnson,City of Oak Park Heights Request for copy of letter from Sen.LeClair referenced in the July 8t°minutes September 17th,2004 MDnistrictAssociation of Soil and Water Conservation Information packet for 68th Annual Meeting and Trade Show September 20'h,2004 Dale Homuth,MN DNR Transfer of Permit#98-6117,Lake St.Croix Boathouse Please call me with any additional agenda items or agenda changes at 275-1136,ext.22. Sincerely, Melissa Lewis Cc: Betsy Vance,Recording Secretary Charlie LeFevere,Kennedy&Graven Konrad Koosmann,WCD City of Oak Park Heights(Agenda and Minutes Only) City of Stillwater(Agenda and Minutes Only) Jeff Davis,SEH(Agenda and Minutes Only) Middle St. Croix Watershed Management Organization MEMBER COMMUNITIES: Afton,Bayport,Baytown Township,Lakeland,Lakeland Shores,Lake St.Croix Beach,Oak Park Heights,St.Mary's Point,Stillwater and West Lakeland Township IF - • ...:,_ .. .. - ,i z„,T / Minnesota Board of ) Water&Soil c.- ( �O Resources .J"Apasawkowook L� \ SEP 3 0 2004 t/Pr) )) I September 28, 2004 i\ IN David Beaudet Cindy Weckworth Middle St. Croix WMO Washington County 1308 W. Frontage Road 14949 62nd Street N Highway 36 PO Box 6 Stillwater, MN 55082 Stillwater, MN 55082 Subject: Middle St. Croix WMO Plan Status and Levy Ability Dear Mr. Beaudet and Ms. Weckworth: I am writing this letter to you both to address issues that have arisen during the planning process for the Middle St. Croix Watershed Management Organization (MSCWMO). A number of calls have been made to a variety of BWSR staff and I thought it prudent to consolidate the agency response in order to ensure consistent replies. The first issue we were asked about was the status of the MSCWMO Plan. The MSCWMO Plan was intended to extend to the year 2000. It is true that a plan update was not performed immediately. This was done with the concurrence of the BWSR. Figuring prominently in this decision was the Washington County Water Governance Study and the subsequent Court of Appeals process. BWSR considers the MSCWMO Plan to still be in effect per 103B.231, Subd. 4 (d). This statute states that the old plan will remain in effect"until amended or superceded..."Put another way, the WMO has a plan,but it is not considered current. Levy authority of WMOs has also been discussed. Both the WMO and the County have a solid grip on the history of efforts to provide levy authority to WMOs. The Mississippi WMO remains the prime example of how this can be attained via special legislation. BWSR would not oppose efforts to obtain special legislation by the Middle St. Croix WMO. This would be in keeping with the original legislative intent of MS 103B.245. We are not concerned that WMO Board Members are not elected. This is similar to the MS 103D Watershed Districts which are appointed by County Commissioners. It is our understanding that the Middle St. Croix WMO will be submitting a watershed plan for state agency review shortly. A prominent comment which will come from BWSR will concern the need to update the Joint Powers Agreement to reflect the authorityanticipatedManagement in the Mana ement Plan. In Bemidji Brainerd Dei/uth Fergus!-al/,c Marshall Neu,Ulm Roe/i sfee Saint Paul 3217 Bemidji Avenue N. 217 S.7th Street 594 S.Lake Avenue 413 W.Stanton AI entre 1400 E.Lyon Street 261 Highway 15 S. 40 16th Street S.E. One West Water Street Bemidji,MN 56601 Suite 202 Room 403 Fergus Falls,MN 56537 Box 267 New Ulm,MN 56073 Suite A Suite 250 phone(218)755-4235 Brainerd,MN 56401 Duluth.MN 55802 phone(218)736-5445 Marshall,MN 56258 phone('507)359-6074 Rochester,MN 55904 Saint Paul.MN 55107 fax(218)755-4201 phone(218)828-2383 phone(218)723-4752 lax(218)736-7215 phone(507)537-6060 lax(507)359-6018 phone(507)285-7458 phone(651)282-9969 fax(218)828-6(136 fax(218)723-4794 fax(507)537-6368 fax(507)280-2675 fax(651)284-0000 Web:www.bwsr.state.mn.us TTY: (800)627-3529 An equal opportunity employer e Printed on recycled paper • lilt II addition,BWSR will require full compliance with MS 103.227 Subd. 2 whic makes city staff(and city consultants) ineligible to be appointed as WMO boar members. BWSR has held-up plan approval for several organizations recently on this point with the approval of the BWSR Board. These organizations included the Elm Creek, Pioneer/Sarah Creek, Shingle Creek, and West Mississippi WMOs. The last issue concerns BWSR's advocacy of the Washington County Water Governance Study. BWSR advised the Marine on St. Croix, Lower St. Croix, and Middle St. Croix WMOs of BWSR's requirement for the WMOs to address to what extent they will conform with the revised implementation plan. We made this requirement of all three WMOs because of the County's stature as a major stakeholder in each of the plans and our favorable opinion of the study process and conclusions. BWSR does not have the statutory or rule authority to compel the WMO to adhere to the details of the revised implementation plan. The BWSR Board will eventually review the Watershed Plan against MS 103B and Minnesota Rules chapter 8410 in making their decision whether to approve these plans. Sincerely, Steven C. Woods Assistant Director Sw/lw J:\LGUs\WMOs\Middle St.Croix\Levy and Plan Status.doc 4111 • Legislative Associates, Inc. P.O.Box 2131 II0130th Street,Suite 500 Stillwater,MN 55082 (6511439-7681 Washington,D.C.20007 (202)625-4356 Fax(651)439-7319 October 4, 2004 Fax(2o2)625-4363 Mr. Larry Freund, Director of Financial Management Department of Administration 50 Sherburne Avenue St. Paul, MN 55155 Dear Mr. Freund: Enclosed are data and materials which provides the information you requested regarding the State Storm Sewer Project at Bayport, Minnesota. Included are the following: 1. Testimony provided to the House Employment and Economic Development Finance Committee, and to the Senate Capital Investment Committee; 2. *Budget for the completion of Stage 2 of the project. 3. Location Map showing the site and options for the areas of work to be accomplished. 4. Map of Phase 1 work completed under previous State allocations. 5. Map of the four areas of concentration, horizontal control transverse stations, and vertical control bench marks. 6. Additional mapping and engineering work completed in 1992 which identifies the need for the need for the replacement of the State storm sewer, including the construction of alternate outlets to mitigate the flooding of Perro Creek. We apologize for not providing written reports with invoices submitted to the State over the past months. This will be corrected for future submissions. The work currently in progress is primarily"clean up"work on Stage 2, and plans and design work for the completion of the project. This work includes the following: 1. Recording of drawings; 2. Planning and design work on the alternate outlet; 3. Working with the Watershed Management Organization (WMO) to record the operations of the documentation of water levels in the Prison Pond (DNR Pond 82-301P): 4. Hydraulic work on the alternate outlet; 5. Projecting preliminary costs; ri‘; plY.4 1. • • 6. Eliminating flooding on the South Reach of Perro Creek. 7. Projection of the hydraulic profile. * The budget proposed in testimony was based on estimates made three years ago when the project funding was passed by both the House and the Senate, but vetoed by the Governor. The revised budget estimates are not yet complete, but we anticipate the cost estimates will be approximately$1.8 million to$2 million. We can discuss at your convenience, any other problems, additional changes in reporting, timing of the project, or clarification of issues needed in the completion of the State Storm Sewer. Thank you for the assistance you have provided us on this project. ly, gra :21. c dwin E. Cain cc: John McPherson, Chairman Middle St. Croix Watershed Management Organization Mike McGuire, City Administrator City of Bayport, MN Jeff Davis, PE, Short Elliott Hendrickson, Inc. 2. m. ��c1NE5pT9 • 1• Minnota Department of Transportation a, r '; 1,. 5'a Metropolitan Division �F nePT' IAAA Waters Edge n 1500 West County Road B2 q )v......., Roseville MN 55113Q covv.--A croT Ldis". ..42, October 1, 2004 &51‘1 ( Mr. John McPherson t v✓ President, MSCWMO 1380 West Frontage Road,Hwy 36 // Stillwater, MN 55082 Dear Mr. McPherson, Thank you for your letter dated September 15, 2004 regarding the St. Croix River Crossing Project. You raised several concerns that I would like to address below. Request for information on proposed changes in drainage areas. While we do not recall a specific request being made in this regard, attached to this letter is the information in tabular form for existing conditions and for each alternative taken from the draft EIS document that is currently under review. Please note that a formal request has not been made to Brown's Creek Watershed District to divert a portion of runoff from the Marketplace Pond drainage area directly to the St. Croix River. The concept of diverting the drainage area was in response to the need to balance volume changes, meet physical constraints of a lowered roadway profile and new interchange, and to address regulatory concerns and comments from various agencies and communities. As preferred alternative design progresses, further discussion with the various regulatory agencies will occur. Calculation of stormwater runoff. On January 15, 2004, a technical meeting of agencies charged with water resources responsibilities or jurisdiction took place at the Washington County Government Center. At that meeting a draft design criteria matrix was introduced that summarized the various rules and regulations that pertain to the proj ect and a recommended set of goals to be met project-wide was presented. Excellent feedback was received at that time. (Among the feedback was the MSCWMO letter stating that there is no official comment at this time... Our response to the letter was that we would continue to provide your organization with meeting agendas and encouraged you to bring any potential issues/concerns to our early attention). Following the January 15 meeting, the matrix was updated and then presented to the Water Resources Sub-Group that was formed under the auspices of the Stakeholders Task Force. The Water Resources Sub-Group met three times. Together with the wide range of other topics considered during those meetings, further discussions of the matrix occurred and the matrix was again updated in April, 2004. As with many aspects of this An equal opportunity employer • S r project, water resources issues have proven to be quite complex. The matrix identifies eight agencies that have varying degrees of responsibility for water resources in Minnesota. Unfortunately, not all agencies apply the same regulations or guidelines to stormwater treatment and discharge. Meeting all requirements of all agencies would be impossible since many overlap each other. The matrix is an attempt to summarize the many regulations and to synthesize them into a single set of goals to which the design would then adhere. All preliminary designs currently meet these goals utilizing appropriate and practical solutions and all calculations have been conducted using standard engineering methodologies. Consistency with the North Washington Groundwater Study. During preferred alternative design, recommendations made in the North Washington Groundwater Study that pertain to the project corridor will continue to be referenced. Also enclosed is a copy of the 2004 Supplemental Draft Environmental Impact Statement and a copy of the mailing that was sent out to the public. Public comments on the Supplemental Draft Environmental Impact Statement will be taken until October 6, 2004. I apologize for any lack of communication that may have occurred. Please contact Todd Clarkowski, 651-582-1169, or myself, 651-634-2356, with any further questions. Sincerely, Keri B. Aufdencamp, Hydrologist Mn/DOT Metro Water Resources CC: Todd Clarkowski • • • $ 0 9 / \ / 2 m a E I 0 2 ± o . = ' / a ) E E o m . o 7k k K a- AWi\ fƒ 2 f III C 5 § a # 2 . . ' � m = c o % k c O = g o . .x c 2 c .0 / V. 0 • c k k $ \ k ° E2 \ 2 2 2 3 o 130 LC) o) 0LO0 � \ � gCR7 � O kq \ gE # � o q � agn = � wb / 2Z Iso2 \ N- O a ~ N- qqm 3 \ m < � rgw ¥ mm / m \ 2kN7 = # \ 0) q0 o << < o k CO N Z Z 2 Ce w I o (/) E 2 0 o < % � = o 2 a � C -0 2 / 0 2 x eiy § c a_ 0 f 2 I § Cl) a) 00 as • i : (i) � 0Im2IE • • , . . 1 l'' Q M1 a? Cll - = Z F s=,Y qit a y OZ ='t OH J� X i z i U o Ial q 8 r a= N " °sem Bio° 4 ?i 3 3 ga„” ff i iF= WOaalg EFx t ee 81A J ° 4wo 8'r! II a 119 1Et 1 { � !s hUll! ill 1111111 1/ E Hi 11 II 1 i - it� I1 if ',iPI R11F �Q}M� A \! 3 PI ill wrg 111 I all 2 li o U ll 1. 15 U l` lilt a °.61 c 1 of 111111 1 ail! I a aI-t 1 0 I a1.-g 'Raga ii.: Will o t r = i R gs a , Ili e= 1:11 75 Z I II! M pit II I !11 , ! O W :a-: ! e to z g PI Oil CI 2 F .81 J1x 11 3 $t . Y €1-1 I�a I 26 illi f III 4€I il0 cc m �. ao ' l $ 5id 0; n /u Et° s x aaMa m li t ' �Fi �1§1111If Id 4 tkiIli s=" 3' II aE a 11 !a WI 11 111 SE7�A iF Iis B s1 • '.l If to oafs i !aa '. e; ill a` 1 pi a ae a s jaes }� i1 F iiiwi A-8... :e ; i ;aa t;'sYiii; eF hal, ; ; 7 1 a I deE la a _ a€� . .� P li ;. 8 F1 Ilii IN1.} }Ey1/ Qj4 9 ."pit 1 glil Mill F[E(t 1 b Y 8$ poi 6Y �€ g = e f ep? �76.7�' Wd I 1n �n a 3 py= I I Iof g p�rc 3 =i c N ; $ e V3 zk >>$ 4 0° m ne. Y1. 3 = o=. r 3 a = • Ill, MLCCS. • e ro. Ara Status Map member 2004 Completed MLCCS 67% of metro area* *Only contains data has been folded into 1 St.Francs I-- t the DNB's MLCCS composite layer. 1 r i The data is available on the MLCCS FTP site: ► Linwood Twp ftp://ftp.dnr.state.mn.us/pub/mlccs R Eos senna ' Contact: Y Bums TwP. oak Grove Twp. Bart Richardson 1 bart.richardson 0dnr.state.mn.us 'F 651-772-6150. 1 . aamcey A n V7 k c1 Columbus Twp Andover Ham Lake Forest Lake Twp. New Scardla Twp. 1 an Twp. DaYlon i ; Madna uat CroixChampkn'Coon Rapids Blame kSi' f Hugo May Twp cProc ono la Corcoran Maple Grove Brooklyn Park 'LakgFa Greenfield gs North Oaks ite Bear T Twp - yn Ce r s v w Grant Twp.,^, I n t 0 n • O r Va•nais Hai;4` '^ ede 9 Medina New H•.e ' kndepende- :Plymouth o R...•:,..le • 'St.. Litt- ,...7 legitLf;• R06aVINeg. fal .. i ape St. ,,, ennepig '. �♦ V -. IYor. ^..11.1-S ,i ,akda. Lake Elmo _ .. ':.�Wue'rt vn `.� dao - • 1 Mmneapoks . LakekndT Hollywood Twp. Watertown Twp MMt�rista mile ii MunnN St Paul ... C,. ordta _Iti •t >+ �u ~ Woodbury l,r�- Vuxona •Y !{4•ka: 'uaRP I a .4„.1, IW{ Camden Twp. JJaconia T •.1110 LakeMwn up. Eden Prairie Ste C a r v - r Bloomington = 'r � Groyne Haig (trove T, ,_rI �-.,1 lawT ,, Shakopee i oung Am e wp Benton Twp. Dahlgren Twp. Ca Bumsvipe Savage, �%e d LoursvAb Twp. Apple Velby Rocemotzd ��Prior Lake �e '. lilliiiil '' Hancock Twp. San Francisco Tt .1: D a k o Ta .'"' _,.-"'" sand Creek T .:da Riva 14. r ••ver �e takeNlle wrena T 7W- wP Spring Lake Twp. Nro TwP' MarstrnTwp. 'la T .. c� rpt. � cJ C O t t Vemrigion Twp. 1 Ik`Wai e H4itn 4 Bteketey Two. Belle Plaine Twp. Helena Twp. Cedar Lake Twp. New Market Twp. Eureka Twp. Castle Rock Twp. Hampton Twp. OwglceT �., ._ Newrprdpue ,..,� "-.wy+-.A.e ---4_•-�v. ..,-,.+mow•-•-xx.X ^t^"— —4. Ii. � ,T Green vale Twp.tjtauft3 to. Mme) ♦ w L 14Po S '. w�aasis dwle:; DNR Central Region ienamieiioiiomkwmthmei September 2034 • DRAFT Middle St Croix Watershed Management Organization Regular Meeting August 12, 2004 Washington County Conservation District Present: Chairman John McPherson,Members Robert Kamps,Jim Gilles, Anders Hansen,David Beaudet; John Jansen,Ron Nelson and Nancy Jacobson Call to Order: Chairman McPherson called the meeting to order at 7:03 PM. Approval of the Minutes: Correction was made to the minutes of the July meeting. Mr. Jansen moved to accept the minutes as corrected. Mr. Nelson seconded the motion. The motion carried. Treasurer's Report: Mr. Hansen presented the treasurer's report, with a balance of$80,210. The following invoices were presented for payment: Kennedy, Gravens and LeFevre for $23.25 and Washington County Conservation District for$649.25. Mr. Nelson moved to accept the treasurer's report and pay the presented invoice. Mr. Gilles seconded the motion. The motion carried. Mr. Hansen reported to the board that an audit would be considered after the first of the year. St Croix River Bridge Project: No new status was available. Draft Watershed Management Plan: The board reviewed the response to member community draft distribution. Comments and changes were noted in the response drafted by Mr. Fossum,based upon the Washington County's concerns over ground water issues, and the response received from Mr. Clayton Eckles. Mr. Jansen moved the report be distributed,with the changes noted. Seconded by Mr. Hansen,the motion passed. Levy Authority: The board reviewed the status of the request for levy authority. Mr. Jansen moved, seconded by Mr. Beaudet, to revise the reponse to the County board workship information draft concerning the status of the Watershed Management District. The motion carried. Mr. Jansen moved to pass a resolution from the Middle St Croix Watershed District to support and solicit support from the member communities and the County Board. Mr. Gilles seconded the motion. The motion carried. Washington County Conservation District: Mr. Conrad Kusman informed the board the Mr.Fossum has resigned his position, and introduced the new administrator from the Washington County Conservation District. Page 1 of 1 DRAFT Middle St Croix Watershed Management Organization Regular Meeting August 12, 2004 Washington County Conservation District State of Minnesota Bonding Update: The legistlature will not be recalled for a special session, so there is no information to report. Development Review Update: There is nothing to report 2003 Annual Report Mr. Fossum submitted the 2003 Annual report reviewed by the board in July to Washington County. 2005 Annual Budget: A draft of the 2005 annual budget of$35,000 was presented for review. Levy amounts to the member communities were not changed from the 2004 level. Budget categories and spending levels were carried over from the 2004 budget. Mr. Beaudet, seconded my Mr. Kamps,moved to direct the administrator to distribute the proposed 2005 contributions to the member communities. Adjourn: Mr. Hansen moved to adjourn the meeting. Mr. Jansen seconded the motion. The motion carried. Chairman McPherson adjourned the meeting at 8:15 PM Respectfully Submitted, Elizabeth A. Vance Recording Secretary Page 2 of 2 • IIIII ;ashington 1380 W. Frontage Rd; Hwy 36 Stillwater,Minnesota 55082 Conservation District (651)275-1136 (651) 275-1254 Fax TO: Middle St. Croi Watershed Management Organization FROM: Jyneen Thatc a etland Specialist DATE: September 8, 2004 RE: Land Cover Mapping In February, 2004, the MSCWMO provided a letter of support to this office, for an LCMR grant application for Land Cover Mapping for Natural Resource Protection. I am happy to announce that this project was approved, pending final legislature authorization of funds, but reduced to half of the original application. Consequently, the full project (which includes six metro _ counties) will be scaled back unless additional local funding is obtained. This project will complete the map for Washington County, using a relatively new protocol known as Minnesota Land Cover Classification System (MLCCS). This system integrates classification of cultural features, non-native vegetation, natural and semi-natural vegetation into a comprehensive classification system. Unlike land-use maps, this system identifies what the surface cover is, and is capable of detailed descriptions such as plant community identification and percent impervious surface. For example, instead of identifying "Open Space", the map might indicate "Oak Forest, moderate quality, due to presence of buckthorn". The information is presented as a GIS data layer, maintained by the MnDNR. As such, it is a public document available to agencies or organizations for land-use planning purposes. At this time, I am asking you to consider contributing finially towards the mapping effort in your watershed. Our calculations indicate approximately 2,50 cres in the watershed need to be mapped o ensure that the mapping is done to a consistent level of detail, we ask you to contr.. - $9500 This amount is approximately half of the anticipated cost, and can be spread across 200 an. 2006. We anticipate using the LCMR funds first, drawing on the local funds as necessary to complete the project to the desired level of detail. Any dollars you provide would be used within the MSCWMO. Feel free to contact me if you have questions about this request, or about MLCCS mapping in general. Thank you for considering this request. er 419J4,- (7,-' .. 4 • 4 MIDDLE ST. CROIX RIVER WATERSHED MANAGEMENT ORGANIZATION 44 1380 West Frontage Road, Hwy 36 Phone: 651-275-1136, ext. 21 Stillwater, MN 55082 Fax: 651-1254 A Joint Powers Watershed Management Organization composed of ten St. Croix Valley ,.. Communities that was established under State Statute 103B to cooperatively manage water ¢' resources within the watershed. 'r Opt February 19,2004 Jeff Berg Washington Conservation District 1380 W. Frontage Rd., Hwy 36 Stillwater, MN 55082 Re: LCMR Grant Letter of Support We understand that Washington Conservation District, along with others, is in the process of applying for a LCMR grant to conduct landcover mapping in unmapped portions of Washington County. Realizing the importance of this type of mapping to comprehensive watershed management, the Middle St. Croix Watershed Management Organization supports the LCMR grant proposal; Application of Land Cover for Natural Resource Protection. This project would complete comprehensive land cover mapping for Washington County and be a valuable resource for all local governments and watershed Organizations. This effort includes which includes 12,672 acres in our watershed, would be of great benefit as we carry out our watershed activities. Specifically, the landcover mapping will assist us with such priority activities as: o Identifying&prioritizing land and water resources. o Assisting in development/refinement of hydrologic/recreational corridors. o Identifying functions &values of land and water resources o Determining the extent of land cover types including impervious areas o Providing a working document to interact with our citizen and community constituents. We wish you luck with your application and look forward to a successful project. Sincerely, Bob Fossum Administrator, MSCWMO Cc: MSCWMO Representatives Middle St. Croix Watershed Management Organization MEMBER COMMUNITIES: Afton,Bayport,Baytown Township,Lakeland,Lakeland Shores,Lake St.Croix Beach,Oak Park Heights,St.Mary's Point,Stillwater and West Lakeland Township • • the St. Croix River Corridor. Table 2.5 indicates the status of shoreland ordinances for the communities with in the Middle St. Croix watershed. Table 2.5 Status of Shoreland Ordinances DNR-Approved Community Shoreland Ordinance Comments Afton No SWSRMP adopted. Bayport Covered under Washington County's Baytown Township No shoreland ordinance,which incorporates SWSRP. Lakeland Lakeland Shores Lake St.Croix Beach Oak Park Heights No SWSRP adopted. St:Mary's Point No SWSRP adopted. Stillwater West Lakeland Covered under Washington County's Township No shoreland ordinance, which incorporates SWSRP 2.3 Human Environment 2.3.1 Transportation Continued improvement of county and township roads in the Middle St. Croix watershed will most likely occur due to increased development pressure. Improved access to the major arterial transportation systems of State Highway 36 and Interstate 94 will be needed and these improvements have the potential to impact the water resources of the watershed. 2.3.2 Airports Lake Elmo Airport is the nearest facility to the Middle St. Croix watershed and is located approximately one mile west of the watershed's western boundary. With the exception of groundwater resource concerns in this particular area, the airport is not expected to have an impact on the plans of the MSCWMO. 2.3.3 Gravel Mining Four active gravel-mining operations exist in the Middle St. Croix watershed, (Figure 2.8), located in Baytown and West Lakeland Township. Mining regulation and permitting is a function of Washington County. Also, gravel-mining operations that have stormwater not contained directly on-site; and/or have wastewater from dewatering of pits, quarries, wash water from washing sand, gravel or aggregate, cooling cutting saws, or from other sources that may carry sediment and solids, which are pollutants, to waters Middle St. Croix Watershed Management Organization 12 12/7/2004 DRAFT 1110 • ,OLE ST. CROIX RIVER WATERSHED ."� MANAGEMENT ORGANIZATION I n , 1 JO West Frontage Road, Hwy 36 Phone: 651-275-1136, ext.21 a" �_�;?° Stillwater, MN 55082 Fax: 651-1254 B r A Joint Powers Watershed Management Organization composed of ten St. Croix Valley i . Communities that was established under State Statute 103E to cooperatively manage water -41, resources within the watershed. aia LETTER OF TRANSMITTAL DATE: September 2,2004 TO: Middle St.Croix River Watershed Management Organization FROM: Melissa Lewis RE: September 9,2004 Meeting Packet WE ARE SENDING: Via Mail: X Courier: Fax: Agenda Item DESCRIPTION 1 Agenda—September 2,2004 MSCWMO meeting 2 Minutes Approved minutes for July 8,2004 Board meeting 5 New Business Budget and Priority Request from Jane Harper,Washington County Correspondence not distributed Date Sender Item August 2004 MNDOT St.Croix River Crossing Project Draft Environmental Impact Statement September 2004 MN Pollution Control Agency Impaired Waters and Local Government Workshop Please call me with any additional agenda items or agenda changes at 275-1136,ext.22. Sincerely, Melissa Lewis Cc: Betsy Vance,Recording Secretary Charlie LeFevere,Kennedy&Graven Konrad Koosmann,WCD City of Oak Park Heights(Agenda and Minutes Only) City of Stillwater(Agenda and Minutes Only) Jeff Davis,SEH(Agenda and Minutes Only) Middle St. Croix Watershed Management Organization MEMBER COMMUNITIES: Afton,Bayport,Baytown Township,Lakeland,Lakeland Shores,Lake St.Croix Beach,Oak Park Heights,St.Mary's Point,Stillwater and West Lakeland Township 110 • ate St. Croix Watershed Management Organization Budget Proposed : Se.tember 9, 2004 2003 Bud•et 2004 Bud s et 2005 Bud•et Cities/Towns $70,000 $35,000 $35,000 Insurance $2,600 $2,600 $2,600 Minutes/Reports $2,000 $2,000 $2,000 Administration $3,000 $3,000 $3,000 Water Monitoring $3,000 $3,000 $3,000 Washington Conservation District $700 $700 $700 Audit $250 $250 $250 Contingency $450 $450 $450 Legal $3,000 $3,000 $3,000 New Water Plan/Projects $55,000 $20,000 $20,000 • 4111 DRAFT Middle St. Croix Watershed Management Organization Regular Meeting September 9, 2004 Washington County Conservation District Present: Chairman John McPherson, Members Robert Kamps, John Jansen, Ron Nelson, David Beaudet, Anders Hansen, Jim Gillis, B d•Beaaelet Others Present: Melissa Lewis, Administrator; Elizabeth Vance, Recording Secretary Call to Order: Chairman McPherson called to the meeting to order at 7:02 PM. Approval of the Minutes: Mr. Hansen moved to approve the minutes of the regular meeting held August 12th,2004. Seconded by Mr. Beaudet the motion carried. Treasurer's Report: Mr. Hansen presented the treasurer's report for August. The account balance is $82,527. Bills received include the soil and water conservation district invoice for the second half payment on comprehensive plan and administrative services and Kennedy and Graven for legal services. Mr. Beaudet moved to authorize payment of the invoices presented. Mr. Nelson seconded the motion. The motion carried. Mr. Beaudet followed with a motion to accept the treasurer's report as presented. Seconded by Mr. Nelson,the motion carried. St Croix River Bridge Crossing: Comments to the Environmental Impact Statement were required by October 6th. Mr. Beaudet suggested that the board draft comments to the Environmental Impact Statement prior to the October 6th deadline. It was suggested that the text of the comments be similar to that of the comments to the scoping document, in that there is not enough detail to fully review,but expect any plan be compliant with the Water Management Organization's requirements, currently under review. The board agreed that Ms. Lewis and Mr. Beaudet would draft the response. Mr. Beaudet moved that the board authorize the Chairman to sign the response drafted by Ms. Lewis and Mr. Beaudet. Mr. Kamps seconded the motion. The motion carried. Mr. Beaudet reported that there would be public information forums on September 21 and September 22 in Somerset and Stillwater. Mr. Beaudet reported on a meeting held by Minnesota Department of Transportation on the options under consideration, including the current buttonhook alternative, and the newly proposed cut and cover plan. The board reviewed potential impacts on the local communities and businesses. Watershed Management Plan: Ms. Lewis reported that the draft Watershed Management Plan was sent out for 60-day review. Copies were sent electronically(via CD)to save money for printing, and made paper copies available upon request. Levy Authority: 14/141')IQ lt, e 1J w L 0 b 9i Page 1 of 3 DRAFT September 9, 2004 DRAFT Middle St. Croix Watershed Management Organization Regular Meeting September 9, 2004 Washington County Conservation District A number of the board members were present at a County Board review of the request for levy authority. The request is based upon the state statutes used to grant levy authority to the Middle Mississippi Watershed Organization. Mr. Jansen provided a brief summary of the precedent. The result of that review is that there are undefined issues, which need to be addressed before the board would support the request in concept. To date, nothing has been received. The board is to provide a detailed specification of those concerns. It was suggested the board members continue informal discussion with state legislative members as well as the county board members. Adoption of the 2005 Budget: Based upon the approved levy amounts approved by the board and forwarded to member communities, Ms. Lewis prepared a draft 2005 budget. The budget categories, and amounts are carried over form the 2004 budget. Mr. Nelson moved to approve the budget. Mr. Jansen secondedithe motion carried. Budget Information Request: Ms. Lewis presented a request for budget summary information from Jane Harper, Washington County staff, focusing on budget programs and key programs for the coming year. Program for 2005 include the same continuing programs listed for 2004. The same priorities are carried forward. Mr. Gilles moved to provide the summary information requested, as drafted by Ms. Lewis. Mr. Jansen seconded the motion. The motion carried. Mr. Jansen suggested that a budget note, a reference should be made that with the sub watershed district, the largest completed projects have been completed with state, not local community funds. State of Minnesota Storm Sewer Project, Phase III Update: Mr. Jansen reported to the board that Mr. Cain requested a meeting to review the lobbying effort in the previous session. Funds are in the budget to support an ongoing lobbying effort into the next session. Chairman McPherson will set up a meeting with Mr. Cain. It is not certain which member communities will continue in the lobbying effort. Development Update: Mr. Erickson, with Foltz, Freeman and Erickson, want to put in irrigation well in their Oak Park Heights project, Presbyterian Homes, and have applied for a DNR permit. They developers have a letter of approval from the Minnesota Department of Health, and are looking for comment from the Watershed Management Organization. Oak Park Heights is expected to have concerns in that this irrigation well is deeper than the city well. The board discussion raised issues with the impact of such a deep well with s �IJ�U�`►' Mr. Jansen moved to authorize Ms. Lewis to raise these concerns when meeting with the (I�jt, developer. Mr. Jansen further moved t motion is to disapprove in concept a well at that ) r./- depth and rate of flow. Seconded by Mr. + , the motion carried. N Conservation District Monitoring Progr Page 2 of 3 DRAFT September 9,2004 ' • • • DRAFT Middle St. Croix Watershed Management Organization Regular Meeting September 9, 2004 Washington County Conservation District The contract for the Conservatio District the ongoing monitoring program and administration for 2005ae resented for review. The contract contains no changes from the 2004 contract. * eaudet moved approval of the contract. Mr. Jansen seconded. The motion carried. Land Cover Mapping Grant: A letter was received from Ms. Jyneen Thatcher of the Conservation District Office; reference the remapping of land cover and a request for further assistance. The LCMR legislative grant was approved,pending authorization of funds, for the work on the southern half of Washington County. The level of funding for the grant was less than the request submitted, covering 50%of the anticipated costs. The board, in concept, supported the request,but would like a presentation by the District office, on the work to be completed, and value to the Water Management Organization. Mr. Gilles moved that the Conservation District be invited to address this issue with the board. Seconded by Mr. Nelson, the motion carried. Other Business: Mr. Jansen attended a ground water consortium presentation on incorporating ground water in water management plan. Draft rules and concerns were provided based upon a Washington County sponsored study. It was suggested that these concerns be addressed in the WMO second generation plan. Provided handouts from presentation to Melissa for reference. Mr.Jansen moved to authorize Ms. Lewis to research these recommendations and compare to the draft second-generation plan to identify any potential gaps, and report back to the board at the next regular meeting. Mr. Gilles seconded the motion. The motion carried. It was suggested that the regular meeting for October be rescheduled due to board member conflicts. Mr. Beaudet moved to change meeting day to Oct 7th and direct Melissa to contact absent members. Mr. Nelson seconded the motion. The motion carried. Adjourn: Mr.Nelson moved to adjourn the meeting. Mr., Beaudet seconded the motion. The motion carried. Chairman McPherson adjourned the meeting at 8:30 PM. Respectfully Submitted, Elizabeth A. Vance Recording Secretary Page 3 of 3 DRAFT September 9, 2004 • • MIDDLE ST. CROIX RIVER WATERSHED MANAGEMENT ORGANIZATION r � .4 Al 1380 West Frontage Road, Hwy 36 Phone: 651-275-1136, ext.22 r,..,1111( Stillwater, MN 55082 Fax: 651-1254 A Joint Powers Watershed Management Organization composed of ten St. Croix Valley ',t:. Communities that was established under State Statute 103E to cooperatively manage water „ 1h resources within the watershed. .,R NOTICE OF PUBLIC HEARING TO CONSIDER THE DRAFT SECOND GENERATION WATERSHED MANAGEMENT PLAN OF THE MIDDLE ST. CROIX WATERSHED MANAGEMENT ORGANIZATION The Middle St. Croix Watershed Management Organization will conduct a Public Hearing on Thursday, January 13, 2005 at 6:00 at the Baytown Township Community Building, 4020 McDonald Drive N, Stillwater, MN to review the Draft Second Generation Watershed Management Plan. All who wish to comment are asked to attend and be heard. Dated: December 30, 2004 Middle St. Croix Watershed Management Organization MEMBER COMMUNITIES: Afton,Bayport,Baytown Township,Lakeland,Lakeland Shores,Lake St.Croix Beach,Oak Park Heights,St.Mary's Point,Stillwater and West Lakeland Township III • , n\v irt Draft Middle St. Croix Watershed Management Organization Regular Meeting all to Order: I airperson McPherson called the Meeting to order at 7:00PM. l Members Present: John McPhe'rson, Robert Kamps, Jim Gilles, Anders Hansen, David Be d, Ron Nelson, John Janssen,I* J Ji l aff Present: Melissa Lewis. c09 L A-/ "`'I ‘A-512•12" �` 5JI �'� s - /Approval of the September 9 2004 Meeting Minutes. Beaudet, seconded by Kamps moved to approve the September 9, 2004 meeting minutes with corrections. Motion Carried. Treasurer's Report: Treasurer Hansen presented the treasures report; the WMO has a balance of$81,141.56. The following bills were presented for payment: Washington County Conservation District for $673.00 and 597.60. Nelson, seconded by Jansen moved the treasurer's report and to pay the bills as presented. The motion Carried. Old Business: A. MLCCS Presentation Ms. Thatcher made a presentation of the land survey identification process and the State of Minnesota Grant to pay for the proposed work. The project would start in July of 2005 and be completed in 2006. The WMO next generation plan indicates this is a project that will be completed as part of the management plan. The acceptance of the grant by the Middle St Croix WMO and by providing up to $10,000 in additional funds to the Conservation District to do the work, the WMO will complete this management plan item. Nelson noted that with the inventory of land,the WMO and Communities would be in a better position to work together to protect the areas of the WMO with pristine land. Beaudet, seconded by Jansen moved to provide$4,000 dollars for the first half of the survey work, that the work will be done to reduce cost of mapping classification where possible and staff to report back to receive to remaining funding for 2006. Motion Carried,McPherson opposed. B. St Croix River Bridge Crossing Update Beaudet noted that the Stakeholders next meeting dates were October 26 and 27, 2004. The cost of the project has risen to near$400 million. • ID C. Watershed Plan: Jansen, seconded by Kamps,moved to extend the comment period for the second generation plan to the first Monday in December 2004. Motion Carried. Nelson, seconded by Gilles, moved to put all of the comments into a table for the WMO second generation plan for review. Motion Carried. New Business: A. MNDOT Letter: WMO received and reviewed a letter From MNDOT concerning the St Croix River crossing and WMO rules. B. Canceling the November Meeting: Beaudet, seconded by Nelson, moved to cancel the November 9, 2004 meeting. Motion Carried. Gilles, seconded by Kamps, moved to direct staff to provide comments to plans submitted for review by the WMO as required to comply with the 60 day rule. Motion Carried. C. Adjournment: Gilles, seconded by Hansen,moved to adjourn. Motion Carried. Meeting adjourned at 8:35 PM. • / • ‘eit poit 6-5\0.1 0 Draft Middle St. Croix atershed Management Organization n Regular Meeting (*IA Call to Order: Chairperson McPherson called the Meeting to order at 7:00PM. Members Present: John McPherson, Robert Kamps, Jim Gilles,Anders Hansen, David Beaudet,Ron Nelson, John Jansen,Nancy Jacobson and44elbns— Staff Present: Melissa Lewis. ° Approval of the September 9 2004 Meeting Minutes. Beaudet, seconded by Kamps moved to approve the September 9, 2004 meeting minutes with corrections. Motion Carried. Treasurer's Report: Treasurer Hansen presented the treasures report; the WMO has a balance of$81,141.56. The following bills were presented for payment: Washington County Conservation District for $673.00 and 597.60. Nelson, seconded by Jansen moved the treasurer's report and to pay the bills as presented. The motion Carried. Old Business: A. MLCCS Presentation Ms. Thatcher made a presentation of the land survey identification process and the State of 1` Minnesota Grant to pay for the proposed work. The project would start in July of 2005 and be completed in 2006. The WMO next generation plan indicates this is a project that will be completed as part of the management plan. The acceptance of the grant by the Middle St Croix WMO and by providing up to $10,000 in additional funds to the Conservation District to do the work, the WMO will complete this management plan item. Nelson noted that with the inventory of land,the WMO and Communities would be in a better I position to work together to protect the areas of the WMO with pristine land. Beaudet, seconded by Jansen moved to provide $4,000 dollars for the first half of the survey work,that the work will be done to reduce cost of mapping classification where possible and staff to report back to receive to remaining funding for 2006. Motion Carried, McPherson opposed. B. St Croix River Bridge Crossing Update Beaudet noted that the Stakeholders next meeting dates were October 26 and 27, 2004. The cost of the project has risen to near$400 million. i • C. Watershed Plan: Jansen, seconded by Kamps, moved to extend the comment period for the second generation plan to the first Monday in December 2004. Motion Carried. Nelson, seconded by Gilles,moved to put all of the comments into a table for the WMO second generation plan for review. Motion Carried. New Business: A. MNDOT Letter: WMO received and reviewed a letter From MNDOT concerning the St Croix River crossing and WMO rules. B. Canceling the November Meeting: Beaudet, seconded by Nelson,moved to cancel the November 9, 2004 meeting. Motion Carried. Gilles, seconded by Kamps,moved to direct staff to provide comments to plans submitted for review by the WMO as required to comply with the 60 day rule. Motion Carried. C. Adjournment: Gilles, seconded by Hansen,moved to adjourn. Motion Carried. Meeting adjourned at 8:35 PM. • Regular Meeting Agenda Middle St. Croix Watershed Management Organization September 9,2004 Washington Conservation District (Located in River Heights Plaza, Stillwater,next to the Washington County License Center) 7:00 PM-Regular Meeting Agenda 1. fto Order (--17A16(-7 2. __}fpproval of Minutes aro a) August 12, 2004 Minutes gi fir--L' — r 11( 3. asurer's Report(Anders Hansen) L oW c 'itif 11, ' 'S� ` 66 Report of Savings Account,Assets S'it Approve payment of bills &(v 20° 't 4. Old Business 37 '1r St. Croix River Bridge Crossing Project Update $ 3 i. 0 0 Watershed Management Plan 53.2)istribution for 60 day review sent August 19, 2004 Levy Authority 5. New Business coag, Budget and Priority Request from Jane Harper, Washington County 00 State of MN Storm Sewer Project, Phase III &Bonding Update c) Development Review Updates It' ilk - 6. Other Agenda Items 11,,t ar 1-� .i -0#iia 7. Adjourn PE. ,--'� 1b ' Middle St. Croix Watershed Management Organization IMUNITIES: Baytown Township,Lakeland,Lakeland Shores,Lake St.Croix Beach,Oak Park Heights,St.Mary's Point,Stillwater and West Lakeland Township • • MIDDLE ST. CROIX RIVER WATERSHED MANAGEMENT ORGANIZATION t14 1380 West Frontage Road, Hwy 36 Phone: 651-275-1136, ext. 21 Stillwater, MN 55082 Fax: 651-1254 y A Joint Powers Watershed Management Organization composed of ten St. Croix Valley Communities that was established under State Statute 103B to cooperatively manage water resources within the watershed LETTER OF TRANSMITTAL DATE: September 4, 2003 TO: Middle St. Croix River Watershed Management Organization FROM: Bob Fossum RE: September 11, 2003 Meeting Packet WE ARE SENDING: Via Mail: X Courier: Fax: Agenda Item DESCRIPTION 1 Agenda—September 11,2003 MSCWMO meeting Minutes—Draft minutes for the August 25, 2003 Emergency meeting 2 Draft minutes for August 14th,2003 Board meeting Approved minutes for the July 10th,2003 Board meeting Informational MSCWMO JPA Community Fee Calculation Formula Item Informational WMOs in the Metro Area map Item MSCWMO Board Members: If any other items need to be included for the September 11,2003 meeting please contact me at 651-275-1136, ext. 21. Sincerely, ior / Bob Fossum cc: Dawn Hilde, EOR, Inc. Jeff Davis, SEH Inc. (Agenda only) Middle St. Croix Watershed Management Organization MEMBER COMMUNITIES: Afton,Bayport,Baytown Township,Lakeland,Lakeland Shores,Lake St.Croix Beach,Oak Park Heights,St.Maty's Point,Stillwater and West Lakeland Township • FINAL Middle St. Croix Watershed Management Organization Regular Meeting September 9, 2004 Washington County Conservation District Present: Chairman John McPherson, Members Robert Kamps, John Jansen, Ron Nelson, David Beaudet, Anders Hansen and Jim Gillis Others Present: Melissa Lewis, Administrator; Elizabeth Vance, Recording Secretary Call to Order: Chairman McPherson called to the meeting to order at 7:02 PM. Approval of the Minutes: Mr. Hansen moved to approve the minutes of the regular meeting held August 12th, 2004. Seconded by Mr. Beaudet the motion carried. Treasurer's Report: Mr. Hansen presented the treasurer's report for August. The account balance is $82,527. Bills received include the soil and water conservation district invoice for the second half payment on comprehensive plan and administrative services and Kennedy and Graven for legal services. Mr. Beaudet moved to authorize payment of the invoices presented. Mr. Nelson seconded the motion. The motion carried. Mr. Beaudet followed with a motion to accept the treasurer's report as presented. Seconded by Mr.Nelson,the motion carried. St Croix River Bridge Crossing: Comments to the Environmental Impact Statement were required by October 6th. Mr. Beaudet suggested that the board draft comments to the Environmental Impact Statement prior to the October 6th deadline. It was suggested that the text of the comments be similar to that of the comments to the scoping document, in that there is not enough detail to fully review,but expect any plan be compliant with the Water Management Organization's requirements, currently under review. The board agreed that Ms. Lewis and Mr. Beaudet would draft the response. Mr. Beaudet moved that the board authorize the Chairman to sign the response drafted by Ms. Lewis and Mr. Beaudet. Mr. Kamps seconded the motion. The motion carried. Mr. Beaudet reported that there would be public information forums on September 21 and September 22 in Somerset and Stillwater. Mr. Beaudet reported on a meeting held by Minnesota Department of Transportation on the options under consideration, including the current buttonhook alternative, and the newly proposed cut and cover plan. The board reviewed potential impacts on the local communities and businesses. Watershed Management Plan: Ms. Lewis reported that the draft Watershed Management Plan was sent out for 60-day review. Copies were sent electronically(via CD) to save money for printing, and made paper copies available upon request. Levy Authority: Page 1 of 3 FINAL September 9, 2004 FINAL , Middle St. Croix Watershed Management Organization Regular Meeting September 9, 2004 Washington County Conservation District A number of the board members were present at a County Board review of the request for levy authority. The request is based upon the state statutes used to grant levy authority to the Middle Mississippi Watershed Organization. Mr. Jansen provided a brief summary of the precedent. The result of that review is that there are undefined issues, which need to be addressed before the board would support the request in concept. To date, nothing has been received. The board is to provide a detailed specification of those concerns. It was suggested the board members continue informal discussion with state legislative members as well as the county board members. Adoption of the 2005 Budget: Based upon the approved levy amounts approved by the board and forwarded to member communities, Ms. Lewis prepared a draft 2005 budget. The budget categories and amounts are carried over form the 2004 budget. Mr. Nelson moved to approve the budget. Mr. Jansen seconded the motion carried. Budget Information Request: Ms. Lewis presented a request for budget summary information from Jane Harper, Washington County staff, focusing on budget programs and key programs for the coming year. Program for 2005 include the same continuing programs listed for 2004. The same priorities are carried forward. Mr. Gilles moved to provide the summary information requested, as drafted by Ms. Lewis. Mr. Jansen seconded the motion. The motion carried. Mr. Jansen suggested that a budget note, a reference should be made that with the sub watershed district, the largest completed projects have been completed with state, not local community funds. State of Minnesota Storm Sewer Project, Phase III Update: Mr. Jansen reported to the board that Mr. Cain requested a meeting to review the lobbying effort in the previous session. Funds are in the budget to support an ongoing lobbying effort into the next session. Chairman McPherson will set up a meeting with Mr. Cain. It is not certain which member communities will continue in the lobbying effort. Development Update: Mr. Erickson, with Foltz, Freeman and Erickson want to put in irrigation well in their Oak Park Heights project, Presbyterian Homes, and have applied for a DNR permit. They developers have a letter of approval from the Minnesota Department of Health, and are looking for comment from the Watershed Management Organization. Oak Park Heights is expected to have concerns in that this irrigation well as deep as the city well. The board discussion raised issues with the impact of such a deep well with the high flow rates near the Lake Elmo Airport plume in Boutwells Landing. Mr. Hansen moved to authorize Ms. Lewis to raise these concerns high water flow, location and depth when meeting with the developer. Mr. Jansen Seconded, The motion carried. Conservation District Monitoring Program: Page 2 of 3 FINAL September 9, 2004 - 1110 111/ FINAL Middle St. Croix Watershed Management Organization Regular Meeting September 9, 2004 Washington County Conservation District The contract for the Conservation District to continue the ongoing monitoring program and administration for 2005 was presented for review. The contract contains no changes from the 2004 contract. Mr. Beaudet moved approval of the contract. Mr. Jansen seconded. The motion carried. Land Cover Mapping Grant: A letter was received from Ms. Jyneen Thatcher of the Conservation District Office; reference the remapping of land cover and a request for further assistance. The LCMR legislative grant was approved,pending authorization of funds, for the work on the southern half of Washington County. The level of funding for the grant was less than the request submitted, covering 50% of the anticipated costs. The board, in concept, supported the request,but would like a presentation by the District office, on the work to be completed, and value to the Water Management Organization. Mr. Gilles moved that the Conservation District be invited to address this issue with the board. Seconded by Mr. Nelson, the motion carried. Other Business: Mr. Jansen attended a ground water consortium presentation on incorporating ground water in water management plan. Draft rules and concerns were provided based upon a Washington County sponsored study. It was suggested that these concerns be addressed in the WMO second generation plan. Provided handouts from presentation to Melissa for reference. Mr. Jansen moved to authorize Ms. Lewis to research these recommendations and compare to the draft second-generation plan to identify any potential gaps, and report back to the board at the next regular meeting. Mr. Gilles seconded the motion. The motion carried. It was suggested that the regular meeting for October be rescheduled due to board member conflicts. Mr. Beaudet moved to change meeting day to Oct 7th and direct Melissa to contact absent members. Mr. Nelson seconded the motion. The motion carried. Adjourn: Mr. Nelson moved to adjourn the meeting. Mr., Beaudet seconded the motion. The motion carried. Chairman McPherson adjourned the meeting at 8:30 PM. Respectfully Submitted, gopm4nu.6W-se Elizabeth A. Vance Recording Secretary Page 3 of 3 FINAL September 9, 2004 • Middle St. Croix Watershed Management Organization August 14, 2003 WCD Offices DRAFT 1. Call to Order Meeting called to order at 7:15P.M.by Manager McPherson. Members Present John McPherson, West Lakeland; John Jansen, Lake St. Croix Beach; Anders Hansen, Baytown Township; Jim Gilles, Lakeland; David Beaudet, Oak Park Heights; Robert Kamps, Bayport, Jo Ella Givens, Lakeland Shores Absent: Pat Tinucci, Afton; Ron Nelson, Stillwater,Judy Bellairs, St. Mary's • Point Others in Attendance: Dawn Hilde, Recording Secretary, Bob Fossum, Administrator, WCD, Jeff Davis, SEH 2. Approval of Minutes Manager Beaudet made a motion to approve the July 10, 2003 minutes, seconded by Manager Jansen. Vote: 7/0 3. Treasurer's Report—Anders Hansen a) Report of Savings Account Assets The bank balance is $88,785.94. The check for Oak Park Heights overpaying their assessment for$699.00 has been lost. Afton has not paid their assessment of$313.60. b) Approve payment of bills Two bills for$1,919.62 were presented for payment by the WCD. Manager Jansen made a motion to re-issue a check to Oak Park Heights for the $699.00 overpayment, seconded by Manager Givens. Vote: 7/0. Manager Jansen made a motion to pay the WCD bills, seconded by Manager Beaudet. Vote: 7/0 Draft MSCWMO Minutes for August 14,2003 1 of 1 • 40 4. Old Business a) Perro Creek Outlet(State Storm Sewer, Phase II) Project construction Update. Jeff Davis, SEH, the engineer for this project presented two change orders for the project. 1) A drop structure requested by Corrections and 2) dewatering from manhole 28 to connection point. The maximum price for these changes would be approximately$37,200. The project cost would go from $722,00 to $759,000. Manager Beaudet made a motion to approve these two change orders, seconded by Manager Jansen. Manager Beaudet made an amendment to this motion to not do the Corrections change order for a drop structure if there are not enough funds, seconded by Manager Jansen. Additionally,Manager Beaudet suggested the total cost not to exceed $37,000, seconded by Manager Jansen. Vote: 7/0 Jeff Davis stated NSP is not giving an easement for the pipe. SEH is working with Excel to get the easement approved. b) Storm Sewer, Phase II/III Project: Funding, Timing and Design Phase III Study—alternate outlet for Perro Creek. Jeff Davis, SEH reported there is $204,000 left in the budget that is earmarked for study and design. SEH is recommending the MSCWMO expand culverts to move water into the river. The 1994 study of flooding issue showed the railroad embankment contributed to the flooding. Manager Beaudet asked what would happen if the MSCWMO extended the project further north into Bayport instead of doing additional railroad project. Manger Beaudet stated that the MSCWMO might want to wait another month until more information is available. If the easement issue holds up the construction we might need the money to pay construction penalties. Manager Beaudet made a motion for the MSCWMO to authorize $1,500 for SEH to study and suggest the options available, and then the MSCWMO could make a decision on one large project, seconded by Manager Jansen. Vote: 7/0 5. New Business a) Development Plan Review Bob Fossum has sent out a letter to respective mayors and chairs explaining the MSCWMO interim process for review and a draft application for them to review. Manager Beaudet made a motion to approve the application, seconded by Manager Givens. Vote: 7/0 Draft MSCWMO Minutes for August 14,2003 2 of 2 • • b) South Washington County Groundwater Study Bob Fossum stated that the local watersheds are holding off on their financial support commitments until BWSR has finalized the amount of the grant for the groundwater study. This should be on the agenda for the next regular MSCWMO meeting. c) Watershed Management Plan Bob Fossum reported he is in the process of getting the digital information from the county. 6. Other Agenda Items Manager Beaudet passed out copies of the 2004 MSCWMO budget. Manager Beaudet made a motion to approve the 2004 proposed budget and to send out to each organization the share amount they will be allocated by September, seconded by Manager Kamps. Vote: 7/0 Manager Jansen reported on a meeting with Mr. Fitzpatrick and the Lower St: Croix Watershed. This group is working on a Joint Powers Agreement and then will draft a watershed plan. Their main issue of concern is taxing power. Bob Fossum reported there were no reviews to be done this month. 7. Adjourn Manager Hansen made a motion to adjourn, seconded by Manager Givens. Vote: 7/0 Meeting adjourned at 8:45P.M. Respectfully Submitted, Dawn Hilde Draft MSCWMO Minutes for August 14,2003 3 of 3 • MIDDLE ST. CROIX WATERSHED MANAGEMENT ORGANIZATION (MSCWMO) 2003 ANNUAL REPORT i Prepared by: Middle St. Croix WMO Board of Managers July 2004 Middle St.Croix Water Management Organization(MSCWMO) DRAFT 2003 Annual Report Page 1 • • Table of Contents Middle St. Croix Water Management Organization (MSCWMO) 2003 Annual Report 1. Introduction 2. Organization and Budget a. MSCWMO Board of Managers b. MSCWMO Contract Support Staff c. Middle St. Croix Watershed Information d. 2003 MSCWMO Budget 3. Projects and Programs a. Watershed Management Plan b. Flood Mitigation of Perro Pond Watershed c. Local Water Management 3. Goals for 2004 a. 2004 Budget b. 2004 Work Plan Appendices Appendix A—Water Monitoring Summary Middle St. Croix Water Management Organization(MSCWMO) DRAFT 2003 Annual Report Page 2 • • 1. Introduction The Middle St. Croix Watershed Management Organization(MSCWMO) is a Joint Powers Watershed Management Organization composed of ten St. Croix Valley communities: Afton, Bayport, Baytown Township, Lakeland, Lakeland Shores, Lake St. Croix Beach, Oak Park Heights, St. Mary's Point, Stillwater, and West Lakeland Township. MSCWMO was established under State Statute 103B to cooperatively manage water resources within the watershed. The member municipalities and townships of the MSCWMO appoint one member each to the MSCWMO Board. The Middle St. Croix watershed encompasses approximately 19.8 square miles and is located in the east-central part of Washington County. Land use in the watershed is evenly split between agricultural uses, rural residential and high-density residential/commercial land uses. In general, the purposes of a Watershed Management Organization(WMO) are to conserve natural resources through land use planning, flood control, and other conservation projects to protect public health and welfare. The specific purposes of a watershed management organization are: 1. Cooperatively manage water resources in the watershed. 2. Inventory and assess the resources of the watershed. 3. Monitor the water quality of lakes and streams in the watershed. 4. Provide education on water related issues in the watershed. 5. Review development plans for stormwater management, erosion and sediment control, and provide wetland and shoreland protection. 6. Plan and implement capitol improvement projects that enhance the water resources of the watershed. The mission of the Middle St. Croix Watershed Management Organization is to jointly and cooperatively manage the water resources of the watershed. The ten member communities will do so to conserve and protect the water resources in an efficient and effective manner. 2. Organization and Budget a. MSCWMO Board of Managers The Middle St. Croix Watershed Management Organization(MSCWMO) is a Joint Powers Watershed Management Organization composed of ten St. Croix Valley communities that was established under State Statute 103B to cooperatively manage water resources within the watershed. Each member municipality or township within the MSCWMO appoints one member to the MSCWMO Board. The current representatives from each participatory community are listed below. Middle St. Croix Water Management Organization(MSCWMO) DRAFT 2003 Annual Report Page 4 • . Table 2. Middle St. Croix WMO Board of Managers John McPherson,Chair Anders Hansen,Treasurer David Beaudet 2398 Stagecoach Trail N P.O. Box 135 6400 Lookout Trail Stillwater, MN 55082 Stillwater,MN 55082 Oak Park Heights,MN 55082 (West Lakeland Representative) (Baytown Twn. Representative) Jim Gilles Joella Givens Nancy Jacobson 690 Quinnell Avenue N 165 Quinlin Ave.N. 2900 Itasca Ave. Lakeland,MN 55043 Lakeland Shores,MN 55043 St. Mary's Point,MN 55043 John Jansen Robert Kamps Ron Nelson P.O. Box 194 137 N. 5th St. 509 Broadway St. S. Lake St. Croix Beach, MN 55043 Bayport,MN 55003 Stillwater,MN 55082 Pat Tinuccii 346 Croixview Dr S Afton,MN 55001 b. MSCWMO Contract Support Staff The MSCWMO does not have any employees. The MSCWMO does contract with several organizations for professional services. What follows is a table of all contract support staff utilized by the MSCWMO in managing the Middle St. Croix watershed. Table 1. Middle St. Croix WMO Contract Support Staff Administrator Attorney Recording Secretary Bob Fossum Charles L. LeFevere Betsy Vance Washington Conservation District 470 Pillsbury Center 1045 Oakgreen Avenue 1380 West Frontage Road 200 South Sixth Street Stillwater,MN 55082 Highway 36 Minneapolis, MN 55402 Stillwater,MN 55082 612.337.9215 651.275.1136 Ext. 21 clefevere@kennedy-graven.com bob.fossum@mnwcd.org c. Middle St. Croix Watershed Information The Middle St. Croix watershed encompasses approximately 19.8 square miles and is located in the east-central part of Washington County. A distinct difference exists between the Middle St. Croix watershed and the other watersheds of Washington County in that the Middle St. Croix watershed has many small, parallel watersheds that all flow to the St. Croix, whereas the other watersheds in the County generally have one major drainage with a headwaters and outlet. Land use in the watershed is evenly split between agricultural uses, rural residential and high-density residential/commercial land uses. Middle St. Croix Water Management Organization(MSCWMO) DRAFT 2003 Annual Report Page 5 • • d. 2003 MSCWMO Budget (Adopted: August 14, 2003) 2002 Budget 2003 Budget REVENUE Cities/Towns $35,000 $70,000 Total Revenue $35,000 $70,000 EXPENSE ITEM Insurance ($2,600) ($2,600) Minutes/Reports ($2,000) ($2,000) Administration ($3,000) ($3,000) Water Monitoring ($3,000) ($3,000) Washington Conservation District ($700) ($700) Audit ($250) ($250) Contingency ($450) ($450) Legal ($3,000) ($3,000) New Water Plan ($20,000) ($55,000) Projects $0 $0 Total Expenses ($35,000) ($70,000) NET GAINS/LOSSES $0 $0 e. Audit Report Audits of the financial management of the District for the years 1997, 1998, 1999, 2000, and 2001 was performed by the firm of HLB Tautges Redpath, Ltd. For all years, these audits reveal, "The accounting policies of the Middle St. Croix Watershed Management Organization conform to generally accepted accounting principles applicable to governmental units." Middle St.Croix Water Management Organization(MSCWMO) DRAFT 2003 Annual Report Page 6 • 3. Projects and Programs a. Watershed Management Plan During 2003, MSCWMO began an update of its Watershed Management Plan. Through a comprehensive ordinance review specific performance standards we developed to address the concerns of MSCWMO regarding development and other disturbances that may impact water resources of the watershed. The Plan defines a more formalized project review program that will be coordinated through the existing review programs of each member community. b. Flood Mitigation of Perro Pond Watershed The State of Minnesota Storm Sewer Project Phase II was completed in 2003. The project is the 2"d of a 3-phased project that will provide a safe and outlet of Perro Pond and the Perro Pond watershed to the St. Croix River. Upon completion of the project, regular flooding that occurred in Bayport and in Oak Park Height's will be alleviated. This project was sponsored by the MSCWMO and funding was provided by the State of Minnesota through the 2002 bonding bill. c. Local Water Management The MSCWMO has implemented the following projects as a part of its overall goal of comprehensive watershed management: Project/Development Review In 2003, the MSCWMO reviewed and offered comment on several developments in the watershed. Nine individual projects were formally reviewed and comments were forwarded to the community in which it was proposed. The member communities incorporated as many of those comments into their approvals as possible. Integrated Water Quality Monitoring Program A comprehensive summary of the monitoring efforts in the Middle St. Croix watershed has been completed for this plan and these resources will be used to develop an overall water quality monitoring program for the future. This program will include baseline monitoring, coordinating, collecting and compiling data; acquiring equipment; and database management and maintenance. Volunteer monitoring will be incorporated into the MSCWMO Data Collection Program whenever feasible. The MSCWMO recognizes that volunteers can collect reliable,meaningful data that can be used in watershed planning and decision-making. Additionally, volunteer monitoring programs promote watershed stewardship by engaging, involving and educating volunteers in natural resource management. Contour Mapping Data Digital two-foot topographic data for the Middle St. Croix Watershed was purchased from Washington County for use in watershed, subwatershed, and drainage delineation. This high- resolution topographic data was also valuable for the evaluation of future developments and projects in the watershed. Middle St.Croix Water Management Organization(MSCWMO) DRAFT 2003 Annual Report Page 7 • 3. Goals for 2004 a. 2004 Budget REVENUE Cities/Towns $35,000 Total 2004 Revenue $35,000 EXPENSE ITEM Insurance ($2,600) Minutes/Reports ($2,000) Administration ($3,000) Water Monitoring ($3,000) Washington Conservation District ($700) Audit ($250) Contingency ($450) Legal ($3,000) Watershed Management Plan ($20,000) Projects $0 Total 2004 Expenses $35,000 PROJECTED 2004 NET GAINS/LOSSES $0 b. 2004 Work Plan Watershed Management Plan During 2004, MSCWMO will largely complete the update its Watershed Management Plan. The formalized review process will be completed. Formal approval by the Board of Water and Soil Resources and the MSCWMO Board will likely occur in early 2005. The updated plan will provide for comprehensive watershed management for several years. Secure Alternative Funding Mechanism In 2004, the MSCWMO will seek to be granted special legislation to have special levy authority. This would provide a more equitable funding mechanism for communities that are only partially in the MSCWMO. (Currently revenues are generated from community's general fund) This more stable funding mechanism would maintain a high level of accountability as nearly all of the members of the MSCWMO board are elected officials from their respective community. Flood Mitigation of Perro Pond Watershed The State of Minnesota Storm Sewer Project Phase III will be completed in 2004-2005. It is anticipated that funding for this project will be included in the 2004 Legislative Bonding Bill. Middle St. Croix Water Management Organization(MSCWMO) DRAFT 2003 Annual Report Page 8 • Phase III of this project will be the final portion to provide a safe conveyance of water from the Perro Creek subwatershed to the St. Croix River. The project will be the final stage in a piping system through the city of Bayport. Project/Development Review In 2004, MSCWMO continue to review and offer comment on developments and other projects within the watershed. Upon completing of the Watershed Management Plan, the costs of review will be charged back to the developer/land owner. This process will be developed during 2004. Integrated Water Quality Monitoring Program MSCWMO will continue its baseline monitoring program,which includes coordinating, collecting and compiling data, and database management. Monitoring will continue on the majority of the perennial surface waters in the watershed. (Lily Lake, McKusick Lake, Perro Pond) Middle St.Croix Water Management Organization(MSCWMO) DRAFT 2003 Annual Report Page 9 • • APPENDIX A 2003 WATER MONITORING SUMMARY The focus of the 2003 Water Monitoring Report is the summary and comparison of surface water quality in Middle St. Croix Water Management Organization (MSCWMO) (MSCWMO). The purpose of the monitoring program is to assess and document the current water quality conditions and to establish a long-term monitoring program to aid in the management of these resources. Middle St. Croix Water Management Organization(MSCWMO) DRAFT 2003 Annual Report Page 10 ID McKusick Lake Vital Statistics DNR ID # : 82-0020 LOCATION : NE14 Section, 29 T3ON-R2OW MUNICIPALITY : City of Stillwater LAKE SIZE : 60 acres MAXIMUM DEPTH : 15 ft. ORDINARY HIGH WATER MARK : 851.7 ft Lake Water Quality Summary Lake Grades 2003 2002 2001 2000 1999 1998 1997 1996 1995 1994 Total Phosphorus (mg/I) C CCC D DC D DD Chlorophyll-a (ug/l) B C C NA NA NA NA NA NA NA Secchi depth (ft) CCBB DDCDDD Overall C+ C C+ C+ D D C D D D McKusick Lake 75 70 .. 65 GP 55 50 s a 2 F.. 45 40 35 —. —Transparency Chlorophyll-a Total Phosphorus 30 1994 1995 1996 1997 1998 1999 2000 2001 2002 2003 Middle St.Croix Water Management Organization(MSCWMO) DRAFT 2003 Annual Report Page 12 S • McKusick Lake Surface Chlorophyll-a Total Surface Phosphorus /0o 0.2 90- o.1e- 70 J 0.0 VI a E 2 80- A q 0.12 ___'- _'-' r �1 50- 0 A s a+ N m i 0.09- u Ti t- - ---- --Ili- 10- 1 ._k 0.02- • 0 0 . 1/31/98 8115194 1928/95 3/17/97 7/2498 11/9/99 419/01 9/1102 1/1404 1/31/97 8/15/94 10/29/95 3/11/97 7/2498 12/8/99 416/01 9/1/02 1/14/04 McKusick Lake Elevation Secchi Transparency 857 1/31193 6/15/94 10/28/95 3/11/97 7/24/98 12/6/99 4/19/01 9/1/02 1/14/04 tElevation 0 OHW 959- z_ t i 111 lit---1/1 855- or W 6- V a ti .... \ ii_11_1Y 4 W CO 10- 12 852- 14- 851 16 - 10/m95 3/11/97 7/24/98 12/9/99 4/19/01 9/1/02 1/14/04 Middle St.Croix Water Management Organization(MSCW11vIO) DRAFT 2003 Annual Report Page 13 • • Lily Lake Vital Statistics DNR ID# : 82-0023 LOCATION : NE1/4 Section, 32 T3ON-R2OW MUNICIPALITY : City of Stillwater LAKE SIZE : 35.9 acres MAXIMUM DEPTH : 51 ft. ORDINARY HIGH WATER MARK : 844.8 ft Lake Water Quality Summary Lake Grades 2003 2002 2001 2000 1999 1998 1997 1996 1995 1994 Total Phosphorus (mg/I) C CC CC C CCC NA Chlorophyll-a (ug/I) B B A NA NA NA NA NA NA NA Secchi depth (ft) CCBCCCCCBNA Overall C+ C+ B C C C C C B- NA Lily Lake 65 60 55 v m 50 = 45 a 0 H 40 35 --j---Transparency --i--Chlorophyll-a Total Phosphorus 30 1994 1995 1996 1997 1998 1999 2000 2001 2002 2003 Middle St. Croix Water Management Organization(MSCWMO) DRAFT 2003 Annual Report Page 14 IP • Lily Lake Chlorophyll-a Surface Total Phosphorus 20 I 0.14 18- - 0.12 16- • y 0.1 14- OI :71. E • N i__i i i i__ 7 0.08- '? 0 7. 10 a 110 t N s 4.I il__ _-- a a M 6- it 0.04 • 4- � 0.02 ___ ___ l __ • 2- 8/15/94 10/2e/95 3111/97 7/24/96 12/6/99 4/19/01 9/1/02 1/14/04 6/15194 10/28/95 3/11/97 7/24/98 12/6/99 4/19/01 9/1/02 1/14/04 Lily Lake Bevation Secchi Transparencies 848.00 6115/94 10/28/95 3/11/97 7/24/98 12/6/99 4/19/01 9/1/02 1/14/04 0 —e--Elevation - L)1-1W 647.00- 5 Ilii, it... 848.50 I I t 11i :i::z ---- ( ,: y 845.00 ,1 11---- ---- OIC ! !i, Y I 4, W 844.50 --- - --- N 15 844.00 843.50- 20--- 843.00 84250 10/25/95 3/11/97 7/24/98 12/5/09 4119101 9/1/02 1/14/04 25 Middle St. Croix Water Management Organization(MSCWMO) DRAFT 2003 Annual Report Page 15 • • Perro Pond Vital Statistics DNR ID#: 82-0310 LOCATION : SW114 Section, 3 T29N-R2OW MUNICIPALITY : City of Oak Park Heights LAKE SIZE : 53 acres MAXIMUM DEPTH : Not Available ORDINARY HIGH WATER MARK: Not Available Perro Pond Elevation • 748.00 747.00 746.00 745.00 \fi,,1 A 744.00 - m Lu 743.00 - 742.00 - • 741.00 740.00 1/1/98 1/1/99 1/1/00 12/31/00 12/31/01 12/31/02 12/31/03 Middle St.Croix Water Management Organization(MSCWMO) DRAFT 2003 Annual Report Page 16 0 • MIDDLE ST. CROIX WATERSHED MANAGEMENT ORGANIZATION DRAFT #1 WATERSHED MANAGEMENT PLAN May 26, 2004 it 4,:'-`4,4,A,‘''ti: & .l t y 1 A YIPM-4,4 ��' M . 4 Vit+ ict'k j`� '�•, e: 4 e ,. r, r' v ty x m' ` k dF }y **7, 1Yn* *I"' t y 4 Prepared by: Washington Conservation District • • Table of Contents Table of Contents i Table of Figures iv Table of Tables iv Executive Summary v Abbreviations xi 1.0 Introduction 1 1.1 Purpose 1 1.2 Background 1 1.3 MSCWMO Mission Statement 2 2.0 Inventory and Assessment of Resources 5 2.1 Physical Environment 5 2.1.1 Climate and Precipitation 5 2.1.2 Geology and Groundwater Resource Data 6 2.1.3 Critical Recharge Areas 8 2.2 Hydrologic System 8 2.2.1 Subwatershed Summary 9 2.2.2 Wetlands Inventory 9 2.2.3 Existing Storm Sewer and Stormwater Systems 9 2.2.4 Existing Flood Level Information 9 2.2.5 Water Quality Data 10 2.2.6 Existing Monitoring Sites 10 2.2.7 Surface Water Appropriations 11 2.3 Human Environment 11 2.3.1 Transportation 11 2.3.2 Airports 11 2.3.3 Gravel Mining 12 2.3.4 Land Use and Land Cover Maps 12 2.3.5 Public Utility Service 12 2.3.6 Water-based Recreation Areas 12 2.4 Fish and Wildlife Habitat 12 2.4.1 DNR Classifications for Lakes, Streams and Wetlands 12 2.4.2 Biological Surveys, Reconnaissance Studies, Unique or Endangered Communities or Species 13 2.4.3 State Plans for Fish and Wildlife Areas 13 2.5 Pollution Sources 13 2.5.1 Groundwater Pollution 14 2.5.2 Surface Water Pollution 15 2.5.3 Landfills, Dumps, and Hazardous Waste Sites 16 2.5.4 Feedlots, Abandoned Wells, Under and Above Ground Storage Tanks16 3.0 Public Involvement and Development of Issues 43 3.1 Issue Identification Process 43 3.2 Issue Statements 43 4.0 Existing Regulatory Framework 45 Middle St. Croix Watershed Management Organization i 5/27/2004 DRAFT • • 4.1 Local Regulatory Framework 45 4.2 State and Federal Regulatory Framework 45 5.0 District-Wide Goals, Policies, and Standards 49 5.1 Water Quality 49 5.1.1 Key Water Quality Concepts 49 5.1.2 Water Quality Goals 50 5.1.3 Existing Water Quality Regulatory Framework 50 5.1.4 Policies and Performance Standards Regarding Water Quality 50 5.2 Water Quantity 51 5.2.1 Key Water Quantity Concepts 51 5.2.2 Water Quantity Goals 51 5.2.3 Existing Water Quantity Regulatory Framework 51 5.2.4 Policies and Performance Standards Regarding Water Quantity 51 5.3 Erosion and Sediment Control 52 5.3.1 Key Erosion and Sediment Concepts 52 5.3.2 Erosion and Sediment Goals 53 5.3.3 Existing Erosion and Sediment Control Regulatory Framework 53 5.3.4 Policies and Performance Standards Regarding Erosion and Sediment Control 53 5.4 Wetlands 54 5.4.1 Key Wetland Concepts 54 5.4.2 Wetland Goals 54 5.4.3 Existing Regulatory Controls 55 5.4.4 Policies and Performance Standards Regarding Wetlands 55 5.5 Education 56 5.5.1 Current Education and Outreach Program 56 5.5.2 Education Goals 57 5.5.3 Policies, Standards, and Criteria Regarding Education 57 5.6 Groundwater 58 6.0 Implementation 61 6.1 Prioritize Problems 61 6.2 Management Programs 61 6.2.1 Joint Powers Agreement 61 6.2.2 Administration 61 6.3 Implementation of Performance Standards 62 6.4 Information and Education Program 64 6.5 Data Collection Program 64 6.6 Studies and Capital Improvement Projects 65 6.7 Financing Approaches 66 6.7.1 Current Approach 66 6.7.2 Future Approach 66 7.0 Appendices 69 7.1 Appendix A: Washington County Water Governance Study 71 7.2 Appendix B: Subwatershed Summary 79 7.3 Appendix C: Water Resource and Wetlands Inventory 81 7.4 Appendix D: Water Quality Data 83 Middle St. Croix Watershed Management Organization ii 5/27/2004 DRAFT • • 7.5 Appendix E: Planning Meeting Minutes 89 7.6 Appendix F: Website References 96 7.7 Appendix G: Joint Powers Agreement 97 7.8 Appendix H: Amendments 98 Middle St. Croix Watershed Management Organization iii 5/27/2004 DRAFT • • Table of Figures Figure 1.1 Member Communities of the Middle St. Croix Watershed Management Organization 3 Figure 2.1 Profiles of Bedrock Formations 7 Figure 2.2 Bedrock Formations 17 Figure 2.3 Surficial Geology 19 Figure 2.4 Surficial Soils 21 Figure 2.5 Erosivity 23 Figure 2.6 MSCWMO Subwatersheds 25 Figure 2.7 Wetland Inventory 27 Figure 2.8 Gravel Mines 29 Figure 2.9 Groundwater Sensitivity to Pollution 31 Figure 2.10 DNR Protected Waters 33 Figure 2.11 Landuse and Land Cover 35 Figure 2.12 Aquifer Contamination and Well Advisory Areas 37 Figure 2.13 Landfills, Dumps, and Hazardous Waste Sites 39 Figure 2.14 Sealed and Abandoned Wells 41 Table of Tables Table 1 Area and Percentage of Member Communities 2 Table 2 Stillwater, Minnesota(1971-2000, 30-year record) Average Temperature and Precipitation 5 Table 3 Recurrence Intervals of Storm Events 6 Table 4 Water Quality Data for Lily Lake,McKusick Lake, and Perro Pond 11 Table 5 Existing Local Ordinances 46 Table 6 Performance Standards 63 Table 7 Information and Education Timetable and Expenses 64 Table 8 Finance Implementation Plans, Completion Dates, and Costs 67 Middle St. Croix Watershed Management Organization iv 5/27/2004 DRAFT • • Executive Summary To be completed betbre formal review process begsin;. Middle St. Croix Watershed Management Organization v 5/27/2004 DRAFT Glossary Acre-feet: Volume of water that would cover an acre of land to a depth of one foot. 43,560 cubic feet. Aquifer: A saturated permeable geologic unit that can transmit significant quantities of water. Banks and shorelines: Those areas along streams, lakes, ponds,rivers, wetlands, and estuaries where water meets land. The topography of banks and shorelands can range from very steep to very gradual. Bedrock: Any solid rock exposed at the earth's surface or covered by unconsolidated materials such as till, gravel, or sand. Best Management Practices (BMP): An engineered structure or management activity, or a combination of these, that eliminates or reduces adverse environmental effects of pollutants. Bluffline: A line along the top of a slope connecting the points at which the slope, proceeding away from the adjoining watershed channel, becomes less than twelve percent (12 %) and it only includes slopes greater than twelve percent(12%) visible from the river or any watercourse tributary to the river. Buffer zone: The area between a water body and upland areas. The area of land that a transition zone occupies varies and is greatly influenced by topography. Channel: A natural stream that conveys water. A ditch excavated for the flow of water. Cholorophyll-a: The primary photosynthetic pigment in plants, a measure of the algal biomass in lakes. cfs: cubic feet per second. Dissolved oxygen (D.O.): Oxygen dissolved in water. Fish and other water organisms "breathe"dissolved oxygen. Drainage density: Sum of all stream channel lengths divided by the watershed area; also affects the rapidity by which water can flow to an outlet. Drift: A catchall term that includes all rock materials that were deposited by glaciers. Drift is composed of stratified and unstratified materials ranging in size from clay to boulders. Erosion: The wearing away of the land surface by running water, wind, ice, or other geological agents. Middle St. Croix Watershed Management Organization vii 5/27/2004 DRAFT • • Eutrophic lake: A nutrient rich lake; usually shallow, green due to excessive algae growth and limited oxygen in the bottom layer of water. Eutrophication: The process of over-enrichment of lakes with nutrients, particularly phosphorus. The term also refers to the results of nutrient enrichment such as algae blooms and excessive plant growth. Glacial deposits: Materials deposited as a result of glacial activity. Gradients: Steepness or angle of slope. Also the rate of change in hydraulic head over distance. Groundwater: Water contained in or flowing through the ground. Amounts and flows of groundwater depend on the permeability, size, and hydraulic gradient of the aquifer. Groundwater discharge areas: Areas where groundwater exits to the surface. Depending on local topography,these may create continuously saturated area on slopes or in shallow depressions that support unusual plant communities, or may interact with surface water runoff to create ponds and deep-water wetlands. Groundwater recharge areas: Areas on the earth's surface where surface water can percolate down to the water table. Gully: A channel or miniature valley cut by concentrated runoff. High water elevation (HWL): The highest water elevation obtained during a design storm. Typically design storms are the 100-year storm. Hydrologic soil groups: The classification of soils by their reference to the intake rate of water,which is influenced by texture, organic matter content, stability of the soil aggregates, and soil horizon development. Hydrology: The study of water, especially its natural occurrence, characteristics, control, and conservation. Ice-contact stratified deposits: Sand, loamy sand, and gravel, locally stratified with silt and glacial till. Impervious surface: A surface not permitting penetration or passage of rainwater, snowmelt, etc. Infiltration rate: Rate at which water percolates into the ground. Land capability: The suitability of land for use without permanent damage. Middle St. Croix Watershed Management Organization viii 5/27/2004 DRAFT S • Landlocked basins: Basins or depressions that have no surface outlet to a body of water. Limiting factor: Environmental factor that limits the growth or activities of an organism or that restricts the size of a population or its geographical range. Loam: Soil composed of sand, silt, clay, and possible organic material. Lowest Floor Elevation: The lowest floor of the lowest enclosed area(including basement). Metropolitan Urban Service Area (MUSA): The outer edge of the metropolitan urban area, that part of the region which local and regional services are committed and which have urban levels of regional sewer and transportation services. Non-point source: Polluted runoff; nutrients and pollution sources not discharged from a single point. Ordinary high water level (OHWL): The highest level reached by a body of water under normal conditions. Outwash: Sandy or gravelly material deposited by glacial meltwater flowing from an ice sheet. Peak discharge: The maximum instantaneous flow from a given storm condition at a specific location. Permeability: The ability of a substance, such as rock or soil, to allow a liquid to pass or soak through it. Phosphorus: A nutrient essential to plant growth. Phosphorus is the nutrient most commonly limiting plant growth in lakes. ppb: Parts per billion. Protected Waters: Also know as "Public Waters". These terms relate to MN Statute 105.37, subdivision 14 of the MN DNR regulations and are identified on the DNR Protected Waters map of Washington County. Any work or alteration in the beds of these waters requires a permit from the DNR. Recharge: Water added to the saturated zone; the main source of recharge is precipitation. Secchi disc: Used to measure water transparency. A device measuring the depth of light penetration in water, typically a nine inch, white, circular plate attached to a rope. Middle St. Croix Watershed Management Organization ix 5/27/2004 DRAFT Sediment: Solid materials,both mineral and organic, that are in suspension, being transported, or have been moved from the site of origin by air, water, wind, gravity, or ice. Seeps: Groundwater/surface water connections caused by river or stream erosion into a near-surface aquifer. Stormwater runoff: Water falling as rain during a storm and entering a surface water body by flowing over land. Stormwater runoff picks up heat and pollutants from developed surfaces such as parking lots. Subwatershed: A smaller geographic section of a larger watershed unit with a drainage area between 2 and 15 square miles and whose boundaries include all the land area draining to a point where two second order streams combine to form a third order stream. Till: Un-stratified and unsorted material deposited directly by a glacier. Till consists of clay, sand, gravel, or boulders mixed in any proportion. Total Phosphorus: A measure of all the different forms of phosphorus in water. Includes phosphorus dissolved in the water, suspended or incorporated in algae or other organisms. Trophic state: The level of growth or productivity of a lake as measured by the phosphorus content, algae abundance, or depth of light penetration. Wetland: An area that under normal circumstances have hydrophytic vegetation,hydric soils, and wetland hydrology. A standardized methodology has been developed by the federal government determining the criteria by which legally recognized wetland boundaries are defined, typically known as wetland delineation. Watershed: The area of land draining into a specific body of water. Water transparency: A measure of the clarity of water; the depth at which an object can be seen in water. Middle St. Croix Watershed Management Organization x 5/27/2004 DRAFT • • Abbreviations BCWD Brown's Creek Watershed District BMPs Best Management Practices BWSR Minnesota Board of Water and Soil Resources CAC Citizen's Advisory Committee CIP Capitol Improvement Program COD Chemical Oxygen Demand COE U.S. Army Corps of Engineers DNR Minnesota Department of Natural Resources EPA United States Environmental Protection Agency FEMA Federal Emergency Management Agency GIS Geographic Information Systems HWL High Water Level MAC Metropolitan Airports Commission MDH Minnesota Department of Health MES Minnesota Extension Service Met Council Metropolitan Council MGS Minnesota Geological Survey MPCA Minnesota Pollution Control Agency MSCWMO Middle St. Croix Watershed Management Organization MUSA Metropolitan Urban Service Area NEMO Nonpoint source pollution Education for Municipal Officials NPDES National Pollution Discharge Elimination System NPS National Park Service NRCS Natural Resource Conservation Service NURP National Urban Runoff Program NWI National Wetlands Inventory NWL Normal Water Level OHWL Ordinary High Water Level PCBs Polychlorinated Biphenyls TAC Technical Advisory Committee TMDL Total Maximum Daily Load VOC Volitale Organic Compounds VBWD Valley Branch Watershed District WCA Wetlands Conservation Act WCD Washington Conservation District WD Watershed District WMO Watershed Management Organization WMP Watershed Management Plan USDA United States Department of Agriculture Middle St. Croix Watershed Management Organization xi 5/27/2004 DRAFT • 411 1 .0 Introduction 1.1 Purpose The Middle St. Croix Watershed Management Organization(MSCWMO) is a Joint Powers Watershed Management Organization composed of ten St. Croix Valley communities that was established under State Statute 103B to cooperatively manage water resources within the watershed. The member municipalities and townships of the MSCWMO appoint members of the MSCWMO Board. In general, the purposes of a Watershed Management Organization(WMO) are to conserve natural resources through land use planning, fld e fare WMOsare responsible for d other conservation projects to protect public health and w managing surface water only; groundwater management is optional. Watershed Districts (WD) are responsible for managing both surface and groundwater. The specific purposes of a watershed management organization are: 1. Cooperatively manage water resources in the watershed. 2. Inventory and assess the resources of the watershed. 3. Monitor the water quality of lakes and streams in the watershed. 4. Provide education on water related issues in the watershed. 5. Review development plans for stormwater management, erosion and sediment control, and provide wetland and shoreland protection. 6. Plan and implement capitol improvement projects that enhance the water resources of the watershed. As a requirement of the Washington County Water Governance Study(Appendix A), MSCWMO is required to complete a Second Generation Watershed Management Plan to be deemed an implementing, functional organization. The State Board of Soil and Water Resources (BWSR) also requires a Watershed Management Plan for WMOs. This plan will prioritize water related issues within the watershed, such as regulation, protection, and education; and include a plan to manage those resources. 1.2 Background The Middle St. Croix watershed encompasses approximately 19.8 square miles and is located in the east-central part of Washington County. A distinct difference exists between the Middle St. Croix watershed and the other watersheds parallel oWashington ash that t nall Countyu in that the Middle St. Croix watershed has many small, watersheds flow to the St. Croix,whereas the other watersheds in the County generally have one major drainage with a headwaters and outlet. Land use in the watershed is evenly split between agricultural uses, rural residential and high-density residential/commercial land uses. The ten member communities of the MSCWMO are: Afton,Bayport, Baytown Township, Lakeland, Lakeland Shores, Lake St. Croix Beach, Oak Park Heights, St. Middle St. Croix Watershed Management Organization 1 5/27/2004 • • Mary's Point, Stillwater, and West Lakeland Township (Figure 1.1). The area and percentage of the member communities is included in Table 1. Table 1 Area and Percentage of Member Communities Community Area (sq mile) % Area Afton 0.18 1 Bayport 1.70 9 Baytown Township 3.85 19 Lakeland 0.55 3 Lakeland Shores 0.30 2 Lake St. Croix Beach 2.06 10 Oak Park Heights 2.17 11 St. Mary's Point 0.66 3 Stillwater 3.35 17 West Lakeland Township 4.99 25 Total 19.81 100 The MSCWMO offices are located at: C/o Washington Conservation District 1380 West Frontage Road, Highway 36 Stillwater, MN 55082 1.3 MSCWMO Mission Statement The mission of the Middle St. Croix Watershed Management Organization is to jointly and cooperatively manage the water resources of the watershed. The ten member communities will do so to conserve and protect the water resources in an efficient and effective manner. Middle St. Croix Watershed Management Organization 5/27/2004 2 MIDDLE ST.CROIX WATERSHED MANAGEMENT ORGANIZATION 0...._ i i / ; I \_s if1 i �z � 1 -- ---- , �3 _ _ �1� —I 06 � 1`V SII �1 1 1 1 1 1 i ;1-\\ , 1 � % ,�\ � 'l u_IFF-1-1-' �� 1 1 � I -1-4 � ,I -J.- 77.E I ' / i ,/ 0 Municipalities 1 AFTON,CITY OF • MI IBAYPORT,CITY OF / I • I /f,` I. I= BAYTOWN TOWNSHIP / p _ •, �� LAKE ST CROIX BEACH,CITY OF •• r '', ' LAKELAND SHORES,CITY OF • I = LAKELAND,CITY OF - OAK PARK HEIGHTS,CITY OF ST MARY'S POINT,CITY OF r— --I— -'-- - IMISTILLWATERTOWNSHIP r- STILLWATER,CITY OF l _ i El WEST LAKELAND TOWNSHIP i G� _I ✓ L / , li-'i L III • • \, , S - :A, „,,, 1 . I , pp ____, I-Li 1 MSCWMO Boundary , —I Roads Sections Lakes and Wetlands gillijill - Figure 1.1 • St.Croix River MOebe4.”' r Communities Streams �� f the Middle StCroix Washington County Border Watershed Management Area Source of Data:Washington County Survey&Land Mgmnt Div. Created:12/03-P:\MSCWMO\2003 Plan\Maps,.apr Files\munLmscwmo.apr 2 0 2 4 Miles • i 2.0 Inventory and Assessment of Resources 2.1 Physical Environment 2.1.1 Climate and Precipitation The climate of the Middle St. Croix watershed is consistent with the climate for the Seven County Twin Cities Metropolitan Area. The summers are short in duration with an average temperature of 70 degrees Fahrenheit(°F). The ground is usually covered with snow from late fall to early spring. Average annual snowfall accumulation is 56 inches. The average winter season temperature is 17 °F. Average annual temperature and average annual precipitation is 45.4 °F and 29.41 inches respectively. Thirty-year average monthly temperature and precipitation data for Stillwater, Minnesota are summarized in Table 2. Data was collected by the National Weather Service Cooperative Program and is available at the State Climatology Working Group [State Climatology(DNR Waters), Extension Climatology(MES) and Academic Climatology (University of Minnesota)] web site: http://www.climate.umn.edu. Table 2 Stillwater,Minnesota (1971-2000, 30-year record) Average Temperature and Precipitation Month Temperature (°F) Precipitation(in) January 13.1 1.04 February 20.1 0.79 March 32.1 1.86 April 46.6 2.31 May 59.3 3.24 June 68.4 4.34 July 73.2 4.04 August 70.6 4.05 September 61.0 2.69 October 48.7 2.11 November 32.5 1.94 December 18.7 1.00 Annual Mean 45.4 29.41 Source: National Weather Service The standard values assumed for the probability of a rainfall event occurring in any given year is illustrated in Table 3. The recurrence interval is a measure of the probability of a particular storm event. For example, a rainfall event of 5.9 inches has a 1%probability of occurring in a 24-hour period during any given year, which is expressed as once in every 100 years. Middle St. Croix Watershed Management Organization 5 5/27/2004 • • Table 3 Recurrence Intervals of Storm Events Recurrence Interval 24-Hour Rainfall Amount (Years) (Inches) 1 2.4 2 2.8 5 3.5 10 4.2 25 4.7 50 5.2 100 5.9 Source: United States Weather Bureau TP-40 2.1.2 Geology and Groundwater Resource Data The geology of the Middle St. Croix watershed is typified by layers of glacial outwash and till ranging from 0 to 150 feet thick overlying bedrock. The surface materials are characterized primarily by glacial drift and outwash materials that were deposited by the St. Croix phase of the Superior Ice Lobe, a glacier that advanced from the Lake Superior Basin and receded about 12,000 years ago. These materials are often described as red sandy drift. The outwash and till are underlain by various layers of bedrock. St. Peter sandstone is the uppermost bedrock formation in the Middle St. Croix watershed(Figure 2.2). Beneath the St. Peter sandstone is Prairie du Chien Group, Jordan Sandstone, St. Lawrence Formation, Franconia Formation, Ironton& Galesville Sandstones, Eau Claire Formation, and the Mt. Simon Sandstone respectively. The older geologic deposits (bedrock formations) can be seen in the geologic cross sections shown in Figure 2.1. The surface materials in the central and northern parts of the Middle St. Croix watershed are till and ice contact stratified drift. Till is unsorted material deposited by the glacier itself, which has not been subsequently affected by flowing water. Ice contact stratified drift is material left at the edges and bottom of a glacier by melt water as the water leaves the glacier. These materials have a relatively low permeability and may retard recharge through them to bedrock aquifers. The southern portion of the watershed is mapped as outwash or alluvium that was deposited by large streams that carried meltwater away from the retreating glacier. A generalized map of the suficial geology is shown in Figure 2.3. A generalized map of the surficial soils, based on the Washington County Soil Survey,is shown in Figure 2.4. Middle St. Croix Watershed Management Organization 6 5/27/2004 • • Figure 2.1 Profiles of Bedrock Formations NW SE ST.PETER SANDSTONE GEOLOGIC CROSS SECTION-#1 ELEVATION(FT,MSL) GLACIAL DRIFT 900 DRIFT OUTWASH aoo ... `` PRAIRIE DU CHIEN DOLOMITE - ST.CROIX RIVER JBRDAN SAND$TONE ,� ' ' / ,' �- ' 7700 ' . � i ••�i X/ Y: M "A'. A '•y: :K• i•. DRIFT .2<:, i•". ST'LAJVRENGI/FORMIO i. ". /. . \ i .\ j 600 i :l' FRANCONIA,GALESVILLE SANDSTONE NW SE ELEVATION(FT,MSL) GEOLOGIC CROSS SECTION-#2 1000 GLACIAL DRIFT 900 ,` `ST.PETERAi(ASfQNE`. OUTWASH 800 \-------.L., PRAIRIE DU CHIEN DOLOMITE ST.CROIX RIVER JORDj 5.1NDSTON.- 700 _'...".............,.." i'•'' i •'\ ! '.•i• ice:. X. •>:: '../ i ST.LAW NCE F9RMO(V ATI FRANCONIA SANDSTONE 600 Middle St. Croix Watershed Management Organization 7 5/27/2004 i • The lakes and depressional wetlands of the Middle St. Croix watershed are largely the result of different types of kettle basins or hummocks. Kettle basins or hummocks form when glaciers retreat leaving large blocks of ice remain in the till or outwash. When these ice deposits melt, a depression is left, which eventually form the wetlands that are present today. These features are confined to the quaternary deposits above the bedrock. Groundwater in the bedrock and surficial materials of the Middle St. Croix watershed discharges to the St. Croix River. Additions are made to the water table mainly by infiltration from rainfall or snowmelt. Withdrawals from the water table occur by evaporation from the land surface and transpiration of water into the air by plants. Discharge to surface water bodies, infiltration into deeper aquifers, and groundwater pumping from wells also remove water from the surficial aquifer. The surficial groundwater table has experienced both seasonal and long-term fluctuations in the Middle St. Croix watershed. The long-term climatic cycles involving several wet years or dry years in succession has probably contributed the most to the fluctuating levels that have been experienced. The MSCWMO has identified areas within the Middle St. Croix watershed characterized by soil types, slopes, and water levels that, without proper corrective actions, are unsuitable for development of any type, or agricultural production involving intensive tilling of the land. Development or inappropriate farming practices in these areas increases soil erosion and sedimentation,potential for the introduction of toxic materials into groundwater, encourages pollution, destroys ecological and natural resources, and requires expenditures of public funds to correct deficiencies. Figure 2.5 is an inventory of areas highly susceptible to erosion from land disturbing activities. 2.1.3 Critical Recharge Areas The majority of recharge in the Middle St. Croix watershed occurs in the western portion of the watershed and discharge occurs predominately in the eastern portion of the watershed. Lakes, wetlands, depressions, and landlocked basins are all characteristic of the western portion of the watershed. Water drains to these vital areas and infiltrates into the groundwater system to later be discharged in the eastern portion of the watershed. Specifically locating these important groundwater recharge areas as well as a thorough analysis of the areas will be completed during the South Washington County Groundwater Study undertaken cooperatively by Washington County and several of the watershed management organizations in southern Washington County. 2.2 Hydrologic System The hydrologic system of the Middle St. Croix watershed is distinctive from other watersheds in the Washington County in that it is not one contiguous watershed draining to one location. The Middle St. Croix watershed drainage system is better described as many parallel drainages generally trending west to east that empty into the St. Croix River. Middle St. Croix Watershed Management Organization 8 5/27/2004 • • The general drainage system of the watershed can be broken into two different types. The first type is located in the western area of the Middle St. Croix watershed and is characterized by numerous small ponds and lakes, many of which are landlocked. The drainage density in this area of the watershed is low, indicating the permeable nature of the soils and the relatively flat relief of the terrain. The second type of drainage system in the Middle St. Croix watershed is located in the northern, eastern and southern portions of the watershed. Well-defined drainage systems and few lakes,ponds and wetlands characterize this area. The drainage density of this portion of the watershed is medium, indicating the permeable nature of the soils and moderate to steep relief of the terrain. This portion of the watershed is also dominated by the St. Croix River bluff, which has many perennial and ephemeral streams that flow parallel to each other and into the St. Croix River. With further urbanization, infiltration basins and stormwater ponds will be necessary to capture excess runoff from increasing amounts impervious surfaces. These basins will be created based on rates of urbanization and drainage potential of particular areas in Middle St. Croix watershed as they are developed. 2.2.1 Subwatershed Summary Ninety-seven subwatersheds have been delineated based on Washington County's 2-ft topographic mapping(Figure 2.6). Appendix B: Subwatershed Summary summarizes the subwatersheds in MSCWMO. 2.2.2 Wetlands Inventory Between 1988 and 1992, a National Wetland Inventory was conducted within the state of Minnesota. The completed inventory delineated areas that are critical wetland resources within the state and more importantly within Washington County. Figure 2.7 shows the results of the national wetland inventory for the Middle St. Croix watershed. Additionally, a water resource and wetland inventory was completed by the Washington Soil and Water Conservation District for MSCWMO in 1986. This inventory can be found in Appendix C. 2.2.3 Existing Storm Sewer and Stormwater Systems The municipalities of Stillwater, Oak Park Heights, Bayport, and Lakeland have developed and adopted stormwater management plans that include stormwater treatment facilities of various type and design. The remainder of the Middle St. Croix watershed has been and will likely continue to be served by stormwater ponds and other management facilities. 2.2.4 Existing Flood Level Information Flooding problems occur along the St. Croix River throughout the Middle St. Croix watershed. Units of government that have regulatory control or jurisdiction over the river and its floodplain include the US Army Corps of Engineers, US National Park Service, Minnesota Department of Natural Resources (DNR), Washington County, National Flood Insurance Program and the municipalities themselves. Although the MSCWMO will express concern and actively manage areas of its watershed that are adjacent to the St. Croix River, it will defer to these regulatory organizations. Middle St. Croix Watershed Management Organization 9 5/27/2004 • • The potential for flooding also exists along the intermittent streams and landlocked basins that exist in the Middle St. Croix watershed. The threat of flooding will increase if encroachment is allowed to occur, or if the drainage ways themselves do not have adequate capacity to handle increased runoff from possible development upstream. Flooding along Perro Creek in the City of Bayport is a problem currently being addressed. The State of Minnesota Storm Sewer Phase II Project designed for the Perro Pond and Perro Creek was completed in 2003 and will significantly decrease the chance of flooding along the creek and pond. By 2005, MSCWMO intends to have the final Phase(III) of the project completed, which will allow for the safe, year-around conveyance of water from the Perro Creek watershed to the St. Croix River. With further urbanization and increased storm runoff, future efforts to control flooding problems will be of increasing importance in the intermittent streams, lakes, wetlands, and landlocked basins within the Middle St. Croix watershed. 2.2.5 Water Quality Data The MSCWMO has monitored two lakes within the Middle St. Croix watershed to assess water quality. Lily Lake has records pertaining to water quality that date back to 1985. McKusick Lake water quality data dates back to 1994. Additionally,water level has been recorded on the two lakes mentioned previously, as well as Perro Pond. The summarized results of the lake water quality program in watershed are included in Table 4. More detailed information can be found in Appendix D. 2.2.6 Existing Monitoring Sites Three long-term monitoring sites exist within Middle St. Croix watershed and are presented in Table 4. Lily Lake and McKusick Lake are both water quality and water surface elevation sites. Perro Pond is a water surface elevation only site. Lily Lake and McKusick Lake both have surface elevation data records that start in the early 1900's, and Perro Pond has data beginning in 1993. All other monitoring sites are permitted sites monitored by the Minnesota Pollution Control Agency(http://www.pca.state.mn.us). The locations and data associated with these sites can also be accessed at the website above. Middle St. Croix Watershed Management Organization 10 5/27/2004 411 • Table 4 Water Quality Data for Lily Lake,McKusick Lake, and Perro Pond Lily Lake McKusick Lake Perro Pond Total Lake Total Lake Phosphorus Transparency Grade Phosphorus Transparency Grade Elevation Year (mg/L) (ft) (mg/L) (ft) 1985 NA 3.93 C NA NA NA 1990 NA 6.27 C NA NA NA 1991 NA 6.85 C NA NA NA 1994 NA NA NA 0.09 3.42 D 1995 0.05 9.61 B- 0.08 3.28 D 1996 0.04 7.07 C 0.10 3.42 D 1997 0.04 5.43 C 0.06 4.10 C 1998 0.05 5.23 C 0.08 3.70 D 746.07 1999 0.05 5.74 C 0.07 3.10 D 744.95 2000 0.06 4.93 C 0.04 8.14 C+ 745.20 2001 0.04 9.08 B 0.05 7.37 C+ 743.21 2002 0.04 6.57 C+ 0.06 4.79 C 745.54 2003 0.03 6.57 C+ 0.04 6.92 C+ 745.09 2.2.7 Surface Water Appropriations The Minnesota Department of Natural Resources (DNR) regulates surface water appropriations in the Middle St. Croix watershed. Information pertaining to permit appropriations can be obtained by contacting the DNR. 2.3 Human Environment 2.3.1 Transportation Continued improvement of county and township roads in the Middle St. Croix watershed will most likely occur due to increased development pressure. Improved access to the major arterial transportation systems of State Highway 36 and Interstate 94 will be needed and these improvements have the potential to impact the water resources of the watershed. 2.3.2 Airports Lake Elmo Airport is the nearest facility to the Middle St. Croix watershed and is located approximately one mile west of the watershed's western boundary. With the exception of groundwater resource concerns in this particular area, the airport is not expected to have an impact on the plans of the MSCWMO. Middle St. Croix Watershed Management Organization 11 5/27/2004 • • 2.3.3 Gravel Mining Four active gravel-mining operations exist in the Middle St. Croix watershed, (Figure 2.8), located in Baytown and West Lakeland Township. Mining regulation and permitting is a function of Washington County. 2.3.4 Land Use and Land Cover Maps The Middle St. Croix watershed lies along the eastern fringe of the Twin Cities Metropolitan Area. The current landuse is predominantly a mix of agriculture, rural and high density residential, and commercial areas (Figure 2.10). Each community has prepared a future land-use plan that indicates residential development will continue in the central and western portions of the watershed. 2.3.5 Public Utility Service The comprehensive plans of the member communities indicate no extension of the Metropolitan Urban Service Area into the Middle St. Croix watershed. With continued growth, municipal sewer lines of the cities of Stillwater, Oak Park Heights, and Bayport will continue to expand within the cities' borders to the west and north. The remainder of the watershed will continue use of individual waste disposal systems. 2.3.6 Water-based Recreation Areas The St. Croix River is the major water-based recreation area within the Middle St. Croix watershed and provides a variety of water-based recreation. Lily Lake in Stillwater has a public access and fishing pier and is available for boating, fishing, and swimming. The Minnesota DNR website(http://www.dnr.state.mn.us) provides information, resources, and maps about these specific recreation areas. 2.4 Fish and Wildlife Habitat The fish and wildlife habitat concerns for the MSCWMO are the natural areas associated with the St. Croix River and the wetlands, streams, and lakes draining to the St. Croix River. The St. Croix River is a body of water of regional importance, which the MSCWMO feels should be studied and addressed either at the regional or State level to adequately plan for future uses that take all interests into account. Impacts of future development in the Middle St. Croix watershed will need to be addressed as to how they may potentially reduce or hinder fish and wildlife habitat. The MSCWMO will focus its efforts on fish and wildlife habitat protection on the areas that drain to the St. Croix River. 2.4.1 DNR Classifications for Lakes, Streams and Wetlands The Minnesota DNR has recognized and classified particular lakes, streams, and wetlands as DNR Protected Waters. These water resources are of important concern and typically have monitoring or assessments to evaluate the changes over time that occur to these resources. Figure 2.11 shows the DNR protected waters within Middle St. Croix watershed. Middle St. Croix Watershed Management Organization 12 5/27/2004 • • 2.4.2 Biological Surveys, Reconnaissance Studies, Unique or Endangered Communities or Species A complete list of rare plants, rare animals, and native plant communities within Minnesota can be obtained from the Ecological Services Division of the Minnesota DNR website (http://www.dnr.state.mn.us/ecological_services). The goal of these surveys and studies is to identify significant natural areas and to collect and interpret data on the distribution and ecology of these rare plants, rare animals, and native plant communities. 2.4.3 State Plans for Fish and Wildlife Areas Fourteen city parks and recreational facilities exist within Middle St. Croix watershed, but no Regional or County parks and their associated facilities are located within the boundaries.The State of Minnesota owns and operates approximately six hundred acres within the Middle St. Croix watershed classified as Wildlife Management or Scientific Natural Areas with portions open to the public. 2.5 Pollution Sources Sources of non-point pollution in the Middle St. Croix watershed are primarily a result of urban and agricultural activities. Non-point pollution from urban or urbanizing activities is highly concentrated and often toxic, resulting from such diverse activities as driving an automobile to fertilizing a lawn. Street and parking lot surfaces are perhaps the largest and most significant diffuse sources in an urban environment since most of these surfaces drain directly into storm sewers. Pollution loads occur from automobile usage, deicing and anti-skid applications, vegetation and litter, chemical spills, road pavement decomposition, and construction activities. The highest concentrations of pollutants from these sources are usually heavy metals, oils, grease and associated petrochemicals, chemical oxygen-demanding (COD) substance, silt, sand, and nutrients. Non-point pollution from agricultural and low density residential areas can generally be characterized as widespread and relatively dilute, but significant in its accumulation. Factors contributing to agricultural non-point pollution are soil erosion, animal feedlots, chemical fertilizers and pesticides, construction site erosion, and gully and stream channel erosion. Erosion and Sedimentation Erosion and subsequent sedimentation occur uniformly over the entire Middle St. Croix watershed wherever construction or agricultural crop production is taking place. Sediment, the largest pollutant by weight, poses two problems. First, detached soil particles settle out in streams and lakes with coarser particles dropping to the bottom and finer particles traveling for long distances. As a result, streams and lakes are clouded; channel and lake bottoms become shallower; bottom-dwelling organisms are buried; fish respiratory functions are hindered; and drainage devices are filled. Second, sediment, especially the silts and clays, has a tendency to hold or adsorb pollutants, particularly nutrients, metals, organics and pesticides. Settling of these fine-grained particles in channel or lake bottoms can lead to accumulations of pollutants that are ready to be suspended or remobilize by biologic, physical, and chemical activities. The extent of erosion and its impacts to the Middle St. Croix watershed need to be assessed. An Middle St. Croix Watershed Management Organization 13 5/27/2004 • • effective best management practice program may have to be created to treat current and future problems that occur with time and increased development. Nutrients Many nutrients are present in water bodies within the Middle St. Croix watershed as well as all water bodies. Most of these nutrients have little impact on the quality of the water and associated water resources because they are usually not the limiting factor that causes poor or lesser water quality. The nutrients nitrogen and phosphorus are essential to the life functions of aquatic organisms such as algae and excessive amounts of these nutrients may result in anoxic lakes,ponds, and slow-moving streams. These nutrients are extremely difficult to remove from lakes because, as the organisms die,portions of the nutrients are readily released. The rest settle to the bottom and are held until oxygen and pH conditions are right for their release. Fecal Coliform Fecal coliform bacteria inhabit the intestinal tracts of warm-blooded animals. These bacteria serve as easily identified indicators of microbial contamination, such as bacteria, viruses, protozoa and fungi. Much of the time, fecal coliform bacteria can be found where large amounts of runoff or non-point source pollution comes from areas containing livestock and livestock involved activities. Another source would be contamination from septic systems, which have the potential to contaminate areas further down the watershed. A high number of fecal coliform bacteria generally indicate that the quality of water being tested is poorly suited for body contact. Pesticides and Polychlorinated Biphenyls (PCBs) Pesticides and PCBs fit into a category called toxins. These toxins can be both very toxic at initial strength, and can accumulate in biological organisms in the food chain. PCBs are extremely slow to degrade. Pesticides degrade at varying rates depending upon their chemical composition. Both pesticides and PCBs can be quite mobile because of the strong ability to adsorb to fine-grained sediment and organic matter. Many pesticides are water-soluble and can travel long distances in solution or adsorbed to fine particles. 2.5.1 Groundwater Pollution The growing demand for groundwater for irrigation, industrial, commercial, and drinking water supplies, along with the increased detection of groundwater contamination focuses attention on this resource in Washington County and in the Middle St. Croix watershed. Planning,management, and protection of the groundwater supply must be supported by the basic understanding of the occurrence, movement, and composition of the groundwater resource. Groundwater and surface water systems do not necessarily coincide with surface water divides or boundaries; therefore, groundwater protection efforts, to be most effective, should be coordinated at the county or regional level. The MSCWMO cannot successfully plan for or control activities outside its boundaries, which ultimately could have a detrimental impact on the groundwater resource it is dependent upon. The Minnesota Department of Health had identified wells with higher than average levels of volatile organic compounds in the Lakeland and Lakeland Shores (Washington County Middle St. Croix Watershed Management Organization 14 5/27/2004 • • private well testing data). Small lots, private septic systems, and many private shallow sand point wells, and coarse textured sandy outwash soils characterize these cities, which makes them more conducive to groundwater contamination problems. Volatile organic compounds (VOC's) in Lakeland and Lakeland Shore's water supply were first discussed in a Minnesota Department of Health (MDH) letter dated January 18, 1960, which recommended that the village of Lakeland install a municipal water system because of the presence of high levels of nitrates from private septic systems. Lakeland installed a municipal water system after this letter was received. In 1987, MDH issued a Well Advisory area for this portion of MSCWMO (Figure 2.12). The MDH has also identified another Water Well Advisory Area located in the Middle St. Croix watershed due to trichloroethylene (TCE) and carbon tetrachloride(CC14)that have been detected in the Prairie du Chien and Jordan groundwater aquifers (Figure 2.2). The CC14 source was identified as a former grain storage facility where this chemical, used as a pesticide, had seeped into the ground. The exact source of the TCE is unknown but is believed to have originated near the Lake Elmo Airport. Municipalities that are or have portions within the Water Well Advisory Area include the Cities of Oak Park Heights and Bayport, and the Towns of Baytown and West Lakeland. Municipalities that are or have portions affected by the contaminant plume in the groundwater of the Prairie du Chien and Jordan aquifers are the City of Bayport, Baytown Township, and West Lakeland Township (Figure 2.12). Well testing,both observation and private well,has been performed to monitor the pollutant's progress through the aquifers. Thus far, CC14 doesn't appear to pose any problem due to its low concentrations within tested wells. TCE has been found in much higher concentrations and poses more of a concern for drinking water supply. So far, testing has shown that one hundred sixteen of three hundred twenty wells within the test areas have had TCE levels that exceed exposure limits set by the MDH. As a result of these pollution sources, the Metropolitan Airport Commission(MAC) as well as the MDH and Minnesota Pollution Control Agency(MPCA)have setup water filtration systems and increased testing within the advisory areas to monitor the plume's progress and to alleviate associated health risks from exposure. 2.5.2 Surface Water Pollution Surface water quality monitoring has shown that the water quality in Lily and McKusick Lakes has stayed about the same is recent years (Table 4 and Appendix D). Major water quality concerns pertain to impaired summer use due to increased weed growth and algal blooms, and sport fishing deterioration. As urbanization continues within these lakes drainage areas, risks to the lakes will increase unless steps are taken to understand the extent and character of non-point source pollutant inputs so that measures can be taken to preserve and improve their water quality. Lily Lake was listed as impaired for swimming due to excess nutrients in the 2002 MPCA Clean Water Act Section 303(d)total maximum daily load (TMDL). More information on TMDLs can be obtained at the MPCA website: http://www.pca.state.mn.us/water/tmdl.html#tmdl Active gully erosion along tributaries that outlet directly into the St. Croix River or are located in steeply rolling areas where crop production and construction do not normally Middle St. Croix Watershed Management Organization 15 5/27/2004 • • take place exist within the MSCWMO. These gullies can be large non-point pollution sources to the St. Croix River. Existing erosion programs and soil erosion regulations implemented by local communities do not always adequately address this problem. 2.5.3 Landfills, Dumps, and Hazardous Waste Sites One hazardous waste site is present within the Middle St. Croix watershed boundaries (Figure 2.13). The A.S. King Ash disposal site is located at a forty-three (43) acre abandoned sand and gravel quarry in Oak Park Heights near the generating plant. The current disposed waste is made up of fly ash and slag, which originates from the burning of coal to generate power. 2.5.4 Feedlots, Abandoned Wells, Under and Above Ground Storage Tanks The number of feedlots is relatively low when compared to other landuses within the Middle St. Croix watershed. As the watershed becomes more developed feedlots, as well as farmland associated with feedlots,will continue to decrease. Abandoned wells are difficult to identify as many were created before adequate well drilling and sealing logs and records were kept. According to Figure 2.14, three known wells have been sealed and four have been inactive or abandoned within the Middle St. Croix watershed. It is highly likely many more abandon wells exist and pose a groundwater contamination threat. Middle St. Croix Watershed Management Organization 16 5/27/2004 MIDDLE ST.CROIX WATERSHED MANAGEMENT ORGANIZATION • 1 0 it � l 1 1� _ i_✓ — —,-- II,_ 1 ., -: 41 ,7,.....41. � �I C' I 1\ f-- 1 l 1 P itit „,i) Surficial Geology �” ® Bedrock Near Surface 7.1.---11 Floodplain Alluvium(loamy) \ Floodplain Alluvium sand ) ` ir Glacial Till(Pre-Late Wisc.) v '- Glacial Till, Sand and Gravel 1 1 Ice Contact Deposit(Superior) i' Lacustrine Deposits _ /, L::t;:: Sand and Silt(Sup.) ._.ill11130 1 ' aces 1,_ Lowest River Warren Terrace ‘___rq — Middle River Warren Terrace Middle Terraces i r_____ ____, Modern Lakes \. Organic Deposits -- - .n Outwash(Superior) 1 1 \ I Till(Superior) Upper River Warren terrace Upper Terrace r" 1 110� � il r-'' ) L —._._(._r t j I I MSCWMO Boundary Roads 4 11�41 -I'l Sections 1 A iiiii IJH Lakes and Wetlands • IISt.Croix River Streams Washington County Border 6-1 Figure 2.3 Surficial Geology Source of Data:Washington County Survey&Land Mgmnt.Div.,MetroGIS Datafindet Created:12/03-P:\MSCWMO\2003 Plan\Maps,.apr Files\surfgeoLmacwmo.apr 2 0 2 4 Miles MIDDLE ST.CROIX WATERSHED MANAGEMENT ORGANIZATION -- j1 ?• sly ;`,?;.r.-.1:: if i,, ri • :. ',_67.,:- 0 ...z.'. S, iS ` Q . 000 1 5 Cs tijoittr: +terr::!,v:+r=-- 1 I :1C'S,;.04;;,..:::ti.t..pTi', . , ,....0.1iiii lisi,kill.i....,.::: <g6<;"; i i :'' '-;-6':;-, ''*• -•'' s''''s* <!' ;','' ',. ,';''''',':''''''..:':1•1.-,:)<I(°11.1: •. '.11.0.1 ''''' _ r>'ri r.�r trt.i'l\''''-..,' • it. -e, 1 $ - ',,'.-..•._ ; kl i'...), ..-11- 1 $t ':!sjill„ 1,_ 1 . . $ %C'C„:„...... ,,''?,,l'.. . I':,?:0 lel/ ' . - 11.10.17•1 ' ;Rt DY Li ifSi ... ' s .?3 i 4, 1114 '-‘15.,..1i :A .-„,.::::,-Nt;-..q.,.,,, ,, , :. - P 1 1 . . 1 .„ ...,..„....,, .. to� +„,,,_.,...z.„, ?iti ! f . ' ? �•�7 '{ � `1{,' rr:+.rr J-t,!r'1 , '1 - I .1 • yr i,€ ,11 11/11//11.. 0 ;trti�+`•,r`. .L ..'r - li . � , 72 { rIt d li:o), .)..* 0 t =i -, ,�i,•il: ???2 ''r- rti_ ,'r•!,rf $, .I uImItllItllll�' '..(0c.-.--..:,__:!,'__ `15r.,+ t1.!+r_r: • I. tt...;,?..,...,,,:::, 'r1l_f:,'j'{.!�• :3ytr•+; Bedrock Geologic Formation • 113 r ,r,"ir:�-• s i• } ,”ih1/4/11 {, r+5 !r�, 4 ':+'!r ♦♦♦ Platteville-Glenwood ++'O{ , {. , } ; r r}. + _rr_r., St.Peter . 4,, ' 47,til-4l;„ •,;r.-_r s: Prairie Du Chien Group 14 4,.+ }5'N' k.''.?,,,.; '{ :: -4":}:: Jordan ' ¢ 'h�'', {{55 5,k5.,5r5 '-r_:{,�C , roc \ - 5}. { h'{ , St. Lawrence-Franconia 1,1r,:•:.:,:.;• : ?.,.:':;%04,, 41 ‘.4,:,:','2::....<.,:,,,,,:.,,,,,- ,+ 40 ;: v{4 ,,- Franconia Ironton Galesville %:,,, :!:$:,:!"!. ttv, ,,,..0 },5 , I, s4i , '.N ' . Eau Claire r r {,5y+r+;{, ` 1E2.,',''k Cambrian Undifferentiated trrIE::':::: 1.1. 1,,,,::.„,•, ,.,:•:s:,:::,,,x,•. s...,,,,,„ • ,", "--,N. . .,%70., q ' v 5{}ilii'{;' �},. ,5 $ +5};' 5tir�r}', r „ 1},l. r 'gyp ,,,R'},4, VN `S'ti:vr: $2 '{:} '{.'K; r r�, i' + 4 5+�}}�' yy'i',.: r4 Lf` FF,ti:;,, 5,7 tis h..: .•00 ,.__ -...v\ ,.,,,.'�... X51++ • Y%,,, ,¢{ ' ...,'fl,‘'', 'i2 �'p ti �r ,,;5A+�+5 5 55;:',, i'i'''.:4 {� 'r''y{Y 'e.:,i 50i .°r .isstilS1SS.ti i; l{�i vl�`-{lr s{, 'r 1, ' ! ,.. ", ,k S 11,,c000 lr! �"� 5xi o ..;•.7..65,'i'.;";::,, ♦7.r-;.rh L .8 F NAW ,r�r �'r��{�.i! r .��.J 1 n ,. , ` ,rti'lam,t.! w j " N "J :....z.."...,::',...:::,.. ... �V - ~N Ai A , A t A 1;.A A...A....N...., ir! A! r•: m!r!r•ir„ r+7r• ! ,', •It,!C,+r~,• `:+{. !r..+.l•!(.,{.!r.,` ) Ike :5531335}.' ? i`--. MSCWMO Boundaryiw1.4 Roads Afr'"� " FA.‘,.......‘,......,.,...,.......,,.....‘a �:. " ''--� xA h `4 n Sections 0'...-.'-1..,,,z: �,.,,, ^.,"„ �.� it...i,,:F .. `''`h " ' h Lakes and Wetlands t i�'� '> 't__ry._ i;` • St.Croix River °:-sf:;R -'. n '• Figure 2.2 Streams ' ,.".." Bedrock 6. Washington County Border 'n" .• '+.•-h Geologic ...:6,..-, A (4 ) Formation Source of Data:Washington County Survey&Land Mgmnt.Div. Created:12/03-P:\MSCWMO\2003 Plan\Maps,.apt Files\bedgeoLmscwrno.apr 2 0 2 4 Miles MIDDLE ST.CROIX WATERSHED MANAGEMENT ORGANIZATION L2 LI , ;, 7 , 40 yr V iti ;,,., 4 ,e----A7P e ,fi ",.,��, 1.-.-..({.� y".. 1 .% 1 - ,, ",... Q„..?‘„,_ jig '''' r. .. 4 ,1111 v* kl.._ ,5)..yikiiiim ,,,,,,.,,,,v ,, ,,_,,,.,..„ ,el,,*liti-1 0 ,..m, N-,ei/coll,* lc ,w,,, x, est/ * 040, it '+ma ylir7 . \-\\ ...4v *•) 4 , lir-i ,it w-fir4.;_-, es:\ii, I ,, _ la. 7i " ...,211 (r ,_ " 1=.'%r � , _ �� rte' < f. tw61701. 11q1k.ltill - 1k. '11.)If 1,W4J111111i '''' um.-41 \.b :"'. ' ' ill ''''177' *IF 0 44 ilit-' ,Altlf tk-,. .:-.-, / 4, i Lit 4 .,...... r , , p ,,,, kip; -0,)044..k. -fa,**,,,k Ii.''' ' tititrall • it., ji 11111_,, __ ,,,,a...:;,(Br ._,,e,,,c, ..1.01;1,41, kt..ikidi k.:,,,,,,, ---4_410,04, \ �► p el "I *1\3-- 1 \ I Hydrologic Drainage Class ���r�t, . �1�"ftli. es 14 ..-e---- i itt Ni sous Vi 1%,4 1 /V ‘16.3 i lirt lkixik,11.F4(4. iff*, ' I A fAa SI lk '':'‘ AlB , 1147.;:in.Lyi-,...z6.-f\tir, 'Ilisj ( B tg V ‘t_19Ptpljal 0 0 7.fri&'VA r) N , B/D rp.,-* k70.0 kr,--Nft.o. --A.-- C/D rib,''. Alre— iffSriVr\ V4111 rliii vorr " 1 irctiole,,�� . ` 411'''' fft y7, 44,ZA- Other(Urban,Gravel Ops.) t t tyr� �11 t `i WATER .-/47., .ti—tcr il iii., ,„9,11! Nlh .c‘..i t me 4 ;itio.,Tr Aiirir ? t; '., *) fr-,-/-• et 9 j is 7._ I 011 4 if," \til e..,. V.444ti � � � '"* "1 0 int. `r :71c11;41 ? 4. L _. v ��'-. I •.l�L ..•rte • i,t �;fi lir 416 16$2 0 410 �� , p / 0:-� lii ,p,..tt 1 r ie ) rhoo,,,,,-,_,A. -kAt It il.r4- 44 U.,' 'z','-;:: 't. 4 WI' I T Lilii.- , ,, ik Ilk: op._ ..,,,v4,, :\iiiii.t. „III \i., • 1 '-'1P 1..—W°' il' iiitr"A II k \ MSCWMO Boundary (470 1 _%"4"41 $ i 01' '\ / al )\\ Roads rfrw._,...eixot( ��'�+1 Sections `f ,� j r - Lakes and Wetlands ,lp �+ ( ` St.Croix River Rtv:0$ + . IP Streams Washington County Border Figure 2.4 Surficial Soils Source of Data:Washington County Survey&Land Mgmnt Div. Created:12/03-P:\MSCWMO\2003 Plan\Maps,.apr Files\soila_mscwmo.apr 2 0 2 4 Miles MIDDLE ST.CROIX WATERSHED MANAGEMENT ORGANIZATION ii --;-'" • ,, 4 0 t i..11 fil el•--A ii f ,, 5 a,', . , i A .\ :, - di sigt,k A., Ni s\, ok \ 1 r :421 , 0 litic,..... 1171 .,--,,-,,c--- j7 it , .,- 4,it IR % fa ......- ec----,4tt_ .N,I. - C;4) . 4i 16 )5 1 • 0k...A 1, ri" - ' -4 e v.. . ) -1 `�. , 1 '42- , %\__N 41 Soil T-Factor * -41i4 1 41,4 s; �`�- f�` t. ) sons PN-- rr. 44/40 . t 1 SO th roZ .1* +l r4 lei4 i t„,, r,. ,- 5iLON ' 1" a 4,, V 1' * -values in tons/acre 11116sot -11 is ,pii Ipe 00 -1. al Ilk 41, \ 1 d ‘11\ )silt , 1. — 4 `i y L )\ ,, ,.., .,„Ir.,III„. „),..),1"ils. iy, 41 A .,, 4..,. ffA1 f• 40,. _) ii____4 , ,,_,, oidii„ i311._e ., ,,, _ p• J S . - 4.,., iii‘ ) 1 ; %-i iii, MSCWMO Boundary ( f 1 I tli Roads Sections 10" .....„4" ` J 1 - Lakes and Wetlands ei 1 `�� t 11111 St.Croix River r 1 Streams ' Figure 2.5 Washington County BorderCilie Soil Erosivity (By T-Value) Source of Data Washington County Survey&Land Mgmnt.Div. Created:12/03-P:\MSCWMO\2003 Plan\Maps,.apr Files\soil_erosivityjnscwmo.apr 2 0 2 4 Miles 1 MIDDLE ST.CROIX WATERSHED MANAGEMENT ORGANIZATION • ,,,L=.-----_ -- ___ _.., ________ :<„,. '� I Li \ t 1 , qv , ..;c4,.•::.;.th'i,4*-i._'.,%:...,..,) f f 1 -, y" 7 S tis•} f ** ,_80.,,,/ _,/ , : _ LVV,444,,k,,,,,,•-;;,.:i ..;,,,,,,-.1„,-,,,it, h l /_ � $ Yom ', ,��'ry � �L_V I '' c4rf 'VgW^A'�, ` S �µ A� r / J- (-`- ' ?^wa, v } . { }�j ,/\ , { . L :� t 411 / VA "..- iiir, ,0 ';.!,' ir 7 ...itir," . t1 1 { MSCWMO Subwatersheds L--- -i'''' MOP* 110000000000 1 1 -1 / 120000000000 i , '''' 130000000000 r- ,�a --r-.r '1mil 40000000000 1- 150000000000 I , ,,,--\ I t \ I-, -Th, 'L_ ___] * 14 Oil 1 I 1 \ I • i w. Yy- I ! I 0 I 1141fl 1 r` 1 1 i j i L \) MSCWMO Boundary I _ _ Roads Ir 1 Sections 1111 , Lakes and Wetlands • St.Croix River StreamsCk Figure 2.6 Washington County Border MSCWMO Subwatersheds Source of Data:Waahingron County Survey&Land Mgmnt Div. Created:12/03-P:\MSCWMO\2003 Plan\Maps,.apt Files\soi erosivity_rnscwmo.apr 2 0 2 4 Miles MIDDLE ST.CROIX WATERSHED MANAGEMENT ORGANIZATION .-•r;.k s :,J4 � •• i i �1 II • {� s. '''-- / ' "%ewer — \--< ',141 ._&.,, 1 C__--- i i west -1--±7 \ . J• •,• r 1 }--1, \ �, . '1' .,� - -i_ - WAli►� _i 1 4t__, �/- �-- C _� � � r +-1 11-1 $.�� •-- -'. . / , 1 ,.!,+: J�1- ,__ I - J � Ii ' I1 i/ I �/ Hli I I . �J 4 _LAI ks 1 ,,, ,,/ , id, J ......._ _ , ,� _ • i rr •�_�_:_, . __ ( - le f fi •a t •, iI *• ' ' - •---- 1111119514— ••• • r • : 1-.'/ l �/ � 1- I ' , 1- *. ,. r--- . l /�t_ 1 it.* • I . `_ 1 National Wetlands Inventory(NWI) J 1 �� i Lacustrine • � I a I 111.� ` I - Palustrine _ — \ Upland I L_../-, -----%i i._ _� , \\ 1-_ —. 1..J (. �• jj 1 V.) '� I I L. ,\ � 1 i _ i • 0 _ :1)\''i?t,'7„,,,i-o, �'i ' r= � \ i ; , __i_r_ 1, - 0.0 , \s,.. r. , f: i / . MSCWMO Boundary \s• l r i I I/ /41-1-117_. Roads _�I. �;' -I _i__.-1 Sections --. / __ Lakes and Wetlands ,' - III i St.Croix River `/ Streams Washington County Borderi IC:k Figure 2.7 Wetland Inventory Source of Data:Washington County Survey&Land Mgmnt Div.,United States Geological Survey Created:12/03-P:\MSCWMO\2003 Plan\Maps,ape Files\nwi_nscwmo.ape 22 4 Miles MIDDLE ST.CROIX WATERSHED MANAGEMENT ORGANIZATION • L, (.7 s, 4 � air ,\ ,Q r, NA Ill LLI —J ( �.) N♦ i ♦ ire IJ I , -- � -k/I4 ai 1/ Li I ly - - �fy�= --f _� 1 ,\ it , / - .• — T ■ mss110r-- 1111110® _L aii110 Blair dig • J i % !�� ! Lr, I, / 1, • 1 . 1111 I j 5 Gravel Mines f / •i I 1 r L I i 1�v I I • I (s, .\tel \�� • • I is MSCWMO Boundary iIllll Roads Sections ^�( i r-- Lakes and Wetlands ) _ _ 11110 I i �� N A ' St.Croix River L/Streams Washington County Border Figure 2.8 Gravel Mines Source of Data:Washington County Survey&Land Mgmnc Div.,Washington Soil&Water Cons.District Created:12/03-P:\MSCWMO\2003 Plan\Maps,.apr Files\gravmine_mscwmo.apt 2 0 2 4 Miles MIDDLE ST.CROIX WATERSHED MANAGEMENT ORGANIZATION • I ;' 7 I a - .' F'j 7 it_ _ , _ ,,,,i,((--:, ...,_/. Ng, A i _`/ 7i t. ` l t-i is A' 1\11\ \ l Groundwater Sensitivity to Pollution i i VERY HIGH j I HIGH 01014 HIGH-MODERATE , MODERATE u LOW `1- 1 WATER � n y A ti • ,L.,::::- 4,_,.),-,-\ I.. 1 , I MSCWMO Boundary 1 ,i i Roads v '-, Sections I Lakes and Wetlands j St.Croix River Figure 2.9 Streams Groundwater Washington County Border Sensitivity to Pollution Source of Data:Washington County Survey&Land Mgmnt.Div. Created:12/03-P:\MSCWMO\2003 Plan\Napa,.apr Files\groundwaterinscwmo.apr 2 0 2 4 Miles MIDDLE ST.CROIX WATERSHED MANAGEMENT ORGANIZATION JJ \ I • ' I \ T -1:74 ''' ------ N'&\ 1J� I _ I L_� I( 0 1 �. o \ �\ — ,\ 4 • a . ,• , n r \-7----1.,...c., - -■■■ ( /t -'am I L —,'1 2--.r 440, 40,, L.410.4,,--.11-- to 1 - � (---k-k I__ W �I IF lig'. L! I ' . I .. I \ ' % / 1 1 ' \ ' 'i;rrcik d , I'i,_ I / `r 7- id_ I,\ A i , I i J ' rl 'y l - T` Ir Pa t d! c ir • v / -\\ -,-�-i a r y i ) .) �\' I ■ I 7 i i % 4 !1� I 1 \ LI, J 1 P ! 1 St.Croix River 1 s rf \`, ,� DNR Protected Waters j y\ { H { \I ` f , L )- - '--T_-'i �J �� i / �1 -1r ,\ ��-�' - --\ II ' T -NIB' ,_ L-- \ M 4 I _L ' L (. ',�--'/ I \)\ I � � 1 1 ) \ '''r / '11 Y c 0 _„,>,-----=---r71---...,-\ i \ (" L'"so , \ , ' --4_ G-- -_ 1 '' I I . / L r--I / f 1 � r '\ 1 V I , i / r 1 . 4 // rid, l /am1 JI. MSCWMO Boundary ' 111 it 1 Roads Ij \ il__!_' Sections \, / Lakes and Wetlands i ri � 1/� �� 11 • St.Croix River C ,v/, .. , O Streams 1.-,--_-/, � r/ Figure 2.10 Washington County Border ' DNR Protected Waters Source of Data:Washington County Survey&Land Mgmnt.Div.,DNR Data Deli Created:12/03-P:\MSCWMO\2003 Plan\Maps,.apr Files\dnrprowater_nacwmo.apr 2 0 2 4 Miles MIDDLE ST.CROIX WATERSHED MANAGEMENT ORGANIZATION r ,4Q l�v 130 °W:� ° ,o • .4100, • I. Ti r • ° R-- ; 1 or --- 7 ,o N , - . or In-r _et 91 :i441-4--k-It -Iti P t,?:.:-::::-.,:i.:- _ i 4, ir A-Nitis � � "'7 ♦' t`+' a t ' � .ud �� �R .yam-a + r � � � c3 �y-r q r a O i Ink �' .° a ro..w4404/11Mribra ifig.;1111 Arrani„,1%.... ' - #41 4.-4,...4: 44,1PPI N,..irF ,, . .;41111-Fr jhr SA i .4111111171 • •1.7161111W4: T rcy s} ' Irt .47r4 A. k,--:-i.,... a ,J _ 2000 MSCWMO Landuse M. ikia ill -' Tif� ' � � Iul� n Farmsteads jF1dI.IUI ! Ilia :Al n Single-Famic ily Residential(Seasonal) nr. �_414 f‘:: �:� -- 0 r4 i n Single-Family Residential(Single-Family Detached) - ■1 j 1.0‘I I '..11' " ''' n S• ingle-Family Residential(Manufactured Home Park zi. ln�,. • �] r(11(1' n M• ulti-Family Residential(Single Family Attached) It dam"II Illht RrIGQ . 4Q n Commercial(Retail and Other Commercial) 9 n C• ommercial(Office) rlS . n Mixed-Use Residential 0Tim o D Gp a , n Mixed-Use Commercial and Other CI Industrial and Utility ... rG� Oki ] li n Extractive 1 �fJ21., iL =Iy �a46 R Park,Recreational,or° C. ■ h ,•�• 2 Ilik n Golf Course 1.."...,01 0 •k'�,'. . ... , ,.. Major Highway • •, Railwa R NOP 1.11 �r♦ * y l 1111ilta • i q . r I f 0, _ n Undeveloped o - '%.' 4 I � " ? i,. Water lok .2r?d's a Q• i liliki_ I .t 4 Lail i .,,..\ i No it i • 0 ; wrE .r.,,,,, .. 1 o + IIIA F. 1ii ..,1-•isil iiii �� <d G -1rr,. Ll) 0. v. ._. . 1,.„, ::.,.:-_„ ,,,i, a . . up._ 4+;:;>., 711 ° % M1 Iv) 0 .-).:..): :'. . ;x: x 1 le, ,•r _...;5;„:!:,..„.`i ` i MSCWMO Boundary 5 61o i a :11,4-g Roads d •d Sections ° Lakes and Wetlands !pi. °e a 0 'ri ' Wo'* 0 St.Croix River o n° Figure 2.11 ', r Streams _,r•_.. i2000 Land Use (A) Washington County Border Activies and Land Cover Source of Dam:Washington County Survey&Land Mgmnt Div.,MettoGIS Darafindmr Created:12/03-P:\MSCWMO\2003 Plan\Maps,ape Piles\landuse2000_macwmo.apr 2 0 2 4 Miles MIDDLE ST.CROIX WATERSHED MANAGEMENT ORGANIZATION 1 --7-< �. I 1 / • J 1 1 , 1 L - T--t.,..) i c--.-- 1 `I o 1 >_1 l' 4.--e--'7-44-H"±-1/1 ' -\ a 4r-_,_ ,-.'s , 111 Imo -- rt , I I ' hIs\\ 1N\, \ _I: ' I i ; _ ' I 1.' Iti j j LL-If-\1-T'--"4 `JL- 1 — I U• _ '-`-rt ' • • yCCC T 1/ ////--(,..7 'F �1 Prairie Du Chien TCE Plume wv Jordan TCE Plume t c v ?.:e.:,.. Well Advisory Area w f e /f. -:- 1 ../.7>:////://e. '5''''..:::-.:Aii.i..;-.:,- .::,.;,ii,.. /6 - r , "I'lerA l \ YI-- 1 I (, ii i `-- -1 ( Com_L-------1- ) /1 • , , ., /1 r ' i i /r - j � �i1 MSCWMO Boundary iii' 1 l UI Roads ' Il1I] �' �' Ili l� Sections , Lakes and Wetlands i St.Croix River Figure 2.12 Streams Aquifer Contamination Washington County Border * and Well Advisory Areas Source of Data:Washington County Survey&Land Mgtnnt Div. Created:12/03-P:\MSCWMO\2003 Plan\Maps,.apr Files\plume.jnscwmo.apr 2 0 2 4 Miles I MIDDLE ST.CROIX WATERSHED MANAGEMENT ORGANIZATION J _1( 0i 0 ,--,_ 11 'r J' '• - - I _ h, ' ,- 1 `J `-}--I 1 'i• ,- - O 1 i ,,,,- al 1, a�. .... tool tool �� us � t �� — I- /Y� us t-1-111\ 61A \ I J /Z__, It T LLL'■ ' L \ I I \ 1-�4-- I I L- t �' I in-- - \ am_ L__- re-! i1 >-\-'/ -- ___{._ si--il i 1 C. \\li \ \ 0• � -t-__ >\ I ,1 _�--r-. �- / . ,.its ' s ) ■■■O v J s t „• I L_ 1 1 1r IMO ' l �.�"� j m co , � . / . nu/A 1 f--- %�1-- A !�� '� I, / 'L �!IL,. I \ • 1 i , • a 1• 1 I 1 1 I \\ Landfills, Dumps,or Hazardous Waste Sites fJ 1 ( -- _ 111 II r_ r- <7Ni 1 1 �; L _ r \ , �,-, H--, \\ 1 _�I • ' I \ I _L lJ ( '..IP \ 1 II I-_L 1.„v., // \, --1-.-1 1_, f-- 1_ 2__ _ _J -.) 0 - ,),_,,____ f I �: U a J1 / �_ I c- 1 T----1 i \ )---I- i� I Y 1— -1 1 /fl1 . ' !IIr MSCWMO Boundary 1i� i i i�ti __ I Roads , II _.1 Sections ,----- ections _--__ Lakes and Wetlands ' i - . I. St.Croix River Figure 2.13 I--- Streams Landfills, Dumps, Washington County Border and Hazardous Waste Sites Source of Data:Washington County Survey&Land Mgmnt.Div.,Washington Conservation Dist Created:12/03-P:\MSCWMO\2003 Plan\Maps,.apr Files\ha=waste_mscwmo.apt 2 2 4 Miles MIDDLE ST.CROIX WATERSHED MANAGEMENT ORGANIZATION I JJ N T\ 1 \�.[' 1 f -.--- C/ o \ • o 11 >- • 71- ■fir■ ' �._.1 r/ ,I - h LL i re- � ��`�-_i(1 ill : •---A , ..6 �mil \• , I 1 D-4, I vi_4._ HiI- 17__ Ley ; / , t - _--_ i‘ ''`! ---_i/ I --}----- i I L- T-1 li\ _ _ — =— �_ Ll' J c - t } 1J JAI I Yom_--- \ % I .4 if% it ' ♦ , J \ i —T i I---_ \ 1_ •1'• I I \ I/ I, , / L' ". I \ • ) 1 I �" I « \ ' Inactive/Sealed Wells ' �' ! \ \ • Inactive/Abandoned `• • Sealed � � 1�1 raj �, \ �l C 1 1 1 Iy r--{ L- '\ , i-% 1 1\ \' \ L L ! 1� '1' 1\ Y I- I i I ( i iii J A, L I L___(� ik I • .::-"s i "'s .r,�: I—,l--,_J I- --.. / I j 'Q ' 1 I i 1 1 \ 1 1 j MSCWMO Boundary ff/f Roads ;--, iSections -_ ; / Lakes and Wetlands i v� • 1 i , • St.Croix River Figure 2.14 Streams Washington County BorderCk Sealed and Abandoned Well Locations Source of Data:Washington County Survey&Land Mgmnt Div.,Washington Soil&Water Conservation Dist Created:12/03-P:\MSCWMO\2003 Plan\Maps,.apr Files\weLpiscwmo.apr 2 0 2 4 Miles • • 3.0 Public Involvement and Development of Issues 3.1 Issue Identification Process The development a Second Generation Plan for the MSCWMO is required as a result of the April 16, 2002 Washington County Governance Study(Appendix A). This study deemed the plan a necessity for the MSCWMO to be considered a functional organization. A Second Generation Plan is also a requirement of the Board of Water and Soil Resources. The process began with a Watershed Management Plan Workshop on February 24, 2003 with the full board and continued with a Community Input Meeting on May 29, 2003 at Baytown Community Hall. Summaries of these meetings can be found in Appendix E. Through input from citizens and board members at these meetings and workshops, the MSCWMO developed a list of issues for the management of the water and natural resources in the watershed. The following issues were identified as important to the MSCWMO: Development Wetlands Runoff/Stormwater Stream/Rivers Erosion and Sediment Control St. Croix Bluffs/Gully Pollution Funding/Costs Flooding Rules/Regulations Water Quality Enforcement Education/Outreach Groundwater Habitat/Fish/Wildlife Plume Regional Coordination 3.2 Issue Statements The list of issues determined by the MSCWMO Board and citizens can be effectively consolidated into four major issues of concern: runoff and stormwater, erosion and sediment control, education and public outreach, and wetlands. Each of these issues stem from development pressure within the watershed. The following descriptions outline these areas of concern: Runoff and Stormwater Development within the MSCWMO contributes to imperviousness and increases the amount of stormwater runoff generated. Managing the increased volume of water is very important, as the lack of any management could be detrimental to property and water resources in the watershed. Runoff naturally carries with it nutrients and pollutants. Therefore the increased runoff and nutrient and pollutant load can have a negative impact on the quality of the water resources and systems of the MSCWMO. Runoff also contributes to increased nutrient and pollution loadings to water bodies and increases Middle St. Croix Watershed Management Organization 43 5/27/2004 potential for flooding. The proper management of increased runoff and stormwater as development pressure increases will be a major priority for the MSCWMO. Erosion and Sediment Control Development and urbanization within the watershed and the associated increase in runoff results in increased opportunities for erosion and sedimentation. During development the natural land cover is disturbed and erosion has a prime opportunity to occur. Sedimentation to the water bodies of MSCWMO can have detrimental impacts to the water quality. Proper methods of controlling erosion and sedimentation will be a major priority for the MSCWMO. The St. Croix River is a very important regional resource that must be afforded protection from water quality degradation associated with erosion and sedimentation. Active gully erosion along tributaries that outlet directly into the St. Croix River are or should be a priority concern of the MSCWMO. In addition, the Washington Conservation District has previously identified gully erosion along the St. Croix River as a priority resource concern. Education and Public Outreach Understanding of watershed issues by the general public, land managers, and decision makers is crucial to improving land use decisions that will in turn impact the watershed. Elected officials in the member communities need to be made aware of the issues that can impact the water resources of the watershed. Also, the citizens/landowners in the watershed, who are the stewards of their land, need to be informed of the best ways to manage their land for the protection of water resources. Timely and effective education of local government officials and watershed citizens will be a major priority for the MSCWMO. Wetlands Wetlands have critical value in terms of water storage, groundwater recharge, and habitat. Wetlands provide areas of storage for stormwater runoff and infiltration to the groundwater aquifers. Wetlands also provide a habitat type that is become more and more limited in the watershed. Proper management of the wetlands of the watershed that allow for a balance between water storage and habitat will be a major priority for the MSCWMO. Middle St. Croix Watershed Management Organization 44 5/27/2004 111 41 4.0 Existing Regulatory Framework 4.1 Local Regulatory Framework All existing local ordinances pertaining to stormwater management, erosion and/or sediment control, and wetlands were complied to determine whether any gaps exist in the local regulation within the MSCWMO. Of the ten member communities, very few have specific existing stormwater management ordinances, wetland setbacks or wetland buffers. includes a brief summary of the existing ordinances of the ten member communities governing three major categories of management of interest to MSCWMO: Stormwater, Grading and Erosion Control, and Wetlands. Also included for comparison are Washington County Ordinances, and the rules of the adjoining watershed districts: Brown's Creek Watershed District (BCWD), and Valley Branch Watershed District (VBWD). 4.2 State and Federal Regulatory Framework Environmental Protection Agency and Minnesota Pollution Control Agency The National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System(NPDES) Phase II is a federal program developed by the Environmental Protection Agency(EPA)that is administered in Minnesota by the Minnesota Pollution Control Agency(MPCA). The goal of the program is to prevent or minimize negative impacts from construction activity both during active construction and after construction is complete. The program requires a NPDES II permit that any project disturbing one acre or more of land. An application and temporary and permanent erosion and sediment control plans must be submitted and approved. The permit also requires that a stormwater management plan that provides for no negative impacts to water equality of the receiving water body be submitted to and approved by the MPCA. A permittee is held to the permit until the site has undergone final stabilization, all maintenance activities have been completed and a notice of termination has been submitted. Minnesota Department of Natural Resources The Minnesota Department of Natural Resources (DNR) is responsible for managing and regulating activities within the ordinary high water levels of Protected Wetlands and Waterbodies of the state. Within this jurisdiction,the DNR manages activities that affect the course, current or cross-section of the water bodies. The DNR also manages lake fisheries and provides guidelines for shoreland impacts adjacent to protected waters. The DNR regulates water appropriations from surface and groundwater. National Park Service The Lower St. Croix National Scenic Riverway, which extends fifty-two miles from St. Croix Falls/Taylor's Falls to the confluence with the Mississippi River at Prescott/Point Douglas, is jointly managed by the National Park Service (NPS), Minnesota DNR, and Middle St. Croix Watershed Management Organization 45 5/27/2004 • Wisconsin Department of Natural Resources. Additional information regarding the regulatory authority of the NPS can be found at: http://www.nps.goylsacn/pdfs/Final_St_Croix_CMP_EIS.pdf or http://www.nps.gov/sacnimanagement/planning_docs.html Table 5 Existing Local Ordinances Stormwater Grading/Erosion Control Wetlands Rate Control, Erosion and Setbacks Water (various Sediment (Building/ Steep Slope Quality magnitude Volume Control Plan Septic),Min Building Direct Stormwater Wetland Standards storms) Control Required When: Low Floor Prohibition Prohibited Filling(C) Setback/Buffersp� ' a _ E all grading 2%18% � 100- ft from y �k�'a+Afton a O 100 am,�„s - [(,y requtttng a c1I3. `10O 200, conditlWi 1 'NQ .a' , lc NO builds E31t1ff 4O 00- g. Sot Bayport NO 2,10, 100 year NO tf ruleaves snoffite ** Not>18% YES WCA NO,16.5 feet Baytown NO NO NO NO MiF-3'above; NO �YESr '. WCA NO Township OHW ;, Lake St.Croix NO NO NO >10,000 sq ft NO Not>18% NO WCA NO Beach 13%a-l8% pProfesgranal potrentiaAy . Lakeland >18.25%;>I Not>25/� NO WCA NO Y1 S Judgement NO sere s yrds Lakeland Shores NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO MLO2`ab oak Park,Hetghts N(JIRP 10 100 year yes(B) >1-0,°°°'$C1>1-0,°°°'$C1ft )OO-- figoovee NO {A) WCA {q) St.Mary's Point NO NO NO NO NO NO NO WCA NO Same as • County except �St)foot setback/5 Stillwater Ts11JRP 2,10 100 year NO >50 cn yrds 'Btuff--40 ft; Nod>1°8% YES a WCA MLF--3'above; OOyc West Lakeland NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO Township Lakes 50/75 SW Pond tb 4 Washington >1000sq feet Strreanns ondi YES 2 1O,100 year ;NO condttionat, YES • WCA 50 feet/16 5 feet County . or>50cu yrds 150/150 Bluff-- u 3O MLF--2' Not>2S Ja above 100 yr �� BCWD 170-250 1.5, 10 100 YES >5,000 sq ft or MLF--2']OOyr NO YES WCA NO/25-150 feet ppb year >50 cu yrds 1.5,10,100 VBWD YES year la day NO >1 are MLF-- Oy2'-10 r NO YES :WCA. "-.NO,/165 feet' River's edge: Slope town-100 0, preservation rural-200 ft. zone:>12% Lower St.Croix National Scenic NO NO NO NO Bluffline:town slope,no NO NO NO Riverway -40 ft,rural structures, residential-100 grading,or ft,conservation filling;40 ft district-200 ft setback A=Oak Park Heights is in the process of adopting a Wetland Ordinance,at this time it has not yet been adopted B=Volume control required only if the runoff created is greater than provided for in the Stormwater Management Plan C=Most communities defer to the Wetland Conservation Act(WCA)for any wetland filling issues Middle St. Croix Watershed Management Organization 46 5/27/2004 • ! Nationwide Urban Runoff Program (NURP) The Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) sampled and studied urban runoff on a large scale throughout the United States. The final report of this study, Results of the Nationwide Urban Runoff Program: Volume 1 —Final Report, presented the results and a statistical analysis of those data(EPA, December 1983). The NURP standards that were developed allowed for the treatment of runoff from pervious areas for water quality concerns. Specific standards vary over the country but all of them are in place to achieve treatment of stormwater runoff to remove particulates and other contaminants. For example, the City of Stillwater requirements regarding NURP are that drainage plans "must include water quality treatment provisions, at a minimum, meeting NURP pond standards (phosphorous removal efficiency of at least sixty-five percent, capacity of 2.5 inches, 24-hour storm, with twenty-five percent increase for sediment.)" Stormwater detention facilities constructed in the city must be designed according to the NURP Wet Basin Design Criteria and the Urban Best Management Practices as reflected in the MPCA publication "Protecting Water Quality in Urban Areas," (http://www.pca.state.mn.us/water/pubs/swm-coverpg.pdf). Middle St. Croix Watershed Management Organization 47 5/27/2004 5.0 District-Wide Goals, Policies, and Standards Watershed management plans provide a means for communities to develop and implement programs and regulations to insure that future development and land use activities will occur within an overall design for the watershed. This section of the plan presents goals and policies that pertain to either the entire MSCWMO or to large portions of the MSCWMO. General information is presented, including water quality concepts. The goals and objectives in this section provide the conditions that are being sought through the water management planning process. The policies will provide the framework in which local communities will prepare or update their local water management plans, or accept this plan by reference. MSCWMO will monitor the adoption of the plan within each member community to ensure that the plan is implemented. The performance standards listed in this section apply to projects as described in Sec. 6.3. 5.1 Water Quality 5.1.1 Key Water Quality Concepts Water quality is impacted to the greatest degree by stormwater runoff. Stormwater runoff collects pollutant-laden sediments that drain into the lakes, wetlands, and streams of the watershed, rather than filter through the ground; thus decreasing water quality. This non- point source of pollution is considered the leading source of water pollution in the United States. Stormwater contains a variety of constituents that can negatively impact the quality of receiving waters. Phosphorus and nitrogen accelerate eutrophication of surface waters and increase surface algal scum, algal blooms, water discoloration, and depressed oxygen levels. Stormwater carries heavy metals, oils and grease from roads and parking lots and toxic organic compounds from herbicides, pesticides and wood preservatives. It carries fecal coliform bacteria that may impair recreational and harvesting uses of receiving waters and sediments that degrade aquatic habitats. Stormwater runoff from land development projects present significant concern with respect to water quality protection. Roadway construction, increased pavement and other impervious surfaces associated with land development, as well as agricultural practices, have meant increased problems with stormwater runoff. Development of a site increases the pollution threat to down-gradient waters by increasing both the intensity of use and consequently the generation of pollutants in most cases. Development also increases the flow volume and peak flow rates of the site, which increases the potential for erosion and sedimentation. Sedimentation reduces the effectiveness of natural pollutant control mechanisms such as on-site infiltration to groundwater and vegetative filtering subsequently increasing the overall pollutant loading of the site. Middle St. Croix Watershed Management Organization 49 5/27/2004 40 5.1.2 Water Quality Goals The water quality goal of the MSCWMO is to protect or improve water quality in the Middle St. Croix watershed through the treatment and control of stormwater runoff. Best Management Practices (BMPs) will be used to mitigate the negative impacts from stormwater runoff generated on development sites and agricultural lands. BMPs will be applied to achieve the following in preferential order: (1) prevent runoff from occurring, (2)retain water and infiltrate it on-site to largest extent possible, and (3) hold water in a detention pond to reduce the amount of nutrients leaving the site. BMPs including but not limited to grassed waterways, infiltration trenches,bioretention ponds, and others will be encouraged. 5.1.3 Existing Water Quality Regulatory Framework Many other units of government in addition to the MSCWMO have a role in managing the water quality of the watershed. Local city and county ordinances are summarized in Table 5. Additionally, the MPCA is charged with implementing the NPDES Phase II program that impacts water quality. Additional information about NPDES Phase II can be found in section 4.2,pg. 45. 5.1.4 Policies and Performance Standards Regarding Water Quality Policies 1. Direct discharge of stormwater to wetlands and all other water bodies without water quality treatment is prohibited. 2. Sources of water pollution shall be identified through data collection and corrected through the application of BMPs. 3. Performance standards will rely largely on control of peak flows as a means to prevent an increase in stormwater pollutant concentrations from the pre-development state. 4. Site design practices that may have only a minor impact on peak flow or flow volume, such as the use of buffer strips along receiving waters and drainage swales, will be used to achieve compliance with the water quality performance standard. Performance Standards 1. All new developments and redevelopments shall use proven Best Management Practice techniques (as listed in MPCA document"Protecting Water Quality in Urban Areas") to remove coarse grained sediments and other contaminants from stormwater runoff before leaving the site or discharging to wetlands,ponds, lakes, and streams. Trash and floatable debris skimming devices shall be placed on the outlet of all on- site detention basins. These devices can consist of baffled weirs, submerged outlets or other such measures. A permanent pool ("dead storage") volume below the principal spillway (normal outlet) shall be provided which is greater than or equal to the runoff from a 2.0-inch 24-hour storm over the entire contributing drainage area assuming full development. Other design standards per the National Urban Runoff Program (NURP) shall be followed. Methodology must be approved by the MSCWMO. 2. No increase in rate of runoff leaving the site from pre-development to post- development conditions generated by the 2-, 10-, and 100-year rainfall. Middle St. Croix Watershed Management Organization 50 5/27/2004 • • 3. An erosion and sediment control plan must be submitted and approved for all projects disturbing greater than ten thousand square feet. 4. Lowest floor elevations of structures built adjacent to stormwater ponds and other water bodies must be a minimum of two feet above the 100-year flood elevation and a minimum of two feet above the overflow of landlocked basins. 5. Construction is prohibited on slopes greater than 12 percent. 6. Direct discharge of stormwater to wetlands and all other water bodies without water quality treatment as outlined in Per. Std. #1 is prohibited. 7. Buffer zones of twenty feet of unmowed natural vegetation shall be maintained upslope of delineated wetland edge of all water bodies (wetlands, streams, lakes). The buffer requirement will apply only to sites that have been(1) subdivided on or after[date of plan adoption]; or(2) subject to a new primary use which will involved a change in runoff characteristics or disturbance of vegetation, for which a necessary rezoning, special use permit or variance has been approved on or after [date of plan adoption]. 5.2 Water Quantity 5.2.1 Key Water Quantity Concepts Control of peak flow is the most important means to prevent downstream flooding, limit sedimentation and protect the physical integrity of downstream watercourses. Roadway construction, increased pavement and other hard surfaces associated with land development have meant increased problems from stormwater runoff, which must be managed and controlled to prevent downstream flooding. Stormwater runoff presents significant concern with respect to water quantity. 5.2.2 Water Quantity Goals Controlling peak runoff will also help with protecting water quality. Excessive flow and flooding is the responsibility of each unit of government to correct. The water quantity goal of the MSCWMO is to reduce the peak runoff to protect downstream locations and; therefore, also reduce the public capital expenditures for flood control. Peak runoff will be reduced by, first, promoting infiltration where the water falls and secondly, by appropriately designed detention facilities to attenuate the peak flows and provide localized infiltration. 5.2.3 Existing Water Quantity Regulatory Framework A number of other units of government in addition to the MSCWMO have a role in managing the water quantity and stormwater runoff of the watershed. Local city and county ordinances are summarized in Table 5. Additionally, the MPCA is charged with implementing the NPDES Phase II program which impacts water quantity issues. Additional information about NPDES Phase II can be found in section 4.2, pg. 45. 5.2.4 Policies and Performance Standards Regarding Water Quantity Fundamental to nearly all of the stormwater management ordinances is the requirement that development not increase peak flow from a site. Middle St. Croix Watershed Management Organization 51 5/27/2004 • S Policies 1. All hydrologic studies shall analyze the 2-, 10- and 100-year rainfall event, with the critical duration defined as that event causing either the highest water surface elevation or the largest peak discharge in an area or both. Any study must use consistent methodology for the pre-development and post-development landuse conditions. The methodology must be approved by MSCWMO. 2. Newly developed or re-developed areas will be limited to the pre-development or existing rate of runoff or to a rate within the capacity of downstream conveyance systems, which ever is less, and no increase in the volume or rate of runoff from newly developed areas will occur in where natural outlets do not exist. In sub-areas of a landlocked watershed, development shall not increase the predevelopment volume or rate of discharge from the sub-area for the ten-year return period event. 3. Developers must secure any flowage easements that would be required to accommodate the stormwater management facilities. These easements will be granted up to the 100-yr flood level. 4. The MSCWMO shall adopt a floodplain regulation consistent with the Washington County Floodplain Regulations. 5. The MSCWMO will establish 100-year flood levels on the areas ponds, lakes, and streams. Performance Standards 1. No increase in rate of runoff leaving the site from pre-development to post- development conditions generated by the 2-, 10-, and 100-year rainfall. 2. Lowest floor elevations of structures built adjacent to stormwater ponds and other water bodies must be a minimum of two feet above the 100-year flood elevation and a minimum of two feet above the overflow of landlocked basins. 3. Buffer zones of twenty feet of unmowed natural vegetation shall be maintained upslope of delineated wetland edge of all water bodies (wetlands, streams, lakes). The buffer requirement will apply only to sites that have been(1) subdivided on or after [date of plan adoption]; or(2) subject to a new primary use which will involved a change in runoff characteristics or disturbance of vegetation, for which a necessary rezoning, special use permit or variance has been approved on or after [date of plan adoption]. 5.3 Erosion and Sediment Control 5.3.1 Key Erosion and Sediment Concepts Erosion and subsequent sedimentation down-slope causes several unintended negative effects on downstream uses. Sediment smothers fish larvae and eggs by covering the coarser substrate that fish typically use to spawn. Sediment induced turbidity reduces light penetration of water, hinders sight-feeding fish and increases the cost of providing drinking water. Sedimentation reduces water quality for recreational uses, lowers the value of adjoining lands, and increases public costs to maintain waterways and stormwater conveyances. Soil particles carry nutrients, trace metals and hydrocarbons into receiving waters and foster algae and weed growth. Runoff from construction sites is the largest source of sediments in urban areas undergoing development such as the Middle St. Croix Watershed Management Organization 52 5/27/2004 • • MSCWMO. Uncontrolled runoff from agricultural crop production also can contribute greatly to sedimentation problems. A vegetative buffer adjacent to a stream, lake or wetland serves a number of purposes critical to the protection of that water resource and is considered an integral part of that protection. Buffers moderate flow rates of stormwater runoff into receiving waters, stabilize banks and shorelines, filter nutrients and sediments from runoff, provide habitat, and visually screen aesthetically unappealing uses. Buffer width is the most important determinant of buffer effectiveness; soils, slope, and the types and condition of plant communities within the buffer also are relevant to buffer function. 5.3.2 Erosion and Sediment Goals The erosion and sediment goal of the MSCWMO is to prevent erosion and subsequent sedimentation from surface runoff within the watershed on construction sites; agricultural lands; and along stream banks, lakeshores, and roadsides. To achieve this, MSCWMO will: (1) promote methods that prevent erosion, (2) intercept eroded material before it leaves the site, and (3)require sedimentation basins or other areas for sediment to be safely controlled. 5.3.3 Existing Erosion and Sediment Control Regulatory Framework Many units of government in addition to the MSCWMO have a role in managing erosion and sediment control of the watershed. Local city and county ordinances are listed in Table 5. Additionally, MPCA is charged with implementing the NPDES Phase II program which requires erosion and sediment control for all construction sites of one acre or greater. Additional information about NPDES can be found in section 4.2, pg. 45. 5.3.4 Policies and Performance Standards Regarding Erosion and Sediment Control Policies 1. The MSCWMO shall encourage and monitor proper erosion and sediment control throughout the watershed to prevent siltation and sedimentation of streams, lakes, wetlands, and other areas of the watershed. 2. Both temporary(during construction) and permanent(long-term) erosion control will be required on newly developed or redeveloped land in MSCWMO with a disturbance of 10,000 square feet or greater. 3. Agricultural lands will be exempt from an erosion and sediment control plan. However, buffer strips will be required downslope of the agricultural activities on the site around water bodies and drainage ways that are on the same site. Performance Standards 1. All new developments and redevelopments shall use proven Best Management Practice techniques (as listed in MPCA document"Protecting Water Quality in Urban Areas") to remove coarse grained sediments and other contaminants from stormwater runoff before leaving the site or discharging to wetlands, ponds, lakes, and streams. Trash and floatable debris skimming devices shall be placed on the outlet of all on- site detention basins. These devices can consist of baffled weirs, submerged outlets Middle St. Croix Watershed Management Organization 53 5/27/2004 411 S or other such measures. A permanent pool ("dead storage")volume below the principal spillway(normal outlet) shall be provided which is greater than or equal to the runoff from a 2.0-inch 24-hour storm over the entire contributing drainage area assuming full development. Other design standards per the National Urban Runoff Program (NURP) shall be followed. Methodology must be approved by the MSCWMO. 2. No increase in rate of runoff leaving the site from pre-development to post- development conditions generated by the 2-, 10-, and 100-year rainfall. 3. An erosion and sediment control plan must be submitted and approved for all projects disturbing greater than ten thousand square feet. 4. Construction is prohibited on slopes greater than 12 percent. 5. Buffer zones of twenty feet of unmowed natural vegetation shall be maintained upslope of delineated wetland edge of all water bodies (wetlands, streams, lakes). The buffer requirement will apply only to sites that have been(1) subdivided on or after[date of plan adoption]; or(2) subject to a new primary use which will involved a change in runoff characteristics or disturbance of vegetation, for which a necessary rezoning, special use permit or variance has been approved on or after [date of plan adoption]. Agricultural activity is exempted from the requirements of these performance standards, provided buffer strips exist around water bodies and drainage ways that are downslope of the agricultural activities on the site. 5.4 Wetlands 5.4.1 Key Wetland Concepts Wetlands provide many important benefits, a fact that becomes only more apparent as wetland numbers have dwindled. These benefits include: storage area for excess water during times of flooding, filtering of sediments and nutrients before they enter lakes, rivers, streams, and the groundwater, fish and wildlife habitat, public recreation, and commercial uses. Wetlands are divided into eight types depending on their characteristics, primarily the amount and frequency of water retention and the typical vegetation. These wetland types are defined in Appendix C. A vegetative buffer adjacent to a stream, lake, or wetland serves a number of purposes critical to the protection of that water resource and is considered an integral part of it. Buffers moderate flow rates of stormwater runoff into receiving waters, stabilize banks and shorelines, filter nutrients and sediments from runoff, provide habitat and visually screen aesthetically unappealing uses. Buffer width is the most important determinant of buffer effectiveness; soils, slope and the types and condition of plant communities within the buffer also are relevant to buffer function. 5.4.2 Wetland Goals Wetlands are valuable natural resources and will be protected in a manner consistent with the Wetland Conservation Act. Middle St. Croix Watershed Management Organization 54 5/27/2004 • O 5.4.3 Existing Regulatory Controls The Wetland Conservation Act (WCA), enacted by the Minnesota Legislature in 1991, aims for a no net loss of wetlands. The law regulates draining and filling wetlands and, if wetland loss is unavoidable, requires replacement. Although the WCA is the most comprehensive law regulating wetlands, there are additional regulations and regulators listed below. Local city ordinances regarding wetlands are listed in Table 5. Board of Water and Soil Resources The Board of Water and Soil Resources (BWSR) provides technical assistance and oversight in administering the Wetland Conservation Act. One member of the Technical Evaluation Panel is from BWSR and provides input in wetland determinations,banking, and violations. Minnesota Department of Natural Resources Minnesota DNR Conservation Officers enforce the WCA; they have the authority to issue cease and desist orders to stop work on a project, replacement orders to require replacement of lost wetland area, and restoration orders requiring that the disturbed wetland be restored. Violation of an order is a misdemeanor. In addition, a permit from the Minnesota DNR is necessary for work in most type three, four, or five wetlands that are at least ten acres in size in unincorporated areas and two and one-half acres in incorporated areas. U.S. Army Corps of Engineers The Corps of Engineers (COE) is responsible for regulating impacts to wetlands and navigable water at a federal level. The COE must issue a permit for all wetland filling or excavating, under Section 404 of the Clean Water Act. If a Section 404 permit is required, an applicant must also obtain a Section 401 permit from the MPCA; this is to ensure that no activity conducted under a section 404 permit degrades water quality. Washington Conservation District While the Washington Conservation District(WCD) does not have regulatory control over wetlands, the WCD is a resource agency for additional wetland information and evaluation. Many communities within the MSCWMO rely on the WCD for technical assistance regarding wetlands. 5.4.4 Policies and Performance Standards Regarding Wetlands All wetlands contained in the National Wetlands Inventory shall be afforded the maximum protection consistent with the policies of the MSCWMO. Policies 1. Permits shall be obtained from appropriate regulatory authorities before any work is started in or near a wetland. 2. All alternatives shall be thoroughly considered, documented, and justified to avoid wetland impacts; all projects shall be designed with minimal need for wetland impact. The pre-existing quality of the wetland will be considered as alternatives are Middle St. Croix Watershed Management Organization 55 5/27/2004 • • considered. Wetlands immediately adjacent to DNR protected waters should only be impacted as a last option. 3. The effect of bounce from stormwater input will be evaluated as per MPCA guidelines. 4. Significant changes to the hydrology of the wetland, (i.e. changes to the outlet elevation or changes to contributing drainage area) are not allowed. Performance Standards 1. All new developments and redevelopments shall use proven Best Management Practice techniques (as listed in MPCA document"Protecting Water Quality in Urban Areas") to remove coarse grained sediments and other contaminants from stormwater runoff before leaving the site or discharging to wetlands,ponds, lakes, and streams. Trash and floatable debris skimming devices shall be placed on the outlet of all on- site detention basins. These devices can consist of baffled weirs, submerged outlets or other such measures. A permanent pool ("dead storage") volume below the principal spillway (normal outlet) shall be provided which is greater than or equal to the runoff from a 2.0-inch 24-hour storm over the entire contributing drainage area assuming full development. Other design standards per the National Urban Runoff Program (NURP) shall be followed. Methodology must be approved by the MSCWMO. 2. No increase in rate of runoff leaving the site from pre-development to post- development conditions generated by the 2-, 10-, and 100-year rainfall. 3. An erosion and sediment control plan must be submitted and approved for all projects disturbing greater than ten thousand square feet. 4. Lowest floor elevations of structures built adjacent to stormwater ponds and other water bodies must be a minimum of two feet above the 100-year flood elevation and a minimum of two feet above the overflow of landlocked basins. 5. Construction is prohibited on slopes greater than 12 percent. 6. Direct discharge of stormwater to wetlands and all other water bodies without water quality treatment as outlined in Per. Std. #1 is prohibited. 7. Buffer zones of twenty feet of unmowed natural vegetation shall be maintained upslope of delineated wetland edge of all water bodies (wetlands, streams, lakes). The buffer requirement will apply only to sites that have been (1) subdivided on or after [date of plan adoption]; or(2) subject to a new primary use which will involved a change in runoff characteristics or disturbance of vegetation, for which a necessary rezoning, special use permit or variance has been approved on or after [date of plan adoption]. 5.5 Education 5.5.1 Current Education and Outreach Program The MSCWMO does not currently have an education program. General public knowledge of the MSCWMO is limited and confusion exists over the purposes and activities of the WMO. Developing an education program will increase the public's knowledge of the WMO, increase their understanding of natural resources and water resource management, and will lead to better natural resource decisions and protection. Middle St. Croix Watershed Management Organization 56 5/27/2004 • Improved communication and outreach with the landowners of the MSCWMO will decrease potential for misunderstandings of management decisions. 5.5.2 Education Goals The education goals of the MSCWMO are broad based, but with the understanding that meeting these goals will result in better individual land use decisions and greater natural resource protection. The MSCWMO believes that awareness of resource issues, understanding of those issues, and skills to protect those resources, can lead to positive changes in land use management. The MSCWMO goals include: 1. Increase communities' (stakeholders') understanding and awareness of the MSCWMO and its Mission. 2. Increase stakeholders' knowledge and understanding of the MSCWMO functions and the rationale behind them. 3. Keep stakeholders informed of the MSCWMO activities. 4. Increase stakeholders' knowledge and understanding of: a. Water quality. b. Water quantity. c. Wetlands. d. Natural resource protection. 5. Foster pride in the resources of the MSCWMO./ The target audiences for the MSCWMO education program include: watershed residents, government officials and staff, consultants, and developers. 5.5.3 Policies, Standards, and Criteria Regarding Education Recognizing the limited budget of the MSCWMO, the education and outreach strategy will focus on a limited number of achievable objectives. The three key objectives of this plan are: Communicate and educate through local newspapers. • Community newspapers include: Stillwater Gazette, St. Croix Valley Press, and the South Washington County Bulletin. • Focus articles on MSCWMO activities and natural resource stewardship will be sent to these publications when applicable. • MSCWMO will work with these publications on developing a recurring natural resource/water resource column(similar to Outdoors column). Communicate and educate through the member communities' newsletters. • Provide MSCWMO communities with information about MSCWMO activities, meetings and natural resource stewardship articles for their newsletters. Technical fact sheets—BMPs for a single lot • Create and provide fact sheets for: infiltration, habitat, runoff, erosion control, construction BMPs, retrofitting existing developments, etc. Middle St. Croix Watershed Management Organization 57 5/27/2004 • • In addition to the strategies mentioned above, the MSCWMO recognizes many other education strategies are available and that these programs may be managed more efficiently and effectively through coordination with other water management organizations. The MSCWMO may develop the following programs, either independently or in collaboration with other organizations, when funding becomes available: • Workshop and/or seminar program for developers, consultants, local officials and staff, potentially in coordination with NEMO (Nonpoint source pollution Education for Municipal Officials) • Have regular communication with each community's planning advisory board • Watershed/WMO newsletter • Presentations and/or presence at regularly held LGU meetings • Demonstration sites of BMPs • Volunteer water quality monitoring programs 5.6 Groundwater The growing demand for groundwater for drinking water supplies, irrigation, industrial, and commercial uses along with the increased detection of groundwater contamination focuses attention on this resource in Washington County and in the Middle St. Croix watershed. Groundwater and surface water systems do not necessarily coincide with surface water divides or boundaries; therefore, groundwater protection efforts, to be most effective, should be coordinated at the county or regional level. The MSCWMO cannot successfully plan for or control activities outside its boundaries, which ultimately could have a detrimental impact on the groundwater resource it is dependent upon. In addition, management of groundwater is not a mandated Water Management Organization function. However, MSCWMO will work to further the goals, objectives, and implementation actions of the 2003-2013 Washington County Ground Water Plan as adopted by the Washington County Board of Commissioners on December 16, 2003. The following implementation actions were listed for Watershed Districts and Watershed Management Organizations: 1.) Develop and adopt policies on the quantity of water used in areas where existing wells and/or groundwater dependent natural resources could be negatively impacted by overuse of groundwater. Negative impacts include reduced flow to surface water bodies, lowering of lake or wetland levels, or interference with other wells 2.) Provide education to citizens and public officials on the inter-relation of surface and groundwater quality and quantity; the value of and need to protect groundwater recharge areas and wetlands; and implementation of best management practices and low-impact development and redevelopment strategies to protect groundwater resources. 3.) For all new developments and redevelopments, adopt rules controlling stormwater runoff volume and establish performance standards based Middle St. Croix Watershed Management Organization 58 5/27/2004 • on issues identified in water resource plans, inventories or studies, and on available scientific literature. Middle St. Croix Watershed Management Organization 59 5/27/2004 S 6.0 Implementation 6.1 Prioritize Problems The four most important issues for the MSCWMO identified by the Board and citizens of the watershed are runoff and stormwater, erosion and sediment control, wetlands, and education. The first three of these issues are interconnected as they are all impacted by development in the watershed. Education is a key component to address the other three issues. 6.2 Management Programs 6.2.1 Joint Powers Agreement To achieve and maintain compliance with the water management system and land use controls, local units of government will refer projects to the MSCWMO for investigation, comments, and recommendations regarding the proposed activity. The MSCWMO will review the performance of the local units of government; and monitor the status of the local plan, current water problems, and the need for local plan amendments. Local Plans shall include adoption of ordinances sufficient to comply with the MSCWMO standards. The role of the MSCWMO with local units of government was established with the philosophy that existing local units of government would be the primary regulator of activities of concern, but where issues affected more than one unit of government the MSCWMO maintains a coordination and dispute resolution role. The MSCWMO review process will be incorporated into existing city and township review processes, which is more efficient than permitting. Each community will refer projects to the MSCWMO to determine if full review is necessary by the review standards listed in this plan. Member communities will not grant building permits until MSCWMO review has occurred. All projects regardless of whether public or private can be reviewed under this scenario. Full MSCWMO review will be required for the following: 1. Any project disturbing greater than ten thousand square feet. 2. All major subdivisions. Major subdivisions are defined as subdivisions with four or more lots. 3. Any project with wetland impacts and any project with grading within the 20-foot wetland/public water buffer or within 40 feet of the bluffline. 4. Redevelopment on a site of 5 acres or more, where pervious surface is disturbed and final impervious surface, in aggregate, exceeds one acre or five percent of a site, which causes a change in runoff characteristics or disturbance of vegetation. 6.2.2 Administration At this time, no hiring of MSCWMO staff is anticipated. Administration of this Watershed Management Plan and its policies will be performed through a service contract. Supervision of the administrative services will be through the MSCWMO Board. Administrative services will include review: of activities for performance Middle St. Croix Watershed Management Organization 61 5/27/2004 • standards, Board meetings, Board meeting minutes, educational programs, and other activities as requested by the Board. Legal, Accounting, and Engineering services will also be contracted for on a biennial basis. 6.3 Implementation of Performance Standards Performance Standards will apply to development within the Middle St. Croix watershed and focus on stormwater management, erosion and sediment control, and wetland protection. The performance standards listed in Section 5 and Table 6.1 will apply to activities listed below: 1. Any project disturbing greater than ten thousand square feet. 2. All major subdivisions. Major subdivisions are defined as subdivisions with 4 or more lots. 3. Any project with wetland impacts and any project with grading within the 20- foot wetland/public water buffer or within 40 feet of the bluffline. 4. Redevelopment on a site of 5 acres or more, where pervious surface is disturbed and final impervious surface, in aggregate, exceeds one acre or five percent of a site, which causes a change in runoff characteristics or disturbance of vegetation. • Middle St. Croix Watershed Management Organization 62 5/27/2004 • Table 6 Performance Standards MSCWMO Priority Concerns Water Water Erosion and Performance Standard Quality Quantity Sedimentation Wetlands 1 All new developments and redevelopments shall use sediment basins or other proven techniques to remove coarse grained sediments and other contaminants from stormwater runoff before leaving the site or discharging to wetlands, ponds, lakes, and streams. (See MPCA document "Protecting Water Quality in Urban Areas" &NURP Standards) 2 No increase in rate of runoff leaving the site from pre- to post-development conditions generated by the 2-, 10-, and 100-year rainfall. 3 An erosion and sediment control plan must be submitted and approved for all projects disturbing greater 10,000 square feet. 4 Lowest floor elevations of structures built adjacent to stormwater ponds and other water bodies must be a minimum of 2 ft. above the 100-yr flood elevation, and 2 ft. above the overflow in landlocked basins. 5 Construction is prohibited on slopes> 12%. 6 Direct discharge of stormwater to wetlands and all other water bodies without water quality treatment is prohibited. 7 Buffer zones of 20 feet of undisturbed vegetation shall be maintained 20 feet upslope of the OHW of all water bodies (wetland, stream, lake). The MSCWMO Board may grant variances from the literal provisions of these performance standards. A variance shall only be granted when in harmony with the general purpose and intent of the Performance Standards in cases were strict enforcement of the performance standards will cause practical difficulties or particular hardship, and when terms of the variance are consistent with the MSCWMO's watershed management plan. "Hardship" as used in connection with the granting of a variance means the land in Middle St. Croix Watershed Management Organization 63 5/27/2004 • question cannot be put to a reasonable use if used under the conditions allowed by these performance standards; the plight of the applicant is due to circumstances unique to the land and not created by the applicant; and the variance, if granted, will not adversely affect the essential character of the locality and other adjacent land. Economic considerations alone shall not constitute a hardship if a reasonable use for the land exists under the terms of these performance standards. Conditions may be imposed in the granting of a variance to insure compliance and to protect adjacent land and the public health and general welfare of the MSCWMO. An application for a variance shall describe the practical difficulty or particular hardship claimed as the basis for the variance. The application shall be accompanied with such surveys, plans, data and other information as may be required by the MSCWMO to consider an application. A violation of any condition imposed in the granting of a variance shall be a violation of these performance standards and shall automatically terminate the variance. 6.4 Information and Education Program The MSCWMO will submit an annual report that includes a financial statement, work accomplishments, and goal implementation to Washington County. This document will also be provided to each of the member communities, and residents of the MSCWMO by request. The MSCWMO will meet the education goals listed in Section 5 on the following schedule: Table 7 Information and Education Timetable and Expenses Task 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 Annual Plan $500 $500 $500 $500 $500 Newspaper Articles $200 $200 $200 $200 $200 Newsletters $500 $500 $500 $500 $500 Technical Fact Sheets $1500 $200 $200 $200 $200 Dollar amounts are estimated and include time and materials. 6.5 Data Collection Program The MSCWMO proposes the following projects be implemented as a part of a data collection program: Integrated Water Quality Monitoring Program A comprehensive summary of the monitoring efforts in the Middle St. Croix watershed has been completed for this plan and these resources will be used to develop an overall water quality monitoring program for the future. This program will include baseline monitoring, coordinating, collecting and compiling data; acquiring equipment; and database management and maintenance. Volunteer monitoring will be incorporated into the MSCWMO Data Collection Program whenever feasible. The MSCWMO recognizes that volunteers can collect reliable, meaningful data that can be used in watershed Middle St. Croix Watershed Management Organization 64 5/27/2004 • planning and decision-making. Additionally, volunteer monitoring programs promote watershed stewardship by engaging, involving and educating volunteers in natural resource management. Contour Mapping Data Contour mapping of the Middle St. Croix watershed was acquired for this plan, and digital two-foot topographic data will be purchased from Washington County for use in watershed, subwatershed, and drainage delineation. This high-resolution topographic data will be valuable for the evaluation of future developments and projects in the watershed. Gully Inventory The MSCWMO will inventory and map both the active and stable gullies of the watershed using methods developed by the Washington Conservation District. Active gully erosion along tributaries that outlet directly into the St. Croix River or are located in steeply rolling areas where crop production and construction do not normally take place contribute to surface water pollution. These gullies can be large non-point pollution sources to the St. Croix River. This inventory will document the location and the quantity of material that is being eroded and the amount that is ultimately transported to the St. Croix River. Wetlands Inventory Wetlands greater than one acre were inventoried and classified in the 1986 MSCWMO Water Resources Inventory(Appendix C). Future evaluation of the watershed's wetlands will include more detailed wetland boundary determination, and further classification and values. Lily Lake TMDL Study Total Maximum Daily Load (TMDL) is a determination of the amount of nutrient or contaminant loading a given water body can sustain and still meet the Clean Water Act Standards for that body of water. The MPCA has placed Lily Lake on the impaired water list. The TMDL study will allow nutrient management and budgeting analysis for the surrounding subwatershed and will assist in future landuse conservation projects to be performed to improve the water quality of this impaired body of water. The target start date for the project will be 2007. It is intended that the City of Stillwater will undertake this study as the lake is and most of the drainage area is within Stillwater. 6.6 Studies and Capital Improvement Projects All capital improvement projects will be funded by the communities that directly benefit from the project. The State of Minnesota Storm Sewer Project Phase III will be completed in 2004-2005. The project will provide a safe and outlet of Perro Pond and the Perro Pond watershed to the St. Croix River. The project will be the final stage in a piping system through the city of Bayport. Upon completion of the project, regular flooding that occurred in Bayport and in Oak Park Height's will be alleviated. This Middle St. Croix Watershed Management Organization 65 5/27/2004 • • project was sponsored by the MSCWMO and funding was provided by the State of Minnesota through the 2002 bonding bill. 6.7 Financing Approaches 6.7.1 Current Approach Through the current Joint Powers Agreement the MSCWMO funding comes from fees paid by the member communities. All communities fund administration of the MSCWMO; large expenditures are funded by those communities receiving a direct benefit. The MSCWMO would prefer an ad valorem taxation process, as it is fairer to the member communities in the MSCWMO and other watersheds. The MSCWMO Joint Powers Agreement states that the portion paid by each community is determined in the following way: 1. 40% is determined by amount of land area of a community as a percentage of the land area of the entire watershed. 2. 20% is determined by the tax capacity of a community's area in the watershed as a percentage of the tax capacity of the entire watershed. 3. 40% is determined by the population of a community's area in the watershed as a percentage of the population of the entire watershed. In summary, the amount paid is based forty percent on land area, forty percent on population, and twenty percent on tax base for the area of the community within the watershed. The MSCWMO uses the Washington County Standardized Chart of Accounts for WMOs to track its revenues and expenditures. 6.7.2 Future Approach Inherent inequalities exist in the current funding approach of each member community supporting the MSCWMO through their general fund. The MSCWMO will rectify these inequalities in one of two ways: either through special legislation granting the MSCWMO taxing authority, or through the member cities and townships creating special taxing districts for the areas within both the city or township borders and the borders of the MSCWMO. The main difficulties with either of these approaches are both approaches add another layer of taxes to the community and questions arise regarding accountability when an appointed board is granted taxing authority. Despite these difficulties, the MSCWMO believes taxing authority or taxing districts are a more equitable way to fund the WMO than through general funds. Additionally, the MSCWMO Board, although appointed, is appointed by the member communities and exists though a Joint Powers Agreement; these factors mitigate the difficulties discussed here. It is the intention of the MSCWMO to gain levy authority via special legislation during the 2004 legislative session. Until levy authority is granted the MSCWMO will continue using the current financing approach. In addition to the overall change in financing, the Middle St. Croix Watershed Management Organization 66 5/27/2004 • • MSCWMO is also prepared to charge review fees directly to individual developers, for work performed in reviewing proposed projects, beginning January 1, 2005. Table 8 Finance Implementation Plans, Completion Dates, and Costs 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 Task Introduce bill Implement review to gain levy fees schedule to authority charge developers _ Est. Cost $5,000 $5,000 Levy Budget $35,000 $35,000 $35,000 $35,000 $35,000 Project Review $5,000 $10,000 $10,000 $10,000 Total Budget $40,000 $45,000 $45,000 $45,000 $45,000 Middle St. Croix Watershed Management Organization 67 5/27/2004 • 0 7.0 Appendices Middle St. Croix Watershed Management Organization 69 5/27/2004 41, 411 7.1 Appendix A: Washington County Water Governance Study Middle St. Croix Watershed Management Organization 71 5/27/2004 • • WASHINGTON COUNTY WATER GOVERNANCE STUDY REVISED IMPLEMENTATION PLAN ADOPTED BY THE WASHINGTON COUNTY BOARD OF COMMISSIONERS APRIL 16, 2002 Middle St. Croix Watershed Management Organization 72 5/27/2004 • 0 I Washington County WAici?ShED 01,-; RiCT Water Units �= n nu Proposed Governance Structure 1 RICE CREEK r N wb 4'E �r E�Ms TRIC T — - o sT CRoa 4 :.¢ a CR i11 41e`A1S3�{�temf 2f 1. ` ;I W _,_�e LIN IT a 1_' OELL'W000 `^ 1' a Ytt"rir+ M1ANTCAIE..1 ZM BIRCHWOOD " RCHW D 'nt a1{Aer .' 5r.CROIX UNIT a w Y _k__.,.- .TILL'HATER VCRTN WA$HINOTON UNIT SEAR lTAE1CF I. ANE �1�� iSPRINGd {{ RAMSEY- . a+YRP WASHIN3TON METRO WA-ER$HEC DISTRICT Tq +'t® RICE CREEK'NATEFSHEC CISTCrCT y +� _ �` •i L^r - P " SOUTH WASHINGTON WATERSHED CIS-RICT / �- ,4,6 COMFCRT LAKE-FORE$ 'LAKE WATERSHED OISTRI ' OAKOALE /P0R' R '�'.!r"�' 'i 1 1F U0 I •aElk T.31t.h- t:0. x 'u^Y'U.CT 4Y'Y�'",WrJJ.'-' ,�r_�__y, L. RATCWN TWP. ' w I. .� '-� 'NEsr I -1 ,1-`.,I UKELANC TWP r r, it LANDFALL r..� ~e�i I CH a 25 RAMSEY-WASHINGTO "K ti LAND 5 miles METRO WATERS J "` tEs J _ ° CROIX:LIT ` H='/ ST DISTRICT - p - ! irk J+.3�.CROLx AFTON 1 --4..TW J W+JI:L.di Ir r NCWPOft A $f� TtirWMMfNk�bk , wiTERStig0 0/STRICT STRATI:' r�Au t _. PARM '-- JINI ARK RVP suvo N — Th' GI$ pport Und Washinglon Cowls,'3a emmect Center - Wq 14949 3 np at North P.O.Sax 8 HAS Er 1; - SUSootcr,MN 95C82 ohcne iesr 030.9424 rhe ratar un.t data depi ned an this yapnlc..as Jr lded by dcnastrcc,Rosene Andenik S Associates Middle St. Croix Watershed Management Organization 73 5/27/2004 • • WASHINGTON COUNTY WATER GOVERNANCE STUDY REVISED IMPLEMENTATION PLAN On January 15, 2002, the Washington County Board of Commissioners met with representatives of watershed districts and joint powers water management organizations to reevaluate the consolidation plans and the implementation strategy recommended in the 1999 Water Governance Study. All organizations except the Comfort Lake Forest Lake and Ramsey/Washington Metro watershed districts were present. The original implementation strategy had Washington County taking an active role in consolidating the water management organizations from eleven to six. The County filed three petitions with the Board of Water and Soil Resources to enlarge the respective watershed districts to incorporate all the areas governed by joint powers water management organizations. One of the joint powers management organizations filed a legal challenge of the BWSR's favorable ruling on the petitions. On September Ii, 2001, the Minnesota Court of Appeals overturned BWSR's ruling and ruled that a watershed district could not be enlarged to include territory governed by a joint powers water management organization. The County Board held this workshop to discuss how to move forward in light of the Court of Appeals ruling. Participants at the workshop made the following points when asked about their organization's current position regarding the consolidation plans: • Most organizations like how water management is currently organized; they like local control. • Several community representatives expressed concern about the large budgets of watershed districts. • All organizations expressed concern that the current five-member boards of managers are inadequate to represent the larger districts. • Many organizations expressed concern over how watershed districts would finance major projects. • Carnelian Marine Watershed District is willing to consolidate with the Marine Water Management Organization but not with the Brown's Creek Watershed District. • New Scandia Township has passed a resolution to not participate in the Marine Water Management Organization. • Stillwater Township is rethinking its position. It favors the water management organization with its small budget over the watershed district with its large tax levy. As a result of the workshop, the County Board reiterated its support of the goals of the Water Governance Study and adopted this revised implementation plan. The Plan lays out the expectations for the water management organizations for actively managing the water resources of the County. It focused more on results than structure. Page 1 of 5 Middle St. Croix Watershed Management Organization 74 5/27/2004 GOALS OF WATER GOVERNANCE STUDY To create a water management structure that will provide long-term protection for surface and ground water resources. To create local water management units with the fiscal capacity and authority to govern efficiently and effectively. To identify financing mechanisms that are fair and adequate to meet the needs of the county. To coordinate surface water, ground water, land-use and natural resources management to provide for a more comprehensive approach to resource management. To adopt a proactive rather than a reactive approach to countywide water governance. To increase the accountability of the water management structure. PLAN OF ACTION East Mississippi Water Management Organization (EMWMO) Goal: Combine the EMWMO with the South Washington Watershed District(SWWD). The County will continue to encourage the SWWD to initiate a petition to enlarge to incorporate the area included in the EMWMO.The Administrator or County Board Chair will send a letter to the SWWD offering the County's assistance and support. The County will assist by providing tax impact information. The SWWD Administrator will meet with each local unit of government during the spring 2002 to discuss their concerns. Key Action. The participating cities dissolve the EMWMQ and the SWWD files an enlargement petition with the Board of Water and Soil Resources by September 1, 2002. Marine on St. Croix Water Management Organization (MWMO) Goal: Combine the MWMO with the Carnelian/Marine Watershed District(CMWD) and include the orphan area north of the MWMO. The Administrator or County Board Chair will send a letter to the MWMO and the CMWD requesting the organizations to develop a plan for the enlargement. The plan should set a target consolidation date that allows for a smooth transition and identify the steps that will be taken to complete the enlargement. Key Action: The Marine Water Management Organization includes the consolidation plan in its updated management plan and structures its updated plan so that it can be incorporated into the Carnelian Marine Watershed District plan after enlargement. Page 2 of 5 Middle St. Croix Watershed Management Organization 75 5/27/2004 4111 Carnelian Marine Watershed District(CMWD) and Brown's Creek Watershed District(BCWD) Consolidation Goal: Consolidate the CMWD and the BCWD into a North Washington County watershed district. The Administrator or County Board Chair will send a letter to the CMWD and BCWD asking them to prepare a plan to consolidate the two districts. The plan should include a target date for consolidation; the steps that will be taken to complete the consolidation; how to deal with current assets, liabilities and obligations of each organization; the process to transfer support services from the current organizations; how future projects will be financed; and recommended membership for the new Board of Managers. Key Action: The County will request the Carnelian Marine and Brown's Creek watershed districts to prepare the consolidation plan after the Carnelian Marine Watershed District enlargement has occurred. Middle and Lower St. Croix Water Management Organizations (MSCWMO and LSCWMO Goal: Enlarge the Valley Branch Watershed District(VBWD) to incorporate the LSCWMO and the southern portion of the MSCWMO and enlarge the BCWD to incorporate the northern portion of the MSCWMO. The timing of these enlargements will be dependent upon the ability and willingness of the water management organizations to responsibly manage the water resources,both surface and ground water, and to provide satisfactory customer service. The County will use the following criteria to determine whether the water management organizations have effective water management programs. Criteria#1: The organization has a current joint powers agreement that meets the standards established by the Board of Water and Soil Resources. Criteria#2: The organization has a current management plan that meets the content requirements and schedule established by the Board of Water and Soil Resources. Criteria#3: The organization is actively implementing the water resources management plan. At a minimum: A. The current water issues in the area are being addressed. B. The organization is actively implementing programs and projects that address both water quantity and quality issues. C. The organization is actively implementing programs to prevent problems from occurring. Page 3 of 5 Middle St. Croix Watershed Management Organization 76 5/27/2004 D. The organization has set performance standards for priority water bodies and has an ongoing monitoring program to assess whether the standards are being met. Criteria#4: The organization is actively implementing the recommended actions defined for the watershed districts and water management organizations in the Washington County Ground Water Management Plan. Criteria#5: The organization has mechanisms in place for citizens to advise the organization on planning, budgeting, and projects that may benefit the area. Criteria#6: The organization has a clear point of contact for customers. The point of contact is able to answer questions about the organization and is able to assist local governments and citizens in resolving their concerns. Criteria#7: The organization is using the Washington County Standardized Chart of Accounts for Water Management Organizations to track its revenues and expenditures. Criteria#8: The organization submits, to the County, an annual report that includes a financial statement, work accomplishments, and how the organization is implementing the goals of the Water Governance Project. Key Action:Annual reports are submitted to Washington County by January 31 of each year. Water Management Coordinating Council Goal: Form a Water Management Coordinating Council of the chair, or designee, of each watershed district and joint powers water management organization to work together to improve the efficiency and effectiveness of water management within the County. Membership of the Coordinating Council should also include managers of other organizations and units of government that are actively involved in water management within Washington County, such as the Washington Soil and Water Conservation District, Washington County Department of Public Health and Environment. The Coordinating Council is expected to: 1. Define and implement a strategy that will achieve the goals of the Water Governance Project. 2. Establish joint priorities, guidelines and policies for issues of common concern, including such things as shared services, shared office space,joint project funding, staff compensation, use of subwatershed taxing authority, legislative needs, etc. 3. Work closely with the Washington County Water Consortium in carrying out joint studies and research on water management issues. Page 4 of 5 Middle St. Croix Watershed Management Organization 77 5/27/2004 • 4. Work with Washington County to ensure effective implementation of the Washington County Ground Water Management Plan. 5. Provide a progress report to the County Board by January 31 of each year. Washington County will designate a staff person to the Water Management Coordinating Council to serve as the liaison with the County Board and the Administration Office. Key Action: Submit a report to the County Board by January31 of each year describing actions that the Water Management Coordinating Council has taken to improve the efficiency and effectiveness of water management within Washington County and progress that has been made to meet the goals of the Water Governance Plan. Watershed District Managers Goal. Appoint watershed district managers that will actively work toward furthering the goals of the Water Governance Study and are willing to initiate consolidation if necessary. The County Board will continue to thoroughly interview all candidates for Board positions and will strive for a balance in geography,philosophy and professional/technical knowledge among the members of each Board of Managers. Key Action. During the appointment interviews,the County Board will ask each prospective candidate for Board positions what their views are on these issues. County Board Goal. To regularly evaluate the implementation strategy and progress being made toward achieving the goals of the Water Governance Study. Performance will be evaluated through the annual reports submitted by the watershed districts,joint powers water management organizations, and the Water Management Coordinating Council. The County will use the eight criteria listed above as the key evaluation criteria. Key Action: Evaluate performance in March of each year. M:\USERS'ADM-1Ml IARPE\WP\WAT\WATERGOVERNANCEDIRECT IONDOC Page 5 of 5 Middle St. Croix Watershed Management Organization 78 5/27/2004 0 0 7.2 Appendix B: Subwatershed Summary SLBWATERSHED AREA(sq.ft.) AREA(sq.mi.) LANDLOCKED DRAINS DIRECTLY TO THE ST.CROIX 158000000000 8,228,779 0.2952 No Yes 158110000000 7,444,414 0.2670 No 158100000000 11,985,892 0.4299 No 158110000000 4,789,983 0.1718 No 158100000000 639,274 0.0229 No 157000000000 11,505,489 0.4127 No Yes 157000000100 782,396 0.0281 Yes 157111100000 3,434,990 0.1232 No 136000000000 5,398,090 0.1936 No Yes 157111110000 546,580 0.0196 No 157000000011 1,863,295 0.0668 Yes 157111111000 702,193 0.0252 No 155000000000 14,598,578 0.5237 No Yes 157111111100 11,570,828 0.4150 No 155100000000 5,752,491 0.2063 No 157000000012 507,462 0.0182 Yes 157111111110 20,186,687 0.7241 No 141100000000 15,903,031 0.5704 No 154000000000 9,161,360 0.3286 No Yes 141110000000 24,156,394 0.8665 No 141100000001 928,635 0.0333 Yes 151000000000 11,371,455 0.4079 No Yes 141111100000 6,193,092 0.2221 No 141113000000 3,934,098 0.1411 No 153000000000 596,954 0.0214 No Yes 141111140000 1,064,254 0.0382 No 151100000000 4,610,702 0.1654 No 123110000020 1,429,578 0.0513 Yes 152000000000 2,265,787 0.0813 No Yes 123110000016 3,842,893 0.1378 Yes 123110000019 902,655 0.0324 Yes 123110000018 2,427,342 0.0871 Yes 141000000000 12,095,872 0.4339 No Yes 141111130000 644,331 0.0231 No 123110000021 371,231 0.0133 Yes 141111120000 563,147 0.0202 No 123110000017 1,551,651 0.0557 Yes 141110000003 2,368,637 0.0850 Yes 141000000001 1,897,795 0.0681 Yes 141110000002 2,673,401 0.0959 Yes 141111110000 569,886 0.0204 No 141111120001 191,656 0.0069 Yes 141111100001 172,381 0.0062 Yes 141111121000 638,506 0.0229 No 123110000015 620,861 0.0223 Yes 123110000014 1,373,167 0.0493 Yes 141110000001 547,976 0.0197 Yes 123110000012 3,435,020 0.1232 Yes 141110000001 3,287,003 0.1179 Yes 124000000000 7,429,503 0.2665 No Yes 141112000001 3,188,800 0.1144 Yes 123110000013 271,099 0.0097 Yes 123110000009 164,332 0.0059 Yes 123110000008 1,844,798 0.0662 Yes 123110000009 251,738 0.0090 Yes 123110000004 669,748 0.0240 Yes 141112000000 2,920,255 0.1047 No 123110000011 304,893 0.0109 Yes 123110000003 630,474 0.0226 Yes 123110000022 389,086 0.0140 Yes 123110000005 1,354,390 0.0486 Yes Middle St. Croix Watershed Management Organization 79 5/27/2004 0 • SUBWATERSHED AREA(sq.ft.) AREA(sq.mi.) LANDLOCKED DRAINS DIRECTLY TO THE ST.CROIX 141110000003 685,233 0.0246 Yes 141111000000 1,121,639 0.0402 No 123110000006 339,388 0.0122 Yes 141110000002 1,104,645 0.0396 Yes 123110000007 258,191 0.0093 Yes 123110000002 357,571 0.0128 Yes 123110000000 7,646,457 0.2743 No 124100000000 4,365,779 0.1566 No 123200000000 1,760,362 0.0631 No 123110000001 1,467,456 0.0526 Yes 123000000000 27,272,153 0.9783 No Yes 123000000001 1,290,820 0.0463 Yes 123100000000 11,138,396 0.3995 No 123000000002 2,178,075 0.0781 Yes 123100000000 12,005,565 0.4306 No 122000000000 2,999,824 0.1076 No Yes 111111110000 5,715,113 0.2050 No 122100000000 4,017,770 0.1441 No 111111100000 21,758,937 0.7805 No 121000000000 24,703,875 0.8861 No Yes 111111100003 1,317,647 0.0473 Yes 111000000000 64,698,325 2.3207 No Yes 111111100012 625,961 0.0225 Yes 111100000000 7,364,889 0.2642 No 111111100002 349,476 0.0125 Yes 111000000002 779,599 0.0280 Yes 11.1000000001 1,470,859 0.0528 Yes 111100000000 597,384 0.0214 No 111111100001 176,700 0.0063 Yes 103000000000 12,775,553 0.4583 No Yes 102000000000 7,764,646 0.2785 No Yes 102100000000 30,806,427 1.1050 No 102000000001 1,529,765 0.0549 Yes 101000000000 22,004,769 0.7893 No Yes 102110000000 7,513,340 0.2695 No Middle St. Croix Watershed Management Organization 80 5/27/2004 • 7.3 Appendix C: Water Resource and Wetlands Inventory Ninety-six page inven.tory from previous WaterManagement Plan, will he included in draft for formal plan review. Middle St. Croix Watershed Management Organization 81 5/27/2004 • 7.4 Appendix D: Water Quality Data Middle St. Croix Watershed Management Organization 83 5/27/2004 • S McKusick Lake Vital Statistics DNR ID # : 82-0020 LOCATION : NE114 Section, 29 T3ON-R2OW MUNICIPALITY : City of Stillwater LAKE SIZE : 60 acres MAXIMUM DEPTH : 15 ft. ORDINARY HIGH WATER MARK : 851.7 ft Lake Water Quality Summary Lake Grades 2003 2002 2001 2000 1999 1998 1997 1996 1995 1994 Total Phosphorus (mg/I) CCCCD D CD DD Chlorophyll-a (ug/l) B C C NA NA NA NA NA NA NA Secchi depth (ft) CCBBDDCDDD Overall C+ C C+ C+ D D C D D D McKusick Lake 75 65 60 m \ ar• 55 O 50 a 1– 45 40 35 —�--Transparency —0—Chlorophyll-a .. ,s Total Phosphorus 30 1994 1995 1996 1997 1998 1999 2000 2001 2002 2003 Middle St. Croix Watershed Management Organization 84 5/27/2004 • • McKusick Lake i Surface Chlorophyll-a Total Surface Phosphorus 100 az go 0.18 80 . .7 0.18 ii. a 14 so 0.a1,2 e ri E • Z., I 0 6 i 0. CI Vi 40 o o a 0 2 1 73M 0.03 41 ill !If 1.- • il 111 il 1-i 20 0.04 0, 0 1/31/93 6/15/94 10/24/95 3/11/97 7/24/98 12/8/99 4/19/01 GM 1/02 1/14/04 1/31/93 6//5/94 10/28/95 3/11/97 7/24/98 12/8/99 4/19/01 W 1/02 11 1,11. McKusick Lake Elevation Secchi Transparency 857 1/31/93 6/15/94 10/28/95 3/11/97 7/24/98 12/6/99 4/19/01 9/1/02 1/14/04 —•—Devotion 0 ii. .....i0HW 858- 2- I 4- ass- ii.... ... _ il- 6— ••••• s, • II C ... ..... '.,E 8- RI 0 } 0 .1. 4.1 W ill ta 10 853 4111144 1/11:--j-ill--- --- - 12 852- 14- 951 1 16 10/28/95 3/11/97 7/24/99 /2/0/99 41 191 01 6/1/02 1/14/04 Middle St. Croix Watershed Management Organization 85 5/27/2004 • i . Lily Lake Vital Statistics DNR ID # : 82-0023 LOCATION : NE114 Section, 32 T3ON-R2OW MUNICIPALITY : City of Stillwater LAKE SIZE : 35.9 acres MAXIMUM DEPTH : 51 ft. ORDINARY HIGH WATER MARK : 844.8 ft Lake Water Quality Summary Lake Grades 2003 2002 2001 2000 1999 1998 1997 1996 1995 1994 Total Phosphorus (mg/I) C C CC C C C C C NA Chlorophyll-a (ug/I) B B A NA NA NA NA NA NA NA Secchi depth (ft) CCBCCCCCBNA Overall C+ C+ B C C C C C B- NA Lily Lake 65 33c- 60 T 55 - K aci 50 N 45 a 40 35 —�—Transparency —i--Chlorophyll-a --A Total Phosphorus 30 1994 1995 1996 1997 1998 1999 2000 2001 2002 2003 Middle St. Croix Watershed Management Organization 86 5/27/2004 • • Lily Lake Chlorophyll-a 1 Surface Total Phosphorus 20 0.14 1e 0.12 16 • • 14 .4 0.1- II 1 J f008 0112-r' lo P. 1::--- - -- ••- -M -- - --- 4 0.02- 2 -- )11 11-P.-- 8/15/94 10/23/95 3/11/97 7124/98 12/5/99 4/19/01 9/1/02 8/14/04 6/15/94 10/28/95 3/11/97 7/24/98 12/8/99 4/19/01 9/1/02 1/14/04 Lily Lake Elevation Secchi Transparencies 6/15/94 10/28/95 3/11/97 7/24/98 12/6/99 4/19/01 9/1/02 1/14/04 — --Bevation I 0 IF OHW 1347.00- 846.50- 5` --- ----- t ( il i t ,,ii r 1 Ili i le r.II i 4..8/8.00 '-- I44. _ 10 V 'I 11 11 i __ I V } 845.00 ______ 1 ____ II 1 Z eio Ot i, pI. ,1 W844.50 I y 1/ '-- - -- N 15- 844.00- 843.50- 20- 84500- 842.50 10/28/95 3/11/97 7/24/98 12/5/99 4/19/01 9/8/02 1/14/04 25 Middle St. Croix Watershed Management Organization 87 5/27/2004 • • Perro Pond Vital Statistics DNR ID# : 82-0310 LOCATION : SW1f4 Section, 3 T29N-R2OW MUNICIPALITY : City of Oak Park Heights LAKE SIZE : 53 acres MAXIMUM DEPTH : Not Available ORDINARY HIGH WATER MARK: Not Available Perro Pond Elevation 748.00 747.00 746.00 745.00VII .4°44 \lt4 "It" m 744.00 LU 743.00 742.00 741.00 740.00 1/1/98 1/1/99 1/1/00 12/31/00 12/31/01 12/31/02 12/31/03 Middle St. Croix Watershed Management Organization 88 5/27/2004 • 7.5 Appendix E: Planning Meeting Minutes Middle St. Croix Watershed Management Organization 89 5/27/2004 S Watershed Management Plan Workshop Summary Middle St. Croix Watershed Management Organization February 24, 2003,3-5pm Washington Conservation District (Located in River Heights Plaza, Stillwater, next to the Washington County License Center) a. Issue Identification—WMP a. Which resource issues are important in MSCWMO? The following issues were listed as being important: Development Runoff/Stormwater, Erosion and Sediment Control Pollution Flooding Water Quality Education/Outreach Habitat/Fish/Wildlife Regional Coordination Wetland Streams/Rivers St. Croix/Bluffs/Gully Funding/Cost Rules/Regulations Enforcement Groundwater Plume b. Which resources are of specific concern? Priorities? The major issue of concern was development in the watershed. Stemming from that the three major issues of concern are: --Runoff/Stormwater --Erosion and Sediment Control --Education Other comments made include: A separation should be made between the WMP (plan) and the rules. The plan needs to be proactive rather that reactive. There is a distinct difference between the MSC watershed and other Watershed Districts in the area. Other watersheds in Washington County have one major drainage with headwaters and an outlet, the MSC watershed has many small parallel watersheds that all flow into the St Croix. Can we find a similar watershed district that has a similar hydrologic layout? What specifically are BWSR's requirements for a plan? Middle St. Croix Watershed Management Organization 90 5/27/2004 • Does/Can this plan fulfill requirements of a 3rd generation WMP? We need a comprehensive list of the other Watershed Districts Rules. A Technical Advisory Committee (TAC) should be formed to help develop the rules. The new NPDES Phase II requirements for cities may have an impact on the MSC plan. b. Watershed Management Plan Requirements Washington County's Water Governance Study listed 8 criteria MSCWMO must fulfill to be considered implementing. These were discussed and emphasis was given to Criteria#3 in regard to the WMP It was mentioned that MSCWMO needs to get the latest requirements BWSR and the state have for watershed management plans. What is required to be in a WMP? c. Work plan and Timetable Bob Fossum will be compiling the following for the March regular meeting of MSCWMO: a. More detailed descriptions of the major issues that were identified at the workshop b. These descriptions will include: a detailed description, data/resource inventory needs, associated costs to the district, other stakeholders c. The Washington County Water Consortium Draft Report of the Summary of Rules of Watershed Districts in Washington County d. BWSR and State requirements of a Watershed Management Plan A revised work plan and timetable will be discussed at the March meeting as well. Middle St. Croix Watershed Management Organization 91 5/27/2004 S • Middle St. Croix Watershed Management Organization Community Input Meeting May 30, 2003 Baytown Township Hall Call to Order Meeting called to order at 7:00P.M. by Manager McPherson. Members Present John McPherson, West Lakeland; John Jansen, Lake St. Croix Beach; Anders Hansen, Baytown Township; Jim Gilles, Lakeland; Ron Nelson, Stillwater; David Beaudet, Oak Park Heights; JoElla Givens, Lakeland Shores, Robert Kamps, Bayport. Others in Attendance: Dawn Hilde, Recording Secretary,Bob Fossum, WCD. A list of attendees is attached. The MSCWMO Board introduced themselves. Bob Fossum welcomed the community members and gave an overview of the agenda for the meeting. Description of Middle St. Croix WMO Watershed Management Plan—What and Why WMP Content Feedback/Input From Audience David Beaudet reviewed the background of the MSCWMO, the Joint Powers Agreement and the need for rules to protect and manage the water in the MSCWMO. Mr. Beaudet explained the difference between WMO's and Watershed Districts. Washington Country tried to combine WMO's in the County into larger watershed districts. The MSCWMO sued to retain its right to exist and not become part of a larger watershed district. One of the biggest differences between them is the size of their budgets. The administration budget for the MSCWMO 2003 is $1,750.00. If it had become part of the Brown's Creek Watershed District the budget would be $440,000. This money would come from property taxes. Mr. Beaudet spent the day of May 29th talking to legislatures about receiving taxing authority for the MSCWMO. During these discussions he was told Washington County was lobbying against this taxing authority. Bob Fossum presented information on the following: Education: Become a larger player in the watershed Make citizens aware and informed of the watershed and its function and activities Communicate and educate through the member communities newsletters/newspapers. Inventory/Data Collection: Middle St. Croix Watershed Management Organization 92 5/27/2004 i • Water Resource inventory will be completed as part of WMP Continued monitoring of water quality and quantity of lakes and ponds of importance. The WMO has been monitoring Lily Lake for many years. The mapping of WMO with new two foot contours will provide the WMO with good basic information. Regulation: Rules and Regulations will be part of WMP and will apply to development in the watershed and focus on stormwater management, erosion and sediment control, and wetland protection. Watershed review process will be incorporated into existing city/township review process —more efficient and streamlined process than permitting. Financing: Currently—MSCWMO funding through fees paid by member communities. Prefer ad valorem taxation vs. current funding process—more fair for communities in MSCWMO and other watersheds. Administration is funded by all communities, large expenditures (projects) are funded by those that directly benefit. Regulation/Review—fee charged to developer. John Jansen stated it is always better to be under local control (Joint Powers Agreement) than be controlled by a large government authority. Perro Pond Pipe Project The old Stillwater Prison caused flooding because of the large area of impervious surface. The legislature provided the funds to repair the problem. Bob Fossum asked for questions from the audience. Eric Johnson, City Administrator, Oak Park Heights Are you adding another layer of government to permitting? Would developers have to receive permits from the local governments and WMO? No, the WMO would like to give input to each local authority if we have concerns about erosion and stormwater issues. How do you know the Perro Pond problem is solved? Perro is a volume problem and it is now being piped directly to the St. Croix River. Bill Nelson - asked "will developers have to come to the WMO and the watershed for permits?" Bob Fossum explained one parcel is only in one WMO or watershed so developers will only need one permit. Middle St. Croix Watershed Management Organization 93 5/27/2004 • • Kent Grandlienard—How can we educate Washington County Board? John Jansen responded that the Washington County Board has been studying this issue for some time and would like to see one large watershed in the County. John Jansen stated that some WMO's have taxing authorization. Bill Nelson asked if"County has control over money received from the state?" No. Terry Swan, Lakeland Township—"Can the WMO continue if it meets the criteria set by Washington County?" Yes. David Beaudet stated the McKnight Study evaluating all water management groups put the costs for MSCWMO just above average. Bob Fossum stated that BWSR is the ultimate judge as to whether or not the WMO is functioning or failing. John McPherson stated the WMO should talk to Ed Cain to get details on legislative action. Konrad Koosmann, WCD, stated that most failures of WMO's are because the Joint Powers Groups fail. JoElla Givens feels that local control is best. Terry Swan—The difference in costs between WMOs and Watersheds makes the decision easy. Judy Sventek, Met Council—The WMP should have a cost analysis in it. Bill Nelson—"How can we get the county board on our side?" Wally Abrahamson was a supporter of the WMO but has retired. The WMO will have to talk to the present Commissioners and find a supporter. John Jansen made a motion to adjourn, seconded by Anders Hansen. Vote: 8/0 Meeting adjourned at 8:05P.M. Respectfully Submitted, Dawn Hilde Middle St. Croix Watershed Management Organization 94 5/27/2004 • • List of Attendees: Penny Huonder Baytown Township 430-4992 Mary McComber Oak Park Heights 351-7879 Konrad Koosmann Washington Conservation District 275-1136 Judy Sventek Met Council 602-1156 Ray Swanson West Lakeland Township 436-2261 Jerry Peterson West Lakeland Township 436-6677 Nancy Jacobson St. Mary's Point 436-7157 Sharon Ridgway Bayport 439-5576 Ron Fredkove Baytown Township 439-6048 Sharon Lee Lakeland 436-7280 Eric Johnson Oak Park Heights 439-4439 Kent Granlienard Baytown Township 430-1142 Bill Nelson Baytown Township 439-7118 Middle St. Croix Watershed Management Organization 95 5/27/2004 • • 7.6 Appendix F: Website References The following list reflects all websites referred to in this document. Ecological Services Division of the Minnesota Department of Natural Resources http://www.dnr.state.mn.us/ecological_services Minnesota Department of Natural Resources http://www.dnr.state.mn.us Minnesota Pollution Control Agency http://wvvw.pca.state.mn.us Minnesota Pollution Control Agency "Protecting Water Quality in Urban Areas," http://www.pca.state.mn.us/water/pubs/swm-coverpg.pdf Minnesota Pollution Control Agency TMDL http://www.pca.state.mn.us/water/tmdl.html#tmdl National Park Service Lower St. Croix National Scenic Riverway: http://www.nps.gov/sacn/pdfs/Final_St_Croix_CMP_EIS.pdf or http://www.nps.gov/sacn/management/planning_docs.html State Climatology Working Group [State Climatology (DNR Waters), Extension Climatology(MES) and Academic Climatology(University of Minnesota)]: http://www.climate.umn.edu. Middle St. Croix Watershed Management Organization 96 5/27/2004 • • 7.7 Appendix G: Joint Powers Agreement 1T{) lx' inserted for draft during formal review process. Middle St. Croix Watershed Management Organization 97 5/27/2004 7.8 Appendix H: Amendments Middle St. Croix Watershed Management Organization 98 5/27/2004 A Regular Meeting Agenda r 1110 Middle St. Croix Watershed Management Organization August 12,2004 Washington Conservation District (Located in River Heights Plaza, Stillwater,next to the Washington County License Center) 7:00 PM-Regular Meeting Agenda i(44/Ak. 1. Call to Order 2. Approval of Minutes °}t1 ''° tiv . ._:> ••• a) July 8, 2004 Minutes /� i 3. Treasurer's Report(Anders Hansen) lor�. •a' a) Report of Savings Account,Assets b) Approve payment of bills 2�`� c) Community Contributions-2nd Payment letter sent out .// 4. Old Business , a) St. Croix River Bridge Crossing Project Update f -/b6 'V b) Watershed Management Plan . = ,et-5 b vo Q A}w� ,Response to Member Community Draft Distribution -- W oP" 1 JAAS INAli-v - PO 01- 5. New Business C NAdt I �' Ask t `f' c,.1 St-N/ �4* --i -ate W tO iot, 1*.filta `t-- d CD-change in a mistrative services��g.n�•Pu� w�tt.�ccs� cvo P f.6t orm wor- ejcct,Phase lam& ding Update ('p0 -4-116 Development evle pates c.-44' ;�� .-d)( 00AortuPdateübmfttedto Washington County PHE, :WSR /JO/ANA 4 _______ t „---...... ivAmei- mi 6. Other Agenda Items44 �Lsipst sdBM, -• - / 7. Adjourn �. cr 4-4/ -. iiiv1h tAil 4d em-'11, CI-W(+ 0 ,T,-.17 garidlitflialAi F-'1' k r 4 r 4. 19' )9ti °547 )0- (410ii.54 2019/ ykei,f 66)4-1.0S - " `�.- " s 3� � IiI Middle St. Croix Watershed Management Organization MEMBER COMMUNITIES: Afton,Bayport,Baytown Township,Lakeland,Lakeland Shores,Lake St.Croix Beach,Oak Park Heights,St.Mary's Point,Stillwater and West Lakeland Township • • lk Washington ..t..,,,,„ , Conservation District 1380 W Frontage Road, Hwy 36, Stillwater, MN 55082 Tel: 651-275-1136 Fax: 651-275-1254 MEMORANDUM TO: Middle St. Croix Watershed Management Organization FROM: Konrad Koosmann, District Manager ,:et/' RE: Change in Administrative Services DATE: August 2, 2004 Washington Conservation District (WCD) employee Bob Fossum resigned from the District on July 19th, 2004. Administration of the MSCWMO will continue through WCD staff. I will be attending the August 12th meeting to introduce Melissa Lewis who will be taking over Bob's responsibilities with the MSCWMO. Supervisors: Louise Smallidge,Chair • Gary Baumann, Secretary • Tom Meyer,Treasurer • Jane Krentz • Torn Armstrong,Jr. WASHIN S �N COUNTY REQUEST FOR BOARD ACTION TIME REQUIRED 30 minutes August 24, 2004 AGENDA ITEM NO. BOARD MEETING DATE ORIGINATING DEPARTMENT/SERVICE BOARD ACTION REQUIRED: County Board Workshop Public Health and Environment Request by the Middle St. Croix Water Management Organization for County REQUESTOR'S SIGNATURE /DATE Board support of Special Legislation for creation of a water management taxing !1tII9. district and levy authority. REVIEWED BY /DATE 110 1 eq 5/1 BACKGROUND/JUSTIFICATION On June 10, 2004, the Washington County Board of Commissioners received a letter from the Middle St. Croix Watershed Management Organization informing the Board that the WMO intends to seek special legislation for levy authority for its operating costs. In the letter, the WMO Board indicates that it would appreciate the support of the County Board in seeking this special legislation. (Letter attached) The request was forwarded to staff to complete an analysis of the request in anticipation of the County Board's discussion of this request. This analysis is now complete. The County Board will discuss the request from the Middle St.Croix Water Management Organization in workshop. The Middle St. Croix Water Management Organization Board received copies of this proposed County Board agenda item on Thursday, August 12. They reviewed the draft analysis document at their meeting that evening and provided responses. This response letter was addressed to the County Board and is attached. Based on comments received from the MSCWMO, the analysis document has been updated and/or clarified. Changes from the draft document reviewed by the MSCWMO are noted through strikeout(deleted)and underline(clarifying) language. • PREVIOUS ACTION ON REQUEST/OTHER PARTIES ADVISED MEDIA CONTACT Mary McGlothlin 651-430-6655 Middle St. Croix River Water Management Organization Board Cindy Weckwerth 651-430-6655 • DATE/TIME RECEIVED BY COUNTY ATTORNEY REVIEW /DATE FINANCIAL IMPLICATIONS: $ N/A COUNTY ADMINISTRATOR — BUSINESS UNIT(S: COUNTY ADMINISTRATOR ADMINISTRATIVE RECOMMENDATION OBJECT(S): ❑APPROVAL BUDGETED ❑DENIAL YES NO DATE 0 NO RECOMMENDATION FUNDING LEVY OTHER COMMENTS COMMENTS REVISED:August 2001 D:\MyFiles\boardagendaitems\MSCVvMO analysis workshop.doc • , MIDDLE ST. CROIX RIVER WATERSHED MANAGEMENT ORGANIZATION Imo, )6; 1380 West Frontage Road, Hwy 36 Phone: 651-275-1136, ext. 21 Stillwater, MN 55082 Fax: 651-1254 ° • A Joint Powers Watershed Management Organization composed of ten St. Croix Valley Err it Communities that was established under State Statute 103B to cooperatively manage water resources within the watershed ! sl� MEMORANDUM TO: Washington County Board of Commissioners FROM: MSCWMO Board • RE: PHE Report regarding the August 24, 2004 County Board Workshop DATE: August 16, 2004 The Middle St Croix Watershed Management Organization (MSCWMO) received a copy of the Public Health and Environment (PHE) report regarding the MSCWMO's request for County Board support of Special Legislation for creation of a water management taxing district and levy authority. This report was reviewed by the MSCWMO Board at their August 12th meeting. The MSCWMO would like to provide some clarification and correction to the information provided for the County Board Workshop. We feel that it is important to have certain items clearly defined in preparation for this upcoming workshop. The following items refer to specific problem areas within the workshop information, with each item listing the page and section for which the subsequent comment/correction applies. Page 1 History of WMO: The history section states that "the WMO has engaged in limited activity during its duration". In fact, the WMO has actively met on a monthly basis since its inception, and has worked on numerous activities, providing an effective water management program for the defined watershed area. These activities include (but are not limited to) reviewing development plans, ensuring compliance with run- off standards, and monitoring and restoring lake quality. The WMO does currently have a Board of Soil and Water Resources approved plan, and is actively working to complete their second-generation plan, within full compliance of Board of Soil and Water Resources standards. Page 5 Disadvantages: 1. Currently under Minnesota Statute, the MSCWMO does not have special taxing authority and is seeking the legislation for this authority. The current uses of special taxing authority in the Joint Powers Agreement is to fund projects such as the State of Minnesota storm sewer project, where the benefiting communities pay the lobbying costs associated with the project. Middle St. Croix Watershed Management Organization MEMBER COMMUNITIES: Afton,Bayport,Baytown Township,Lakeland,Lakeland Shores,Lake St.Croix Beach,Oak Park Heights,St. Mary's Point,Stillwater and West Lakeland Township • 2. Washington County currently provides taxing district administration service to all the Watershed Districts. If all residents are to have equal protection under the law, all citizens should benefit from similar County taxing district administration policies whether they reside in a Water Management Organization or Watershed District. Since all county residents pay to support the current administration policy, it would seem to be unfair to provide this service to some residents and not to others. Page 5 (cont.) Additional Concerns: 1. Operating costs are clearly defined in the MSCWMO budget. While it may be true that "most watershed districts finance their entire expenditures with the general levy", that is not the financial plan for this watershed maintenance organization. We do not expect the annual budget to increase substantially due to the mechanisms in place to fund special projects (such as the State of Minnesota Storm Water Project). - 2. The Watershed Managers, appointed by member communities, do promote public participation in the activities and deliberations of the WMO. A recent example of this is in the public forums held regarding the second-generation management plan. Citizen input was solicited and incorporated into the draft plan. 3. The MSCWMO does indeed have a history of being an active, functioning WMO. It does meet the criteria established for an implementing, functioning WMO. It is very clear that the MSCWMO has been and can indeed continue to carry out the functions and responsibilities required for a WMO. Page 6 Conclusion: ' The MSCWMO is a functioning Water Management Organization and has not received any report indicating we are not in compliance with the Board of Soil and Water Resources requirements. The MSCWMO reviews plans, ensures compliance with run-off standards, restores lake water quality, and is monitoring water quality. The MSCWMO has indeed demonstrated the ability to function as an implementing agency within the standards set by the Board of Soil and Water Resources and the Washington County Water Governance Study. Page 7 Criteria for Effective Water Management Program: 1. Status: The MSCWMO has 10 member communities. Due to the geography and municipal boundaries, the greatest number of communities that could be involved in a drainage dispute is four. All MSCWMO water drainage is common to the St. Croix River. The MSCWMO Board has the common sense to resolve all disputes of water drainage, since in the worst case scenario six community members would remain neutral and find the common ground to resolve disputes. This current organizational structure does meet the BWSR standard. 2. Status: The MSCWMO currently does have in place a Board of Soil and Water Resources approved plan, thereby fully meeting this criterion. We are not out of compliance with any Board of Soil and Water Resources requirements. The MSCWMO is in the process of finishing its second-generation plan. The Board of Soil and Water Resources has no timeline Middle St. Croix Watershed Management Organization MEMBER COMMUNITIES: Afton,Bayport,Baytown Township,Lakeland,Lakeland Shores,Lake St.Croix Beach,Oak Park Heights,St. Mary's Point,Stillwater and West Lakeland Township • • in place as to when the second-generation plan must be completed, however the MSCWMO is working to get this plan in place as quickly as possible. 3. Status: The staff report is in error when it states that the MSCWMO has no current plan. From the State of the Watershed Water Quality report (an independent study of the state of water in Minnesota) the MSCWMO, under the water quality improvement program section of the report, reviews municipalities' development plans with assistance from SWCD, ensuring compliance with runoff standards. The MSCWMO is indeed actively implementing the currently approved water resources management plan. Page 8 Criteria for Effective Water Management Program (cont.): 4. Status: The MSCWMO is working on the second-generation plan to comply with the State of Minnesota requirements as administered by the Board of Soil and Water. The draft MSCWMO 2nd generation plan does commit to work to further the goals, objectives and implementation actions of the 2003-2013 Washington County Groundwater Plan and therefore fully meets this criterion. It should be noted that a member of the MSCWMO Board is also a member of the Washington County Groundwater Advisory Committee. 5. Status: The most obvious and direct mechanism in place for citizens to advise the organization is through the constituent government bodies, which directly appoint the MSCWMO Board members. The MSCWMO Board of Commissioners respectfully requests your support in seeking special legislation to receive levy authority for its operating costs. We believe this to be the most equitable funding mechanism for the organization, with a high level of accountability to our constituents. The MSCWMO is a well-run, well-organized WMO which meets all of the criteria set forth by the Board of Soil and Water Resources and the County's Revised Implementation Plan for Water Governance. We welcome your questions and comments. S. ce/ely, �/ 2'/ CV hn McPherson, Chairman • Middle St. Croix Watershed Management Organization MEMBER COMMUNITIES: Afton,Bayport,Baytown Township,Lakeland,Lakeland Shores,Lake St.Croix Beach,Oak Park Heights,St.Mary's Point,Stillwater and West Lakeland Township 0 s ,,,,k, , .,„ , . MIDDLE P. CROIX RIVER WATERSHED MANAGEMENT ORGANIZATION Imo, a; 1380 West Frontage Road, Hwy 36 Phone: 651-275-1136, ext. 22 Stillwater, MN 55082 Fax: 651-1254 ' 1 ,1` A Joint Powers Watershed Management Organization composed of ten St. Croix Valley -i,,,:`. Communities that was established under State Statute 103E to cooperatively manage water , yr'. resources within the watershed. ,e ,ti. Resolution of the Middle St. Croix Watershed Management Organization WHEREAS the Middle St. Croix Watershed Management Organization Board of Managers, understands that inherent inequalities exist in the current funding approach of member communities contributing through general funds,and WHEREAS the Middle St. Croix Watershed Management Organization Board of Managers is appointed by member communities and exists through a Joint Powers Agreement,and WHEREAS the Middle St. Croix Watershed Management Organization Board of Managers understands that creating special taxing districts or granting the Organization taxing authority creates another layer of taxes to the communities, and WHEREAS by the Middle St. Croix Watershed Management Organization Board of Managers believes taxing authority is a more equitable way to fund the activities of the Organization, now therefore, BE IT RESOLVED by the Middle St. Croix Watershed Management'Organization Board of Managers, that it will hereby seek special legislation during the 2005 legislative session granting the Organization taxing authority. RESOLUTION INTRODUCED BY: John Jansen RESOLUTION SECONDED BY: Joella Givens VOTE ON RESOLUTION: 9 yes, 0 no, 1 absent WHEREUPON the above resolution was adopted at the August 12, 2004 meeting of the Middle St. Croix Watershed Management Organization Board of Managers. 1.t.a.,1200 ?V c..rfree4frek4___. ( _ /(_ a `( Authorized Signature Date . Cku.t r MAO Title LAL. 34- '6, — 64( Attested to by Date • Aa t.s.01 ,s1,,;. - . 1\s% JMO 11 Title Middle St. Croix Watershed Management Organization • MEMBER COMMUNITIES: Ayton,Bayport,Baytown Township,Lakeland,Lakeland Shores,Lake St.Croix Beach,Oak Park Heights,St.Mary's Point,Stillwater and West Lakeland Township • • MIDDLE ST. CROIX RIVER WATERSHED MANAGEMENT ORGANIZATION A �1 1380 West Frontage Road, Hwy 36 Phone: 651-275-1136, ext.22 1�� Stillwater,MN 55082 Fax: 651-1254 A Joint Powers Watershed Management Organization composed of ten St. Croix Valley IMP Communities that was established under State Statute 103E to cooperatively manage water resources within the watershed. i.�. August 19, 2004 Les Lemm,Board of Water and Soil Resources Charlotte Cohn,Minnesota Department of Natural Resources David L.Johnson/John Hensel/Craig Affeldt Minnesota Pollution Control Agency Art Persons,Minnesota Department of Health Becky Balk,Minnesota Department of Agriculture Jack Frost,Metropolitan Council Mary McGlothlin/Amanda Goebel/Cindy Weckwerth,Washington County PHE John Hansen,Valley Branch Watershed District Konrad Koosmann,Washington Conservation District Brown's Creek Watershed District Eric Johnson,City of Oak Park Heights Larry Whitaker,City of Afton Wendy Lindquist,City of Bayport Pauline Huonder,Baytown Township Patty Guiles,City of Lakeland Mary Cedarleaf,City of Lakeland Shores Larry Hanson,City of Stillwater Holly Shellabarger,City of St.Mary's Point Susan Agrimson,West Lakeland Township RE: Middle St. Croix Watershed Management Organization Draft Watershed Management Plan Enclosed please find an electronic copy of the MSCWMO Draft Watershed Management Plan. This plan is being submitted for the initial 60-day review and comment period. In accordance with Minnesota Rules, we request that comments on the draft plan be submitted on or before October 21, 2004. If you do not intend to submit comments,a written notice would be appreciated. If we do not receive comments or notification prior to October 21,2004, we will assume that none will be forthcoming. For a paper copy,please call Melissa Lewis at 651-275-1136 extension 22 or email at melissa.lewis@a,mnwcd.ore. Written comments can be directed to either this email address or to the MSCWMO address listed above,attn. Melissa Lewis. Sincerely, Melissa Lewis Administrator,Middle St.Croix Watershed Management Organization Cc: MSCWMO Board of Managers Charlie LeFevere Middle St. Croix Watershed Management Organization MEMBER COMMUNITIES: Afton,Bayport,Baytown Township,Lakeland,Lakeland Shores,Lake St.Croix Beach,Oak Park Heights,St.Mary's Point,Stillwater and West Lakeland Township • ► -;-f_ LA L DW 07E2 ttl c:it-St-: &&C' J0_1 (.4 6;ct✓lS Jrs@, l tQ . jiotkis eck.€ . Stait mn . LAS Nso eL_A-4 A—pt-,k4c tr-A A—ki Toe() A ) =a K.5 ii%_ I s b @„ u.� a s s1- , et ciMize6c# y� �z 6thc5e)-y % /0/4t 17 e- /LA�.,.� srt4Zr�1 e.ls':►i,' 'be.• co dvi ke..,Le-tT e L c_. � - 71cex.47, 3 g' 3 pPir • DRAFT ..... ....... Middle St Croix Watershed Management Organization Regular Meeting July 8, 2004 Washington County Conservation District Present: Chairman John McPherson, Members Robert Kamps,Jim Gilles,Anders Hansen, David Beaudet; John Jansen, Joella Givens; Mr. Robert Fossum, Washington County Conservation District, Ms. Elizabeth Vance, Recording Secretary Call to Order: Chairman McPherson called the meeting to order at 7:03 PM. Approval of the Minutes: . Correction was made to the minutes of the May meeting,reflecting that referent ' to Mr. Ron Nelson should be corrected to Mr. Jim Gilles. Mr. Hansen moved to accept 4 4 the minutes as corrected. Ms. Givens seconded the motion. The motion carried. Treasurer's Report: Mr. Hansen presented a treasurer's report,with a balance of$63,981.98. Invoice to Kennedy, Graven and LeFevre for$542.50 was presented for payment for attorney services. Mr. Beaudet moved to accept the treasurer's report and pay the presented invoice. Mr. Gilles seconded the motion. The motion carried. Mr. Hansen reported to the board that an audit would be considered after the first of the year. Draft Watershed Management Plan: The board reviewed the comments provided by the City of Stillwater in response to the draft water management plan. Concerns centered around potential conflict with existing city ordinances. Specifically,the city expressed concern over the review of any project with greater than 10,000 sq ft of disturbance. Most single-family homesites would fall under this requirement. There was also concern expressed about the restriction of slopes greater than 12%,because of the predominance of single-family walkouts, where construction often includes limited slopes greater than this limitation. The city considers greater than 25%to be steep slope. Mr. Kamps asked if Washington County maintained a definition of slope. The County and BWSR do not specifically define a slope,but rely on reasonable interpretation. The 12%was selected for the draft to be consistent with the St. Croix River Corridor standards. The core issue revolves around the board's intent toward small projects. There needs to be a weighing of the administrative costs and burdens against the potential gains from review. Mr. Beaudet suggested that if the plat or development had been reviewed, there was no need to review planned projects within that development. Mr. Fossum will meet with the city staff to discuss these concerns. The board reviewed the comments fro ''Schug's office. Mr. Fossum has been in contact with Ms. Weckwo 1 , ra ' the staff report. It was discussed if the WMO should appear before the County Boar . e,, Page 1 of 2 I ' • • DRAFT Middle St Croix Watershed Management Organization Regular Meeting July 8, 2004 Washington County Conservation District Phase III Storm Sewer Project: Chairman McPherson reported on the letter received from 1V%teClair in response to the failed bonding bill. Inspiration Development Environmental Assessment Worksheet: The board reviewed the Environmental Assessment Worksheet for the Inspiration Development in Bayport: The concept is to use rate and volume control using bio infiltration ods. In general,the proposal appears acceptable. Mr. Fossum presented draft comments for Ts ew. Discussion ensued around the effectiveness and longevity of the bio-infiltration projects. t s inew technology in the Twin Cities area. Mr. Beaudet moved to approve the draft recommendations, and forward to the City of Bayport. Ms. Givens seconded the motion. The motion carried. Washington County Fair: Mr. Beaudet discussed staffing requests for the Washington County Fair. Volunteers are needed to staff during the week. Draft 2003 Annual Report: Mr. Fossum presented a draft of the 2003 annual report required to Washington County and BWSR. Ms. Givens offered some minor corrections. Mr. Beaudet moved approval of the report, as corrected. Mr. Hansen seconded the motion. The motion carried. Community Education: Mr. Jansen brought forward a letter from Washington County to area Watershed Districts and Water Management Organizations to provide for community education back through member governing bodies. The business model used by the Middle St Croix Watershed Management Organization closely ties the member communities,which meets the intent of the letter. Mr. Beaudet move that Mr. Fossum draft a letter to Washington County in response to the May 27th letter, detailing the role of the local communities in the WMO structure. Adjourn: Mr. Hansen moved to adjourn the meeting. Mr. Beaudet seconded the motion. The motion carried. Chairman McPherson adjourned the meeting at 8:10 PM Respectfully Submitted, gi,4441/7u. Elizabeth A. Vance Recording Secretary Page 2 of 2 • • r ___alopaya.D. ' 1.1,:'-',604,0," i V> � rr 0 � �f� z q tic / cA / Vick' 611' . - ,,,._,o-5",-, • • APPROVED Middle St Croix Watershed Management Organization Regular Meeting August 12, 2004. / Washington}County Conservation District ,/ ✓ ✓ Present: Chairman John McPherson,Members Robert Kamps, Jim Gilles,Anders uL S Hansen,David Beaudet; John Ja isen,Ron Nelson and NancyJacobson Call to Order: Chairman McPherson called the meeting to order at 7:03 PM. - Approval of the Minutes: Correction was made to the minutes of the July meeting. Mr. Jansen moved to accept the minutes as corrected. Mr.Nelson seconded the motion. The motion carried. Treasurer's Report: Mr. Hansen presented the treasurer's report, with a balance of$80,210. The following invoices were presented for payment: Kennedy, Gravens and LeFevre for$23.25 and Washington County Conservation District for$649.25. Mr.Nelson moved to accept the �3 treasurer's report and pay the presented invoice. Mr. Gilles seconded the motion. The motion L carried. # 51-1 41) Mr. Hansen cj orted to the board that an audit would be considered after the first of the year. 09 & Y. 0 J!ice 5"`i St Croix River Bridge Project: No new status was available. Draft Watershed Management Plan: The board reviewed the response to member community draft distribution. Comments and changes were noted in the response drafted by Mr. Fossum,based upon the Washington County's concerns over ground water issues, and the response received from Mr. Clayton Eckles. Mr. Jansen moved the report be distributed,with the changes noted. Seconded by Mr. Hansen, the motion passed. Levy Authority: The board reviewed the status of the request for levy authority. Mr. Jansen moved, seconded by Mr. Beaudet, to revise the response to the County board workshop information draft concerning the status of the Watershed Management District. The motion carried. Mr. Jansen moved to pass a resolution from the Middle St Croix Watershed District to support and solicit support from the member communities and the County Board. Mr. Gilles seconded the motion. The motion carried. Washington Co i • • action D t ict: Mr. Conr. • • ed the board the Mr. Fossum has resigned his position, and introduced the new administrator from the Washington County Conservation District. Page 1 of 1 • APPROVED Middle St Croix Watershed Management Organization Regular Meeting August 12, 2004 Washington County Conservation District State of Minnesota Bonding Update: The legislature will not be recalled for a special session, so there is no information to report. Development Review Update: There is nothing to report 2003 Annual Report Mr. Fossum submitted the 2003 Annual report reviewed by the board in July to Washington County`. 2005 Annual Budget: A draft of the 2005 annual budget of$35,000 was presented for review. Levy amounts to the member communities were not changed from the 2004 level. Budget categories and spending levels were carried over from the 2004 budget. Mr. Beaudet, seconded my Mr. Kamps, moved to direct the administrator to distribute the proposed 2005 contributions to the member. communities. Adjourn: Mr. Hansen moved to adjourn the meeting. Mr. Jansen seconded the motion. The motion carried. Chairman McPherson adjourned the meeting at 8:15 PM Respectfully Submitted, 4141411A4&CA Elizabeth A. Vance Recording Secretary Page 2 of 2 • Middle St Croix Watershed Management Organizatio• Regular Meeting July 8, 2004 Washington County Conservation District Present: Chairman John McPherson, Members Robert Kamps, Jim Gilles,Anders Hansen, David Beaudet; John Jansen, Joella Givens; Mr. Robert Fossum,Washington County Conservation District, Ms. Elizabeth Vance, Recording Secretary Call to Order: Chairman McPherson called the meeting to order at 7:03 PM. Approval of the Minutes: Correction was made to the minutes of the May meeting, reflecting that reference to Mr. Ron Nelson should be corrected to Mr. Jim Gilles. Mr. Hansen moved to accept the minutes as corrected. Ms. Givens seconded the motion. The motion carried. Treasurer's Report: Mr. Hansen presented the treasurer's report, with a balance of$63,981.98. Invoice to Kennedy, Gravens and LeFevre for$542.50 was presented for payment for attorney services. Mr. Beaudet moved to accept the treasurer's report and pay the presented invoice. Mr. Gilles seconded the motion. The motion carried. Mr. Hansen reported to the board that an audit would be considered after the first of the year. Draft Watershed Management Plan: The board reviewed the comments provided by the City of Stillwater in response to the draft water management plan. Concerns centered around potential conflict with existing city ordinances. Specifically,the city expressed concern over the review of any project with greater than 10,000 sq ft of disturbance. Most single-family homesites would fall under this requirement. There was also concern expressed about the restriction of slopes greater than 12%,because of the predominance of single-family walkouts, where construction often includes limited slopes greater than this limitation. The city considers greater than 25% to be steep slope. Mr. Kamps asked if Washington County maintained a definition of slope. The County and BWSR do not specifically define a slope,but rely on reasonable interpretation. The 12%was selected for the draft to be consistent with the St. Croix River Corridor standards. The core issue revolves around the board's intent toward small projects. There needs to be a weighing of the administrative costs and burdens against the potential gains from review. Mr. Beaudet suggested that if the plat or development had been reviewed, there was no need to review planned projects within that development. Mr. Fossum will meet with the city staff to discuss these concerns. The board reviewed the comments from Commissioner Schug's office. Mr. Fossum has been in contact with Ms. Weckworth, drafting the staff report. It was discussed if the WMO should appear before the County Board. Phase III Storm Sewer Project: Page 1 of 2 APPROVED Middle St Croix Watershed Management Organization Regular Meeting July 8, 2004 Washington County Conservation District Chairman McPherson reported on the letter received from Mr. LeClair in response to the failed bonding bill. Inspiration Development Environmental Assessment Worksheet: The board reviewed the Environmental Assessment Worksheet for the Inspiration Development in Bayport. The concept is to use rate and volume control using bio infiltration methods. In general, the proposal appears acceptable. Mr. Fossum presented draft comments for review. Discussion ensued around the effectiveness and longevity of the bio-infiltration projects. This is new technology in the Twin Cities area. Mr. Beaudet moved to approve the draft recommendations, and forward to the City of Bayport. Ms. Givens seconded the motion. The motion carried. Washington County Fair: Mr. Beaudet discussed staffing requests for the Washington County Fair. Volunteers are needed to staff during the week. Draft 2003 Annual Report: Mr. Fossum presented a draft of the 2003 annual report required to Washington County and BWSR. Ms. Givens offered some minor corrections. Mr. Beaudet moved approval of the report, as corrected. Mr. Hansen seconded the motion. The motion carried. Community Education: Mr. Jansen brought forward a letter from Washington County to area Watershed Districts and Water Management Organizations to provide for community education-back through member governing bodies. The business model used by the Middle St Croix Watershed Management Organization closely ties the member communities, which meets the intent of the letter. Mr. Beaudet move that Mr. Fossum draft a letter to Washington County in response to the May 27th letter,detailing the role of the local communities in the WMO structure. Adjourn: Mr. Hansen moved to adjourn the meeting. Mr. Beaudet seconded the motion. The motion carried. Chairman McPherson adjourned the meeting at 8:10 PM Respectfully cttfullly Submitted,,�� 4.14411,14 Elizabeth A. Vance Recording Secretary Page 2 of 2 APPROVED • .acT°"�o �ffice of Administration ngton y� ..,..,__ � =-_�' James R.Schug Jlln °"5°/ County Administrator Molly F.O'Rourke Deputy Administrator r-----41111;--August 25,2004 O: Cliff Aichinger,RWWD John Hanson,VBWD Matt Moore, SWWD Paul Haig,CLFLWD John Bower, CMWD Kevin Shoeberg, LSCWMO Karen Kill,BCWD Melissa Lewis,MSCWMO WMO Steve Hobbs,RCWD Jim Shaver,Marine FROM: Jane Harper , RE: Budget Information The County Board will review the budgets of the water management organizations on October 12. Due to the success of last year's review,we will use the same format this year. Staff will present a written summary of the proposed budgets with presentations on a couple select projects.If you would like a few minutes on the agenda to present a particular project or issue facing your organization let me know. To prepare the summary document could you provide me with information addressing the questions below by September 20,2004. Please let me know if you cannot provide the information by that date. 1. What is the District's proposed 2005 budget and what are its major revenue sources? How does the proposed budget compare to the 2004 adopted budget? Are there any anomalies in the proposed budget? 2. What is the District's proposed Year 2005 property levy and how has it changed from the Year 2004 levy? 3. What are the District's priority projects and programs for Year 2005? Are there any"hot"issues that the district is addressing? 4. How is the District implementing the concepts promoted by the Governance Study,e.g. shared services,partnerships, land use coordination within cities, citizen involvement, and consolidation? I have included a copy of last year's report to assist you in understanding what the County Board is interested in. You can email your information to me at jharperco.washington.mn.us or mail a hard copy to the above address. Feel free to call me at 651-430-6011 if you have any questions. Thanks for your assistance. c. WMO Board Chairs Molly O'Rourke, Deputy Administrator Cindy Weckwerth,Public Health and Environment Government Center • 14949 62nd Street North—P.O. Box 6,Stillwater, Minnesota 55082-0006 Phone: 651-430-6001 • Fax: 651-430-6017 • TTY: 651-430-6246 www.co.washington.mn.us Equal Employment Opportunity/Affirmative Action • WASHI N ON COUNTY REQUEST FOR BOARD ACTION TIME REQUIRED 30 minutes August 24,2004 AGENDA ITEM NO. BOARD MEETING DATE ORIGINATING DEPARTMENT/SERVICE BOARD ACTION REQUIRED: County Board Workshop Public Health and Environment Request by the Middle St. Croix Water Management Organization for County REQUESTOR'S SIGNATURE /DATE Board support of Special Legislation for creation of a water.management taxing 04162_, _ 1 8/ district and levy authority. REVIE 41a BY /DATE O4 BACKGRO D/JUSTIFICATION On June 10, 2004, the Washington County Board of Commissioners received a letter from the Middle St. Croix Watershed Management Organization informing the Board that the WMO intends to sgek special legislation for levy authority for its operating costs. In the letter, the WMO Board indicates that it would appreciate the support of the County Board in seeking this special legislation. (Letter attached) The request was forwarded to staff to complete an analysis of the request in anticipation of the County Board's discussion of this request. This analysis is now complete. The County Board will discuss the request from the Middle St. Croix Water Management Organization in workshop. The Middle St. Croix Water Management's Board has been informed of the workshop and received copies of this County Board agenda item on Thursday, August 12. U 24 CA PREVIOUS ACTION ON REQUEST/OTHER PARTIES ADVISED MEDIA CONTACT Mary McGlothlin 651-430-6655 Middle St. Croix River Water Management Organization Board Cindy Weckwerth 651-430-6655 DATE/TIME RECEIVED BY COUNTY ATTORNEY REVIEW /DATE FINANCIAL IMPLICATIONS: $ N/A COUNTY ADMINISTRATOR — BUSINESS UNIT(S: COUNTY ADMINISTRATOR ADMINISTRATIVE RECOMMENDATION OBJECT(S): ❑APPROVAL BUDGETED ❑ DENIAL YES NO DATE ❑NO RECOMMENDATION FUNDING LEVY OTHER COMMENTS COMMENTS REVISED:August 2001 O:\ALL\FORMS\COUNTYBD\RequestForBoardAction.dot • Middle St. Croix Watershed Management Organization Emergency Meeting August 25, 2003 WCD Offices DRAFT Call to Order Meeting called to order at 7:00P.M. by Manager McPherson. Members Present John McPherson,West Lakeland; John Jansen, Lake St. Croix Beach; Anders Hansen, Baytown Township; Jim Gilles, Lakeland; David Beaudet, Oak Park Heights; Robert Kamps, Bayport, Ron Nelson, Stillwater Absent: Pat Tinucci, Afton; Judy Bellairs, St. Mary's Point, Jo Ella Givens, Lakeland Shores Others in Attendance: • Dawn Hilde, Recording Secretary, Konrad Koosmann, Administrator, WCD, Jeff Davis, SEH This emergency meeting was called to discuss contractor delay claims and the need for an easement agreement with Xcel The contractor is claiming$21,000 for delay fees. Jeff Davis, SEH, has asked for detailed accounting for these fees. These claims were for delays prior to August 15, 2003. Jeff Davis is gathering information from the Corps of Engineers as to how they deal with fees for standing equipment. At the last MSCWMO meeting two change orders were approved, one to dewater area near Manhole 28. Estimate for this dewatering was $27,000. Manager Beaudet stated the MSCWMO should have let the contract for this project contingent upon receiving the easement from Xcel. The previous planned route in 1996 for the pipe had received an easement from NSP. The pipe route was changed because NSP wanted to receive wetland credits. Manager Beaudet stated he has arranged a meeting with Darrel Knutson from Xcel for tomorrow to discuss the easement issue. Draft MSCWMO Emergency Meeting Minutes for August 25,2003 1 of 1 S 110 Jim Lammers, legal counsel for Bayport, feels the contract we received from Xcel has some clauses that are not clear. The indemnification paragraph is not clear and the request to add Xcel to workman's compensation is not acceptable. Jim Lammers suggested if negotiations failed, Oak Park Heights would have to condemn the property needed for the easement. Manager Beaudet stated the MSCWMO could cancel the contract for construction and then ask the city of Oak Park Heights to pursue eminent domain of the easement area. Manager Beaudet suggested a committee meet with Xcel as soon as possible to resolve the easement issue. Manager McPherson suggested Manager Beaudet, Jeff Davis, Jim Lammers and a representative from Xcel. Manager Beaudet suggested the MSCWMO would have to receive a letter giving the right to trespass on Xcel property by Thursday or cancel the project. The decision was made to continue the dewatering. Manager McPherson made a motion directing Manager Beaudet to start negotiations with Xcel, seconded by Manager Hansen. Vote: 7/0. Manager Hansen made a motion to continue this emergency meeting on September 3, 7:00P.M. at the WCD, seconded by Manager McPherson. Vote: 7/0 Manager Hansen made a motion to recess meeting, seconded by Manager Nelson. Vote: 7/0 44 - �� Res,ectfully Submitted, Dawn Hilde Draft MSCWMO Emergency Meeting Minutes for August 25,2003 2 of 2 • • • Dennis C.Hegberg 1NGTON CO District 1 Bill Pulkrabek \Vashington istr ct 2 Nile L.Kriesel District 3 t'NsrBr � 2Ot11ltY MyraDisMct Peterson4 ,Vice Chair BOARD AGENDA R.H.Stafford,Chair District 5 AUGUST 24, 2004 - 9:00 A.M. 1. 9:00 Roll Call 2. 9:00 Comments from the Public Visitors may share their comments or concerns on any issue that is a responsibility or function of Washington County Government,whether or not the issue is listed on this agenda. Persons who wish to address the Board must fill out a comment card before the meeting begins and give it to the County Board secretary or the County Administrator. The County Board Chair will ask you to come to the podium,state your name and address,and present your comments. You are encouraged to limit your presentation to no more than five minutes. The Board Chair reserves the right to limit an individual's presentation if it becomes redundant,repetitive,overly argumentative,or if it is not relevant to an issue that is part of Washington County's responsibilities. The chair may also limit the number of individual presentations to accommodate the scheduled agenda items. 3. 9:10 Consent Calendar 4. 9:10 Public Hearing-Transportation and Physical Development-Ann Pung-Terwedo, Sr. Planner Rezoning Request by Norman Lee Busse, Stillwater Township 5. 9:30 Transportation and Physical Development-Jim Luger,Parks Director Grant from DNR for Acquisition of a Portion of the Point Douglas Trail 6. 9:35 Assessment,Taxpayer Services and Elections-Bogdan Filipescu, Supervisor Classification of Tax-Forfeited Parcel as Non-Conservation 7. 9:45 Public Health and Environment A. Resource Recovery Project's 2005 Operating Budget—Judy Hunter, Sr. Program Manager B. Baytown Special Well Construction Area Update—Cindy Weckwerth,Program Manager 8. 10:25 General Administration—Jim Schug, County Administrator 9. 10:30 Commissioner Reports—Comments-Questions This period of time shall be used by the Commissioners to report to the full Board on committee activities,make comments on matters of interest and information,or raise questions to the staff This action is not intended to result in substantive board action during this time. Any action necessary because of discussion will be scheduled for a future board meeting. 10. Board Correspondence 11. 10:50 Adjourn 12. 11:00 Board Workshop with Public Health and Environment to 11:30 Middle St. Croix WMO Special Legislation Support 13. 11:30 Board Workshop with Office of Administration to 12:15 Review Updated Inventory and Cost of Mandates and County Core Functions in Health and Human Service Areas and Outstanding Supplemental Requests REMINDER: NO BOARD MEETING AUGUST 31,2004—5TH TUESDAY MEETING NOTICES Date Committee Time Location August 24 Brown's Creek Watershed District Interview 8:35 a.m. Washington County Government Center August 25 Mosquito Control Commission 9:00 a.m. 2099 University Avenue West—St.Paul August 25 911 Board Executive Committee 10:30 a.m. 2099 University Avenue West—St.Paul August 25 Regional Solid Waste Coord.Board 10:30 a.m. 2099 University Avenue West—St.Paul August 26 Community Corrections Advisory 7:30 a.m. Washington County Government Center Assistive listening devices are available for use in the County Board Room If you need assistance due to disability orlam uaoe barrier Meese call(6511430-6000 EQUAL EMPLOYMENT OPPORTUNITY/AFFIRMATIVE ACTION EMPLOYER WAStNGTON COUNTY BOARD OF COMMISSIONER, CONSENT CALENDAR * AUGUST 24, 2004 The following items are presented for Board approval/adoption: DEPARTMENT/AGENCY ITEM Administration A. Approval of the August 10, 2004 Board meeting minutes. B. Approval to reappoint Richard Damchik, Comfort Lake-Forest Lake Watershed District Board of Managers, to a three-year term expiring September 22,2007. C. Approval of an amendment to a contract with the Washington Conservation District for activities related to the South Washington County Groundwater Surface Water Interaction Project. Community Services D. Approval of funding agreement with the U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development for the 2004 Community Development Block Grant program and designate a Labor Standards Officer. E. Approval of the HOME subgrantee agreement with Two Rivers Community Land Trust for the Community Initiated Program. F. Approval to modify the Local Mental Health Advisory Council member composition to allow individuals who work in the county but do not reside here to fill the professional positions on the committee. Human Resources G. Approval to ratify the 2004-2006 Law Enforcement Labor Services contract. Library H. Approval to accept a grant in the amount of$17,298 from the Metropolitan Library Services Agency(MELSA)for technology enhancements. Public Health and Environment I. Approval and authorization from the County Board Chair and County Administrator to enter into an agreement with the Minnesota Department of Public Safety,Division of Homeland Security and Emergency Management, to receive funding through the Emergency Management Performance Grant Program. Transportation and Physical J. Approval of Supplemental Agreement No. 5 with SRF Consulting Group, Development Inc.for the environmental and preliminary design services for reconstruction of Valley Creek Road and Century Avenue South in the City of Woodbury, for a cost not to exceed$234.063. K. Approval of resolution authorizing the County Engineer to establish a No Parking zone on County Road 55 from 150th Street North to 1,000 feet south. *Consent Calendar items are generally defined as items of routine business,not requiring discussion,and approved in one vote. Commissioners may elect to pull a Consent Calendar item(s)for discussion and/or Separate action. • WASHINGTON COUNTY REQUEST FOR BOARD ACTION TIME REQUIRED CC August 24, 2004 AGENDA ITEM NO. 3B BOARD MEETING DATE ORIGINATING DEPARTMENT/SERVICE BOARD ACTION REQUIRED Administration REQUESTOR'S SIGNATURE/DATE Approval to reappoint Richard Damchik the Comfort Lake-Forest Lake Watershed District Board of Managers to a three-year term %Is I av expiring September 22, 2007. REVIEWED BY/DATE BACKGROUND/JUSTIFICATION Commissioner Hegberg recommends this reappointment. PREVIOUS ACTION ON REQUEST/OTHER PARTIES ADVISED MEDIA CONTACT Cities and Townships within the Watershed District Jim Schug (651)430-6001 Advertisement in the Forest Lake Times and Lake Elmo Review DATE/TIME RECEIVED BY COUNTY ATTORNEY REVIEW/DATE COUNTY ADMINISTRATOR FINANCIAL IMPLICATIONS: AUG 5 2004 /I9 $ BUSINESS UNIT(S): COU ADMINIST A OR/DATE ADMINISTRATIVE RECOMMENDATION !X APPROVAL 0 DENIAL OBJECT(S): e//9/0,/ ❑NO RECOMMENDATION C MENTS BUDGETED YES NO FUNDING LEVY OTHER N:\WPWGENDA\ACTIONS\Appointments\ComfordLakeForest ake.doc • • !!VASHINGTON COUNTY REQUEST FOR BOARD ACTION TIME REQUIRED CC August 24 2004 AGENDA ITEM NO. 3C BOARD MEETING DATE ORIGINATING DEPARTMENT/SERVICE BOARD ACTION REQUIRED: Approve the attached amendment to Contract#2549 between Washington REQTOR'S SIGNATURE /DATE County and the Washington Conservation District for services provided in 2004. REV WED BY /DATE BACKGROUND/JUSTIFICATION This amendment is needed to increase the contract amount by$20,941 to account for an additional allocation of revenue from the Board of Water and Soil Resources for activities related to the South Washington County Groundwater Surface Water Interaction Project. PREVIOUS ACTION ON REQUEST/OTHER PARTIES ADVISED MEDIA CONTACT none/WCD, PHE and BWSR Jane Harper 430-6011 DATE/TIME RECEIVED BY COUNT ATTir EY REVIEW /DATE FINANCIAL IMPLICATIONS: $ COUNTY ADMINISTRATO UG 1 3 2004 FA�/�[/ BUSINESS UNIT(S: COUNTY MINISTRATOR ADMINI TRA VE RECOMMENDATION OBJECT(S): 8/1/7/0 EI APPROVAL BUDGETED X p 9/09 ❑DENIAL YES NO DAT0 NO RECOMMENDATION FUNDING X LEVY OTHER COMMENTS COMMENTS MEETS CONTRACT GUIDELINES REVISED:August 2001 N:\W P\WATEirdActioncontractamendment.doc WASHINGTON COUNTY REQUEST FOR BOARD ACTION • TIME REQUIRED Consent August 24,2004 AGENDA ITEM NO. 3D ORIGINATING DEPARTMENT/SERVICE Community Services BOARD MEETING DATE BOARD ACTION REQUIRED: Approve Funding Agreement with the U.S. Department of Housing and Urban REQUESTOR'S SIGNATURE /DTE Development for the 2004 Community Development Block Grant Program, 7 ®f authorize the County Board Chair and County Administrator to execute the Agreement, and designate a Labor Standards Officer. REVIE )=Y�� /DATE BACKGROUND/JUSTIFICATION Execution of the Funding Agreement with the Department of Housing and Urban Development(HUD)will enable HUD to release 2004 Community Development Block Grant(CDBG)funds for approved projects benefitting low-and moderate- income residents. The designation of a Labor Standards Officer is required for administration of Federal Labor Standards requirements under the CDBG program. PREVIOUS ACTION ON REQUEST/OTHER PARTIES ADVISED MEDIA CONTACT April 6,2004-Board approval of 2004 CDBG Annual Action Plan. Diane Elias 651-430-8317 DATE/TIME RECEIVED BY COUN ATTORN Y REVIEW /DATE FINANCIAL IMPLICATIONS: $ COUNTY ADMINISTRATORM IG 6 2004 I / BUSINESS(/g%� UNIT(S: MINIST T ADMINIS RATIn Q APPROVAL BUDGETED COMMENTS VE RECOMMENDATION OBJECT(S): 6 II eV ❑DENIAL DATE YES NO NO RECOMMENDATION FUNDING LEVY OTHER COMMENTS MEETS CONTRACT GUIDELINES ATN REVISED:August 2001 I O:\COMSVS\CDBG\WP\CDBG\County Board\2004\HUD 2004 Release of Funds App C • WASHINGTON COUNTY REQUEST FOR BOARD ACTION TIME REQUIRED Consent August 24,2004 AGENDA ITEM NO. 3E BOARD MEETING DATE ORIGINATING DEPARTMENT/SERVICE Community Services BOARD ACTION REQUIRED: Approval of the HOME Subgrantee Agreement with Two Rivers REQUESTOR'S SIGNATURE /DATE Community Land Trust for the Community Initiated Program(CIP). REVIE .j e Y /DATE ACRGROUND/f USTIFICATION The Two Rivers Community Land Trust applied to the County and was awarded$68,850.00 of 2004 HOME funds to purchase and rehabilitate at least two existing single-family homes for resale to low-and moderate-income persons. The homes purchased and rehabilitated through this program may be located anywhere within Washington County. To reduce the purchase price of the homes and to increase their affordability,the homes will be part of the Two Rivers Community Land Trust. This Agreement begins July 1,2004 and ends June 30,2006. Washington County Community Services recommends approval of the Agreement with Two Rivers Communi Trust for the Community Initiated Program(CIP). ty Land PREVIOUS ACTION ON REQUEST/OTHER PARTIESADVISED None MEDIA CONTACT Mary Farmer-Kubler 651-430-6503 DATE/TIME RECEIVED BY COUN ATTOR Y REVIEW /DATE FINANCIAL IMPLICATIONS: $68,850 COUNTY ADMINISTRATQI7rG 1 7 2004 HHUU V/g/e. BUSINESS UNIT(S: 101011 COUN DMINISTR TO ADMINIS RATIVE ECOMMENDATION OBJECT(S): 602005-27684W p q� �C APPROVAL BUDGETED X DAT 0 /T"y ElDENIAL YES NO 1:1NO RECOMMENDATION FUNDING X COMMENTS LEVY OTHER MEETS CONTRACT GUIDELINES HOME F nds REVISED:August 2001 O:\COMSVS\CDBG\HOME Projects\Two Rivers CLT Community Initiated Program Board Action.doc WASHINGTON COUNTY REQUEST FOR BOARD ACTION TIME REQUIRED Consent 8/24/04 AGENDA ITEM NO, 3F BOARD MEETING DATE ORIGINATING DEPARTMENT/SERVICE BOARD ACTION REQUIRED: Community Services Approval to modify the Local Mental Health Advisory Council Committee Book for compositions of committee members. REQUESTOR'S SIGN A TURE /DATE I A ff /h/ j -- 1 il. :Y /DATE .% �l/ /7/?/ p i CKG-O ND/JUSTIFICATION The Washington County Local Mental Health Advisory Council is composed of consumers, family members of a mentally ill person, Commissioner representatives, Human Services Inc., Board representative, Alliance for the Mentally III representative, Chaplaincy representative, Law Enforcement representative and five mental health professional positions. The professional positions have been difficult to fill with Washington County citizens as required by the Committee Book for the advisory council. These positions would not be difficult to fill with mental health professionals who work in Washington County service organizations with local residents but do not reside here. We are requesting that the committee book be amended to allow for individuals who work in the County but do not reside here to fill the professional positions on the Local Mental Health Advisory Council. Community Services recommends the amendment of the Local Mental Health Advisory Council composition. PREVIOUS ACTION ON REQUEST/OTHER PARTIES ADVISED MEDIA CONTACT Local Mental Health Advisory Council Cynthia Rupp (651)430-6562 DATE/TIME RECEIVED BY COUN� ATTORNEY REVIEW /DATE FINANCIAL IMPLICATIONS: $ 0 COUNTY ADMINISTRATOIAUG 1 7 2004 /t'/ BUSINESS UNIT(S: 7400000000 COUNTY MINISTRA OR ADMINISTRATIVE RECOMMENDATION OBJECT(S): ��9/y ®APPROVAL BUDGETED ❑DENIAL DATE 0 NO RECOMMENDATION FUNDING YES NO LEVY OTHER COMMENTS COMMENTS REVISED:August 2001 O:\COMSVS\Cindy-Christina\LACBoard Action Aug 2004.doc • • WASHINGTON COUNTY REQUEST FOR BOARD ACTION TIME REQUIRED CC August 24,2004 AGENDA ITEM NO. 3G BOARD MEETING DATE ORIGINATING DEPARTMENT/SERVICE BOARD ACTION REQUIRED: Human Resources Board ratification of the 2004—2006 Law Enforcement Labor Services contract. REQUESTOR'S SIGNATURE /DATE REV/WED BY /DATE 4-.1 M aLaILAW\LAA,53.1 7-4 BACKGROUND/JUSTIFICA`t ION The request before the County Board is to provide the following wage and benefit package to employees of the LELS bargaining unit effective January 4,2004 through January 13,2007 as stated below: 1. Wages: 2004—3%general adjustment 2005—0%general adjustment 2006--2%general adjustment During the duration of the Agreement,the salary schedule has been compressed and longevity steps are reduced to 5, 10 and 15-year steps. 2. County contribution to health insurance: 2004-$433.00/month single coverage, $589.00/month family coverage. 2005&2006 Insurance re-openers. . PREVIOUS ACTION ON REQUEST/OTHER PARTIES ADVISED MEDIA CONTACT Kay McAloney—Director Board closed sessions May,June and December 2003. Frank Madden—Labor Relations Consultant DATE/TIME RECEIVED BY COUNTY ATTORNEY REVIEW /DATE FINANCIAL IMPLICATIONS: $ COUNTY ADMINISTRATORAUG 1 7 2004 /(j BUSINESS UNIT(S: OBJECT(S): COUNTY MINISTRAT R ADMINISTRATIVE RECOMMENDATION — NJ BUDGETED APPROVAL YES NO 0DATE VW 0 DENIAL FUNDING 0 NO RECOMMENDATION LEVY OTHER COMMENTS COMMENTS REVISED:August 2001 N:\WP\requestforboardaction.doc • • LAW OFFICES FRANK MADDEN &ASSOCIATES SUITE 295 505 NORTH HIGHWAY 169 PLYMOUTH,MINNESOTA 55441-6444 FRANK J.MADDEN TELEPHONE(763)545-2525 PAMELA R.GALANTER FACSIMILE(763)545-2566 SUSAN K.HANSEN August 16, 2004 County Board of Commissioners County of Washington Washington County Government Center 14900 61st Street North Stillwater,MN 55082 Re: 2004-2006 Agreement With Law Enforcement Labor Services, Inc. (Deputy Sheriff Unit) Dear Commissioners: A tentative agreement has been reached through the negotiation process for 2004-2006 for the Deputy Sheriff unit represented by LELS. Set forth below is a summary of the tentative agreement which has been ratified by the bargaining unit. 1. Duration: Three year agreement effective January 4, 2004 through January 13, 2007. 2. Wages: Effective 1/4/04, 3.0% general adjustment. Effective 1/2/05, 0% general adjustment. Effective 1/1/06, 2.0% general adjustment. During the duration of the Agreement, the salary schedule has been compressed and longevity steps are reduced to 5, 10 and 15 year steps. 3. Health Insurance: 2004 $433.00 (single) $589.00 (family) 2005 Insurance reopener. 2006 Insurance reopener. • 0 0 FRANK MADDEN &ASSOCIATES County Board of Commissioners August 16, 2004 Page 2 4. Clothing Allowance 2004 Retain language of current Agreement($570). 2005 $585 2006 $600 5. Field Training Officer Compensation Language has been modified to provide one hour of straight time compensation for each assigned shift that an employee is assigned as Field Training Officer. Such employees may receive the FTO compensation in the form of pay or compensatory time. 6. Holidays Delete Columbus Day and add Day After Thanksgiving. Recommendation: It is recommended that the County Board adopt and implement the 2004-2006 collective bargaining agreement with LELS. ,V4e. Very, ly yo el0,/,,,,,,\ '''10.(rank J.Madden FJM:clh cc: Jim Schug Kay McAloney • • WASHINGTON COUNTY REQUEST FOR BOARD ACTION TIME REQUIRED CC August 2 4, 2 0 0 4 AGENDA ITEM NO. 3H BOARD MEETING DATE ORIGINATING DEPARTMENT/SERVICE BOARD ACTION REQUIRED: . Library Accept grant of$17,298.00 from the Metropolitan Library Services Agency(MELSA)for technology enhancements REQUESTOR'S SIGNATURE /DATE REVIEWED BY /DATE BACKGROUND/JUSTIFICATION The Metropolitan Library Services Agency has authorized a grant of$17,298.00 from their Phase VI program to be used for technology enhancements. The Library will use this funding to pay for hardware and software needed to increase security on the Library network. The Library Board accepted the grant at its July 26, 2004 meeting and recommends acceptance by the Washington County Board of Commissioners. PREVIOUS ACTION ON REQUEST/OTHER PARTIES ADVISED MEDIA CONTACT Patricia Conley, Library Director DATE/TIME RECEIVED B COUN ATTOR EY REVIEW /DATE FINANCIAL IMPLICATIONS: $ 17,298.00 COUNTY ADMINISTRATOUG 1 3 2004V/iVoye BUSINESS UNITS: 230001 OBJECT(S): 536000.MISC COUNTY MINISTRATOR ADMINISTRATI E RECOMMENDATION BUDGETED XXX El APPROVAL YES NO Cf/144 ❑DENIAL FUNDING XXX DATE ❑NO RECOMMENDATION LEVY OTHER COMMENTS COMMENTS REVISED:August 2001 O:WLL\FORMS\COUNTYBD\RequestForBoardAcdon.dot • • • WASHINGTON COUNTY REQUEST FOR BOARD ACTION TIME REQUIRED Consent August 24,2004 AGENDA ITEM NO. 31 BOARD MEETING DATE ORIGINATING DEPARTMENT/SERVICE BOARD ACTION REQUIRED: Public Health and Environment Approval and authorization from the County Board Chair and RE( IESTOR s SIGNATURE /DATE/ Administrator to enter into agreement with the Minnesota Department ltt( of Public Safety, Division of Homeland Security and Emergency (p.,,, o i 8/7 -4/ Management,to receive funding through the Emergency Management REVIEW a BY f /DATE Performance Grant Program (EMPG). CKGRO ND/J TIFICATION The Emergency Management Performance Grant Program (EMPG) provides financial assistance for the administration of local emergency management programs which meet State and Federal requirements. The grant provides funding for the Department of Public Health and Environment, Emergency Services Program in the amount of$75,890.00 in FFY 2004. These funds are used to offset costs in personnel, travel and"other"administrative categories. PREVIOUS ACTION ON REQUEST/OTHER PARTIES ADVISED MEDIA CONTACT Deb Paige 430-7621 DATE/TIME RECEIVED BY COON 7EY REVIEW /DATE FINANCIAL IMPLICATIONS: $ 75 890.00 COUNTY ADMINISTRATORAUG 1 3 KO4 4 /e7/0;r BUSINESS UNIT(S: 157022 COUN MINIST TO ADMINI TRATVE RECOMMENDATION OBJECT(S): ['APPROVAL BUDGETED X F/g/y ❑DENIAL YES NO DATENC)RFrOMMFNDATION FUNDING LEVY OTHER COMMENTS MEETS CONTRACT GUIDELINES COMMENTS REVISED:August 2001 Q:\EMS\Board Action\EMPGRequest for Board Action2004.doc • . WASHINGTON COUNTY REQUEST FOR BOARD ACTION TIME REQUIRED CC I August 24, 2004 I AGENDA ITEM NO. 3J BOARD MEETING DATE ORIGINATING DEPARTMENT/SERVICE BOARD ACTION REQUIRED Transportation&Physical Dev. Approval of Supplemental Agreements No. 5 to Contract 2196 with SRF RE UESTOR'S SIGNATURE/DATE Consulting Group, Inc. for the Environmental and Preliminary Design nIn,,","�1"�J ,- 18_IG_04 Services for Reconstruction of Valley Creek Road and Century Avenue `" South in the City of Woodbury, fora cost not to exceed $234,063. REVIEWED BY/DATE BACKGROUND/JUSTIFICATION Washington County is receiving State Trunk Highway and State Turnback funds to design and reconstruct the Valley Creek Road interchange at 1-494, Valley Creek Road from 1-494 to Century Avenue and Century Avenue from Valley Creek Road to Woodbine Avenue (see map). SRF Consulting Group, Inc. was selected to provide environmental and preliminary design services for the project on March 11, 2003. On July 1, 2003, Supplemental Agreements No. 1 and 2 were added to the contract for additional traffic analysis on the freeway and environmental documentation on Century Avenue south of Valley Creek Road. Supplemental Agreements No. 3 and 4 were approved on March 23, 2004. These provided for additional alternatives evaluation and preparation of an Environmental Assessment because Federal funding was received. Supplemental Agreement No. 5 provides for evaluation of alternative design components of the interchange, alternatives for the Burger King/PDQ access, final design services for Weir Drive, and preliminary drainage design for the Valley Creek Road/I-494 interchange. Mn/DOT has agreed to prepare final plans for the Valley Creek Road/I-494 Interchange Project which will include the drainage design done by SRF. Funding will be State Turnback funds for the interchange work and drainage design. Weir Drive design will be split between the County and City based on prorated construction costs. A summary of the contract is shown on Table 1. Staff recommends approval of the Supplemental Agreements No. 5 with SRF Consulting Group, Inc. for the additional services. Additional traffic analysis is needed for the 1-494 freeway. Mn/DOT, SRF and Washington County are working on the work scope for Supplemental Agreement No. 6. The cost will be less than $25,000, and will be approved by the County Engineer. PREVIOUS ACTION ON REQUEST/OTHER PARTIES ADVISED MEDIA CONTACT October 9, 2001 Board Workshop; May 14, 2002 Turnback Agreement Approval; March 11, Sandy Cullen, 2003 SRF Contract Approval; July 1, 2003 Supplemental Agreement No. 1 and 2 Approval; Transportation Manager March 23, 2004 Supplemental Agreement No. 3 and 4 Approval; August 3,2004 Board 651-430-4330 Workshop/City of Woodbury, City of Maplewood, Ramsey County, Mn/DOT DATE/TIME RECEIVED BY COUNTY ORNEY REVIEW/DATE COUNTY ADMINISTRATOR+ C FINANCIAL IMPLICATIONS$234.063 AUGV16 - 7//�/o BUSINESS UNITS 201605 � OBJECTS 676600 COU TY ADMINI TRATOR/DATE ADMINISTRATIVE RECOMMENDATION BUDGETED X f @I APPROVAL YES NO IJ' O ❑ DENIAL y 0 NO RECOMMENDATION FUNDING LEVY OTHER COMMENTS COMMENTS $ CTB funds revenue in 2003 aFT CONTRACT , o IP I 1 _ $ LocalfundsWoodbury iiil^ it0_ $ County State Aid Highway Funds R:\201605-TH 120 tb all\County lard Actions\BA 8-24-04 SRF Contract SA 5.doc I, 7 r. R,n sT.K w s` .te dz iztn¢. o 0-7----z3:::calr-, , BUSH �.it' i i i GR.Ary yaN•W • i AYE K u u 4, 3 51111611111.1111• Yom• N. , ,/ O �, g Utn sT.KV.ry+� ID u1 ....( 1 10,, ST Ip 1 ."E. MINNEHAN! AVE Z u Toto ST. �• " 1 u 1-1,,-,,, , • z . `/Armitrohj � '~^ `-' ' -< 57. . �..,. 1 I [.AkeJ �.MAPLEWOOD E. YARGAPET ST..: 9In5T. ` . > L ll. alIw ,K. „"�hsr G6 V Sl. 'r %27600 POP.34,947 8 �, E z "ern sT. W •sT. sT. •C f iN E. 5th .. m N r a i E 69.FOREST NTS. " , c as •• B!.SUMYERRIND CI0. �lth ST. K 31Y� 'S Jas OA . w $ $ �' cr i . T0.GARDEN GLEN ♦ 90.SUNWARD..R0. I • i LIMN• 71.HEITNFR DII 5T. r6A� i ' , 2 , ST Ta lth .� C1R•N• .91.SLRMERRIMO BAT TREY 7z.IVT LA. ' 4 46.®® 71 Avon 1 CLRYC g HERON 9s.SIRRERNI ALCOVE 6M _ 97.SPRINCvIEN Way /'�• 6tn ST. •.... 6I ROVE ST. Cr. 94.SPRINGVIEw ALCOVE S A65.DELLw=pp COVE IS 116 AVE SEP® kill Stn ® Si, ` 107.PRESERVE ALCOVEM5. sr,$T ST. 66.Stn AVE IDO.PRESERVE DRAR j� • ® 1sT` ~ W 4,• ;7.4th AVE. [09.PARKSIDE ECND 1 K 6t EVERGREEN OR. 6tn .K >S" Q U. K _ _.,e Sleet!). 'sr. K i i' llo.PRESERVE TR. sr. Srw h `I�I�� _ Tanners sE z :k +yl /( TWA 5T. K Lake\A\\Nk ."'ams G'� y y .\ �c `l P},h •t4.znc avE. 7e.Iv?AYE lo / t ' ANDFALl 6L Bit. �i► TS.ASPEN E. 79.DELLNO. u. y g' g 'lo 4' ; Tye pN 2000 POP.T00 ®iii MEI : TRBIRCN LA. SRALLwOo so.. 3 Os .;N ,;,/ it.CEDAR O0. 'LUMEN LA. Tr'ST.a Qi. _-UP ' ��\__ "-a e ' - ,y, BLVD. p� i OSON KVa �" RAS. �g N"SM �\7� S'Egg4. ..__' `.700=0RD. S. nwsM RD li „wo i ,$ WOODBURY 41 0,80- 4 Battle eT.uGLE RIDGE\ g 2000 POP.46,453 Et. rlt 'S,.ioNTutE cT. .t Geek g moo 1> az LA �I Creek 4o:c C7. J4C4ya j1 0,,C'' e ,A Cake CAIIBRI! l• .V•+-* JAMESg OR. - - s + "- .t IC(0# CT.CT..- ELA1It c _ OTS .QCT N FALCON RIDGE BOOT.gIOL RON _ _ GAPER 4 8� P RO.,, ,11. E S1•- 13 1.17 74Zi�Ilk _ ..� 414 LLCM R. $� nT N Pd ,L .. 4 0% 6 IN,n: " •00 t• ABY I." ADO 0� ort 1?. ".±X. COLLER �.AE%/dI.0 4P AMIN.•i • MN RZIR - w .1N 11E2w MAPLEWOOD 8 T.'-i 6 5 _ ii . TAMARACK �•�• • wTWN ET., 41.1 Iz 2000 POP.34,947 'g POE. * • TELL R0. _ g R. OR. ' C; V m: ktSWLi 1 ... - aE AcY 4. Li T ALBEAw000 Sf7 D ��..¢ *art �#E Ns SPRUCETI000 CT. P S 19 BY �•i ALCOVE 56.sKVERNOW BAT PRwY. s F sANDLEw NATURE PAI .- + 69.YOdLIGNT OR. € s S} D 39 w r^•N no ..+. a�� yTAY/ER.1:008- RD, T3.SCNOONER WAY 56. EMO4D 4. ...is`O+E• l" PROJECT LIMITS . CT. ;1•1 v. D•�AY �� g s 4‘'E.LLa . 44. E ti so 1, 3.RO• u f sam N V'O- J ' I ! g ,c•�'•4444s" 4L N.. z 5QL 61,..... . CT• n 00D LA. ' passion!. RD. -. L}°+• Es al , ; inwo RST - soYERS : u +B9 CT. s!�• SJ CiR. _ ® �Eq CT. C IL cr. p 9 CR` tis• ow V• Ci. 4P FE I ah, ®B.1y NES •� ? K/p0i o 0 4YE < OR. m' TVI I• Alic-!'D' -% 8 W ?�O'DAY,. MIN OLE SEWN` CDe 8G, p '.PNEA^ANT RuN ENO o• RD.E COi. gscL� �1111.111 C`.�. V d' I �dsr CT - 3 7. .w.•g17; E®: • !1:11(1111611"..""...74 , __`� TALL y `"YQ :Loc , • .. .r.,a1 z �Ej�1 v NAr $i Fb o .CENTURY C1R Ipito u NEXE0:1,171- RD $ u ` , OAKRIDGE OR REST e -_ilm`� E EVERGR EEN •-0. DR KERRY 19 •• ",p C 0, AGMEN NT t�NBLR000 g i0..RESTViEw DR. �, flT tR: �q� {LLCOVE YM.einmili s .: ., so i sA NEL '1 d W¢ ;Os: 06 • OWITOGENR• r`nN1(( RjC.' RTOOE •• et CT. ST• _ w 'i$ `� ALCOVESpR Ct' '1PAUL® ST. g IRNE 8 y� a'OSIpE ON, CI':-. ALCOVE I, RD. a.`s."AVE €2) wiNOGlTE I :t. LWNOOD l® S. m N; °� �. STEEpLEVWEw RD.3 `CITY J VE $ WW a ' ' v, 3��o'�' Hall ;•gam�, \ vw4cT.0 d. - ,3 ` \f y �' .+ ,P t4. �. 4.r4Y DONEGAL on. I,, rr ' 1 1 4 y VD. OLVO,W S R.` lT. o •� 4" ' /g4. !.YRrINGTM CT.n 07. © / OE ® IRAFAYR LL 15.-;A IB. �• 1 TONER CT. PROyEwOE N is io. itMBER , CR. g, 16. 27. RIDGE . d, e4.y,n. 5 B VIM DER CT. " q/ �FTURA j es r, y LA•RAINI M 64. L� AVE� a M' GG• aR �rCKINGS CIR. J� LA' 6 g ` d• N SCSI rs• LI•, u g g Iney=ONAY RAT Y vC W t, ,GSPORNTE Ro.P® 7:00oto G cr tChE'► u YLLLET vlEw AVE.F Ca , .jap ® \ _ g �� se �.{Nds o•,, R°. -t1055 ALET`•sT CRoJ NlGMN000 '^ AVE.r \` [• ti.eSgw .L RD• TDIBERLE4 x.WE AVE Ire Y���, ED ( ra. T 00 1 i s � ND. 9li�J CT. ` sE A. �.;•_._.._. NE�a.S.e•F�.4 e ! T4s• Wl.C�T.?g ;OE emulous,. o�COPPE R CUFF TR. ay ,q[.T. T fA� NOIt SESNOE �� ACADIA R0. T HEIGHT ' ~souTH CREST •vE 72 16dis; z r .'�J Q T +c•10 } S.'y LA. �vA N o•Ks - 1 ELA,... i -4, `,.. `,pq 4kt(g� uK `s CLOW o4 '$•mm Ili ..s, .Pqs.. a-4e IEA J to.v, y. i Y ,s5"1' Ps '1c q _ wryer ' g �P I'�1 .a OA•s.;SAN+ o a X ., Lk if ¢ L /y CI.Y.. .yb t ClR. ��; 16;44% o'.sow„1-p,-. i..,a' C iti F..., E. SCNVp7 DV. N .40' JORDAN CT.u �c C[2.K� IV, LAKE G` 11 LAKE'itib 09,2 m"d' m T N9NWcvE 6 •T ,g YE40ow IBROOK c ..1•r,,.l.�, J is CA •• o 5 _e....� N�PY -%.., C CIR. . CT. yx y. vv77 0..'1 rzeN rats BLY k.,' •� -.2-4-J•J-_ 16 IS n '5 4� ® cc. d 'YLY o o� war Y,�Z ' z i zz • g ,I". 4?..' �'. `�' � Sri J ��� BROOk l' `Y. . PINETR EE R0. AVE �i YORK ILCOVE MAYBE 7N CT.w� V RD. GATCOPQgO PL.' ,., G 13 T !• SHER oQ QX =w OX FORD 60. - • o GT. OVERLOOKriir '� // TOµ9A j Alco w .ENC E 3p or' 41.4 N VQ C'HaMBER[Y '�•u � uTin g F• CX90R0 g�III ®f+ ..,,,,? :-=,'s ``t~e�+E+ LOCATION MAP III 111 . • f O 0 0 N CO 0 J V M N N O cc N 0 a N N in CD 0) N F N OOH N 4 • S 4 N U 0 ���Opp CA W v ! CO c0 <0 t0 Co. yF 4, t N (C Z g3 U - - 0 0 R' N - N CO _ G 0 0 0 to Z• O C - N N CO t00 M CO A Z 6 N M A 0 =7 67). N U N. EO., NO.O) CO cO 0 0) `a, 0 0 ~ try a0 M gr....". A . m 0 P') 0)j M .0010 y eft 4 f9 10 N 2F� w ii e vi«9w Fc c0+) c N r Ot N 0 a-C30 OO) - 7 cc 7 CDi 0 ;;4&112M'" W�qZG'aa O M cn N 70 r...00 a�0) OM MM 0_ MM .;'V'l:N In x.- OON OON 4 4 4,4, A oom 2 J eQFT.. co co p O 2 UO th ^ M Cn CC o E. E E m E E EO — CO o A O O 00 O O G y OW m m e a m m c C c C CZ CC CC ? Q 2 v .X . aV H CD o O > g' g S c c H EUr r r `— Tco coE oa, o 3 O Q To > y d 1 ro = m° N o Y. C d t 0 R m o, 5 , U _ 0 c 03 O .ama o uO_iE O( ,a m D Y-.Eo O O P C mm 0 ) inn I.CD m LL c 0 h 3E cI LI Q 4._5c- CQ y`v y §C �-.,�. G O�i V m p0 O N U C O V= C m . 02. yy y 1 M O — r C p Ic m p O)LL O m > ry C, y .z‹ . m N N rn o• $ E E . C J _m 4 LU ,_0 Ol 0 w •m Y C a i° g M� � �� NEo Mc > ¢ `�� 10 ,.1.r0. 0y .� mE > E OJ n c U c om-- Quihililhil m HI 0 flt0 : �� ilrE1J c72 ° Q �uEgOi°viiy Zm J e t.° Q v�° JLL Wm Q"� mc om Q ° y coo F m w om2' E F 00d °C�Ltc V) ° >itT, CCi , Wi m m yYY OO dL'°Eci° wM Za'3tt Z.2.12 = C� o ...1 la y -+ � Zc_SUU m2 ��1JJ $ cwaCgc�0o F d— Zv a s y y y y 1.- m c =-- c 0.= log, a m'p-p >•QQ > x Dmmmmx O ^m mm of m 0.-Nm mironmO.,.- co_W oo W.k co to U).g. COW GOI-FFF-W F .`..0 >> av �> C • WASHINGTON COUNTY REQUEST FOR BOARD ACTION TIME REQUIRED I August 24, 2004 I AGENDA ITEM NO. 3K BOARD MEETING DATE ORIGINATING DEPARTMENT/SERVICE BOARD ACTION REQUIRED Authorize the County Engineer to establish a"NO PARKING"zone on County Transportation&Physical Dev. Road 55 (Norell Avenue North)from 150th Street North to 1,000 feet south. REQ ESTOR'S SIGNATURE/DATE 4/14 ",v( ->" 6/i3 to y EVIEDB /DATE CKG OUND/JUSTIFICATION Residents of the area near Boot Lake have expressed concern about traffic safety with cars parked along County Road 55 in the narrow area adjacent to Boot Lake. A staff evaluation of the site concluded that a"NO PARKING"zone from 150th Street to approximately 1,000 feet south would help preserve sight distance, enhancing pedestrian safety while still allowing reasonable access to the lake for fishing and other uses. It was also desirable to prohibit parking near the dry hydrant at the northwest corner of East Boot Lake to ensure that it is not blocked in an emergency. We received a letter (copy attached)from the May Township Board Chairman indicating the Board's concurrence. We have requested a 1,000 foot long"NO PARKING"zone, but the accompanying resolution contains provisions to reduce or add to the length at the County Engineer's discretion as field conditions dictate. PREVIOUS ACTION ON REQUEST/OTHER PARTIES ADVISED MEDIA CONTACT Field Review of Site/May Township Joseph Lux 651-430-4312 DATE/TIME RECEIVED BY COUNTY ATTORNEY REVIEW/DATE COUNTY ADMINISTRATOR FINANCIAL IMPLICATIONS$$600.00 AUG 17 2004 // //' 7/01 /�G/�`. BUSINESS UNITS 250006 • 0 OBJECTS 600100 COU Y ADMINI TRATOR/DATE di / AD NIS ATIVE RECOMMENDATION BUDGETED X pd. APPROVAL YES NO ����y O DENIAL FUNDING 0 NO RECOMMENDATION LEVY OTHER COMMENTS COMMENTS BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS • WASHINGTON COUNTY,MINNESOTA RESOLUTION NO. DATE August 24, 2004 DEPARTMENT Transportation & Physical Development MOTION SECONDED BY BY COMMISSIONER COMMISSIONER No Parking Zone on County Road 55 (Norell Avenue North) WHEREAS, residents of the area near County Road 55 (Norell Avenue North) and Boot Lake expressed concerns for traffic and pedestrian safety where County Road 55 abuts Boot Lake shoreline; and WHEREAS, a field review by Traffic Engineering staff concluded that prohibiting parking from the intersection of 150th Street North and CR 55 to approximately 1,000 feet south of the interection would be beneficial since parked vehicles encroach on the driving lanes of County Road 55 and obstruct drivers' visibility, especially when pedestrians are present; and WHEREAS, the May Township Board of Supervisors has indicated its support for this parking restriction. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED, that the Washington County Board of commissioners hereby authorizes the County Engineer to establish a No Parking zone on County Road 55 from its intersection with 150th Street to 1,000 feet south of the intersection and to install and maintain appropriate signing for that parking restriction. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED, that the Washington County Board of Commissioners delegates authority to the County Engineer to extend or reduce the size of the No Parking zone by 50% (500 feet) if he or she determine the need to accommodate unforeseen or changing conditions. ATTEST: YES NO COUNTY ADMINISTRATOR HEGBERG KRIESEL PETERSON PULKRABEK CHAIRMAN,COUNTY BOARD STAFFORD July 2002 http://washnet/forms/CountyBd/Resolution.dot CHAIRMAN SUPERVISOR SUPERVISOR TOWN l 411111 Voedisch John Adams J azlar of 625 Old Guslander Trail. 14035 Oldfield Road N. 1 Orwell Road N. MAY Marine on St.Croix,MN 55047 Stillwater,MN 55082 Marine on St.Croix,MN 55047 (651)433-5976 (651)430-8134 (651)433-5013 CLERK TREASURER PLANNING COMMISSION j Linda L.Klein Cheryl D.Bennett Lester I.Rydeen r 1 ; ma 13519 May Avenue North 16624 Square Lake Trail N. 13528 170th St.N. Stillwater,MN 55082 Stillwater,MN 55082 Marine on St.Croix,Mn 55047 Est 1893 _ (651)439-1706•Fax(651)430-0107 (651)439'-8599 (651)433-3282 August 10, 2004 Joe Lux Senior Transportation Planner Washington County 11660 Myeron Road No. Stillwater, MN 55082-9573 Re: Parking at Boot Lake • Dear Mr. Lux, On Thursday, August 5th,the May Town Board took up the issue of safety and parking at Boot Lake. The Town Board concurs that this is a dangerous area and that a parking ban as you described could help the situation, and we support it Also keeping folks from blocking the dry hydrant at East Boot Lake should be a mutual goal of all concerned. Please be aware however that some people who fish from shore will likely park on 150t street,walk down and continue to fish. Thus the parking restrictions may provide only partial relief, and of course enforcement will be up to the County Sheriff's office. We agree with your letter in that this is not an issue with a clear cut solution and that denying lake usage and access is not the goal. Solutions beyond a parking ban may need to be discussed at some point. Thank you for giving us an opportunity to respond. On behalf of the May Town Board, Bill Voedisch Board Chair Cc: Gary Papermaster Daniel Pilla 411--------- 0 , L orl, ,7:44,,,. , • r z r.4 11,,:ittl, ,•.1 ot, ., .'* t. ' •.,,,,-'''ff:,4-,,"---I,,, •,v,,,, ',,,k..1;',-..,,40 S . p,,ow R19W V R2I W R2 OW tv.....472. !:-,•‘" t ' ill 132N #,t r,,,, 1, , q 32. un.... ,0 L„,"4,1ii'"i';'• I' yo ,,T',/$ 43-1•"•': , T ..".?' ' . Xir `,.,1 1'4 '' . 1.'1;','''..:41° '' ' .f 4' ri#44,;,,.•;!;`,'Z.-7,44,,,,;!: "! ,' •. ,,,..,, • , .4,."'" I, ''", , 4!„,„.„.•••, ' ,f4jr---'it'''''.";i•r4;114!••"''''41,te,fr',4,t,,,,„, , : '414i6A. , , ITT1233890INNNNJIIIIIii;IT:332'NNNN 127N • . , ' ',.,,,., ,,, ,. . ,.-27Nt„L„....), ' , ' , . ., , .1..*%,,,,,,,t4.. - ,. - ' _ - '' ",...„. .-• isr.,' Vr,"4,gi"P...'-'..,,4%.'#.:4t,t-0,-,,,,' ,, - • --t-.4c,;:,' - ' ' „..',e-'-`!"*"--,. . ,‘,:" R22W R2IW R- ,0W -i.jy '''' : , '-,.,, ,,',. ,, '' 4 '4.4i.'41:3,,.;1-' .,=14 ,.- .'' -,-,:., ' ..,, • ,f.;" --- , •-4.,--*!..-!i"--.*2'-`,'':(1z...?.-,-4....,...,,i'.:41Q.4 .--,''''';,- '.'• -,,'. 'i! •A/ 0,,, , ,,,., .. ;-,,-,,,.„, . . . 221„ 4,, t,„' ,C« i/ 14 P'''''" ' , 4- -,,, It., ::',.''''. •.,,t,„„i,lir'll ' 47 'I' 14 , 1:4 , ..,- ,. _.... , „., VicinityMap ,, , It"4 1-p . •."A qc '•,,,„._.-• ;.•-•`tt..--,v,.."- 4,1, "•,' c--.',.'' 1,,itr•i,' ',,,:, , 7. 60/4:,•f '''r ' - - .,' ,A 4' r'r r °, , «'..-7 M,,..,.•-,"7.;,`',','' ,. 4.' ' -......i, ,,•"" .f it - ';',,,, .13,,K., f„iv,,,,--1','"Ve'r.,,, • - -://' , I ,, „•7....f •, of, ""1-'-',4 „,!•:, ,,, ' ' ,- ,"4,47.4%.707. ,i4 • ,2 '\ ' .4iiiit,s.."';'',•;"A.,,,,''' 4%4' tit),4''' i, ,,,,,„,, 7-31,..t,',. .f,• I I L _ . , ,-.,-,:,-.1.., ,-,„r-...pfr ..,,, 14 'A. 04,i,- "•''''itt.'••;1,4•''''-4 4kit'..`/rt ,r""'Ir';•/,;•,'; .•,,•,'• --„,:7`,."!`,"4, : h ' i ';'',4'1' ,- '1 ' t'. !I tr!414 . ," -' •,' ' i•.!' ,i•-'-.•! 4-41 ;..,'", i', , '-' IA'''''... 400 ct ,if , .1".•',' o ' . , ,. 1 Feet i. . 4.,- i ,..st-ei.‘ttli''-' , .44 Scale in Y-•.!..t.-b• ,• ,,•-iti ", , .,trove, - l • -°••i-.1,,,.- •'''''''I -trt,tt,-,,,,z1 ., , *'"•,,t,'")'; 4',! --t".4! * • 41 "t4".'0 ..tr.'„' •••••--,'t •-.rt ", .-{, ---' et ,''-•- ..'' *1, ;44•",•- N•,. ", _ ' 7.7`f , 1 •..,4,'--r.k ...• -,...., .:,, ..2 ,..,1/,, i :_t„, • ,...it- ,,, , ,_.,,,,, „ 4, ,. I-2-„,• .. --,v,.,,,,, ; „ , ir,„... „ r i ,.," ,,,...•'..--,4 ' '- „ ,st,t,'„,','"r itt, r 4--r14,2 ', -', s! ' , •'", . -,, tt ' '. !„,-04 ,- it • t -• ' '4-k...4'.",",r- •i: - '.4"4!.."'" -.. -'f4'el,; .:',,, 1'..g«.*,'''',..i`, ‘,c,-,=' 1- .'"/:,, -,, / ,' -A:1 :,';',,...,21: ' '''',,7 qt. ,i, «7,'rrr :,, •?;,,,.";',,'',A4;-V '-' ''',‘ ' ';',1,,' ',' ''''''' / / •' ,...4,`„p,',,"t::Z1,(''' ':', ..","' ,...%',41°,.• .,g,,, „At4t.N. , , ,,itfr Lt.,,,,-4,,t,'i,. ,4,.`",-x'-:., krji,e7 ,2 ttlfigkt.,,,w.,,:42..:t,lti-....,:..:,4 ' it .,‘:4,;..., ke,' #-• ,-,..7....:,,i,„7,.:. 4.1 -4 ---.,--.;,-• ,. 1 , „:, T.4-...-1:-.,-,r,' ,,„, ,...„r " „„4.4 .,-,,,-41, 14'4 2 or,..•••••!•,,,'" 'et'. 4'," ! • ,42'," " 14' rr %r.. ,cr-ii,t1" ,t,,,!--"1„-".:-1'14 -•., -ii ,.f' ..... ,,,t,,„ .,4_,.,),P.,;,-- •„"'41:44tz.,.,',,, ..‘t,. ",,,It.:-•- 1,,i'V",, 1. ,a-,. ,...§eN1* A '*-71;k 's ,..' •4441i, .:4'1 '„,••4".-„,""4,',.,.,, 11,0,..6„,&.•-..'•4).,.•,,,,T,,4t','",,,'- `4/ ,2,,it, . ° . ,-. ,-,.,-. to • ,-; :,.,-,,,,,s.;;,''',,-,..-..,, ,„7,',7e, wi,.,„. 1- ..;, ,,.., .virgf,,er'..,,,,,,e-*,;,, 4,v,,,... . . ' -". , ,•••";"-t4 't '41% ;e.,.";;;••,,:;,•,'-';'.;',;.- '''''' .41'.)'4.7411' ;'4,• 4.''''''•";"14AVV• ' ,•"'',,,-i, -14;4'tirv,, Y!9,k',!'•''." '''4' 4 . '- ' ,, v-rif"..' i,.4•:;--,,"--' '"""' . 0,f SL'''''''''' . "1,,,,,,it•'4: '':'•',;:7',*p,%,--k44..'"?.:',..`, I '-',,,,',,'4,,t111;ii-Af.olli'l ,--'-•I. ,-;,,,,,,,,,i4 ,_ '''" t''.'.:,",',4,.,ii:t.t!-.?',., ;-,0,,,.,,,~-:',, ,,..• ";,,,,..,,, , -. •i _______,J....t-i1„0.,,-.11,, ,,,••,•••. „,,,,., -v.!,;., „•40,'„i:,..r..• ' 4,,,,,oil.fti,14,0-, -,,,,,;•••-t„._ _,,,,,-.7.--- ,-;-,,,p, ,„,. -.,0,,;.;.°.,,,:''-' - - 1 ,_1•,)-y-,,-,1, .- '444''' irt'Vt =:747-k.,"‘ „:•;p'4.',1%.--2"%-, - - ,•, "::,,,r: :'', r:"`"'",',°,',',',',',,,,, . _ r I ', ''' •,-,„ «,,,.."',, ",,,,,,tt«t:'-'7,...___---",-,-,,v' Location map a,«„,",•'440-r-v_z ,' -.--,-,‘,''•'414`'"4-4,4•• - '4'.'!-- ,,.;`,'''-;'''',.!; -; "-•,tr"' ,,„ _ .„„_,_-_ ,' ,••• - ‘ • • WASHINGTON COUNTY REQUEST FOR BOARD ACTION TIME REQUIRED 15 minutes August 24, 2004 AGENDA ITEM NO. 4 BOARD MEETING DATE ORIGINATING DEPARTMENT/SERVICE BOARD ACTION REQUIRED: TPD/Survey and Land (1) Hold Public Hearing on rezoning request Management Division REQUES R'S SIGNATURE /DATE (2) Take action on rezoning request allit y"--kipeic)1 (3) Direct County Attorney to prepare a resolution consistent with O the motion so it can be acted on at future Board Meeting. REVIEWED BY DATE C44[1,40yt /r,Qr-_ 8-/3-44 BACKROUNDD/JUSTIFICATION Washington County has received an application from Norman Lee Busse, 12320 Dellwood Road, Stillwater Township, to rezone a 20 acre parcel of property from a C, Conservancy Zoning Designation (two dwelling units per 40 acres)to an A-4, Agricultural Zoning Designation (four dwelling units per 40 acres). The Washington County Planning Commission considered the request at a public hearing on Tuesday, July 27, 2004 and has recommended approval of the request. According to the Washington County Development Code, Section 14, the County Board considers the application to rezone the property provided by Minnesota Statutes 394.26 and 375.51. * See staff report, application package and attachments *Ann Pung-Terwedo, Senior Planner, will present this agenda item PREVIOUS ACTION ON REQUEST/OTHER PARTIES ADVISED MEDIA CONTACT Stillwater Township Ann Pung-Terwedo Washington County Planning Advisory Commission Senior Planner 651-430-6715 DATE/TIME RECEIVED BY COUNT ATTOR EY REVIEW /DATE FINANCIAL IMPLICATIONS: $ 0 COUNTY ADMINISTRATOFAUG 13 2004 / 7//i _ jey BUSINESS UNITS: COUNTY ADMINISTRAT R ADMINI TRATI E RECOMMENDATION OBJECT(S): Ei APPROVAL /�` BUDGETED DATEicifr".... 1 f/y ❑DENIAL Alt)j...1 �J QNORECOMMENDATION Hekril FUNDING YES NO LEVY OTHER COMMENTS COMMENTS REVISED:August 2001 N:\WORD\Bussepublicction.doc • o� Department of Transportation a`N.,..."�O°z and Physical Development Washington ., . �; ar- i-3/ Survey and Land Management --- County \ti= Division ' .,,nGIhY.T04Pts! Donald C.Wisniewski,P.E. Director Michael J.Welling,P.L.S. MEMORANDUM County Surveyor/Division Manager • To: Washington County Board of Commissioners From: Ann Pung-Terwedo, Senior Planner Subject: Rezoning Date: August 16,2004 PLAN REVIEW TYPE OF REQUEST: Rezoning APPLICANT: Norman Lee Busse OWNER: same PROJECT LOCATION: 12320 Dellwood Road GENERAL LEGAL DESCRIPTION: W 660 feet of the SE1/4 of the SW1/4 of Section 18, T 30N, R20W TOWNSHIP: Stillwater Township COMPREHENSIVE PLAN 2015, LAND USE TYPE: Agricultural ZONING DISTRICT: C-Conservancy PROPOSAL: The request to rezone a 20 acre parcel of property from a C, Conservancy Zoning Designation (two dwelling units per 40 acres) to an A-4, Zoning Designation (four dwelling units per 40 acres). EXISTING CONDITIONS: The twenty acre parcel of property is located along Dellwood Road, State Highway 96, approximately to of a mile from Manning Avenue. The site is a combination of grassland and woodlands with mature oak, pine and other large deciduous trees which buffers the exiting residential home from the highway and adjacent land uses. The home is a large two-story structure with an attached garage and is placed on the east side of the property. A long driveway provides access to Dellwood Road. The site contains a number a small wetland depressions but none of the wetlands are considered DNR protected wetlands. Government Center • 14949 62nd Street NortMh--P.O. Box 6, Stillwater, Minnesota 55082-0006 Phone: 651-430-6875 • Fax: 651-430-6888 • TTY: 651-430-6246 www.co.washington.mn.us Equal Employment Opportunity/Affirmative Action Washington Coun�oard of Commissioners Busse Rezoning August 16, 2004 Adjacent Land Uses: To the north, west and east of the subject property is a mixture of large residential uses and rural agricultural uses consisting of tilled fields of corn and soybeans and pasture lands. Small woodland areas are sprinkled throughout the area. To the south of the property is a large parcel of vacant property located within the "Transition Zone" and is planned to be annexed into the City of Stillwater during their existing Comprehensive Plan period to 2015. This area will become urban in nature. As noted on the Stillwater Township Zoning Map, the Brown's Creek watercourse is located directly west of the property. The subject property is located within 1000 feet of the creek so the site is also within the Shoreland.Management Overlay District. Special development consideration needs to be identified for any development within this area since it is in the Brown's Creek Watershed. COMPREHENSIVE LAND USE PLAN POLICIES: General Development Philososophy: The Washington County Comprehensive Plan, 2015, Land Use Plan identifies this area a General Rural which allows 4 dwelling units per 40 acres. The intent of this location is to accommodate farming, protect long-term agricultural uses, and preserve the County's remaining senses of openness and rural character. The subject property, as well as the properties to the west, east and north has this future land use designation. ZONING: Existing Zoning: The existing zoning designation for the site is C-Conservancy District (2 dwelling units per 40 or 20 acre zoning). The purpose of this designation is to provide special regulatory protection for those areas that either contain valuable natural resource or other similar resource, and to foster, preserve and promote sensitive development in these areas. Land within this District may be unsuitable for agricultural production or development due to wetlands, steep slopes, scenic views, bedrock formations, and/or other physical features, unique natural, and biological characteristics. In review of this site in comparison to other properties in the area, staff has not found any specific evidence which indicates this area has valuable natural resources. Surrounding Zoning: To the north and west of the site, the properties are zoned C- Conservancy. The site adjacent to the west has Brown's Creek meandering through the site and there are significant wetland areas. To the north are also other significant wetland areas. To the east of the site, as well as a majority of Stillwater Township with the exception of the St. Croix Riverway and Shoreland Management Districts, has the A-4, Agricultural Zoning District designation consistant with the Comprehensive Plan. 2 6 Washington County Board of Commissioners • Busse Rezoning August 16, 2004 ANALYSIS: As with all rezonings, there are several issues the County Board should address in consideration of this case: 1) Is the request in conformance with the Comprehensive Plan? The Comprehensive Plan does indicates this area planned for long term agricultural uses. The intent of this land use is to accommodate farming, protect long-term agricultural uses, and preserve the County's remaining senses of openness and rural character. The subject property as well as the properties to the west, east and north of this site have this future land use designation. 2) Is the existing and proposed uses compatible with adjacent land uses? The present use of the 20 acre parcel is consistent with adjacent land uses. If the zoning is changed, one additional parcel could be located on this site using the lot averaging method of developing. This would also be consistent with adjacent land uses. 3) Does the request represent spot zoning? This zoning designation would not be spot zoning since the adjacent parcel to the east as well as a majority of the Township north of State Highway 96 is zoned A-4, Agricultural. 4) Will the proposed zoning and resultant development place an undue financial burden on the Town or County, or have any negative off-site impacts? One additional parcel on this property would not impact the County. If this property were to be subdivided in the future, an access permit would need to be acquired from the Minnesota Department of Transportation, a certificate of compliance and septic permit from the County as well as a building permit from the Township. 5) Does the property owner have use of the property under present zoning conditions?The present owner does have use of the property as residential. Township Action: On June 10, 2004, the Stillwater Township Board approved the rezoning for this parcel of property. The property owner will need to present a minor subdivision to the Township which meets all the requirements of the Development Code. Washington County Planning Advisory Commission Recommendation: On July 27, 2004, the Planning Advisory Commission held a public hearing on this matter and have made a recommendation to the County Board to approve the rezoning request. 3 Washington Coun Ilkoard of Commissioners 40 • Busse Rezoning August 16, 2004 CONCLUSION: In review of the conditions of the area and this site in particular, we feel residential uses of this property would be the best and sound use of the property as well as surrounding properties. The rezoning of this property is consistent with the Washington County Comprehensive Plan. BOARD ACTION REQUIRED: (1) Hold public hearing (2)Take action on rezoning request (3) Direct County Attorney to prepare resolution consistent with the motion If you have any questions, please contact me at 651-430-6715. Attachments: 4 • 0 WASHINGTON COUNTY . REQUEST FOR BOARD ACTION TIME REQUIRED 5 Minutes I August 24,2004 I AGENDA ITEM NO. 5 BOARD MEETING DATE ORIGINATING DEPARTMENT/SERVICE BOARD ACTION REQUIRED Transportation&Physical Dev.- Parks 1) To approve the attached resolution authorizing the Parks Division to accept REQUESTOR' IGNATURE/DATE a grant from the DNR, to match Federal TEA-21 grant funds,for the ill B1(1I0`1 acquisition of a portion of the Point Douglas Trail. -P&R DBY/ ATE, ' 41. / g)17/0g BA • GROUND/JU=TIFICATION 1 e Minnesota Department of Natural Resources (DNR) has made funds available through the `Local Trails Connection' grant program. Washington County submitted an application for$100,000; to match previously approved TEA-21 grant funds of$400,000, for the purchase of an abandoned railroad bed along the Mississippi River and between Prescott, WI and Hastings, MN. This future Point Douglas Trail will connect two States, three Counties, and three communities, as well as the many local and regional trails in the area. Washington County was successful in receiving this grant. Approval to enter into a grant and execution of the grant with the Minnesota DNR is requested. PREVIOUS ACTION ON REQUEST/OTHER PARTIES ADVISED MEDIA CONTACT February 23,2003—County resolution in support of the Point Douglas Trail John Elholm, August 25, 2003—Application for Federal TEA-21 Funds submitted Senior Planner February, 2004—Notification of award of TEA-21 Grant. (651)430-4303 February 27, 2004—Application for DNR Local Trails Connection Grant DATE/TIME RECEIVED BY COUNTY ATTORNEY REVIEW/DATE FINANCIAL IMPLICATIONS$ 100.000 COUNTY ADMINISTRATOR AUG 1 7 / b//i/6L( BUSINESS UNITS 322640 1 I 2004 OBJECTS 671000 COUNTY ADMINISTRATOR/DATE ADMIN TRA IVE RECOMMENDATION BUDGETED XX 0/0, �i. APPROVAL ves Ho O DENIAL FUNDING XX 0 NO RECOMMENDATION LEVY OTHER C MMENTS COMMENTS DNR funds will cover 20%of the project costs,TEA-21 funds will cover the remaining 80%of the project costs • BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS WASHINGTON COUNTY, MINNESOTA RESOLUTION NO. DATE August 24, 2004 DEPARTMENT Transportation & Physical Dev. MOTION SECONDED BY BY COMMISSIONER COMMISSIONER ACCEPTANCE OF LAND ACQUISITION GRANT TO PURCHASE ABANDON RAIL LINE WHEREAS,the Minnesota Department of Natural Resources has grant funds available in their"Local Trails Connection" Program, and WHEREAS,Washington County applied for these funds, to match Federal TEA-21 funds,for the acquisition of an abandoned railroad bed along the Mississippi River between Prescott,WI and Hastings, MN, and WHEREAS,Washington County was successful in.receiving this grant, BE IT RESOLVED that Washington County agrees to accept a grant from the Minnesota Department of Natural Resources in the amount of$100,000, as partial funding for this trail project, and that it has the institutional, managerial, and financial capability to ensure that all aspects of the proposed project will be completed; BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that once acquired, the Washington County Parks Division, of the Transportation and Physical Development Department, assures that the facility will be maintained for no less than 20 years; NOW BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that John Elholm, Senior Planner Parks, is hereby authorized to execute the grant agreement as necessary to implement the project on behalf of Washington County. • ATTEST: YES NO COUNTY ADMINISTRATOR HEGBERG KRIESEL PETERSON PULKRABEK CHAIRMAN,COUNTY BOARD STAFFORD July 2002 http://washnet/forms/CountyBd/Resolution.dot • I • WASHINGTON COUNTY REQUEST FOR BOARD ACTION TIME REQUESTED 10 minutes BOARD MEETING DATE August 24, 2004 AGENDA ITEM NO 6 ORIGINATING DEPARTMENT/SERVICE BOARD ACTION REQUESTED ASSESSMENT,TAX PAYER SERVICES&ELECTIONS Pass attached resolution approving the classification of the following REQUESTOR'S SNATURE/DATE tax-forfeited parcel as non-conservation. .t143-tefi,,et_ .04-c-- 8- 1-TDI-I REVIEWED BY/DA • J BACKGROUND/JUSTIFICATION . Before anything else can be done with a parcel of tax-forfeited land, the county board is to classify the parcel as "conservation land"or "non-conservation land"(M.S. 282.01). The county board is to use the following criteria to decide whether to classify a parcel of tax-forfeited land as "conservation land"or "non-conservation land": 1 The present use of all parcels adjacent to the tax-forfeited land. 2 The potential productivity of the soil, which is part of the tax-forfeited land. 3 The character of any forests or other vegetation growing on the tax-forfeited land. 4 The existing and potential accessibility of the tax-forfeited land to established roads, schools, and other public services. 5 The suitability or desirability of the tax-forfeited land for particular uses. Parcel 17.029.21.32.0003 forfeited to the State of Minnesota on July 21, 2004 for non-payment of real property taxes. This parcel, which is assessed on AY2004 for$1,699,200.00, was the property of Douglas and Suzanne McKinnon. This is a commercial/industrial property with several buildings on it, which used to be a gas station/convenience store with a car wash and an automobile repair shop. The mailing address of the property is 3355 Hadley Avenue in Oakdale. Based on the attached memo from the Washington County Department of Public Health and Environment it appears that this land was, for the last year, under the investigation of Minnesota Pollution Control Agency for repeated fuel spills. Our department recommends the classification of this parcel as non-conservation land. PREVIOUS ACTION ON REQUEST/OTHER PARTIES ADVISED MEDIA CONTACT Kevin Corbid 430-6182 DATE/TIME RECEIVED BY COUNTY ATTORNEY REVIEW/DATE COUNTY ADMINISTRATOR FINANCIAL IMPLICATIONS: $ AUG , �2004 • /4.."-- COU //�/�`/ SERVICE: OBJECT: COU ADMIN T TOR/DATE ADMINI TRATI RECOMMENDATION BUDGETED APPROVAL YES NO O10 A) FUNDING /` 0 NO RECOMMENDATION LEVY OTHER I'l f1FNIGl COMMENTS COMMENTS 4110 BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS 1111 • WASHINGTON COUNTY, MINNESOTA RESOLUTION NO. DATE August 24, 2004 DEPARTMENT Assessment, Taxpayer Services and Elections MOTION BY COMMISSIONER SECONDED BY COMMISSIONER RESOLUTION APPROVING THE CLASSIFICATION OF PARCEL 17 . 029 . 21 . 32 . 0003 AS NON-CONSERVATION LAND WHEREAS, the County Board of Commissioners of the County of Washington, State of Minnesota, desires to offer for sale or conveyance, parcel 17.029.21.32.0003 that forfeited to the State of Minnesota for non- payment of taxes, and WHEREAS, the arcel has been reviewed bythe designees of the County p Board of Commissioners and has been recommended for classification as non- conservation land as provided for in Minnesota Statutes 282.01 NOW, THEREFORE BE IT RESOLVED, that the Washington County Board of Commissioners hereby certifies that parcel 17.029.21.32.0003 has been reviewed and comply with the provisions of Minnesota Statutes 85.012, 92.461, 282.01, and 282.018, or other statutes that require withholding of tax forfeited land from sale or conveyance NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED, that the Washington County Board of Commissioners hereby classifies parcel 17.029.21.32.0003 as non-conservation land BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED, that the Washington County Board of Commissioners hereby requests approval from the Minnesota Department of Natural Resources and the City of Oakdale for the sale or conveyance of said land. PARCEL I.D.NUMBER: -17.028.21.14.0001 LEGAL DESCRIPTION: PART OF TRACT A, BEING THE NORTH 335 OF THE WEST 258 FEET OF SAID TRACT, REGISTERED LAND SURVEY #102 MUNICIPALITY: CITY OF OAKDALE DATE FORFEITED: 7/21/04 APPROXIMATE SIZE: 1.98 ACRES M/L ASSESSED VALUE: $1,699,200.00 ATTEST: YES NO COUNTY ADMINISTRATOR HEGBERG KRIESEL PETERSON PULKRABEK CHAIRMAN, COUNTY BOARD STAFFORD • WASHINGTON COUNTY REQUEST FOR BOARD ACTION TIME REQUIRED 10 min August 24, 2004 AGENDA ITEM NO. 7A BOARD MEETING DATE ORIGINATING DEPARTMENT/SERVICE BOARD ACTION REQUIRED: PH&E/RR/157023 Adoption of the attached resolution approving the Ramsey/Washington County REQUESTOR'S SIGNATURE /DATE Resource Recovery Project's 2005 Operating Budget in the amount of (4 $17,416,944 and establishing a tipping fee of$39.00 per ton. Washington County's share of the budget is$4,366,425. REVIEWED BY /DATE (14.14eq i 3- BACKGROIJ1 D/JUSTIFICATION Pursuant to the joint powers agreement,the authority to approve the Ramsey/Washington Resource Recovery Project budget resides with the County Boards. The Project's Budget Committee met on June 24,2004 and recommended approval of the budget to the Project Board. The Project Board met on July 22,2004 and approved the attached resolution which recommends County Board approval of the 2005 Resource Recovery Board budget. The attached Project Board memo explains the details of the budget. As part of the budget action,the Project Board recommended an adjustment in the Tipping Fee,consistent with the waste delivery agreements with waste haulers. Those agreements provide that,beginning with 2005,the tipping_fee will escalate each year by the Midwest Urban Consumer Price Index,not to exceed 3%. The index change is 2.7%,and the Project Board recommends that the tipping fee be changed from the current$38 per ton to$39 per ton. The Administration costs are 4%of the total budget or$735,902. The Service Fee is 96%of the budget or$16,681,042 an increase of$953,049 over 2004. The,increase is due to a variety of factors: 1) The N1 fee, inflation indices related to petroleum pricing 2) Inflationary increases in B1 base fee and B2 processing fee. 3) County Board adoption of 4 '/2 year waste delivery agreements which increase waste deliveries each year. Washington County's share of resource recovery costs will increase 6%from$4,098,384 in 2004 to$4,366,425 or an increase of$268,041. PREVIOUS ACTION ON REQUEST/OTHER PARTIES ADVISED MEDIA CONTACT DATE/TIME RECEIVED BY COUN ATTO EY REVIEW /DATE FINANCIAL IMPLICATIONS: $ COUNTY ADMINISTRATOIAUG 1 3 2004 V/bVely BUSINESS UNIT(S: COUNTY INISTRAT ADMINI RATIVE RECOMMENDATION OBJECT(S): ppl ®APPROVAL BUDGETED 0/>( o //// , ❑DENIAL YES NO DATE ❑NO RECOMMENDATION FUNDING LEVY OTHER COMMENTS COMMENTS REVISED:August 2001 C:\MyFiles\board items\BOARD\rba05rrbudget.doc BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS WASHINGTON COUNTY,MINNESOTA RESOLUTION NO. DATE August 24, 2004 DEPARTMENT PH&E/Resource Recovery MOTION SECONDED BY BY COMMISSIONER COMMISSIONER Ramsey/Washington County Resource Recovery Project's 2005 Operating Budget WHEREAS,The Ramsey/Washington County Joint Powers Agreement for the Resource Recovery Facility provides that authority for approval of Resource Recovery Project budgets and for establishing the tipping fee at Ramsey/Washington County Resource Recovery Facility(Facility)remains with the respective County Boards; and WHEREAS, the Ramsey/Washington County Resource Recovery Project Board has prepared and recommended a proposed Project budget for 2005; and WHEREAS, Ramsey and Washington Counties, in order to accomplish environmental and public health goals, have each contracted with waste haulers to assure the delivery of waste to the Facility through July, 2007, at a reduced tipping fee; and • WHEREAS,the agreements with haulers are of two types,an All Waste Agreement and a Specific Tonnage Agreement; and WHEREAS,the Counties included in both types of agreements the following provision regarding an increase in the tipping fee: "The tipping fee will escalate beginning January 1, 2005 according to the Midwest Urban Consumer Price Index, calculated and published by the U.S. Department of Labor, Bureau of Labor Statistics. The tipping fee will escalate annually on January 1st each year thereafter during the remaining term of the Agreement. Any annual escalation will not exceed 3 percent. The period of July 1 through June 30 of the previous year will be used to calculate the percentage change for each succeeding year. The County will provide at least a 90 day notice prior to any change in the tipping fee;"and WHEREAS, the Specific Tonnage Delivery Agreements includes an additional provision that establishes the tipping fee at a higher rate, but provides a credit to the hauler at the end of the year in an amount that makes the tipping fee equal to that of the All Waste Contract tipping fee if the Specific Tonnage hauler delivers waste according to the agreement; and WHEREAS, the information on the Midwest Urban Consumer Price index for the period June 2003- June 2004 indicates that the index has increased by 2.7%, which results in an increase of the tipping fee to $39.00 per ton beginning January 1, 2005. NOW, THEREFORE BE IT RESOLVED, The Washington County Board of Commissioners hereby approves the following 2005 Resource Recovery Project Budget as recommended by the Resource Recovery Project Board: September 2001 http:Uwashnet/forms/CountyBd/Resolutionl stPage dot • Appropriations Administration $ 735,902 Service Fee 16,681,042 $17,416,944 Financing Sources Washington County Participation $ 4,366,425 Ramsey County Participation 11,805,519 Interest Income 45,000 State of Minnesota 1,200,000 $ 17,416,944 BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED, that effective January 1, 2005 the tipping fee shall be $39.00 per ton for waste delivered pursuant to All Waste contract. BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED,that effective January 1, 2005, the tipping fee shall be $41 per ton for waste delivered pursuant to the Specific Tonnage Delivery Agreements and that this $41 per ton tipping fee may be reduced pursuant to the credit provision in paragraph II.F. of the Specific Tonnage Agreement. ATTEST: YES• NO COUNTY ADMINISTRATOR HEGBERG KRIESEL PETERSON PULKRABEK CHAIRMAN,COUNTY BOARD STAFFORD July 2002 http://washnet/forms/CountyBd/Resol ution2ndPage.dot . 11. _ • RESOLUTION 04—RR- 05 WHEREAS, The Joint Powers Agreement for Resource Recovery provides that authority for approval of Resource Recovery Project budgets and for establishing the tipping fee at Ramsey/Washington County Resource Recovery Facility(Facility)remains with the respective County Boards; and WHEREAS,the Ramsey/Washington County Resource Recovery Project Board Budget Committee has prepared and recommended a proposed Project budget for 2005; and WHEREAS, Ramsey and Washington Counties, in order to accomplish environmental and public health goals, have each contracted with waste haulers to assure the delivery of waste to the Facility through July, 2007, at a reduced tipping fee; and WHEREAS, The All Waste Delivery Agreements and Specific Tonnage Delivery Agreements for both Counties include a provision regarding an increase in the tipping fee that states: "The tipping fee will escalate beginning January 1, 2005 according to the Midwest Urban Consumer Price Index, calculated and published by the U.S. Department of Labor, Bureau of Labor Statistics. The tipping fee will escalate annually on January I'each year thereafter during the remaining term of the Agreement. Any annual escalation will not exceed 3 percent. The period of July 1 through June 30 of the previous year will be used to calculate the percentage change for each succeeding year. The County will provide at least a 90 day notice prior to any change in the tipping fee. "and WHEREAS, The latest information on the Midwest Urban Consumer Price index indicates that the index has increased by 2.7%, which increases the tipping fee to $39.00 per ton beginning January 1, 2005. NOW, THEREFORE BE IT RESOLVED, The Ramsey/Washington County Resource Recovery Project Board hereby approves and recommends that the Ramsey and Washington County Boards approve the 2005 Resource Recovery Project Budget as recommended by the Resource Recovery Project Board Budget Committee as follows: Appropriations Administration $ 735,902 Service Fee 16,681,042 $17,416,944 Financing Sources Washington County Participation 4,366,425 Ramsey County Participation 11,805,519 Interest Income 45,000 State of Minnesota 1,200,000 $17,416,944 BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED, The Ramsey/Washington County Resource Recovery Project Board hereby recommends that the Ramsey and Washington County Boards approve a tipping fee of$39.00 per ton for waste delivered pursuant to All Waste and Specific Tonnage Delivery Agreements, effective January 1, 2005. •gr/L./ 4 July 22,2004 Project Boardhair • AGED IUM B RAMSEY/WASHINGTON COUNTY RESOURCE RECOVERY PROJECT • REQUEST FOR PROJECT BOARD ACTION BOARD MEETING DATE July 22,2004 DATE SUBMITTED: July 15,2004 FROM: Joint Staff Committee DOCUMENT DESCRIPTION: ** ;t cry Prof i 1)Memorandum from Budget Committee 2)June 15,2004 Memorandum&Budget from Joint Staff Committee 3)Resolution BACKGROUND: The Budget Committee met on June 24,2004 and recommends a total 2005 Resource Recovery Project Budget of $17,416,944 to be funded from County participation,the State of Minnesota processing payment and interest income. This budget is based on deliveries of 400,000 tons and a tipping fee of$39.00 per ton. (See attached memorandum and budget for more detail.) Budget Review Committee members are Commissioners Hegberg,Ortsa, and Wiessner. PROJECT BOARD ACTION REQUESTED: Approve the resolution recommending the Resource Recovery Project Budget in the amount of$17,416,944 to the Ramsey and Washington County Boards for approval. FINANCIAL IMPLICATIONS OFACTION.: County participation is based on 73%($11,805,519)from Ramsey County and 27%($4,366,425)from Washington County. It is estimated that$1,200,000 would be funded from the State(400,000 tons at$3/ton)and$45,000 from interest income. ADMINISTRATIVE COMMENTS: REVIEWED BY.. Ramsey County Attorney Date Washington County Attorneyate u geting&Accounting Date • RAMSEY/WASHINGTON COUNTY ESOURCE RECOVERY PROJECT 1670 Beam Avenue • Suite A • Maplewood, Minnesota 55109 • 651/773-4494 • Fax 651/773-4496 June 24,2004 To: Resource Recovery Project Board From: Resource Recovery Project Budget Committee Commissioners Wiessner,Hegberg,and Ortega. Re: Proposed 2005 Budget The Budget Committee met on June 24, 2004 and has prepared a recommended 2005 budget for consideration by the Project Board. This memo explains the action taken by the Committee. Attached to this memo are the documents submitted by staff to the Committee. The Budget Committee recommends a total 2005 Resource Recovery Project Budget of $17,512,944. Funding for this budget would be from County contributions, and the State processing payment. Revenue for 2005 would include County participation, based on 73% ($11,875,599)from Ramsey County and 27% ($4,392,345) from Washington County. It is estimated that up to $1,200,000 would be funded from the State via the processing payment; it is noted that the State has reduced the appropriation for the processing payment for the current biennium, and future funding of the Processing Payment depends on the 2005 Legislature. This budget also includes an increase in the tipping fee at the Facility, as provided for in the agreements with waste haulers. The Service Fee budget is based on delivery of 400,000 tons at a tipping fee of$39.10 per ton. Action Requested: The Budget Committee requests that the Project Board recommend that the Counties approve the resolution recommending the 2005 Resource Recovery Project Budget in the amount of$17,512,944 to the Ramsey and Washington County Boards for approval. • SG . 1111 RAMSEY/WASHINGTON COUNTY 4 ESOURCE RECOVERY PROJECT 1670 Beam Avenue • Suite A • Maplewood, Minnesota 55109 • 651/773-4494 • Fax 651/773-4496 June 15,2004 To: Resource Recovery Project Budget Committee: Commissioner Rafael Ortega Commissioner Jan Wiessner Commissioner Dennis Hegberg From: Project Joint Staff Committee: Zack Hansen Judy Hunter Kathy Kapoun Judy Brown CC: Commissioner Dick Stafford, Project Board Chair Commissioner Victoria Reinhardt, Project Board Vice-Chair Julie Kleinschmidt, Ramsey County Director of Budgeting and Accounting RE: 2005 Project Budget Introduction A draft of the 2005 Project budget is attached, for your review prior to the June 24,2004 Budget Committee meeting. The process for consideration of the budget is as follows: Committee review and action June 24, 2004 Project Board Action July 22,2004 Budget submitted to County Boards for approval August Structure of Budget The 2005 budget has two parts: Administration(140101), and Service Fee (140102). Administration Expenses The Administration portion includes internal Resource Recovery Project operations costs such as: staff, consultants,postage,telephone, education programs, etc. Administration costs are 4%of the total budget or$735,902. This compares to $696,206 for year 2004,or an increase of$39,696. The principal ' reason for the increase is in three items: • Personnel Costs: An increase of$2,648 for salary and benefits for the two people employed by the Project. Budget Committee Memo June 17,2004 Page 1 of 3 Aim • 424601 Other Services: The 2005 budget is $30,000 greater than the 2004 budget. It includes $50,000 in funding, the same level as 2004, for continued direct outreach to commercial/institutional generators of food waste, using an • outside consultant. Also included in this line item is $100,000 to work on waste processing following the expiration of the Service Agreement in 2007. • 421103 Budgeting and Accounting Services: This item increased$5,477; additional time, estimated at 50 hours, is expected to be spent in 2005 on preparing analysis for negotiations with NRG and/or other metropolitan • counties on Service Agreement related issues. Service Fee Expenses The Service Fee is 96% of the budget. The Service Fee for the 2005 budget is based on projected delivery of 400,000 tons of waste at$38.76/ton. The total amount is $15,577,042, an increase of$1,049,049 or 7%over the 2004 budget. The targeted tonnage contained in the waste delivery agreements for 2005 is 385,000 tons; but staff expects about 400,000 tons to be delivered. The Agreements with haulers anticipate a tipping fee increase according to a consumer price index,not to exceed 3%. Staff expect the tipping fee would increase about $0.76. There are several reasons for the increased Service Fee: • The N1 fee, a landfill abatement incentive, is projected to increase about $300,000. That component of the fee increases each year according to an inflation index related to petroleum pricing, and has historically been a ' cost driver. The Ni component of the Service Fee,which is paid to NRG for tons of RDF produced above a certain level as an incentive to assure more resource recovery, is a major part of the budget. • Over$618,000 is due to the inflationary increase of the B1 Base Fee and B2 Processing Fee. • The remaining cost increases are spread among a number of service fee components, all of which escalate according to agreed upon indices. It should be noted that the expected Service Fee expense for 2004, at this time, appears to be on target. In 2003 the Service Fee was under budget by$1.6 million;those savings were realized in the individual County solid waste funds. The total Project Budget for expenses (Administration and Service Fee) in the 2005 budget is $17,512,944, a change of$1,088,745,or 6.2%. Revenue Revenue for the Project comes from three sources: Contributions from Ramsey and Washington Counties(which collect the funds in manner each chooses);the State Budget Committee Memo June 17,2004 Page 2 of 3 Processing Payment, and interest income. Processing Payment: The budget includes $1,200,000 as revenue for the State Processing Payment, which matches $1,200,000 in expenses for hauler rebates, and is based on$5 per ton for 240,000 tons. The 2004-2005 State budget reduced the appropriation for the Processing Payment in the current biennium;the amount Ramsey and Washington Counties receive will not likely be$5.00 per ton for all the tons processed. Interest Income: Interest income is budgeted with expected earnings of 1% on Project reserves. County Contributions: Based on this budget,the contributions from Ramsey and Washington Counties would be as follows: • 2004 2005 Change Ramsey County $11,080,815 $11,875,599 $ 794,784 Washington County $ 4,098,384 $ 4,392,345 $ 293,961 It should be noted that the Project Board no longer has a designated reserve fund to pay for service fee deficits. Each County needs to individually decide whether to fund it fully with service charge funds, or to use any solid waste fund balance they may have. • Action Requested The Budget Committee is requested to discuss and recommend a proposed 2005 Resource Recovery Project Budget to the Project Board for adoption on July 22, 2004. • Budget Committee Memo June 17,2004 Page 3 of 3 16 2005 BUDGET REQUEST DEPARTMENT 140101-R/W CO.RES.REC.BRD. 2004 2005 EXISTING OPERATIONS 2002 2003 APPROVED BUDGET COMMITTEE TITLE OF ACCOUNT AND EXPLANATION EXPENDED EXPENDED BUDGET RECOMMENDATION 411101 SALARIES PERMANENT W*f .a -k'' n^a 84,663 84,663 93,913 95,426 7005 BUDGET Clerk IV $40,908 Administrative Assistant III $54,518 The staff is independent of other departments of Ramsey and Washington Counties and reports to the Joint Staff Committee that reports to the Project Board. Staff,as approved by the Project Board,consists of an Administrative Assistant III and Clerk IV. 411103 SALARIES TEMPORARY • 0 0 0 0 Funds for temporary employment are transferred from the public education budget as needed(see line item 421602). 411104 SALARIES OVERTIME ; 0 0 500 0 Overtime is provided for clerical staff if the need arises. The current staff prefers to receive comp time for extra hours worked. 411106 RESERVE FOR SALARY INCREASE 0 0 1,578 1,604 This reflects a 1.68%increase. 411112 DEFERRED COMPENSATION:_ 4; i; , 0 0 120 240 , Ramsey County will provide a matching contribution to deferred compensation of$10 per month per contributing employee. 2 employees x $10/month x12 months=$240. 411201 PERA • 4,678 5,015 5288 5,379 Clerk IV:$2,306.80 Administrative Assistant Ill:$3,072.11 411202 FICA.OASDI 5207 5,579 5,928 6,031 Clerk IV: $2,586.29 Administrative Assistant III:$3,444.32 411203 FICA-HI 1218 1,305 1,387 1,411 Clerk IV: $604.86 • Administrative Assistant III: $805.53 - „411301 HEALTH&WELFARE INSURANCEea11 ; 7,328 4,145 9,534 10,913 Current provision for single health insurance for 2 employees. $5,456.28 x 2=$10,912.56 Page 1 • 2004 2005 2005 BUDGET REQUEST 2002 2003 APPROVED BUDGET COMMITTEE TITLE OF ACCOUNT AND EXPLANATION EXPENDED EXPENDED BUDGET -RECOMMENDATION 411302 DENTAL INSURANCE ,µms a; t , LL 813 848 906 891 • 1 employee on single coverage=$303.48 1 employee on family coverage=$587.40 y rte' e'p, '.rr" 4-,, �' I-1 X11306 LFE INURANCE �'�"-rA+ � u�" sx189 201 228 148 $0.134 per 1,000 of salaries x 12 mo. $0.134 x$92 x 12=$147.94 Note: Limit$50,000 coverage per employee. 411307 LONG-TERM DISABIUTY 83 88 94 81 Total Salary/100 x$0.083 $97,267/100 x$0.083 $972.67 x$0.083=$80.73 421102 STATE AUDITOR 3579 4,563 4,980 4,200 Project Board is required to have the State of Minnesota audit Project records.A 4%increase became effective January 1,2003. -421103 BUDGETING&ACCOUNTING SERVICES ' • i 15,484 24,000 24,523 30,000 In accordance with the Joint Powers Agreement,Ramsey County provides Budgeting &Accounting services to the Project. The services have included serving on the Joint Staff Committee,reviewing all NSP invoices in detail,analyzing management data,reviewing all finance related agenda items, attending meetings of staff and Project Board, preparation of the Project Board's annual financial statement and coordination of the annual audit. Additional time may be spent on preparing analysis for negotiations between the Counties and NRG Energy in Service Agreement negotiations. Budgeting&Accounting services also include disbursing checks,payroll and central services such as personnel services.To maintain services for 2005,350 hours are estimated. a 3%increase is needed for extra administration of the CEC. $24,523 x 1.03/300 x 350 421201 LEGAL SERVICES • 0 0 25,000 25,000 During 2004 the Counties revised the Solid Waste Master Plans. Outside legal assistance may be needed for review of Agreements and financial documents as the future role of resource recovery evolves from the regional and county plans. 421208 COUNTY ATTORNEY SERVICES '. 20,632 4524 15,450 15,450 The Project Board continues to receive services from Ramsey and Washington County Attorney's Departments. Services include the following areas: process guarantees, unacceptable waste, infectious/hospital waste, pass through costs,Dispute Resolution, ordinance advice,diversions,NRG Proposals,changes in the Service Agreement&Joint Powers Agreement There may be a need for additional County Attorney time in 2005 due to the hauler collected service charge, implementation of recommendations from the public collection study,or Service Agreement issues. Hourly Rates for Ramsey County: $131.76/hour Hourly Rates for Washington County: $95/hour Page 2 4108' („tpr 2004 2005 2005 BUDGET REQUEST 2002 2003 APPROVED BUDGET COMMITTEE TITLE OF ACCOUNT AND EXPLANATION EXPENDED EXPENDED BUDGET RECOMMENDATION 421401 DATA PROCESSING SERVICE OTHER 5,268 5,768 5,858 6,074 The Project's computers are connected to the Exchange system and Ramsey County network through the Ramsey County Environmental Health Section's server. -Upgrades,trouble shooting, and general maintenance is done in-house by the Information Systems Supervisor employed by Ramsey County Environmental Health Section. The yearly rate is comprehensive including costs of staff salary& fringe benefits. Information Management Supervisor: 90%of salary&benefits/27 users=$3,037;$3,037 x 2 users=$6,074 • 421402 DATA PROCESSING SERVICES MAINTENANCE 2,404 2,404 3,468 1,780 Ramsey County Information Services charges for network access. Charges are based on threeconnectionsto the network. 421501 CONSULTING SERVICES 10,438 3,015 25,000 25,000 Computer Consultant: $10,000 The Project currently contracts with an information systems consultant to assist the Project in programming services used to process facility data and invoices from NRG Energy,Inc. In 2004 the Project contracted with Superior Consulting Services(SCS)to maintain the Project's programs in a Windows environment. The contract (not to exceed $10,000 or the annual budgeted amount) included supporting the Project's computer system through December 2007. Financial Consultant: $15,000 The Project Board's contract with Springsted, Inc., Public Finance Advisors,was awarded in 2003 for the term January 1, 2003 through December 31,2007,for an amount not to exceed$15,000 per year or the annual budgeted amount. 421502 ENGINEERING SERVICES • 70,528 37,246 40,000 40,000 Engineering Consultant: ' The Project Board's contract for engineering services was awarded to Foth & Van Dyke in 2003 for the term January 1, 2003 through December 31, 2007 not to exceed $40,000 per year or the annual budgeted amount. The scope of engineering services for 2005 may include monitoring of waste deliveries pursuant to the long-term waste delivery agreements; preparing waste delivery projections; recommending alteration to Specific Tonnages for contract haulers;conducting the annual Newport Facility site inspection and spot checks for waste origin;advising the Project on facility modifications or additions and alternate demonstration projects related to waste composition and alternative disposal; serving as a liaison with waste haulers for the Project; monitoring traffic impacts of road construction near the facility;providing recommendations on the management of certain waste streams;serving as a liaison on the Project's landfill contract. 421511 COUNTY PROJECT MANAGEMENT,SERVICES 37,709 48,025 50,130 51,367 Participation on the Joint Staff Committee (JSC) by the Managers of the Environmental Health Section in Ramsey County and the Washington County Department of Public Health and Environment began in 1997 upon the retirement of the Project Manager. Costs for the • amount of time managerial staff devotes to the JSC are being passed on to the Project. Project Management costs are projected at 20%of salary and benefits. Additional work relating to Project activities is assigned to a Ramsey County Environmental Health Specialist. These activities may include providing information on contracting, coordinating community cleanups with the Newport Facility, coordination with Project data,serving as hauler liaison and some on-site monitoring. Approximately 5%of salary and benefits is allocated. Ramsey County Environmental Health Section Manager and Environmental Health Specialist $26,767 Washington County Department of Public Health&Environment: $24,600 Page 3 • 2004 2005 2005 BUDGET REQUEST 2002 2003 APPROVED BUDGET COMMITTEE TITLE OF ACCOUNT AND EXPLANATION EXPENDED EXPENDED BUDGET RECOMMENDATION 421512 PURCHASING 238 5;401 2,000 3,583 Services include issuance of requests for bids for "Trash Today" and support through master contracts for services. Estimated from Budgeting&Accounting based on 2003 activity. .. ...tet ,• .. 421518 PHOTOGRAPHY/PROCESSING SERVICES i 0 0 150 150 Occasionally needed for public education and documentation of waste streams. Estimated(§$150/yr. 421520 MICROFILM/MICROFICHE PROCESSING ' 66 49 100 100 Some Project records must be retained permanently as historical documentation. Presently a single copy of these permanent records is being retained on site at the Project Office. For security reasons it is desirable to seek duplication. Microfilm offered through Ramsey County has been selected. Microfilming of Project records began in 1990 with Board materials from 1983-1989. This ongoing process of copying current permanent records is estimated to cost no more than$100/yr.($125 per box). 421522 OTHER PROFESSIONAL SERVICES 39,816 0 6,000 6,000 Dispute Resolution: This appropriation is for funds that would be needed for a Dispute Resolution Committee,provided for in Section 12.01 of the Service Agreement.The Dispute Resolution Committee,when activated,will generate meeting expenses estimated to be$6,000.The Dispute Resolution Committee has never been activated;should it be activated,Project Staff recommends that NRG Energy,Inc.would pay one-half of the cost. Public Collection:The 2002 expenditures were for the study on Public Collection,and included consultant costs for engineering,legal services and public affairs. No funds are included in the 2005 budget for this work. 421602 ADVERTISING AND PROMOTION 158,562 160,919 205,000 205,000 Ramsey and Washington Counties revised the Project's outreach and education work in 2003,following the extensive public engagement. process during the 2001-2002 study of public collection.The following budget contains a minimum level of funding to maintain communication with the public on solid waste issues. Trash Today is the County's principal means of broad public communication,and is regarded as an important source of information for the public on waste management.Since 2003 Trash Today is now printed on a high grade recycled paper. The 2005 budget reflects the shift in paper quality and expected postage increases. General outreach messages in 2005 will include where your garbage goes matters;waste reduction is important;recycling can save money and reduce waste;proper hazardous waste and HHW management are key parts of protecting our groundwater and air quality;food rescue and yard waste composting can save money and reduce landfilling usable waste products;the resident and business community can be liable for out-of-state landfill cleanup;change in the garbage market may result in the increase use of landfills;and the current solid waste system status. These messages will be conveyed using a variety of tools,including two issues of Trash Today,targeted to different audiences,assisting schools with tours of the Facility;partnering with the MPCA Mercury Free Zone program;partnering with the SWMCB on food waste management opportunities;continued use of the Trash Trunks. 2004 2005 1) Two issues of"Trash Today": $150,000 $150,000 2) Working with Schools $30,000 $30,000 3) Materials $5,000 $5,000 4) Food Waste Coordination $20,000 $20,000 Total $205,000 $205,000 • • Page 4 • 41):3 2004 2005 2005 BUDGET REQUEST 2002 2003 APPROVED BUDGET COMMITTEE TITLE OF ACCOUNT AND EXPLANATION EXPENDED EXPENDED BUDGET RECOMMENDATION 421603 PRINTING/STATIONERY • d1 6,946 359 1200 1200 The Project sends out packets of all Project Board agendas and supporting materials to all Commissioners,various consultants, parties directly involved in Ramsey and Washington County Departments, the press, and the public (on request). The Project will maintain necessary stationery to conduct normal business. Expenses in 2002 reflect purchases made specifically for mailings pertaining to the Public Collection Study and the County Environmental Charge(CEC). 2005 expenses are expected to be for routine mailings. $100/mo.x 12 mos.=$1,200 • 421701 POSTAGEt 3,337 551 2,500 2,500 2005 expenses are projected to reflect routine mailings associated with the Project operation and perhaps special mailings related to the County Environmental Charge(CEC). Every effort is made to decrease postage use by expanding e-mail as a communication tool. 2002 expenses were greater than anticipated due to increased mailings regarding the Public Collection Study and the CEC and an 8.8%increase on first class mail effective June 30,2002. 421707 TELEPHONE-LOCAL SERVICE , 1,780 1,780 1,780 1,780 The Project's portion of costs for the telephone system it shares with the Environmental Health Section in Ramsey County through US West is$1,780.Based on 2000 actuals: ($24,050/27 people=$890 x 2 RRP staff=$1,780). 422402 BUILDINGS&OFFICE SPACE 5,081 5,081 5,081 7,149 Space is provided to two Resource Recovery Project Staff in the Environmental Health Section Office in Ramsey County. Use of common space is included in the overall price of$7,149 for 2005. 422601 EQUIPMENT&MACHINERY REPAIRS 71 2,065 1,608 2,755 2,755 2 Phones: $200/yr.equipment repair Copy Machine: $97.50/quarter x 4 quarters=$390 Overage for extra copies and supplies: estimated$1,665/yr. The number of extra copies run on the printer/copier has increased. Facsimile&Proxima: $500/yr.equipment repair 423107 OTHER EDUCATION • 26,086 100 0 0 From July 2000 through June 2002 the Project had a contract with Washington County to hire an outreach coordinator.The outreach coordinator worked to encourage and coordinate tours of the Facility,and to provide presentations to community groups.When the position was created the Board made it clear that this was to be a temporary position,so it is not included for funding after June,2002.Further efforts to work with communities will be carried out by County staff,as they are available. • 423111 EMPLOYEE DEVELOPMENT 0 0 1,500 1,500 Continuing education monies for software upgrade seminars,enrichment programs and skill development are provided for staff to use when appropriate training opportunities are identified. The Ramsey County Board increased the maximum tuition reimbursement from $500 to $750,effective January 1,2003. Administrative Assistant Ill: $750 Clerk IV: $750 Page 5 1111,2 2004 - 2005 2005 BUDGET REQUEST 2002 2003 APPROVED BUDGET COMMITTEE TITLE OF ACCOUNT AND EXPLANATION EXPENDED EXPENDED BUDGET RECOMMENDATION 423309 RECORDS STORAGE/RETRIEVAL FEES ; 264 264 345 345 The Project processes and disseminates large amounts of electronic data. Staff has chosen an off-site storage facility for protection of our historical backup tapes and disks. Yearly storage contract through Business Data Record. Supplies and Services: $245 Retrieval costs estimated at$100 • 424103 WORKERS COMPENSATION INSURANCE , s 117 142 300 300 Ramsey County Attorney's Office estimates 2005 coverage at $300. Insurance is provided through the Minnesota Counties Insurance Trust. 424107 UABIUTY&PROPERTY DAMAGE 16,014 21,425 24,600 24,600 On May 28, 1998, the Project Board approved the purchase of tort liability insurance from the Minnesota Counties Insurance Trust in addition to its self insurance fund accumulation of$600,000. The 2004 premium due January 1,2004 was$19,219. Ramsey County Attorney's Office estimates 2005 coverage to be approximately$24,600. 424302 MEMBERSHIP&DUES • 0 0 500 500 Memberships help Project Staff stay abreast of changes in the industry. Minnesota Resource Recovery Association: $500 424303 CONFERENCE& EXPENSES L_. 0 55 1,500 1,500 Establishing contacts around the country and learning from the experiences of others in the resource recovery field is similar to setting up a network of experienced consultants. Staff attend the MPCA and other conferences and seminars. • 424304 OTHER TRAVEL 0 0 1,000 1,000 Funds may be used for travel to resource recovery facilities to examine alternate technologies or methods. 424306 MEETING EXPENSES ACCOUNT 778 93 1,000 500 The Project Board and Executive Committee officially meet at the Ramsey County Environmental Health Office in Maplewood. Various items are furnished at these official meetings. This line item is also used by the Joint Staff Committee for meeting expenses. Additional meetings may be necessary as we partner with cities and haulers to implement the recommendations from the Public Collection Study. Estimate is based on 10 meetings @$50 per meeting=$500 424501 MILEAGE/PARKING 306 352 450 463 $0.375/mile x 75 miles/mo.x 12 mos.=.$337.50+$125 for parking Staff is reimbursed as infrequent drivers @$0.375/mile plus parking expenses. 424507 MESSENGER SERVICE 799 691 1285 1,302 Urgent Transportation of documents is occasionally required. We are using Express Messenger for this service. Daily delivery of mail from the Ramsey County Court House is also provided by Express Messenger. Express Messenger: $22.40/day x 26 weeks=$582 Other Messenger Services: $60/mo.x 12 mos.=$720 Page 6 --- • may 2004 2005 2005 BUDGET REQUEST 2002 2003 APPROVED BUDGET COMMITTEE TITLE OF ACCOUNT AND EXPLANATION EXPENDED EXPENDED BUDGET RECOMMENDATION 424601 OTHER SERVICES 0 30,000 120,000 150,000 • There are two parts to this work.First,following the results of the 2001-2003 study on public collection,the Project took a leadership position to promote the separate management of organic waste,particularly food waste.In 2003 and 2004,the Project has retained a consultant to conduct direct outreach to specific generators of food waste to encourage separate management.That work will continue in 2005 at the same level as 2004,$50,000.The Second part of the work is related to work preparing for waste processing after the Service Agreement expires in 2007.While it is unclear at the time of budget preparation whether Ramsey and Washington Counties will be working with other metropolitan counties for waste processing, or working on their own,there will be a need for outside expertise to assist in this work.Staff expect that outside legal, financial and engineering services will be needed beyond the annual work performed for the Project. Staff recommend$100,000 for this work. "424608 PER DIEM FEE • <...; j 0 0 200 200 The Project Board meets a minimum of four(4)times each year. On September 25,1997,the Project Board dropped its practice of paying per diems to Commissioner members. A per diem will continued to be offered to the Washington County representative. The current representative has declined the per diem. Washington County Representative:$50/mtg.x 4 mtgs.=$200 424620 BOOKS,PERIODICALS&SUBSCRIPTIONS 104 100 600 600 Newspapers: $200 Reference or Computer Books: $400 431101 OFFICE SUPPUES 1,617 ,1,027 1,675 1,080 Based on 2003 expenses plus 5%increase. 432202 SOFTWARE :1 0 1305 800 800 Upgrades may become available for existing computer software(Microsoft products standardized for Ramsey County).As web development evolves,additional software may be purchased to aid in upgrading and maintaining our website.Estimated at$600. Software for network.A portion of network software expenses may be allocated to departments.Estimated at$200 for Resource Recovery Project. 441204 OFFICE FURNITURE AND EQUIPMENT 0 0 0 0 No additional equipment is needed at this time. 441211 DATA PROCESSING EQUIPMENT 0 4,123 0 0 In 2003 two Project staff computers and a lap top computer were replaced. No expenses are anticipated for 2005. TOTAL DEPARTMENT 140101: 735,902 Page 7 ft #9 DEPARTMENT 140102— CO.RES.REC.BRD. 2004 2005 2005 BUD T RE ST 2002 2003 APPROVED BUDGET COMMITTEE TITLE OF ACCOUNT AN• EXPLA •TION EXPENDED EXPENDE' BUDGET RECOMMENDATION 422306 RESOURCE RECOVERY FAC TY 15,567,005 12,26 , 78 14,527,993 15,577,042 SERVICE FEE =w ,„ r, 4 In June 2002,the Ramsey and Washington ounty Boards each approved : esolution that accepted the final report on the Study on Public Collection: These resolutions also directed sta "to negotiate contracts f• aste delivery with licensed waste haulers by September,2002, having a contract term through at least July 2007, • taining enforceme• provisions,and to assure delivery of at least 350,000 tons,with a goal of optimizing the Facility at 420,000 tons of wast- •enerated in - msey and Washington Counties..." Based on contract negotiations, staff estimate that$16,358,219 will be needed in 2005'a meet th- cost of waste processing services provided to the Counties by NRG Energy, Inc. pursuant to the Service Agreement. This esti -te based on a tipping fee at Newport of$38.76/ton and 400,000 tons of waste delivered in 2005. Gross Service Fee of$31,081,042 less$15,504,000 tipping -es bas-, on 400,000 tons @$38.76/ton equals net service fee of $15,577,042. 424623 REBATES RESOURCE RECOVERY TIPPING F ES 1• 140 1,200,000 1,200,000 The new waste hauler agreements provide f. rebates to haulers from revenues from the State Pr. essing Credit.The State Processing Credit will be rebated quarterly to all contra haulers after the Counties receive the funds from the S - - (i.e.,anticipated to start 3 months into the contract). The full amount of the tate funds will be rebated to haulers for as long as the State f •.s are available. The Counties receive$5 per ton for each ton process the amount rebated to haulers will,therefore,be between$4.00 a • $5.00 per ton(since not all tons delivered are processed).The re..te will be shown as a credit on NRG's invoice. Estimated tons delivered 400,000 o $3/ton equals$1,200,000. OTAL DEPARTMENT 140102: 16,777,042 • • Page 8 DEPARTMENT 140102—RNV CO.RES.REC.BRD. 2004 2005 2005 BUDGET REQUEST 2002 2003 APPROVED BUDGET COMMITTEE TITLE OF ACCOUNT AND EXPLANATION EXPENDED EXPENDED BUDGET RECOMMENDATION 422306 RESOURCE RECOVERY FACILITY 15,567,005 12,262,878 14,527,993 15,481,042 SERVICE FEE In June 2002,the Ramsey and Washington County Boards each approved a resolution that accepted the final report on the Study on Public Collection. These resolutions also directed staff"to negotiate contracts for waste delivery with licensed waste haulers by September,2002, having a contract term through at least July 2007,containing enforcement provisions,and to assure delivery of at least 350,000 tons,with a goal of optimizing the Facility at 420,000 tons of waste generated in Ramsey and Washington Counties..." Based on contract negotiations, staff estimate that $16,358,219 will be needed in 2005 to meet the cost of waste processing services provided to the Counties by NRG Energy, Inc. pursuant to the Service Agreement. This estimate is based on a tipping fee at Newport of$39.00/ton and 400,000 tons of waste delivered in 2005. Gross Service Fee of$31,081,042 less$15,600,000 tipping fees based on 400,000 tons @$39.00/ton equals net service fee of $15,481,042. 424623 REBATES-RESOURCE RECOVERY TIPPING FEES $147,140 1,200,000, 1,200,000 The new waste hauler agreements provide for rebates to haulers from revenues from the State Processing Credit.The State Processing Credit will be rebated quarterly to all contract haulers after the Counties receive the funds from the State(i.e.,anticipated to start 3 months into the contract). The full amount of the State funds will be rebated to haulers for as long as the State funds are available. The Counties receive$5 per ton for each ton processed;the amount rebated to haulers will,therefore,be between$4,00 and$5.00 per ton(since not all tons delivered are processed).The rebate will be shown as a credit on NRG's invoice. Estimated tons delivered 400,000 @$3/ton equals$1,200,000. TOTAL DEPARTMENT 140102: 16,681,042 • • Page 8 iSI BUDGET APPROPRIATIONS 2004 2005 2002 2003 APPROVED BUDGET COMMITTEE 'ITLE OF ACCOUNT AND EXPLANATION EXPENDED EXPENDED BUDGET RECOMMENDATION 140101 ADMINISTRATION 534,298 470,728 696,206 735,902 140102 SERVICE FEE 15,567,005 12,410,018 15,727,993 16,681,042 Projected Potential Shortfall 140103 541301 Refunds&Reimbursement Clearing TOTAL PROJECT BOARD BUDGET: 16,101,303 12,880,746 16,424,199 17,416,944 REVENUE SUMMARY 2004 2005 2002 2003 APPROVED BUDGET COMMITTEE RECEIVED RECEIVED BUDGET RECOMMENDATION 1TERGOVERNMENTAL REVENUE ;14429 State of Minnesota 2,017,409 1,573,130 1200,000 1200,000 314103 Other Participation(Washington County) 3,782,136 2,982,015 4,098,384 4,366,425 PERA Rate Increase Aid 844 479 0 0 319110 Ramsey County Participation 10,225,776 8,062,486 11,080,815 11,805,519 tEVENUE FROM USE OF MONEY&PROPERTY 318102 Interest on Investments 75,860 41,642 45,000 45,000 )THER REVENUES 319102 Recovery Prior Years Expenses 0 0 0 0 319103 Recoveries of Expenses 0 0 0 0 319105 Insurance Dividends 1,611 4,635 0 0 TOTAL REVENUE: 16,103,636 12,664,387 16,424,199 17,416,944 :UND BALANCE SUMMARY tesource Recovery Project Board Fund Balance 0 0 Page 9 i • WASHINGTON COUNTY REQUEST FOR BOARD ACTION TIME REQUIRED 30 minutes August 24,2004 AGENDA ITEM NO. 7B BOARD MEETING DATE ORIGINATING DEPARTMENT/SERVICE BOARD ACTION REQUIRED: Informational Only: Public Health and Environment The Department will provide an update on activities in the Baytown Special Well REQUESTOR'S SIGNATURE /DATEy Construction Area and the recent discovery of high levels of TCE west of / J '�7 Manning Avenue REVIEWED /DATE //14#11 271 3 BACKGROU /JUSTIFICATION In 1988, the Minnesota Department of Health established the Baytown Special Well Construction Area(SWCA)in response to chemical contamination found in the groundwater. The chemical of primary concern is trichloroethene(TCE). In January 2002, based on a draft health risk assessment report by the Environmental Protection Agency, the Minnesota Department of Health lowered the acceptable drinking water standard for TCE from 30 ug/L ,to 5 ug/L. The establishment of a new interim health standard renewed the search for the source(s)of contamination. Within the past few weeks, high levels of TCE were detected less than 50 feet below the surface, near a former metal fabrication facility on property currently occupied by Hagberg's Country Market. There is no evidence that the market contributed in any way to the contamination. Concentrations of TCE in the groundwater may be as high as 50,000 ug/L. The Department will provide more information on the location of the source near Hagbergs, and an update on the development of remediation plans and sampling of residential wells and the Bayport city wells. Staff from the Minnesota Department of Health, the Minnesota Pollution Control Agency, and the Metropolitan Airports Commission will be available to answer questions. PREVIOUS ACTION ON REQUEST/OTHER PARTIES ADVISED MEDIA CONTACT Cindy Weckwerth 651-430-6703 DATE/TIME RECEIVED BY COUNT ATTORNEY REVIEW /DATE FINANCIAL IMPLICATIONS: $ COUNTY ADMINISTRATOM1 320 04 /pi il BUSINESS UNIT(S: COUNTY A INISTRAT'RADMINISTRATIVE RECOMMENDATION OBJECT(S): . / / ❑APPROVAL J BUDGETED /v YES NO ❑DENIAL DATED NO RECOMMENDATION FUNDING LEVY OTHER COMMENTS COMMENTS REVISED:August 2001 C:\My Documents\Baytown\Board Update\RFBA 8 24 04.doc • • Contamination puzzler may be solved Dan Wascoe, Star Tribune August 5, 2004 New test wells near the Lake Elmo Airport in Washington County appear to have solved a long-standing pollution mystery, officials said Wednesday. The tests last week by the Minnesota Pollution Control Agency (MPCA)found high concentrations of a chemical compound called trichloroethylene (TCE) near property once occupied by a metals fabricating plant about three-quarters of a mile west of the airport. Since 1987, evidence of TCE has been found spreading east through groundwater and aquifers to the St. Croix River. The underground pollution plume, which led to the designation of the area as a federal Superfund site, prompted the installation of filters on about 140 homeowners' wells by e Metropolitan rports mission. TCEth ,used for degreasing metalCombefore it is painted or fry, inished, can cause liver, kidney and lung damage, if it is ingested in large amounts over. long periods. TCE, also used as a dry-cleaning solventAi, can be absorbed by breathing its vapors when t evaporates from contaminated water. To be harmful, the exposure typically must be much greater than previously experienced in Washington County, the agency said. No harmful health effects have been reported there so far, said Bruce Brott, a supervisor with the agency, and Jim Kelly, a health assessor for the Minnesota Department of Health. The metals plant was closed in the late 1960s, and the building now houses a grocery store. Brott said that although a well on the site serving the store "is clean," high TCE readings have been taken in soil and water close to the surface. The Pollution Control Agency said there is no evidence that the store has contributed to the TCE contamination on the property. After decades of looking for the source of the pollution, Brott said, "Now we've got something we can go after." Earlier tests had focused on the Lake Elmo Airport, one of six small airports run by the Airports Commission to divert small planes from Minneapolis-St. Paul International Airport. Future cleanup efforts could include removing the soil or drilling wells to pump polluted water from the site. Roy Fuhrmann and Toni Howell of the Airports Commission staff said the commission has spent about$3.4 million over several years on filters, fees for consultants and lawyers and reimbursements to the MPCA. A meeting this month could explore whether the commission might be repaid for some of its expenses. • Source of well pollutiound Page 1 of 2 • TwinCitiesecom Posted on Fri,Jul. 30, 2004 Source of well pollution found TCE solvent is from the site of a defunct metal fabricating shop in Lake Elmo BY MARY DIVINE Pioneer Press Officials said Thursday they have found a major source for the chemical solvent that has contaminated at least 140 wells across Baytown Township. Officials from the Minnesota Pollution Control Agency found trichloroethylene concentrations of 50,000 parts per billion, or 10,000 times the recommended exposure limit, in the ground near Hagberg's Country Market in Lake Elmo — the site of a former metal fabricating shop.TCE is used mainly to remove grease from metal parts. Health Department officials said Thursday that there is no possibility of being exposed to TCE at the Hagberg site, and said TCE had not been found in the well that serves the Country Market,the feed store and the dentist office on site. Bill and Pat Hagberg purchased the four-acre property in 1972. Pollution control agency officials stressed that there is no indication the Hagbergs contributed to the TCE contamination. "We've done everything we can," said Bill Hagberg Jr., meat department manager at the store at 11325 Stillwater Blvd. "We are confident that it was nothing that we did. It was an unfortunate inheritance of the land." State officials on Thursday could not conclusively identify the name or owner ofthe metal shop. Now that such a major concentration of TCE has been found, pollution control agency officials say they can work on treating it.The agency will determine if chemical treatment, soil removal,soil-vapor extraction or groundwater pump- and-treat technologies would best mitigate the pollution, said Mike Rafferty,a spokesman for the agency. "It's a huge relief because now it seems there will be a solution to cleaning up the contamination and to really get the majority of the contamination out," said Cindy Weckwerth, program manager for Washington County's Public Health and Environment Department. To date, about 140 of the estimated 300 wells tested in Baytown Township, West Lakeland Township, Bayport and Lake Elmo have tested at levels higher than the recommended exposure limit set by the Health Department. All the wells have been fitted with granular-activated carbon filters to remove the TCE. TCE also was found in one of Bayport's municipal wells, but has remained below the 5 parts per billion limit for municipal water supplies. Long-term exposure to high levels of TCE in drinking water has been linked to liver and kidney cancer and associated with birth defects. Lake Elmo City Administrator Martin Rafferty said the city would work with state and county officials"to take whatever precautionary measures needed to ensure that it won't affect the health of the community." Although pollution agency officials say the Lake Elmo Airport still is considered a possible source of the TCE contamination, airport officials say this week's discovery one mile northwest of the airport disputes that. It appears that it has moved east to the airport from (the Hagberg) site,"said Pat Hogan, spokesman for the Metropolitan Airports Commission, which owns the Lake Elmo Airport. "We believe that this is a clear indication that the airport was not the source of the contamination." The commission has spent about$1 million on groundwatet testing and for the installation of carbon filters on wells. • http://www.twincities.com/mld/twincities/news/local/9276759.htm?template=contentMod... 7/30/2004 411 MPCA FINDS A SIGNIFICANT TCE SOURCE DURING INVESTIGATION IN LAKE ELMO PRESS RELEASE FROM MPCA: July 29, 2004 Media Contact: Michael Rafferty, 651-297-8294 Toll-free: 1-800-657-3864 St. Paul, Minn. -- Recent sampling by the Minnesota Pollution Control Agency (MPCA) one mile northwest of the Lake Elmo Airport has shown concentrations of trichloroethylene (TCE), as high as 50 parts per million (ppm). This is the highest concentration found thus far in the investigation at the Baytown Ground Water Contamination Superfund Site and shows the characteristics of a source area. TCE has contaminated drinking water in parts of Lake Elmo,West Lakeland Township, Baytown Township and Bayport. The MPCA conducted soil and ground-water sampling to determine the magnitude and extent of the TCE contamination in the area and locate the sources of contamination. The MPCA will determine if chemical treatment, soil removal, soil-vapor extraction or ground-water pump-and-treat technologies can mitigate this TCE source and reduce the impact on the TCE plume. If one or more of these technologies can be used, the impact of the TCE in the Jordan, Prairie du Chien and Franconia aquifers, which flow to the east toward the St. Croix River, may be greatly reduced. Right now, in order to prevent or reduce exposure to TCE from this Superfund site, granular-activated carbon (GAC)filters have been installed at some homes in the area with private wells. Approximately 140 homes have been fitted with GAC filters because TCE levels in the wells were above the 0.005 ppm interim exposure limit. TCE was also found in one of the Bayport municipal wells, but it has remained below the 0.005 ppm limit for municipal water supplies. The MPCA is coordinating soil and ground-water sampling with the current property owner. At this time, there is no indication that the current property owner contributed to the TCE contamination. The MPCA continues to investigate the cause of and any contribution to the contamination. During this phase of investigation, the MPCA also conducted ground-water sampling from the water table at the Lake Elmo Airport. Sampling showed TCE at concentrations up to 0.089 ppm in the shallow ground water on the airport property, indicating a nearby source. Recent data suggests that there are least two sources of TCE in the vicinity of the airport and Lake Elmo. The MPCA continues to work in partnership with the Metropolitan Airports Commission, the Minnesota Department of Health, Washington County, West Lakeland Township, Baytown Township, the city of Bayport, the city of Lake Elmo and area legislators to protect the drinking water supply and the environment. TCE is commonly used for metal cleaning and degreasing and as a dry cleaning solvent. Long-term exposure to high levels of TCE (much higher than what has been seen in drinking water at the Baytown Superfund Site) in drinking water can damage the liver,kidney, immune system, and the nervous system. TCE may also harm a developing fetus if the mother drinks water containing high levels of TCE over an extended period of time. Some studies suggest that exposure to lower levels of TCE over many years may be linked to an increased risk of several types of cancer. People can be exposed to TCE by inhaling the vapor because it easily evaporates from water. TCE may evaporate from water during activities such as bathing, doing dishes or flushing a toilet. • • Budget: Prior to 2002,the WMO reported an annual budget of$10,000. In 2002 the budget increased to $35,000 of which$20,000 was targeted for development of its 2nd generation watershed management plan and $15,000 was targeted for operating costs; its 2003, budget was $70,000, of which$55,000 was targeted for development of its 2nd generation watershed management plan and $15,000 was targeted for operating costs; its 2004 budget is $35,000 of which $20,000 is targeted for development of its 2n generation watershed management plan and $15,000 for operating costs. Its budget is supported by contributions from each of the jurisdictions in the joint powers based on a formula determined by the WMO Board. According to representatives of the WMO Board, all jurisdictions have contributed their share in 2004 with the exception of the City of Afton Financing: Current Approach: Through the current Joint Powers Agreement,the MSCRWMO funding comes from fees paid by the member communities. All communities fund administration of the MSCRWMO; large expenditures are funded by those communities receiving a direct benefit. The MSCWMO Joint Powers Agreement states that the portion paid by each community is determined in the following way: o 40% is determined by amount of land area of a community as a percentage of land area of the entire watershed. o 20% is determined by the tax capacity of a community's area in the watershed as a percentage of the tax capacity of the entire watershed. o 40% is determined by the population of a community's area in the watershed as a percentage of the population of the entire watershed. The MSCWMO uses the Washington County Standardized Chart of Accounts for WMOs to track its revenues and expenditures. Future Approach: The MSCWMO believes that inherent inequities exist in the current funding approach of each member community supporting the MSCWMO through their general fund. The MSCWMO's May 26, 2004 draft watershed management plan indicates that the WMO will rectify these inequities in one of two ways: either through special legislation granting the MSCWMO taxing authority, or through member cities and townships creating special taxing districts for the areas within both the city or township borders and the borders of the MSCWMO. It should be noted that Section 6.3 of the current MSCWMO Joint Powers Agreement provides that "each governmental unit may establish a watershed management tax district for the portion of its corporate boundaries which lie 2 • • Introduction On June 10, 2004, the Washington County Board of Commissioners received a letter from the Middle St. Croix Watershed Management Organization(MSCWMO). In the letter, the WMO Board indicates that it will "seek special legislation to be given levy authority for its operating costs". The WMO Board indicates that this will be a minor additional tax ($35,000) annually to support its operating costs and it is seeking County Board support for this special legislation. History of WMO The Middle St. Croix Water Management Organization is organized under a joint powers agreement among the City of Afton, City of St. Mary's Point, City of Lake St. Croix Beach, City of Lakeland Shores, City of Lakeland, Town of West Lakeland, City of Bayport, City of Oak Park Heights, City of Stillwater and Town of Stillwater. The WMO's joint powers agreement was executed in 1996. Each member municipality appoints one (1)member to the MSCWMO Board. Most WMO Board members are, but need not be, elected officials from their respective jurisdictions. The watershed encompasses approximately 19.8 square miles and is located in the east- central part of Washington County. The boundaries of the watershed are such that only the Cities of Bayport, Lakeland, Lakeland Shores, Lake St. Croix Beach and St. Mary's Point are wholly contained in the watershed. Other communities are only partially within the watershed with the City of Afton having the smallest area of only 121 acres within the watershed. The WMO has no employees but contracts for services with several organizations for professional services. Its current administrator is the Washington Conservation District. - , , e -, - _ _ . •- •--' -. ._ ' ' .. �- ' �- -. The Middle St. Croix Water Management Organization's first surface water management plan was completed in 1991 and expired in 2001. BWSR gave MSCWMO an extension until January 2002 to complete their 2nd Generation plan. After the report of the Washington County Water Governance Study in May, 1999, and its subsequent Revised Implementation Plan dated April 16, 2002, the WMO initiated planning for its 2nd generation watershed management plan; this plan is nearing completion and, according to the timeline presented by the WMO Board,will be starting its formal sixty(60) day draft review within the month. At this time, MSCWMO does not have an approved, current water management plan. 1 • 410 within the watershed for the purposes of paying the cost of the planning required to develop a Surface Water Management Plan or implement capital improvement projects." The MSCWMO acknowledges that the main difficulties with either of these approaches are that each adds another layer of taxes to the community and questions arise regarding accountability when an appointed board is granted taxing authority. Despite these difficulties, the MSCWMO believes taxing authority or taxing districts are a more equitable way to the fund the WMO than through general funds. Additionally, the MSCWMO communities believe that,although the MSCWMO Board is appointed, it is appointed through the member communities and exists through a Joint Powers Agreement, thereby mitigating the difficulties associated with accountability. Legislative Levy Authority The question as to whether or not a joint powers WMO has the authority to adopt and ' certify a budget to the county having territory in the watershed management organization and to file approved assessment statements with each affected county has been debated for many years. The Board of Water and Soil Resources (BWSR)believes it is clear that the legislature intended that joint powers WMOs have taxing authority for the purpose of preparing and implementing watershed management plans. Minnesota Chapter 103B governs water planning and project implementation and is the legal authority from which the MSCWMO operates as a watershed management organization. In 1995, the BWSR introduced, and the Legislature passed, amendments to this Act adding the express authority for a JPAWMO to adopt and certify a budget to the county. However,the intent of the changes to Minnesota Statute 103B to levy taxes is in conflict with Minnesota Statute 275.066 which defines special taxing districts. Joint Powers WMOs are not defined as a general category of special taxing districts for the purposes of property taxation. This was tested in 1998 when the Forest Lake JPAWMO attempted to certify a budget to Washington County. The county, after consultation with the Department of Revenue, was informed that because JPAWMOs were not identified as a special taxing district under MN Stat.275.066, they could not receive levy directly but only through their member cities and towns. One JPAWMO, Middle Mississippi River Watershed Management Organization,has obtained special legislation which specifically lists it as a special taxing district under MN Stat. 275.066. The Middle St. Croix River WMO intends to model its special legislation after the legislation adopted for Middle Mississippi River WMO. MSCWMO Reason for pursuing Special Legislation: David Beaudet and John Jansen, members of the MSCWMO Board, and Bob Fossum, Washington Conservation District WMO Administrator, met with Washington County 3 • • staff on July 22, 2004. At that meeting, the MSCWMO representatives stated two primary reasons for pursuing this special legislation: 1. Fairness The Middle St. Croix WMO is comprised of ten(10)municipalities -- five that are all geographically within the WMO and five that are geographically partially within the MSCWMO and within a watershed district. The WMO Board feels that constituents within municipalities who are in two districts are paying twice—once for the general revenue tax that is collected by the municipality for the MSCWMO and again for a special taxing district watershed. Those constituents who are not within the MSCWMO boundary are not benefited by the taxes they are paying to support the MSCWMO. The WMO Board feels that by creating the special taxing district, they can assure that only citizens who are within the MSCWMO are paying the cost for the activities of the WMO and for the improvements made in the WMO boundaries. Of note to this argument is that the MSCWMO Joint Powers Agreement does provide each municipality with the ability to create a watershed management tax district that would encompass only the boundaries of the MSCWMO. Using this method in their existing WMO agreement, the jurisdictions could tax only those residents benefited by the MSCWMO. The WMO Board members agree that they have this authority; however, they point to the administrative burden of creating the tax district by jurisdiction and still having to each calculate and send the payment to the WMO as being inefficient. 2. Efficiency and Ease of Collection At the present time, ten(10)jurisdictions must each levy for the costs of the WMO and then separately calculate and send payments twice yearly for payment of their shares. The WMO Board believes that a single taxing authority with ability to receive one payment from the County will create improved administrative efficiency. Under this scenario, the WMO Board will also not have to contend with issues if one of its joint powers members does not pay its share of costs. The tax will be collected and remitted on behalf of all jurisdictions (wholly or partially) within the WMO. 4 • Advantages/Disadvantages of Request Advantages: 1. The request would meet an equity/fairness test in that only residents within the boundaries of the MSCWMO would pay for the costs of the watershed management area. 2. At this time,there is accountability for the taxing authority through the appointment of elected officials from the jurisdictions to the MSCWMO Board. It should be noted, however, that appointment of Board members may change over time and the Board could eventually be comprised of non-elected representatives from the jurisdictions with then limited accountability for a direct taxing authority. 3. Special taxing authority will remove the problem of non-payment from participating parties in the JPA. 4. The Water Governance Study recommended that the water units use a full range of financing mechanisms including ad valorem taxes, special assessments, storm water utility funds, and other. The choice of funding mechanism should depend on the nature of the activity being funded. It further recommends that a Truth-in- Taxation hearing be held to increase accountability for financial management and to make financial decisions more visible to the public. Disadvantages: 1. The MSCWMO is not fully using the authorities it currently has available. Section 6.3 of its JPA states that"each governmental unit may establish a watershed management tax district for the portion of its corporate boundary which lie in the Watershed for the purposes of paying the cost of the planning required to develop a Surface Water Management Plan, or implement capital improvement projects. The WMO has defined planning within its $35,000 administrative costs subject to its special levy authority request., broadly defined, other administrative costs could be considered part of implementation of projects. It already has a mechanism in its joint powers agreement for creation of special taxing districts which would address the fairness/equity concerns presented as a justification for pursuing special legislation. This authority is further supported by MN Statute 103B.245 which specifically provides local government units with the authority to establish watershed management tax districts in the territory [in their boundaries.] within the watershed. county for a small return in benefit. Special legislation would create a special taxing district for a very limited area in the County (19.8 square miles) and for a very limited amount($35,000). The County has been reluctant to support the 5 • • • establishment of new taxing districts of this nature. The cost for the County to create and administer a special taxing district would be approximately $3.00 per parcel. If the special taxing district is approved, the management and administration of this district by the Department of Assessment, Taxpayer Services and Elections would be consistent with other watershed management taxing districts. Additional Concerns for Consideration by the County Board 1. While the amount of the proposed tax is small at this time, there is the potential this could increase substantially in the future. The MSCWMO states that this special legislation is for its "operating costs" in the amount of$35,000. It is unclear what these operating costs are; In its Draft 2nd Generation Plan dated May 27, 2004, the MSCWMO provides a Finance Implementation Plan for years 2004 through 2008; in 2004, based on the budget provided in the MSCWMO's annual report, $20,000 of this cost is related to completion of their 2nd generation watershed management plan. This plan should be complete in 2004. It is unclear in years 2005 through 2008, what the administrative costs are -- given that the administrative levy budget remains at $35,000 and we can assume that the $20,000 cost related to development of the watershed management plan in 2004 should be significantly reduced 2005 through 2008. In any event, the amount proposed is an increase over the past three years' budget for operating costs despite the fact that the WMO's cost for planning will be complete. Also, the MSCWMO does this,the annual budget could increase substantially. The MSCWMO has indicated that it is not the financial plan of the watershed management organization to use general levy to finance projects. As stated by the MSCWMO, "We do not expect the annual budget to increase substantially due to the mechanisms in place to fund special projects (such as the State of Minnesota Storm Water Project). 2. The proposed action may not improve accountability. The MSCWMO is not obligated to hold a"truth-in-taxation"meeting to inform residents of its intent to tax. The MSCWMO also does not appear to have an ongoing citizen advisory committee to promote public participation in the activities or deliberations of the WMO. The WMO's joint powers agreement, Section 4.9 states: "The Commission may appoint citizen and technical advisory and subcommittees as it deems necessary". The MSCWMO did provide public forums during the development of its second-generation management plan. However the permissive language as contained in their JPA does not assure ongoing citizen input or public review of WMO activities. 6 • • • 3. According to BWSR, the MSCWMO has been without an approved watershed management plan since 2001. -- e -. --= - :. -• ° = an active, functioning WMO. It has shown increased activity since 2003 and is currently in the process of finalizing its 2nd generation watershed management plan; however, it appears that the MSCWMO may not yet be meeting the criteria established for an implementing,funetiefial WMO and there is not clear evidence that it can effectively carry out the functions and responsibilities of a WMO at this time. (See the attached page.) 4. Consistent with the Washington County Water Governance Study, Revised Implementation Plan, adopted April 16, 2002, by the Washington County Board., Middle St. Croix WMO could merge with the adjoining watershed districts. The benefits of this action are: • The watershed districts already have taxing authority; this would address the issue raised by MSCWMO and eliminate the need to pursue special legislation. • Merger may reduce duplication in some functions and costs. • Some cities would have fewer water management units within their boundaries. • May increase the fiscal capacity over the current structure. • Unit may more closely follow hydrologic boundaries so one organization deals with the source and endpoint of water and management issues. 5. At the time that staff met with representatives of the WMO Board,it was unclear as to whether or not all jurisdictions in the Joint Powers Agreement were aware of and supported this effort to attain special taxing authority by the WMO. Knowledge about this effort and support by all affected jurisdictions should be a condition of support by the County Board. 7 • • Conclusion: It appears to be premature to support this request at this time. The MSCWMO has, within its joint powers agreement, other mechanisms to address its primary concern of tax equity/fairness for its member communities. Providing levy authority alone does not ensure performance. The WMO should demonstrate the ability to function as an implementing agency within the standards set by the Board of Water and Soil Resources and the Washington County Water Governance Study before any steps are taken to grant the WMO taxing authority. If the County Board chooses to support the request of the MSCWMO, we would suggest the following conditions: 1. The WMO develops an active citizen advisory committee to provide input to the WMO Board on planning, budget and projects. 2. The WMO holds an advertised, public budget meeting for citizen input before certifying its annual budget and taxing request to the County. 3. All WMO Board members are elected officials within a member community. 4. That the request be expanded to include the other joint powers agreement water management organizations located within Washington County, to provide them all with similar financing tools. 8 • 110 Criteria for an Effective Water Management Program In April, 2002, the County adopted its Revised Implementation Plan for Water Governance. This plan focused more on results than on structure. It established criteria that the county will use to determine whether or not a water management organization has an effective water management program and thereby determined to be an implementing, functional organization. These criteria, as well as a short statement regarding the status of the MSCWMO, follow: 1. The organization has a current joint powers agreement that meets the standards established by the Board of Water and Soil Resources. Status: The MSCWMO has a 1996 Joint Powcrs Agreement; however, this current -. . . • . . - . . '. For purposes of this analysis, we reviewed a 1996 Joint Powers Agreement that we believe to be the current agreement. This agreement does not have a procedure for the establishment of citizen and technical advisory committees or other means of public participation (MN Rules 8410.0030, subp 1 G.) and its section on dissolution is also not in compliance with current rules as it does not provide for notice to Washington County or to the BWSR Board (MN Rules 8410.0030, subp 1 N) The MSCWMO needs to update its joint powers agreement in order to meet BWSR standard. Based on discussion with BWSR, we understand that BWSR will not consider approval of the MSCWMO's 2nd Generation Watershed Management Plan until such time as their Joint Powers Agreement is in compliance with current rules. 2. The organization has a current management plan that meets the content requirements and schedule established by the Board of Water and Soil Resources. Status:According to BWSR, the MSCWMO's first watershed management plan expired in 2001 and they do not have a current, approved plan. The MSCWMO is in the process of finalizing its 2nd'generation water management plan. When that plan is finally approved, the WMO will have a plan that meets the requirements of the Board of Water and Soil Resources; however, at this time, it does not meet this criterion. 3. The organization is actively implementing the water resources management plan. At a minimum: • The current water issues in the area are being addressed. • The organization is actively implementing programs and projects that address both water quantity and quality issues. • The organization is actively implementing programs to prevent problems from occurring. • The organization has set performance standards for priority water bodies and has an ongoing monitoring program to assess whether the standards are being met. 9 • • Status: Because the MSCWMO deer net curre-ntly have a final water resources "• ' - - - - ' Because the MSCWMO does not have a.a currently approved watershed management plan, it is difficult to assess how well they are performing the minimum activities listed. 4. The organization is actively implementing recommended actions defined for the watershed districts and water management organizations in the Washington County Ground Water Management Plan. Status: Representatives from the MSCWMO regularly attend Water Consortium Meetings. The draft MSCWMO 2"d generation watershed management plan recognizes that management of groundwater is not mandated, but commits the MSCWMO to "work to further the goals, objectives and implementation actions of the 2003-2013 Washington County Groundwater Plan as adopted by the Washington County Board of Commissioners on December 16, 2003. " However, it is unclear if this meets the criterion to "actively implement" as noted above. 5. The organization has mechanisms in place for citizens to advise the organization on planning, budgeting, and projects that may benefit the area. Status: The MSCWMO provided for citizen input in the development of its 2"d generation water management plan; it is not clear, however, that there is an ongoing mechanism in place for citizens to advise the organization on planning, budgeting and projects as required by State Rules. The MSCWMO has stated: "The most obvious and direct mechanism in place for citizens to advise the organizations is through the constituent government bodies, which directly appoint the MSCWMO Board members" 6. The organization has a clear point of contact for customers. The point of contact is able to answer questions about the organization and is able to assist local governments and citizens in resolving their concerns. Status: The MSCWMO has designated the Washington Conservation District as its Administrator. 7. The organization is using the Washington County Standardized Chart of Accounts for Water Management Organizations to track its revenue and expenditure. Status: Criterion Met 8. By January 31 of each year, the organization submits to the County an annual report that includes financial statement, work accomplishments, and how the organization is implementing the goals of the Water Governance Project. Status: Washington County received a 2003 Annual Report from the MSCWMO in July 2004. 10 1110 • . MIDDLE ST. CROIX RIVER WATERSHED MANAGEMENT ORGANIZATION /Vif INA\ � 1380 West Frontage Road, Hwy 36 Phone: 651-275-1136, ext. 21 —• Stillwater, MN 55082 Fax: 651-1254 ° • A Joint Powers Watershed Management Organization composed of ten St. Croix Valley Communities that was established under State Statute 103E to cooperatively manage water resources within the watershed. MEMORANDUM TO: Washington County Board of Commissioners FROM: MSCWMO Board RE: PHE Report regarding the August 24, 2004 County Board Workshop DATE: August 16, 2004 The Middle St Croix Watershed Management Organization (MSCWMO) received a copy of the Public Health and Environment (PHE) report regarding the MSCWMO's request for County Board support of Special Legislation for creation of a water management taxing district and levy authority. This report was reviewed by the MSCWMO Board at their August 12th meeting. The MSCWMO would like to provide some clarification and correction to the information provided for the County Board Workshop. We feel that it is important to have certain items clearly defined in preparation for this upcoming workshop. The following items refer to specific problem areas within the workshop information, with each item listing the page and section for which the subsequent comment/correction applies. Page 1 History of WMO: The history section states that"the WMO has engaged in limited activity during its duration". In fact, the WMO has actively met on a monthly basis since its inception,and has worked on numerous activities, providing an effective water management program for the defined watershed area. These activities include (but are not limited to) reviewing development plans, ensuring compliance with run- off standards, and monitoring and restoring lake quality. The WMO does currently have a Board of Soil and Water Resources approved plan, and is actively working to complete their second-generation plan, within full compliance of Board of Soil and Water Resources standards. Page 5 Disadvantages: 1. Currently under Minnesota Statute,the MSCWMO does not have special taxing authority and is seeking the legislation for this authority. The current uses of special taxing authority in the Joint Powers Agreement is to fund projects such as the State of Minnesota storm sewer project, where the benefiting communities pay the lobbying costs associated with the project. Middle St. Croix Watershed Management Organization MEMBER COMMUN Anon,Bayport,Baytown TownITIESship,Lakeland,Lakeland Shores,Lake St.Croix Beach,Oak Park Heights,St.Mary's Point,Stillwater and West Lakeland Township S • . . . 2. Washington County currently provides taxing district administration service to all the Watershed Districts. If all residents are to have equal protection under the law, all citizens should benefit from similar County taxing district administration policies whether they reside in a Water Management Organization or Watershed District. Since all county residents pay to support the current administration policy, it would seem to be unfair to provide this service to some residents and not to others. Page 5 (cont.) Additional Concerns: • 1. Operating costs are clearly defined in the MSCWMO budget. While it may be true that "most watershed districts finance their entire expenditures with the general levy", that is not the financial plan for this watershed maintenance organization. We do not expect the annual budget to increase substantially due to the mechanisms in place to fund special projects (such as the State of Minnesota Storm Water Project). 2. The Watershed Managers, appointed by member communities, do promote public participation in the activities and deliberations of the WMO. A recent example of this is in the public forums held regarding the second-generation management plan. Citizen input was solicited and incorporated into the draft plan. 3. The MSCWMO does indeed have a history of being an active, functioning WMO. It does meet the criteria established for an implementing, functioning WMO. It is very clear that the MSCWMO has been and can indeed continue to carry out the functions and responsibilities required for a WMO. Page 6 Conclusion: The MSCWMO is a functioning Water Management Organization and has not received any report indicating we are not in compliance with the Board of Soil and Water Resources requirements. The MSCWMO reviews plans, ensures compliance with run-off standards, restores lake water quality, and is monitoring water quality. The MSCWMO has indeed demonstrated the ability to function as an implementing agency within the standards set by the Board of Soil and Water Resources and the Washington County Water Governance Study. Page 7 Criteria for Effective Water Management Program: 1. Status: The MSCWMO has 10 member communities. Due to the geography and municipal boundaries, the greatest number of communities that could be involved in a drainage dispute is four. All MSCWMO water drainage is common to the St. Croix River. The MSCWMO Board has the common sense to resolve all disputes of water drainage, since in the worst case scenario six community members would remain neutral and find the common ground to resolve disputes. This current organizational structure does meet the BWSR standard. • 2. Status: The MSCWMO currently does have in place a Board of Soil and Water Resources approved plan, thereby fully meeting this criterion. We are not out of compliance with any Board of Soil and Water Resources requirements. The MSCWMO is in the process of finishing its second-generation plan. The Board of Soil and Water Resources has no timeline Middle St.Croix Watershed Management Organization MEMBER COMMUNITIES: Afton,Bayport,Baytown Township,Lakeland,Lakeland Shores,Lake St.Croix Beach,Oak Park Heights,St.Mary's Point,Stillwater and West Lakeland Township • in place as to when the second-generation plan must be completed, however the MSCWMO is working to get this plan in place as quickly as possible. 3. Status: The staff report is in error when it states that the MSCWMO has no current plan. From the State of the Watershed Water Quality report (an independent study of the state of water in Minnesota) the MSCWMO, under the water quality improvement program section of the report, reviews municipalities' development plans with assistance from SWCD, ensuring compliance with runoff standards. The MSCWMO is indeed actively implementing the currently approved water resources management plan. Page 8 Criteria for Effective Water Management Program (cont.): 4. Status: The MSCWMO is working on the second-generation plan to comply with the State of Minnesota requirements as administered by the Board of Soil and Water. The draft MSCWMO 2nd generation plan does commit to work to further the goals, objectives and implementation actions of the 2003-2013 Washington County Groundwater Plan and therefore fully meets this criterion. It should be noted that a member of the MSCWMO Board is also a member of the Washington County Groundwater Advisory Committee. 5. Status: The most obvious and direct mechanism in place for citizens to advise the organization is through the constituent government bodies, which directly appoint the MSCWMO Board members. The MSCWMO Board of Commissioners respectfully requests your support in seeking special legislation to receive levy authority for its operating costs. We believe this to be the most equitable funding mechanism for the organization,with a high level of accountability to our constituents. The MSCWMO is a well-run, well-organized WMO which meets all of the criteria set forth by the Board of Soil and Water Resources and the County's Revised Implementation Plan for Water Governance. We welcome your questions and comments. S' ce ely, I 0 27iC p . ,.. hn McPherson, Chairman 1,, • • Middle St. Croix Watershed Management Organization MEMBER COMMUNITIES: Afton,Bayport,Baytown Township,Lakeland,Lakeland Shores,Lake St.Croix Beach,Oak Park Heights,St.Mary's Point,Stillwater and West Lakeland Township • • MIDDLE ST. CROIX RIVER WATERSHED MANAGEMENT ORGANIZATION A*. 1380 West Frontage Road, Hwy 36 Phone: 651-275-1136, ext. 22 P ; Stillwater, MN 55082 Fax: 651-1254 D +° 11' A Joint Powers Watershed Management Organization composed of ten St. Croix Valley Communities that was established under State Statute 103E to cooperatively manage water resources within the watershed. Resolution of the Middle St. Croix Watershed Management Organization WHEREAS the Middle St. Croix Watershed Management Organization Board of Managers, understands that inherent inequalities exist in the current funding approach of member communities contributing through general funds,and WHEREAS the Middle St. Croix Watershed Management Organization Board of Managers is appointed by member communities and exists through a Joint Powers Agreement,and WHEREAS the Middle St. Croix Watershed Management Organization Board of Managers understands that creating special taxing districts or granting the Organization taxing authority creates another layer of taxes to the communities,and WHEREAS by the Middle St. Croix Watershed Management Organization Board of Managers believes taxing authority is a more equitable way to fund the activities of the Organization, now therefore, BE IT RESOLVED by the Middle St. Croix Watershed Management Organization Board of Managers, that it will hereby seek special legislation during the 2005 legislative session granting the Organization taxing authority. RESOLUTION INTRODUCED BY: John Jansen RESOLUTION SECONDED BY: Joella Givens VOTE ON RESOLUTION: 9 yes,0 no, 1 absent WHEREUPON the above resolution was adopted at the August 12,2004 meeting of the Middle St.Croix Watershed Management Organization Board of Managers. (0it) ?WC.,(9 Authorized Signature Date CkctiCwtavi Title Attested to by Date 1 c a a - msowMo Title Middle St. Croix Watershed Management Organization MEMBER COMMUNITIES: Afton,Bayport,Baytown Township,Lakeland,Lakeland Shores,Lake St.Croix Beach,Oak Park Heights,St.Mary's Point,Stillwater and West Lakeland Township • • • • MIDDLE ST. CROIX RIVER WATERSHED tor, MANAGEMENT ORGANIZATION 1380 West Frontage Road, Hwy 36 Phone: 651-275-1136, ext. 21 Stillwater, MN 55082 Fax: 651-1254 D A Joint Powers Watershed Management Organization composed of ten St. Croix Valley -!o Communities that was established under State Statute 103B to cooperatively manage water resources within the watershed. June 10, 2004 Washington County Board of Commissioners 14949 62nd Street North, P.O. Box 6 Stillwater, Minnesota 55082-0006 RE: MSCWMO Watershed Management Plan Dear Commissioner: • As you are aware, the Middle St. Croix Watershed Management Organization (MSCWMO) is a Joint Powers WMO consisting of 10 St. Croix River communities from Stillwater in the north to Afton in the south. The MSCWMO has, for the past 16 months, been in the process of developing its 2nd Generation Watershed Management Plan. The purpose of this letter is to give you an update of our progress. Currently, we have the first draft of the Plan distributed to the ten member communities. We are distributing this draft to all member communities for their informal review and comment. This is NOT part of the formal review process, which includes the member communities and other local and state agencies. The intent is to address any issues that may need to be resolved amongst the member communities prior to the formal review process. An updated timeline our progress and the formal review timeline (as of 5/26/04) have been included below. Distribute to communities for review. (June 2004) Make changes based on communities input(Early July 2004) - Distribute for formal 90-day DRAFT review(Late July--Early October 2004) MSCWMO response to comments (October-November 2004) Public Hearing on Plan (November 2004) Distribute for formal 45-day FINAL review (December 2004—Early January 2005) MSCWMO makes final changes (January—February 2005) Submit to BWSR for approval, 90-day(February—April 2005) Adoption by MSCWMO Board (April 2005) Concurrent with the formal review of the Plan, MSCWMO will seek special legislation to be given levy 'authority for its operating costs. The MSCWMO Board of Commissioners believes this is the most equitable funding mechanism for the organization, especially in regard to communities that are not fully contained within MSCWMO. The MSCWMO Board of Commissioners would appreciate your support it seeking this legislation as it would be a minor additional tax ($35,000 annually). Additionally, there would be a high level of accountability to the constituents because nearly all of the board members are elected officials from their Middle St. Croix Watershed Management Organization. MEMBER COMMUNITIES: Afton,Bayport,Baytown Township,Lakeland,Lakeland Shores,Lake St.Croix Beach,Oak Park Heights,St.Mary's Point,Stillwater and West Lakeland Township • • • respective community. We encourage you to attend one of our board meetings, which are held the second Thursday of the month at 7pm at the address listed above. Thank you and please feel free to call me with any questions. Sincerely I/ 211 e J• McPherson, Chairman Cc: \/Jim Shug, County Administration Jane Harper, County Administration Les Lemm, BWSR Steve Woods, BWSR MSCWMO Board Members • • Middle St. Croix Watershed Management Organization MEMBER COMMUNITIES: Afton,Bayport,Baytown Township,Lakeland,Lakeland Shores,Lake St.Croix Beach,Oak Park Heights,St.Mary's Point,Stillwater and West Lakeland Township . • Watershed Management Organizations in the Twin Cities Metropolitian Area February, 2003 • � : ^;f' a t � a. Ni ,.. Rik • fit- I Y� 'dal 1 o Ia1 LPPER RUM RIVET@ ' � ,r ,x Y SUNRISE RIVER a' rsll 1;; Y)� '1 FORTIAKE! i 1YER RUM RIVER F. l■ a'O) h. 70 '3,,:' n1r i --:::49'''''''''''':°:?-41.''''''''''''''''.4::. l Anoka „[..,„,-,,,,-,,,,....„-,:•:•••,,, ` Ir r' COON CREEK(WO) *ti,, q)m`, 5,v SIX CITIES RICE CRE �(MD) ti,,,i,.. o=,,id 1 WEST x ELM CRI EIt .-:•;..o:.,....,...-.;.#,.:,..,SISSIPP DARNELIAN� I \li. a MARINE A,'1 ;, ii Y K4 VADNA) D) p) LMr::: 7 BROWNS ( AREA a CREEK SHINGLE CRELCC a r (Wp) IONEER SARAH CR K +; `7y,�,1, b I GRA ,—1/� 4, .'kj.. _ I +a r ,i 'I 1 Q'• LAKE- :• s ey -®" RAMSEY wash in to _ BASSETTCREEK MIS5ISSI,PPI' WASHINGTON g �,s, Hennenln METRO VALLEY ; -,- -,:::',',',,,,t,.:'31*:' p " CAPITOL (WD) BRANCH y�' MINNEHAHACREEK(WD) REGION(WD) WO) CROW RIVER(CTY) x,v, ,i ■ RICHFIELD ',f NPE OOMINGTON f� ■ •SOUTH �I ' MILE I�r 'MIS$I ,'51PP ' .S 4001,, WASHINGTON "�- PoLEYI RGATORY CREEK RIVER ' (WO) { HAZEL E CREEK (W� a �x a va Carver • BAVAR. •---.(W„ rM u a6 CREE G ( tai ;k` w� f„,,,d ... ® , CARVER CREEK(CTY) CNASKA �T� W'� BASIN LAIfE $H41171$-;./.'+ (CTY) LOWER MINNESOTA m t S RIVER(WO) aa.,('' ft�a SHAKOPEE "CLs°,� �, BASIN iltki,,..,,,:.- (CTY) Dakota EAST SEVENS CREEK(CTIA r.. MISSISSIPPI RIOR LAKE SPRING L CREDIT ND) RIVER ( VERMILLION RIVER(CTY) Scott au .,,r'N SOUTHWEST SAND CREEK(CTY) ' r (CTS E` ��w t er# `'n n F NORTH CANNON ,...,, I,;,q ,, n f-,c vr,” IkW". Planning and Implementation of 103B.201 Watershed District " n "% Joint Powers WMO's +.µ I I County . S irMia� 410 WASHINGTON COUNTY REQUEST FOR BOARD ACTION TIME REQUIRED 30 minutes August 24,2004 AGENDA ITEM NO. 12 BOARD MEETING DATE ORIGINATING DEPARTMENT/SERVICE BOARD ACTION REQUIRED: County Board Workshop Public Health and Environment Request by the Middle St. Croix Water Management Organization for County REQUESTOR'S SIGNATURE /DATE Board support of Special Legislation for creation of a water management taxing /1/111 7/r district and levy authority. REVIEWED BY /DATE litfdi eq 5/15 BACKGROUNti/JUSTIFICATION On June 10, 2004, the Washington County Board of Commissioners received a letter from the Middle St. Croix Watershed Management Organization informing the Board that the WMO intends to seek special legislation for levy authority for its operating costs. In the letter, the WMO Board indicates that it would appreciate the support of the County Board in seeking this special legislation. (Letter attached) The request was forwarded to staff to complete an analysis of the request in anticipation of the County Board's discussion of this request. This analysis is now complete. The County Board will discuss the request from the Middle St. Croix Water Management Organization in workshop. The Middle St. Croix Water Management Organization Board received copies of this proposed County Board agenda item on Thursday,August 12. They reviewed the draft analysis document at their meeting that evening and provided responses. This response letter was addressed to the County Board and is attached. Based on comments received from the MSCWMO, the analysis document has been updated and/or clarified. Changes from the draft document reviewed by the MSCWMO are noted through strikeout(deleted)and underline(clarifying) language. • PREVIOUS ACTION ON REQUEST/OTHER PARTIES ADVISED MEDIA CONTACT Mary McGlothlin 651-430-6655 Middle St. Croix River Water Management Organization Board Cindy Weckwerth 651-430-6655 DATE/TIME RECEIVED BY COUNATTORNEY REVIEW /DATE FINANCIAL IMPLICATIONS: $ N/A U,, COUNTY ADMINISTRATOF 8 2004 Ao7 //ii BUSINESS UNITS: COUNTY INISTRATO ADMINISTRATIVE RECOMMENDATION OBJECT(S): ❑APPROVAL 8/� /lJ BUDGETED P 1 DATE ElDENIAL N/A YES NO ❑NO RECOMMENDATION FUNDING COMMENTS LEVY OTHER COMMENTS REVISED:August 2001 D:\MyFiles\boardagendaitems\MSCWMO analysis workshop.doc • • WASHINGTON COUNTY REQUEST FOR BOARD ACTION TIME REQUIRED 45 minute workshop August 24,2004 AGENDA ITEM NO. 13 BOARD MEETING DATE ORIGINATING DEPARTMENT/SERVICE BOARD ACTION REQUIRED: Administration Review updated inventory and cost of mandates and county core functions in Health and Human Service areas and outstanding REQU O '.,,y1ATA / ATE supplemental requests. `` kl 12-0"1 RE I WE By, /DATE BACKGROUND/JUSTIFICATION This is one of several workshops the County Board will hold to receive more detailed information on the proposed 2005 county budget. The focus of this workshop will be on the cost of mandates and county core functions in the Health and Human Services areas and the outstanding supplemental budget requests that were not contained in the recommended budget. PREVIOUS ACTION ON REQUEST/OTHER PARTIES ADVISED MEDIA CONTACT Administrations proposed 2005 budget was presented to the County Board on August 10, 2005. DATE/TIME RECEIVED BY COUNTY ATTORNEY REVIEW /DATE FINANCIAL IMPLICATIONS: $ COUNTYADMINISTRATORl1G 1 �/ BUSINESS UNITS: 3 2004 COUNTY INISTRAT•R ADMINISTRATIVE RECOMMENDATION OBJECT(S): APPROVAL BUDGETED // ElElDENIAL N/ YES NO DATE ❑NO RECOMMENDATION FUNDING LEVY OTHER COMMENTS COMMENTS REVISED:August 2001 X:\forms\bd act form.dot • • WASHINGTON COUNTY 2005 Budget Outstanding Unfunded Requests 8/13/2004 Department • Position/Item Requested FTE Cost Attorney Computer replacements • 0.00 33,600 Attorney Total: 0.00 33,600 PHE Nurse Practitioner Case Manager 1.00 89,800 Maintain 4-H Coordinators/Master Gardener • Coordinator at current staffing levels 0.30 17,200 PHE Total: 1.30 107,000 Sheriff Deputy Sheriff 1.00 53,500 Correctional Officer 1.00 50,300 Sheriff Total: 2.00 103,800 TPD Historical Society Grant 0.00 8,200 TPD Total: 0.00 8,200 Total Outstanding Unfunded Requests 3.30 252,600 C:\Documents and Settings\mforour\Local Settings\Temp\[Unfunded Supplementals.xls]Revised • • Regular Meeting Agenda Middle St. Croix Watershed Management Organization July 8,2004 Washington Conservation District (Located in River Heights Plaza, Stillwater,next to the Washington County License Center) 7:00 PM-Regular Meeting Agenda 1. Call to Order 2. Approval of Minutes a) June 10, 2004 Minutes 3., Treasurer's Report(Anders Hansen) a) Report of Savings Account, Assets b) Approve payment of bills c) Community Contributions-2nd payment 4. Old Business (176 kr Project Update ` � St. Croix River Bridge Crossing p � rh'�I /-e) Watershed Management Plan n�f C,6 L Member Community Comments on Draft Y ( �/ / tb tetter to County Board,BWSR and Administrator Shug"s response 5. New Business ,z) . State of MN Storm Sewer Project, Phase III &Bonding Update 5/7 Development Review Updates ✓ L�" aspiration EAW, Bayport GWD/WMO booth at the Washington County Fair Ar---'2003 Annual Report 6. Other Agenda Items 7. Adjourn Middle St. Croix Watershed Management Organization MEMBER COMMUNITIES: Afton,Bayport,Baytown Township,Lakeland,Lakeland Shores,Lake St.Croix Beach,Oak Park Heights,St.Mary's Point,Stillwater and West Lakeland Township • . MIDDLE ST. CROIX RIVER WATERSHED MANAGEMENT ORGANIZATION r F. 1380 West Frontage Road, Hwy 36 Phone: 651-275-1136, ext. 21 Stillwater, MN 55082 Fax: 651-1254 A Joint Powers Watershed Management Organization composed of ten St. Croix Valley Communities that was established under State Statute 103E to cooperatively manage water 4. resources within the watershed. MEMORANDUM TO: MSCWMO Board FROM: Bob Fossum 'f RE: Levy Authority DATE: July 15, 2004 I would like to give you a brief update of some issues regarding MSCWMO intention to seek levy authority a funding mechanism for its operating expenses. Washington County's Department of Public Health and the Environment has requested a meeting with MSCWMO to discuss its intentions and plan regarding independent levy authority. This meeting will be on July 22, 2004, at 9:30 am at the Washington County PHE offices. Board members John Jansen and David Beaudet, and I will be attending on behalf of the WMO. Others who are interested are welcome to join us. Please give me a call at 651-275-1136, ext. 21 if you have any questions or more details about this meeting. Middle St. Croix Watershed Management Organization MEMBER COMMUNITIES: Afton,Bayport,Baytown Township,Lakeland,Lakeland Shores,Lake St.Croix Beach,Oak Park Heights,St.Mary's Point,Stillwater and West Lakeland Township • • Ne' , MIDDLE ST. CROIX RIVER WATERSHED MANAGEMENT ORGANIZATION h.T 1380 West Frontage Road, Hwy 36 Phone: 651-275-1136, ext. 21 Stillwater, MN 55082 Fax: 651-1,254 A Joint Powers Watershed Management Organization composed of ten St. Croix Valley Communities.that was established under State Statute 103B to cooperatively manage water resources within the watershed. ` 3 LETTER OF TRANSMITTAL DATE: July 2,2004 TO: Middle St.Croix River Watershed Management Organization FROM: Bob Fossum RE: July 8,2004 Meeting Packet WE ARE SENDING: Via Mail: X Courier: Fax: Agenda Item DESCRIPTION 1 Agenda—July 8,2004 MSCWMO meeting 2 Minutes—Draft minutes for the June 10,2004 Board meeting Approved minutes for May 13,2004 Board meeting 4.b)a. Comment letter from Stillwater regarding draft 2nd Generation Watershed Management Plan 4.b)b. Letter to County Board,County Administration and BWSR regarding 2nd Generation Watershed Management Plan and Levy Authority. 4.b)b. Response letter from Jim Shug,County Administrator regarding 2nd Generation Watershed Management Plan and Levy Authority. 4.d) Draft of 2003 Annual Report I will complete a review of the Environmental Assessment Worksheet for the Inspiration Development in Bayport and will summarize the issues for your consideration at the meeting on July 8th. Please call me with any additional agenda items or agenda changes at 275- 1136,ext.21. Sincerely, Bob Fossum Cc: Betsy Vance,Recording Secretary Charlie LeFevere,Kennedy&Graven Konrad Koosmann,WCD City of Oak Park Heights(Agenda and Minutes Only) City of Stillwater(Agenda and Minutes Only) Jeff Davis,SEH(Agenda and Minutes Only) Middle St. Croix Watershed Management Organization MEMBER COMMUNITIES: Afton,Bayport,Baytown Township,Lakeland,Lakeland Shores,Lake St.Croix Beach,Oak Park Heights,St.Mary's Point,Stillwater and West Lakeland Township 4 oilt, 4,1-)L-A Q q ., ors re,ic. • 1 frif, 4 App,_ v„...... .----- 44A,50--,____ / jj6/6Te --,u x � ) �(--, /-, �-� cam' F-5fi. ' \ 1 ,4) . ` ---' !L 2 g,4 ,4;,( 5-ta, _._ __ ___, , liki&ki-4 ci-t) A-piai -4,(mideu-4*- 6614-1-}mr- xte,a--_ ,AA,k 1-0 pl 079 r-s),uucam.a5 — 60\A- i vva 4,0- 5(e,,,, ,p rams 0,4 —up tOsi -. iMAk---- 4 --i--WW — dam �� MIDDLE ST. CROIX RIVER WATERSHED .� MANAGEMENT ORGANIZATION '` r .., 1380 West Frontage Road H 3G tt" I. Stillwater, MN 55082 � � Phone: 651-275-1136, ext. 21 .-�� Fax 651-1254 D "l. A Joint Powers Watershed Management Organization composed of ten St. Croix Valley Communities that was established under State Statute 103B to cooperatively manage water resources within the watershed. 4 t1 July 9,2004 Michael McGuire,Administrator City of Bayport 294 N. 3'd St. Bayport,MN 55003 RE: Inspiration Environmental Assessment Worksheet(EAW) Dear Mr.McGuire: The Middle St. Croix Watershed Management Organization(MSCWMO)has received and reviewed the Inspiration Environmental Assessment Worksheet(EAW)dated June 7, 2004. Based on this review the MSCWMO offers the following comments. In general,the Inspiration Development concept appears much better than the previously proposed Bayport West Development. The concept plan appears to meet all of the policies in the MSCWMO's Watershed Management Plan. W concur with the specific comments that were made by the Washington Conservation District. Additionally, Table 8.1. e lists MSCWMO as only requiring submittal of a Stormwater Management Plan. MSCWMO will also require that the Erosion and Sediment Control plan be submitted. MSCWMO formal approval requirement is exists through it existence as a Joint Powers Board. As with all projects within the watershed, we will review and forward our comments to the City of Bayport for inclusion in the preliminary plat approval for the project. We will also forward our comments the developer. We recommend the developer submit the plans to us as early as possible so that our suggestions may be incorporated as easily as possible. We have no further comment at this point in the process EA W).appropriate time in the approval process(preliminary plat). We look efo willprovide to working ng with the developer on more innovative approach to water resource management. Sincerely, / ..__it..,......______ ______ Bob Fo sum Administrator Cc: Applied Ecological Services, 21938 Mushtown Rd, Prior Lake,MN 55372 Westwood Professional Services, Inc., 7599 Anagram Dr, Eden Prairie,MN 55344 Middle St. Croix Watershed Management Organization MEMBER COMMUNITIES: Afton,Bayport,Baytown Township,Lakeland,Lakeland Shores,Lake St.Croix Beach,Oak Park Heights,St.Mary's Point,Stillwater and West Lakeland Township • 411 Middle St Croix Watershed Management Organization Regular Meeting June 10, 2004 Washington County Conservation District Present: Chairman John McPherson, Members Robert Kamps, Jim Gilles, Anders Hansen, David Beaudet; Mr. Robert Fossum, Washington County Conservation District, Ms. Elizabeth Vance, Recording Secretary Call to Order: Chairman McPherson called the meeting to order at 7:02 PM. Approval of the Minutes: The minutes from the May regular meeting were presented for review. Mr. Hansen moved to accept the minutes as presented. Mr. Kamps seconded the motion. The motion carried. Treasurer's Report: Mr. Hansen presented the treasurer's report. Balance is $77,159. Invoices presented for payment include: Attorney fees' for$131,71, Washington County Soil and Water Conservation District for$253 and $12,789 for the 3d invoice for the Second Generation Watershed Plan. Mr. Beaudet moved payment of these invoices and acceptance of the treasurer's report. Mr. Gilles seconded the motion. The motion carried. St. Croix River Bridge Crossing Project Update: Mr. Beaudet presented an update on the St. Croix River Bridge Project. The Bridge is included in the project list for the Transportation Advisory Board of the Metropolitan Council for 2025,pending funding. The current Transportation Bill does not include funding for this project. Current cost estimate is $33 million. The cost of the bridge can vary based upon the proposal reviewed. Draft Watershed Management Plan: Mr. Fossum presented an update on the draft Second Generation Watershed Plan. The draft was sent to member communities for review. Comments are not expected until toward the end of the month. A draft letter to Washington County was presented for review by the board. The letter referenced the board's intent to pursue levy authority. Mr. Beaudet moved to approve the draft. Mr. Kamps seconded the motion. The motion carried. Mr. Gilles commended Mr. Fossum on his work on this plan. Storm Sewer Project Phase III: Bonding bill presented at the end of the legislative session did not include the Storm Sewer Project. The Board expressed disappointment at the level of support from Senators Bachmann and LeClair. Discussion indicated that a letter should be sent to Senators Bachmann and LeClair to reinforce the need for this program if a special session is called. Mr. Beaudet will draft the letter on behalf of the board. Page 1 of 2 S • Middle St Croix Watershed Management Organization Regular Meeting June 10, 2004 Washington County Conservation District Development Review Updates: Inspiration, Bayport West: The Environmental Assessment worksheet was completed, and should be distributed to impacted parties. Mr. Kamps commented that the water management system is less traditional, with water infiltration on each lot. Oak Park Heights Development The area west of Club Tara was discussed. The concept proposal is for condominiums and office space. There are challenges in terms of grading, space management with the existing buildings. Plans should be available for review at the next regular meeting. Watershed District/Water Management Organization at the Washington County Fair: At the last consortium meeting, a joint support of the WD/WMO booth at the Washington County fair as part of the education charter. Mr. Beaudet asked for volunteers to assist in manning the booth. Mr. Beaudet said the consortium also discussed a handout magnet. He request the board consider supporting that handout. Other Business: Mr. Fossum brought forth the requirement for an annual report for BWSR. All Watershed Management Organizations and Watershed Districts are required to submit an annual report to BWSR. This was last done for Middle St. Croix in 1989. Mr. Fossum will prepare a draft report for review at the next regular meeting. Adjourn: Mr. Kamps moved to adjourn the meeting. Mr. Hansen seconded the motion. The motion carried. Chairman McPherson adjourned the meeting at 8:05 PM. Respectfully Submitted, 4/A44644/ tc Elizabeth A. Vance Recording Secretary Page 2 of 2 • . MIDDLE ST. CROIX RIVER WATERSHED MANAGEMENT ORGANIZATIONIrk 1380 West Frontage Road, Hwy 36 Phone: 651-275-1136, ext. 21 Stillwater, MN 55082 Fax: 651-1254 D A Joint Powers Watershed Management Organization composed of ten St. Croix Valley Communities that was established under State Statute 103E to cooperatively manage water resources within the watershed July 28,2004 Klayton Eckles Director of Public Works 216 N. 4th St. Stillwater, MN 55082 Subject: MSCWMO Watershed Management Plan Dear Mr. Eckles: Thank you for your comments on the initial draft of the MSCWMO Watershed Management Plan that was distributed to the member communities in June. The MSCWMO Board has reviewed your comments and instructed me to response to each. Figure 2.13 and Table 5 will be updated to correct the inaccuracies that you mentioned. Performance Standard#3 requires an erosion control plan for all disturbances greater than 10,000 square feet. The MSCWMO board shares your concern about the number of sites this ordinance would include and the workload that may be involved. This performance standard will be revised to exempt lots/sites that have been previously reviewed and approved as part of a planned unit development or subdivision. Performance Standard#5 prohibits construction on slopes greater than 12%. The MSCWMO believes this standard is appropriate because it will allow for a uniform standard across the whole WMO. The 12%threshold is the standard in the Lower St. Croix Riverway District,which covers large portions of the MSCWMO. MSCWMO is exploring the alternatives to remove walk out lots from this standard. Currently, MSCWMO is considering a minimum slope length that trigger the threshold, which would remove walkout lots from this standard. It is the intention of MSCWMO to have plan review, and comment costs paid by the applicant and/or developer. It is MSCWMO's philosophy that projects should be paid for by the communities that contribute drainage to the particular water resource. This would be the case with any type of study or project associated with Lily Lake. The funding mechanism of an ad valorem tax for administration costs only is a desirable option for MSCWMO in communities that lie within more than one WMO or Watershed District. This approach would eliminate the inherent inequity that currently exists with the MSCWMO fee structure coming from the general fund. Middle St. Croix Watershed Management Organization MEMBER COMMUNITIES: Afton,Bayport,Baytown Township,Lakeland,Lakeland Shores,Lake St.Croix Beach,Oak Park Heights,St.Mary's Point,Stillwater and West Lakeland Township • (Residents of Stillwater that reside in BCWD have a special levy for BCWD and pay the fees for MSCWMO.) Again only administrative costs will be part of this levy, the applicant will pay all project review costs, and the communities that have drainage contributing to the water resource and would benefit from the project will fund any project or study. MSCWMO is currently drafting legislation for special levy authority that may include some language limiting the size of the annual levy. Thank you again for the comments on the informal draft. Within the next two weeks, the plan will be distributed to the member communities and pertinent agencies for the formal 60-day review, at which time you will have another opportunity to comment on this Watershed Management Plan. Sincerely, Bob Fossum MSCWMO Administrator Cc: MSCWMO Board Members Middle St. Croix Watershed Management Organization MEMBER COMMUNITIES: Afton,Bayport,Baytown Township,Lakeland,Lakeland Shores,Lake St.Croix Beach,Oak Park Heights,St.Mary's Point,Stillwater and West Lakeland Township • MIDDLE ST. CROIX RIVER WATERSHED 4 MANAGEMENT ORGANIZATION I 1380 West Frontage Road, Hwy 36 Phone: 651-275-1136, ext.21 " at; Stillwater, MN 55082 Fax: 651-1254 D r A Joint Powers Watershed Management Organization composed of ten St. Croix Valley �3� {•. Communities that was established under State Statute 103E to cooperatively manage water resources within the watershed. Resolution of the Middle St. Croix Watershed Management Organization BE IT RESOLVED by the Middle St. Croix Watershed Management Organization Board of Managers, understands that inherent inequalities exist in the current funding approach of member communities contributing through general funds, BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED by the Middle St. Croix Watershed Management Organization Board of Managers that the Board is appointed by member communities and exists through a Joint Powers Agreement, BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED by the Middle St. Croix Watershed Management Organization Board of Managers understands that creating special taxing district or granting the Organization taxing authority creates another layer of taxes to the communities, BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED by the Middle St. Croix Watersh ment Organization Board of Managers believes taxing authority is a more equitable way to fund the activities of the • � t , I .''• BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED by the Middle St. Croix Sanagement Organization Board of Managers,that it will hereby seek special legislation during the 2004 legislative sessio . g the Organization taxing authority. RESOLUTION INTRODUCED BY: RESOLUTION SECONDED BY: VOTE ON RESOLUTION: WHEREUPON the above resolution was adopted at the ,meeting of the Middle St.Croix Watershed Management Organization Board of Managers. Authorized Signature Date Title Attested to by Date Title Middle St. Croix Watershed Management Organization MEMBER COMMUNITIES: Afton,Bayport,Baytown Township,Lakeland,Lakeland Shores,Lake St.Croix Beach,Oak Park Heights,St.Mary's Point,Stillwater and West Lakeland Township • • DRAFT ,�� \ 42)Middle St Croix Watershed Management Organization 0 Regular Meeting V June 10, 2004 Washington County C• se 'ationDistrict Present: Chairman John`McPherson, Members Robert Kamps, Anders Hansen, David Beaudet;'Mr. Robert Fossum, Washington County onservation District, Ms. Elizabeth Vance, Recording Secretary � Jam- ,r' V ,` � Call to Order: N Chairman McPherson called the meeting to order at 7:02 PM. Approval of the Minutes: The minutes from the May regular meeting were presented for review. Mr. Hansen moved to accept the minutes as presented. Mr. Kamps seconded the motion. The motion carried. Treasurer's Report: Mr. Hansen presented the treasurer's report. Balance is $77,159. Invoices presented for payment include: Attorney fees' for$131,71,Washington County Soil and Water Conservation District for$253 and $12,789 for the 3d invoice for the Second Generation Watershed Plan. Mr. Beaudet moved payment of these invoices and acceptance of the treasurer's report. Mr. Gilles seconded the motion. The motion carried. St. Croix River Bridge Crossing Project Update: Mr. Beaudet presented an update on the St. Croix River Bridge Project. The Bridge is included in the project list for the Transportation Advisory Board of the Metropolitan Council for 2025,pending funding. The current Transportation Bill does not include funding for this project. Current cost estimate is $3Ani1lion. The cost of the bridge can vary based upon the proposal reviewed. Draft Watershed Management Plan: Mr. Fossum presented an update on the draft Second Generation Watershed Plan. The draft was sent to member communities for review. Comments are not expected until toward the end of the month. A draft letter to Washington County was presented for review by the board. The letter referenced the board's intent to pursue levy authority. Mr. Beaudet moved to approve the draft. Mr. Kamps seconded the motion. The motion carried. Mr. Gilles commended Mr. Fossum on his work on this plan. Storm Sewer Project Phase III: Bonding bill presented at the end of the legislative session did not include the Storm Sewer Project. The Board expressed disappointment at the level of support from Senators Bachmann and LeClair. Discussion indicated that a letter should be sent to Senators Bachmann and LeClair to reinforce the need for this program if a special session is called. Mr. Beaudet will draft the letter on behalf of the board. Page 1 of 2 • DRAFT Middle St Croix Watershed Management Organization Regular Meeting June 10, 2004 Washington County Conservation District Development Review Updates: Inspiration, Bayport West: The Environmental Assessment worksheet was completed, and should be distributed to impacted parties. Mr. Kamps commented that the water management system is less traditional, with water infiltration on each lot. Oak Park Heights Development The area west of Club Tara was discussed. The concept proposal is for condominiums and office space. There are challenges in terms of grading, space management with the existing buildings. Plans should be available for review at the next regular meeting. Watershed District/Water Management Organization at the Washington County Fair: At the last consortium meeting, a joint support of the WD/WMO booth at the Washington County fair as part of the education charter. Mr. Beaudet asked for volunteers to assist in manning the booth. Mr. Beaudet said the consortium also discussed a handout magnet. He request the board consider supporting that handout. Other Business: Mr. Fossum brought forth the requirement for an annual report for BWSR. All Watershed Management Organizations and Watershed Districts are required to submit an annual report to BWSR. This was last done for Middle St. Croix in 1989. Mr. Fossum will prepare a draft report for review at the next regular meeting. Adjourn: Mr. Kamps moved to adjourn the meeting. Mr. Hansen seconded the motion. The motion carried. Chairman McPherson adjourned the meeting at 8:05 PM. Respectfully Submitted, ?t, k41a-411CA Elizabeth A. Vance Recording Secretary Page 2 of 2 • MINNESOTA • ECEiVED MDHJUL 1 4 2004 DEPARTMENToF HEALTH WASHiNG f ON SWCD Protecting, maintaining and improving the health of all Minnesotans July 13, 2004 Mr. John McPherson Chairman, Middle St. Croix River WMO do Washington County Conservation District 1380 West Frontage Road—Highway 36 Stillwater,Minnesota 55082 •ti Dear Mr.McPherson: Subject: Watershed Management Plan I am writing on behalf of the Minnesota Department of Health (MDH)to encourage your organization to collaborate with public water suppliers in your area to help prevent and mitigate contamination to drinking water supplies. The MDH administers the federal Safe Drinking Water Act, in which public water suppliers (PWS)are required to develop wellhead protection plans. Part of the process involves delineating the groundwater"capture" areas and subsequent drinking water supply management areas (DWSMA) of public water wells. Managing potential contaminant sources within a DWSMA is a concern for public water suppliers. In some instances, a municipality may not have complete jurisdiction to control land . uses within their DWSMA. It is especially important in these instances for the PWS to have cooperative partners to provide aid in implementing measures to protect groundwaters. The MDH commends your organization for working to protect and properly manage the surface and groundwater resources within your jurisdiction. While efforts to address flooding have historically been a primary goal of a Metro area watershed management organization, today's water resource management should also include policies and goals that address groundwater and related drinking water issues. The MDII would like your organization to consider adding the following groundwater- oriented goals or objectives to your current planning activities and,if possible,to coordinate your planning process with local public water suppliers. The proposed objectives include: • Provide an awareness to the public of the importance of drinking water protection for the general health and well-being of the populace. • Address storm water management in the geologically vulnerable portions of drinking water supply management areas. This should include the development of specific performance standards for storm water controls based on the vulnerability of the groundwater recharge areas of public water supply wells. • Support source water/wellhead protection planning for all public water supplies within your watershed. This should include identification, by reference, of all public water suppliers within the watershed and inclusion of specific DWSMAs or wellhead protection areas as they become known. In addition, the MDH would encourage your organization to acknowledge your role in General Information: (651) 215-5800 • TDD/TYY: (651) 215-8980 • Minnesota Relay Service: (800) 627-3529 • wwv health.state.mn.us For directions to any of the MDH locations,call (651) 215-5800 •An equal opportunity employer S Mr. John McPherson Page 2 July 13, 2004 providing technical aid as needed, and possibly financial support (i.e., cost share for abandoned well sealing) as may be needed in future wellhead protection measures within the watershed. Current information is available regarding source water protection and the public water suppliers in your area at www.health.state.mn.us/divs/eh/water/swp/index.htm. • Develop educational efforts, in partnership with public water suppliers, directed to the general public (residents, developers,contractors, commercial,etc.) about the use of best management practices for various potential contaminant sources and how they are beneficial in protecting surface- and groundwater resources. We are requesting your organization's assistance because we feel you are in a position to provide a high level of water resource management and leadership with client cities and citizens that rely on ground- or surface waters for drinking water within the watershed. We look forward to working with your organization and the public water suppliers within your watershed in efforts to protect and enhance drinking water supplies. If you have questions,please contact Art Persons at art.persons@health.state.mn.us (507/292=5138) or Terry Bovee at terry.bovee@health.state.mn.us (507/389-6597). Sincerely, 34.741-... Patricia A. Bloomgren, Director Environmental Health Division P.O. Box 64975 St. Paul, MN. 55164-0975 PAB:ACP:kmc cc: Mr. Doug Thomas,Assistant Director,Board of Water and Soil Resources Mr. Daniel Huff, Watershed Program Director, Friends of the Mississippi River /14- .5%,„,,,,_„.„,._:,,, MOffice of Administration WashinIligton�""'`�+•�•` James R.Schug C011nt�7 County Administrator u Y-VRO�i5g. Molly F.O'Rourke Deputy Administrator June 29, 2004 E IV E.0 JUN 3 0 .7004 WASHING i ON SWCD John McPherson, Chairman Middle St. Croix River Watershed Management Organization 1380 West Frontage Road Highway 36 Stillwater, MN 55082 Dear Mr. McPherson: Thank you for your letter of June 10, 2004 advising the Washington County Board of Commissioners of the activities being undertaken by the Middle St. Croix River WMO in developing its 2nd Generation Watershed Management Plan. I have distributed the report on your progress and the timeline for review of the plan to our staff in the Department of Public Health and Environment. With respect to your request for county support for special legislation to authorize the MSCRWMO to levy separate property taxes to pay for its operating costs, I have referred this matter to the County Board of Commissioners for their consideration in late July. Prior to asking the Board to discuss this matter, I will have county staff put together a brief analysis of the request and the issues that might arise from this type of special levy authority. Representatives of the WMO are most welcome to provide input into this discussion and assist county staff in identifying the relevant issues and arguments. We will also make sure that you are advised when the County Board takes up this matter in a future meeting. If you have any questions or comments in the meantime, please feel free to contact me. Sincerely, c2p.- James R. Schug County Administrator pr c Washington County Board of Commissioners Molly O'Rourke, Deputy Administrator Mary McGlothlin, Director of Public Health and Environment Jane Harper, Principal Planner Cindy Weckwerth, Senior Program Manager Patricia Raddatz, Administrative Assistant Government Center • 14949 62nd Street North—P.O. Box 6,Stillwater, Minnesota 55082-0006 Phone: 651-430-6001 • Fax: 651-430-6017 • TTY: 651-430-6246 www.co.washington.mn.us Equal Employment Opportunity/Affirmative Action fr \ • • oti i ar - ....m...------THE BIRTHPLACE OF MINNESOTA j 1 JUN 4 2004 1 2 June 22, 2004 Bob Fossum MSCWMO Administrator 1380 W. Frontage Road, Hwy 36 Stillwater, MN 55082 Subject: Stillwater Comments on MSCWMO Watershed Management Plan Dear Bob: Thank you for the opportunity to comment on the MSCWMO Watershed Management Plan. The following comments have been prepared by staff for Council's final approval. It is anticipated that the City Council will endorse these comments at the July 6th Council meeting. However I am forwarding you Stillwater's draft comments at this time in order to attempt to meet your timeline of comments by July 1St Stillwater City comments are as.follows: Figure 2.13 —The landfill dumps and hazardous waste sites does not show the old Stillwater City dump located on Myrtle Street next to the JC Bailfields. Although this site has been removed from the cercla list and has been dealt with through the voluntary investigation and cleanup program with the MPCA, it is an old landfill. Table 5 Existing Local Ordinances—The table shows that Stillwater has no regulations concerning volume control, this is not accurate. Stillwater's ordinance has a qualitative requirement. It requires new developments to manage storm water with the highest priority method being infiltration techniques. Also on Table 5 under Steep Slope Building Prohibition, Stillwater code has a conditional approval between 12 and 24%and prohibition of construction on slopes over 25%. The 18%requirement is a discrepancy in our code. Section 5.1.4 Performance Standards—Number 3 requires erosion and sediment control plan must be submitted for all projects disturbing greater than ten thousand square feet. Since the minimum lot size for most communities is 10,000 square feet, any single- family project generally results in the disturbance of at least 10,000 square feet. This requirement will result in plans being submitted for all single-family development. The City of Stillwater already requires this and we believe that this is something all CITY HALL: 216 NORTH FOURTH STILLWATER, MINNESOTA 55082 PHONE: 651-430-8800 • ikk communities should require. However if this is a requirement of the WMO or a plan that the WMO intends on pursuing, Stillwater would only support such an outcome if all of the costs were born by the communities or the developer or contractor causing the disruption Number 5 —Construction is prohibited on slopes greater than 12 percent. This requirement is contrary to what happens on virtually on all developments in this region. Since approximately 80% of all new home construction involves walkout basements the developers and contractors will either wish to construct homes along steep slopes or create steep slopes in order to achieve walkout basements. For illustration a home that has an 8-foot basement and has a 30-foot house width,would require a 27% side slope along the foundation. Stillwater considers 12% a steep driveway and 25% a steep slope. 12% is a very moderate slope on a single-family lot. Section 5.3.4 Policies—Number 1 and 2. Stillwater agrees with policies set forth in these two sections but questions how the MSCWMO will achieve these polices given the significant amount of development that occurs in sizes greater than 10,000 square feet. Performance Standards—Number 4 again lists 12 percent and Stillwater would suggest standards in line with Washington County standards for slopes. Section 6.2.1 —Number 1 states that full review will be required on projects over 10,000 square feet. Under this criteria the MSCWMO will be reviewing virtually all building permits for new construction within the WMO area. Stillwater would only support this approach if all the costs associated with this review are borne by the member communities using the service or are charged to the developer/contractor. This issue is also significant in that it requires building permits to be held until such time as MSCWMO review is completed. This could result in significant delays. Section 6.5 Lily Lake TMDL Study—The City of Stillwater would agree to participate in the TMDL Study note however that Stillwater is not the only community that contributes water to Lily Lake and therefore the WMO may need to participate to ensure all communities contributing in the district participate at an appropriate level. Section 6.7.1 —The City of Stillwater supports the current funding arrangement given that the City of Stillwater is nearly full developed and has provided all of the staff and services necessary to manage, maintain, operate and control storm water within our community. We may have issue with the ad valorem process that would require highly developed communities to contribute significantly to dealing with the issues and problems that occur in undeveloped communities that have not dealt with storm water issues to the level that Stillwater has. Prior to supporting special legislation to create special taxing authority, the City of Stillwater would need to have a better understanding on the safe guards that would be in place to insure that Stillwater residents are not funding development and storm water controls in other communities. S I The City of Stillwater also has a general comment concerning capital improvement projects. There are many potential storm water projects that reside strictly in one community or another and do not cross community boundaries. However it could still be beneficial to member communities if the WMO included some individual city projects within this capital improvement program. For instance the City of Stillwater is contemplating a floodwall along the river. This project resides within the WMO jurisdictional boundaries. Although the City of Stillwater does not anticipate the WMO would be contributing to this project, there may be benefits to the City of Stillwater if the flood control project was listed as a capital improvement project for.the WMO. This may make it easier for the City to obtain State or Federal funding to help support the project as well as provide a tool for educating the public as to the importance of the project. In general it is much easier to add any potential projects onto the capital improvement program now instead of having to modify or amend the plan in the future if and when it would be desirable to have a project on the list. Therefore it is recommended that member communities each provide a list of projects that might be included in the capital improvement program for the WMO. Thank you for accepting our comments. Sincerely, Klayton Eckles Director of Public Works • 0/ 144/V111:6z, ,-•-i Ski- Regular Meeting Agenda VMiddle St. Croix Watershed Management Organization June 10,2004 Aj„,... ..- Washington Conservation District (Located in River Heights Plaza, Stillwater,next to the Washington County License Center) 7:00 PM-Regular Meeting Agenda Call to Order W 1 ik 1),fu04k V' Approval of Minutes �,� a) May 13, 2004 Minutes ilk tc- `9-( 1,3. Treasurer's Report(Anders Hansen) 6 A c6412.,c -c)- Report of Savings Account, Assets 2-1 --il‘ Approve payment of bills 13,bk-1` . 4. Old Business uJ 464.30. , , v St. Croix River Bridge Crossing Project Update +b.>� Watershed Management Plan • 14- ,C= .— Member Community Draft Distribution Oi ��el tib: Letter to County Board, BWSR At' New Business State of MN Storm Sewer Project, Phase III & Bonding Update Development Review Updates,.) ‘ c—`5 4 '�'�� ' ' fV c) WD/WMO booth at the Washington County Fair Ar oi 6-4 t 111 6. Other ends Items 7. Adjourn ci.. . ..---7 U tfArl r- A is Middle St. Croix Watershed Management Organization MEMBER COMMUNITIES: Afton,Bayport,Baytown Township,Lakeland,Lakeland Shores,Lake St.Croix Beach,Oak Park Heights,St.Mary's Point,Stillwater and West Lakeland Township I MIDDLE ST. CROIX RIVER WATERSHED MANAGEMENT ORGANIZATION ! 1380 West Frontage Road, Hwy 36 Phone: 651-275-1136, ext. 21 , Stillwater, MN 55082 Fax 651-1254 Je ' A Joint Powers Watershed Management Organization composed of ten St. Croix Valley Communities that was established under State Statute 103B to cooperatively manage water resources within the watershed. r LETTER OF TRANSMITTAL DATE: June 3,2004 TO: Middle St.Croix River Watershed Management Organization FROM: Bob Fossum RE: June 10,2004 Meeting Packet WE ARE SENDING: Via Mail: X Courier: Fax: . Agenda Item DESCRIPTION 1 Agenda—June 10,2003 MSCWMO meeting 2 Minutes—Draft minutes for the May 13,2004 Board meeting Approved minutes for April 8,2004 Board meeting 4.b)a. Copy of letter to community and draft 2nd Generation Watershed Management Plan 4.b)b. Draft letter to County Commissioners regarding 2nd Generation Watershed Management Plan I have included a copy the draft Watershed Management plan that was sent to your community,in case there are any specific questions that you get regarding the plan. Please call me with any additional agenda items or agenda changes at 275-1136,ext.21. Sincerely, Bob Fossum Cc: Betsy Vance,Recording Secretary Charlie LeFevere,Kennedy&Graven Konrad Koosmann,WCD City of Oak Park Heights(Agenda and Minutes Only) City of Stillwater(Agenda and Minutes Only) Jeff Davis,SEH(Agenda and Minutes Only) Middle St. Croix Watershed Management Organization MEMBER COMMUNITIES: Afton,Bayport,Baytown Township,Lakeland,Lakeland Shores,Lake St.Croix Beach,Oak Park Heights,St.Mary's Point,Stillwater and West Lakeland Township • MIDDLE ST. CROIX RIVER WATERSHED1 MANAGEMENT ORGANIZATION Alit'sio 1380 West Frontage Road, Hwy 36 Phone: 651-275-1136, ext. 21 Stillwater MN0 � 55082 Fax: 651-1254 � 1<. A Joint Powers Watershed Management Organization composed of ten St. Croix Valley NI® " e Communities that was established under State Statute 103E to cooperatively manage water q resources within the watershed. Ai) June 10, 2004 Washington County Board of Commissioners 14949 62nd Street North, P.O. Box 6 Stillwater, Minnesota 55082-0006 RE: MSCWMO Watershed Management Plan Dear Commissioner: As you are aware, the Middle St. Croix Watershed Management Organization (MSCWMO) is a Joint Power WMO consisting of 10 St. Croix River communities from Stillwater in the north to Afton in'the south. The MSCWMO has, for the past 16 months, been in the process of developing its 2nd Generation Watershed Management Plan. The purpose of this letter is to give you an update of our progress. Currently, we have the first draft of the Plan distributed to the ten member communities. We are distributing this draft to all member communities for their informal review and comment. This is NOT part of the formal review process, which includes the member communities and other local and state agencies. The intent is to address any issues that may need to be resolved amongst the member communities prior to the formal review process. An updated timeline our progress and the formal review timeline (as of 5/26/04) have been included below. • Distribute to communities for review. (June 2004) Make changes based on communities input (Early July 2004) - Distribute for formal 90-day DRAFT review (Late July-- Early October 2004) MSCWMO response to comments (October-November 2004) Public Hearing on Plan (November 2004) Distribute for formal 45-day FINAL review (December 2004— Early January 2005) MSCWMO makes final changes (January— February 2005) Submit to BWSR for approval, 90-day (February—April 2005) Adoption by MSCWMO Board (April 2005) Concurrent with the formal review of the Plan, MSCWMO will seek special legislation to be given levy authority for its operating costs. The MSCWMO Board of Commissioners believes this is the most equitable funding mechanism for the organization, especially in regard to communities that are not fully contained within MSCWMO. The MSCWMO Board of Commissioners would appreciate your support it seeking this legislation as it would be a minor additional tax ($35,000 annually). Additionally, there would be a high level of accountability to the constituents because nearly all of the board members are elected officials from their Middle St. Croix Watershed Management Organization MEMBER COMMUNITIES: Afton,Baypon,Baytown Township,Lakeland,Lakeland Shores, Lake St.Croix Beach,Oak Park Heights,St.Mary's Point,Stillwater and West Lakeland Township CC • rn-►- � Lindy wtcK • • MIDDLE ST. CROIX RIVER WATERSHED MANAGEMENT ORGANIZATION tt<° 1 � 1380 West Frontage Road, Hwy 36 Phone: 651-275-1136, ext. 21 e"-' Stillwater, MN 55082 Fax: 651-1254 .Z A Joint Powers Watershed Management Organization composed of ten St. Croix Valley 11111W Communities that was established under State Statute 103E to cooperatively manage water resources within the watershed. ,+r • June 10, 2004 Washington County Board of Commissioners 14949 62nd Street North, P.O. Box 6 Stillwater, Minnesota 55082-0006 RE: MSCWMO Watershed Management Plan Dear Commissioner: As you are aware, the Middle St. Croix Watershed Management Organization (MSCWMO) is a Joint Powers WMO consisting of 10 St. Croix River communities from Stillwater in the north to Afton in'the south. The MSCWMO has, for the past 16 months, been in the process of developing its 2nd Generation Watershed Management Plan. The purpose of this letter is to give you an update of our progress. Currently, we have the first draft of the Plan distributed to the ten member communities. We are distributing this draft to all member communities for their informal review and comment. This is NOT part of the formal review process, which includes the member communities and other local and state agencies. The intent is to address any issues that may need to be resolved amongst the member communities prior to the formal review process. An updated timeline our progress and the formal review timeline (as of 5/26/04) have been included below. Distribute to communities for review. (June 2004) Make changes based on communities input (Early July 2004) - Distribute for formal 90-day DRAFT review (Late July-- Early October 2004) MSCWMO response to comments (October-November 2004) Public Hearing on Plan (November 2004) Distribute for formal 45-day FINAL review (December 2004 — Early January 2005) MSCWMO makes final changes (January— February 2005) Submit to BWSR for approval, 90-day (February—April 2005) Adoption by MSCWMO Board (April 2005) • Concurrent with the formal review of the Plan, MSCWMO will seek special legislation to be given levy authority for its operating costs. The MSCWMO Board of Commissioners believes this is the most equitable funding mechanism for the organization, especially in regard to communities that are not fully contained within MSCWMO. The MSCWMO Board of Commissioners would appreciate your support it seeking this legislation. as it would be a minor additional tax ($35,000 annually). Additionally, there would be a high level of accountability to the constituents because nearly all of the board members are elected officials from their Middle St. Croix Watershed Management Organization EON AftonMEMB,BaypoR Crt,BaytownMMUTownshipITIES: ,Lakeland,Lakeland Shores,Lake St.Croix Beach,Oak Park Heights,St.Mary's Point,Stillwater and West Lakeland Township • 0 • respective community. We encourage you to attend one of our board meetings, which are held the second Thursday of the month at 7pm at the address listed above. Thank you and please feel free to call me with any questions. 3V Sincerely t0 c.... J. McPherson, Chairman Cc: ✓Jim Shug, County Administration Jane Harper, County Administration , Les Lemm, BWSR Steve Woods, BWSR MSCWMO Board Members Middle St. Croix Watershed Management Organization MEMBER COMMUNITIES: Afton,Bayport,Baytown Township,Lakeland,Lakeland Shores,Lake St.Croix Beach,Oak Park Heights,St.Mary's Point,Stillwater and West Lakeland Township in at lia la Ili .vit Ili mi a .M II M A --Mt -M, -II, R. E. 'ff ------ 1 , -, , / ... - - / , I 1 / '; // / / •./, /- ; -/,, '.--:.-:::_•,-,; /- /,,, ';;;'-.--- .--..:,--. .\'‘, ,,--\, '' ,‘ • '• -• \ , ,. -' 1 '‘ -` ,' ' I ,' /' ';/' -."-'' '• '''',/ \ \ 4- ,...7.:1 ‘ N:\,\,,, ..,.\1 /..,1 '',, -,,, ..1 \ \ 1 ' ', , ///,' '// ",....;:'/"-,/,,,/ --//'' /,..;2..5":"...'-..'" . \ , / / __- --1- i \ \ ak\-1 ' 1` \ s' ' '' I\\,:•..---••\ : 1 ',C I,/ //it': // , /-,„,/ ,7( ,l', \7 1 '. \ \ `7, \ -? .. •, '. .•,,,,-----....,••-::'>1.,,.. '.--x---1•. • ' •• / , • /'/1/' /i / / ••J i/ /xi ..s. , °./ I 1 ',',...t-'''' ' '.1. - ')1 1 . // „/ ,, , /,.- ' i ',-. ..„J --1,,17-7„ "li'll'i-,11,,' ",' 6 ''',C "IN '' 1 ‘"" .''') 1 ft. 1 5:.0:14.' ,.''',... ''', ' / , ,' \ 1 ' ' , 7 ''', ',,,7,/,,A4/./ ,... -i//' i / i/,,../ ,.., -.. 1 ,,/ ''.Nx.v ,•2i,..„:„-,•":": ::• :..„- , ....±,/./,,c,r,.\§/01.17:;_58.1.=E ,;/+7,;‘ , _c,i4/7_1_ • — ---,'","7,7-77•' --• ' -- ., 1 I / ... 1 . ‘'.-t,;,'--•'..7'72-7- 7.7), T.:77...-, •::"'''-' ..,• • '..-- - "I- . 171 I ,/ ,,C ' /;////,',./)•4/ ) / , , 1 x-\ - /1 , -//i / 1 / 1/, I ..— ''' .-//,' 1 ___- 1_1..,‘. -..-.....--;,....,-;:::::: -:.9.;:iii-,i;:.':',-'74-"7,_:._•-, - / ..!, 6 1 7/,,,,,,,,, ,,,,,,,,,,/,7/0/:,,,,,y1. /„..,, I, 4,) ' / //lc, \ \,. ....... _...._ _ , /,i II l\-„,i1,-:: - .0.....-- - • -. k. 1,' --:IIIi7-- •••'' - ":-.-ik ---..!IV N ‘s\- j ' i:''' ' 1 .1 • if " /17 I C4' / ' \ \\ ‘-. — -- — r`..ii".4' ;'/ - -7%;f:,I;:..-- „- ' - -4 os \ \ - - 0.4.• , 7 / i , / bt, '//y, ', il ''( i 1 I i I$ ' - '.- -,,,. • -- -\ ' 1-,;'.;.;::':-''''1, /slit"6„. -""- - $ ,•\1.1,, 1, 1/41 ••• ,• ' ••,, ', ,'" ' / ' ;;to. . t„..\\ - -_--....--_---_-_ ,' \ \.:( ' \' j 124i ,1‘ ‘,7`,i,N‘ :..§7.;-.1- * ) / /I' ,1"j.,, /,,,//,7;// /,,,."; / / /4 ,7.-:.?..•.,:11::111•:f ...?!-::_,'._ ,,,„!!•:::'::::,',".' ._ _/ / 1• .g. ,,,thi Ill 7 ...... ., \\s V N •N, t t f\\ P ---,-2--L'''/ /,j/ r,il';41"://`/11// 'IV 1) , .- ....., s•, . / y, 1 ,', .-- --7-, / , I f ov f.,...,// f,,,,,,, , I : \ ,.......t.,,,,42 ,,,,,t , , •-.i A 1 c,„ :_.-..,./ ii( ‘i i 1 , , - ,,,,.....,... -04,141;417;14F411"---772/- 1 (--.fl'-'1 / // ! //XL, I isos --.'"'•..,,,,‘„____ 'L..._,-- ,§9.......71,1-716••E'..- - :.:_ .,_...........i:=...-;77 ..,....._777..,..0022 • .7 41. • '-\--. -.... SA,' ... t C. ' -/'''' ,,X E. acie yi (,,t,LIP-- -.::..-- /,i, - --- -. ---- - _...- ---- _ / ,„. - -.-:.-'/.//,...i --...:--, i I, Iiiiii1,.,..,....„,,..... ,,, ___1 irea.,syt ' • .,t,.•., -...,'--l'•,_ i,• 1;/4 k., f 1 1 /i• IL.24,1-1,.,`,^."' ".. -- 1 1 _.-olt,- -,0„, ./: . ......._.,-..,,,,4- .- , _ . ''11,- '? ~ ". ' .// k......1,,.'1,,,...k. .11 ',t k\,, t---\,,„....././ -- -- -" _ / ./-"' :I-_..: 7.---__-. ".• -;..„;;,_-/./., :.:: - :...--,„,-' • - 1 II, ' il II 're'''''''..-'....7'. ' ik... ., ,, „.4.4,'' •,, .4.x.\,' ,--t_t-• ---.\ x .-s: -..: - ....,,,,. , , •--7.• -.-1 r.7.--,.:,__ _ ._._ _. ---.....c.----;7- ',.-, ---:-.---. --. ---..---I-- -5- 1' ,p li 11;v7*-.- ) la,,.., II.' ,:I --- '"-- 11671*- 4;0 ' ' 4 \ '4tez ,; , ,,V>i•••....--•.,,,:-._. ..,.' -,-z,:-•-•••:-7. -.1---L._ - i - -1_ - . , ,,...../'-:1„;,,c-- - .-:., ,I• :,: .., :".• 7: -, .--„I ." )., . _ ,,* \ , ,, dp- v A , , '''---t., - • • •,':'--).:;-..'....z---'---.-: :- -.:.. t_p.1 -1.:-."-k-/-1::'''' kocikc "j...);...A',:)( ( -- i • //r4-TiNk1/44*) 1\4 _ ::::n ,;401r,/ 4,14#1 ,..‘...4N ,, \ .. / itlf 4‘ •i • • /,,.::::--- 4§: _isii--;_. t-- - - , , /L " • ‘ .„, . 1 I .:„• lo, ,..,_1.,,,--.50. , ik „. ,, „ .41,7 ,,, ,, )‘. -:,.. - •NN „, , // ,/ .r., .' - y, • -14.4 I Ifti - ' "^.. -Psolft_. 7 f- ..'4,.- &It': /-/' ,...- .2) t '"'"(%illitW'f•"- NN li, ' ' •>.' '''01,11‘ - 1. .,:\K.,-..,,, •• -Pfipl-- _ __./.,,z. p,s,-- .___-- , ', ,g:g i%) •,,/ _i - ' tl 1 ( , '6411r .. :i§I I ...- -% . *. k *- kik** I t/N.Ve• - .... OVA -_-.1 J.--,---y‘• • A //' ii , wo,' ::" - --/./1- -- -1 -- i.e.,: .E., • . .111,,igi.dik ---'12....„7,4;NI)\414,, A, .i<t'k:-„. - 1411, "fil .: PI :I 1 ' il'-' 004111111alkak -- -) i --." ‘'''''---'1k,,, , :-//-2- \\ ,\ -,-• „ I Sat., °.,,,,.-ti ,i//. ,, -1' ,,t:j .a.._141111L'ames764- 1101111Wliti,_ • • 7.,5.._,..,414Ntiiiir', ''..r..\t,\\' 's•.,-''l / -Mr* ?/ /P ''' ' - '10-4 " 11 1 ' ' .-• f' ,I I 1 a; / r--- \ _,trim.ow:._ mikijr,,,, ''''•'••••, ,';.,e falli-R. `V-0-.. •\4, 7/ ik Ay, 1..../. /1 ; I• Irp. *11`•••• —edistadl- ir-- c„1111,w-ir -,---Q,k,:k ..... I) i ii /7: i r; .. ,,Z Irs. P /410' / ' •r \ ilirAl*aPP---, # :Ur . PA-4Miltio,..„ ''''-! I ..-.: — ..- -d / //I . :44 1 .' :-0 -----".- "'... ' „,.„ 'i t JAI ‘2, 7 \ I -" i-y:; *•••••.,.,_ .o_k,- '--.. ::.. /'-, lir 1 .. ; '"-.:.:. 1 j_ J. Lj -^•,.. / ,. t' ' ak . I 1 — --1 '„i„'",/4112 .411 ............:v.7;,...,,,,,, ,:__ ' - - ./ // -, I -.I ( 1, ' ,:.., ;t ‘. .N ..• 4 4 .i.iiiii. `,Z1,1', ' `'3' I "7''''II s'1 1 I ..,,,,,Lj), 1'i •7:"....\%-...... .744141410;111„..s.* 4k. • , I' fi i • ) II N ,::'1.\,,‘\: ' _L.,:.,"••• N '1 j i ts::„ 1 f I " \,I. .s.,, , :I I,, 4 L;l',/(ell';'...:tf..'''' 4."S'1.'.' s.',\''.*H'triTV.Ile - ‘..:44IK. 1117i.tr 1}41,41,i l't4,/„. pq 0 1 : I 1 ..,,, \ \\, mum II . .2.9c4.8.ours, ,, i ,, is ,, 04,4 t itd , if„,,i,, , ..,te,---li..4`,..........::\ , 7,41114. -, 8_).„',.. ' :,,,;::.,,,,1:"-t...joi'1,'il; •v.- 0 \.` 1 \\ •44,* 441.1.1.._ 4.N 1r I ii . — ', 1 , 1,-,A fil 1.4,te---i,/ .;,22, '''": `2',•*,. N .,.. -.._-.;_-,-:-,;',-----:,,,-.,...-;:. ,,, I I •.. ... \\ ift. ; 7'. • 411111;_q ' 11116 .... • FT-7 •,. ii 1 141„ 04, ,,,!;?i,;‘-sc..y. ‘,.„)y^\.%),\,..... I -)\\Ai\.....- . (.......--,:ica-6'3__j C44 I I• ,A., \ N\ \ \r ; ; $' . %ft* 1.... \ I )1,4/, „/ R. 1.0f t....N.12(:. vt4ii. , - 1-0 t-, I t . ' :::\ , ‘,..\ „ : ....•-- . - Oir'''' A 8. 1 a, 1 , I 1 •1 1 lii ,. // -)-4 R• : t I - 11,,.„1 - , 1,.,......1 a 1 , / ////,'j 7 /, 1 ";--- -, • zr, ,V- Mt. ,orio" I s?1:\,":: \ ' *4?''''') .,$P . \ •\,1 , _ _,,,. ... • ;;',///"I hi,,',/,,/‘",..iiii- 111111110-4.:*4‘4111 , 1 . ___ - ,,, , , r____,:_:--:,- \\ ,,A, , ,Iati• , •,.. t...0t, ;"______ _____,t..:....--.. _....,. ,,,,-.1, 1 11 ,40,40,-,A,I•1,1•//';-,,',//,(,<,,'",,,,,•,ififf,/,40,, /////1, ,, .__,)'111101 ./ii ,r;,4)... Alkilli ''' I'', /1 /'(:)-4 P:i ... 1 : 1 r„,..44,0 - 4, *.•ob\ 111,10140001------ "1- ''.1 ..I ks•-i-talk` tj 1/,/_/2,1 '1'/ ; ,// .. -----_,_— 7_11.1_7-- —, ,/‘1461't r ; 4 Mil 1 ' I- *'I 1tVP:$1( )iIl \,,•1"411111"- ,F3 \ 1 ,-Nr*••••---,1: i I..- --, i'‘2,1, ,.._ 7_,ri_l_447--,- i 1 , — ,,/./..,i / i, ,i"\) .. jr. . . - ,.., ;co.• .;''ta—1114k310. . ''''''1,.... .2 ''. /"..1.1.", ft /.•-'-' 1/ I' I i f'i f IIII"......tftN:§ ' ' '. 1 1\ .' i - 't .! op,, 4111177" '>, '426.- t oarille• 6-' --., - •••I-.,04, i I i ,,, / 1 i 1 / i „ 1§11, '''' I ("/ ' ''/ •I , ti? mil , , ' ) • 0 \l,.11.4*.T4‘41 . " ,N,. - - ----- .8 --.. -- - - --...-1 --• i_ -A-,,/,,/, [-, Li: , 1,, 1, ir-40 -, • L,. . , ...4: „,- It, ‘--. t".4 11 , .. -T.- Ae. 1 ; . , ,..• -'1, -At, ..- ,-;_„...„-„, _. :-.. /..-‘0. / 40 1 1 1 .,, i • -• , i ,.......1._ 4 ,, ....., r: it \ , ,„ ,,,o0.404,,,,,„ . ..p • ,_, ...-, ,_.;:vkiik. ...„,-...,„.1-....y..7...Y_-:-‘,_y-zs,..-yt L.. Le L't.."1L_ A.i.,41.4.2 -u- - .i--z-.. -___--;`•_.-_---.--......c-- i...w- . r'-'""i• \ 1. •,,)vwet.,,.. -..., •Nr.i. "",,.. ..A.,-;11:.„-. .74,---..••••:_f-_---_p2z-..-F ___-,„ - , , , \,, •,, %w‘ , I tO4q.06 -\ \ , : i i ! , ..:,, ,.= .., - - -. _..4, --4, ") ' 06"E ' ' ...:,),.;•VPN,, if.— 'll'il'ig. AlApf ,, ',•‘: : Ap-s,--1st*..1I5- - f 410, '.. - 41I- -' -Y-' • ` rill.( IT•• -,..cf,,•‘ v. •I•ur.. 1,..,•[7:- ) ) , . ,,./..1/ .4-/ •* Ili ....,•=0011211tfcrsr, .- •/' '\\ ''ll -,/,7!":).0.4.7:•:`,,, -4,,Iilqi il- ir.4P-ii.--- ----",-< )p .',`, ti i,(\(t--C.k H.,--Si_ '%'n \\\,\,',\,.\\\ s''' ' si4 ,'1-,1 / /- ,"'-‘\..4,0-‘•-",-.1.1-``„\ \ q " fr' 'ril , -,•4, \ "-')V.tw'"••%.:;'0-,----iiii.r.r.NwPtill‘k , --... .. •, \ \• I\ ' 1 I \\ Vk k 0 ',, -'1%•-lc'4.;i•\.•\\ ‘ (/ ( k i ' • i. /* _,1 OtlY -- " 1 , k 1 • ' • 1 , ", .4> / . ... % 1 1, ,-., I.;"--- Ilk\-.."„,..-44k. i.,:,, „..4,,-..-42;;;114,..;.,,,..,"- .4,,,)7- --:' ,,,,,,. 4W,01., ,,,, TAIL,,,,. 0 , , ' 1 \' . , : \ ''"••I 1%Is \\\ '\''''•-•sN's.s,..:‘,..\:.s.:.... .11, I, I.... 2.1 „, ••• .'')t 6 \ 1 VT.ft k,./1.1:1,\.ii.': .AA';>7,/91./''1,i 1.,IP.- .17,7 7.,,a.4 1;7 .4 i:.i liV4t4.4 1 I.s 5 vv Afft.4:0;\,11441,2‘.,,,,,,k,\It\ 1,\\‘C\sks\‘N\ \‘‘\\:`,-,,-- 2 ) ‘,\\''\'\•,\..\••.,,•\\‘ \---,\,—,-------'\\--:ri... -`4:, ("7,7,71'<;- „/"/":,---,1 ,..\\ \ / / ./' !. \• tee,te, \;,...,---;;-,:,-,-;,,‘ - ,.._ ... i ', u., 1 'N\4 , „. ...\ , ,,, ,,‘,,, , t, , ,, lI/ /, , ,„ -\ 1 IllI' f a;1 1 Ti..-„IL.• , . t',irvp' '•;'- ","2,4 - ) \.-.s W.1 /5(1 (tzl ) f -:-‘:' S'\-\ CI \is'Is\\O:\ ‘"NC --') \ (1-Ill 't /'t / '''' ' -,..-,-„, •.;;•. .,-\ -;no , it .. S al/ -,klet,I ,f_.. < , . ..1\" \ ‘' . — .../ \`•\.;4 ,, , , - ,_ .-. .... , l?'-i4...2.. !',A :, .fr,,,,,,a A;* i-iW;-: AVIA; , -,fr,,,p ) 9,,s,4, , • •... .__\ -•- 1-, k-----•,11-\ ‘ ,---....-_% 7• / . 1 , ,' / 1 -1,/-!•,...--,.---:,-- - --.VI/ • ,ii, c k4,- „5; /7., i x, (1.2,- -- _ \ \• , \ =4\•'1/4, if - / - i Ai ,,,--,-P•,,,- --4.-." .:. 4 ' 41 ?,!!!'-'17,---, 7._ if, ---- • ai II cil il ' l i --- --'':::'--..: A k \ ;', \\ )\' \\' \ ',..-:::, \ 'I; i '- ,/ /.' -. ifloirt-'1- ----- •-• , 't p.4-"-• 'P. 4 it rt,„_. Ica „„,-.. Na /, ,,, ) ,, 07/ , , , •( ;J. / - , ‘ ,';.,,.:,..„-,4• t---- / ; 40.4,41* y ai, i., 0 • 41.,\,/ 1Ik , '/ I I 1 ; ,„- — S V \ s -,'- 1 ' , -11; ''., - - I 40 i,. it ‘44 kr __ ...,.:11,,•\\ , \„..„ ,...,:,„:._ , , ..., _ 7,4?1,511',/,;-/ -',.`...-,,•s\ -',::- ,.;=,::-.- i.... ... ( r . (...... ) •,,...:,.„ .\'•-, „ • , .,,,, , ,,,/,/iiiii, ' i,: '1: 9, __,g, 1...-,,' "v,el,-•,- , I , -1\ " .. (4. ; 1 i,i'Ll i'7 „//' i 2 , , 1 , yl, .pl '. ,>„ 's'y,.„-_,k ,/,7 \„ , \ 1 ...,r, /,....-, I . • '' ri i l',' ., , ',., - A\\\:' ‘‘) ' (/ -,ii.‘ , i , ,,,, ) ,„ - ..,.....„.....‘• , 114, ;.,,,, \ , ( 4• .. . .......,, . 1\ 1H I I,k. i i, (., k 1, ' •-_ -. 7 ,..„ . „,‘:•„-i,., , i i , 1 ti li_ _l'''' \) 4 ( ,11t7 \ ital4p iv \ Itwadlity 7,1" ,, Y, ), \ ,_-\-,-,-, 7; , ),\,.. .•- •, si1 , . ,.. ) •-•.,- 400, , ,, . , ,..2.__ • z-LIA,- '' , , -, , / / 1 l 1 i/f ^.'- 1). ---1 ,. .• /,// I ; ( `, .- IN, ,I ', ' P-.4.•' '' k.. 11,-- 1--4 ' 14r— ... .„2-1 7"-r'.'-''''..•-,- --- '. --Igo .:.9, . .. , , -- - . ) ' . --0-ef,2 , \\ , 1 " i/1,1,,,2',.-\,„/-•- \„ ' "'N ,7 y ' 1 ‘ • -__ .____ ,' ;i"I,--y'//;-..,'..,-- ; .-- ...\\:ii, \\- .6,'. i;i-\\ ' .- ' .- ,. ,') 1 1 ,t\'')'‘. ‘'s • ' ' i I . ,.//..1„.>•/•;:„ .•'...- , - 1 1 i I 1{',.' / i , ss.„, (..., "" — —. .1,,' i'iiiit.(-'i ( 'll?IT.'-•-•'`'' ''t'','' '':.k,--'4°-° -41/44/:::: if..----_ .... --- -'1,1' I 1, 1 : 1 i )1 I / „I' I ; '' )-7%;-,-/%'//." -\ 1 I 1 t( i / (' \( ., 1 i i . 1, . ,,......„, \S.,,,,,,.._,- -. // . ..,,,,,, s_ Mq0 ,„,,,, i ,1 I , , / / f \......,/,. / )7/ \ / 1 i , \ 1 \ • '...... , i Is 1 \116,)ii sk l -, t.\ t,:sk\k \ \i,,,,,,,,,;s4,,.„. .„.,,,v/-, z',,-:,-,--'-,..,_„:,11,:,i ..._ it , ' , 1,, 1, // // , .,, , , "•/// ‘ i /, , 1, ,\ ! i k `s, , s•,s, ---r --.1 i I • ,\,\,,\,,,\ ....51 .4.\\,,,.:,:.*:.,. /,, ,/1/\ s.,\\\ :41F., •\,(1 i , i i , 1 i ti ,if/ /, i --- ,,,.;.//////,., .,, /,/,,,..,. , 1, 1 , , ..‘ .., • \ \ , II,,,, .,, (-,IT:k: ',,,,z.,,,,w \\•\ `z.,„..:: 1, N\ . ‘,..,,,/,i: ( li.), ,1 )(ctig- .)li\'\ ., i I : i ://1 Iv /i , '' z / //, ,', ' ' /,y „" ) 1 1 . 1 ' \ ,/ '.. , . / II 'I r,s•-•: s ,,, , .,, ,' , '"•,:....„ , ' ' a i ,, ) /1 ,.I., k ,\ ' ‘ • , \ / ir ''.0,,,P\I\\''`'.- \\ \' - ,- ' - , I t •'" / //4:i I 1 ,. .."Ii / J i) ‘,‘ ;•,',N\\‘•,\`, -.-.7,z./.-,•. , 1 '----11, i 1 \ ,, \ ii/ V,"'. )I / •.`\`,' ,\\ ',- re I 1 I \t k 5... I 0 -r---- t -.,.. r 7,- ..r-- tt,•f?, 11. t ,:t I 0 ., t; s .1 V R 0 SIFF;‘,40NP, IA ....7 ":0111P-- —../111.•,.....-.4P"--"`"`"" ..mill ,!., ..T. (4 „T, g 'A ::•.=.7...;;;:fs,f2f4q,:i ---,-, • ...NN 2 ,g El tn 2 9 C Sif.igi7.0.4',;Vi. -i‘.- ri 114 L- - Eg4g ..§.:0,...1411,,Afif -,:„. (-1 T.. g m x c2 73 g .A.4. ..,..:..ii ,,._ z , .. .)1f 5 ,,. r.' -g ,.,,,,),„!: - , ,..... m 2 i g 2.. rn :::Wiii Vf.. 4 a 9. I' is.c4 7 fp ;1 * t ii$4i0:t ;;•,,,e Z IAINNUll -es g ....,-, 3 R .? I g ____, 1 .i.i ,,.., if POST ERBEDRINT t,§-4 4 .,. ..3, - ....Q.k.",01 i- a g •* 4 E P - SS PS,4,OSiAll: .° 4 4 T•i ,. P :11,,..•,;ii,40.v.V...:1 --aft V.1,..10,•• s.. .. n ..••ysmier ',..f..-Afei,,Iv k iii ri 7, V4.4.41(1 0 rn 0 .'q namsi lAtirdedibei Folz,Freeman,Erickson,Inc. ,.. 1 PRELIMINARY PLAT MBM DEVELOPMENT, LLC 1 tpa tpa +5 — No—SURVEYING 0 E • •1 2 8 ' c4vi;.1(11-i3 (. ) GRADING&EROSION CONROE RAN mg ig ENGINEERING (..1 " 1 _____ INJ riOraiiME 2614/3/120161 1 ; Ft A 56 A ,,/,2ci-,/E1 — I • 5620 MINORIAL AVENUE NORM,STILLWATER,RN 55032 (7;3 c, N 2 ......1 LORAMERE 118 SOUTH MAIN STREET Pioa 1650 439•NO3 Prt 1650 4304331 ..". X. "299%11 Ci WEST LAKELAND TOWNSHIP,MN STILLWATER,MN 55082 %bow•,...**.x.• ; Y, NO. REVISION DESCRIPTION DATE DRANICK08 4 N. III • Legislative Associates, Inc. P.O.Box 2131 110130th Street,Suite 500 Stittwater,MN 55082 Washington,D.C.20007 (651)439-7681 (202)625-4356 Fax(651)439-7319 Fax(1o2)625-4363 May 24, 2004 To: St. Croix WMO Representatives, John McPherson, Chair Mike McGuire, Project Administrator From:Ed Cain, LAI Subject: State Storm Sewer Project at Bayport: Legislative update I'm sure you are all aware that the Legislature adjourned with a lot of unfinished business, including the passage of the Bonding Bill. The House bill included the$1.55 million for the completion of the State Storm Sewer Project, and the Senate bill while not specifically including the appropriation, agreed to accept it in conference Committee. The House leadership gave our project the highest priority ranking it, "a must fund." The Process and what happened: The House Bonding Bill was passed and sent to the Senate. As is usual procedure, the Senate offered a"delete all amendment"to the House Bill and substituted their bill. Ordinarily, the Senate Bill would then be passed, and then sent back to the House. A conference committee consisting of House and Senate Members would then be appointed, and they would work out the differences between the two bills. The compromise report would then be sent back to the House and Senate for final passage. The final bill would then go to the Governor for his signature, and/or, any line item vetoes he might invoke to eliminate and expenditures that he does not like. Passage of Bonding Bills require a three fifths vote by each of the two Legislative bodies. The Senate consists of 35 DFL'ers, 31 Republicans, and 1 independent. In the House the ratio is 81 Republicans, and 53 DFL'ers, requiring all 81 votes to pass any bonding legislation. The House bill was passed by a bipartisan vote of 102 to 30. The Senate bill did not obtain the required 60%, as the Senate bonding bill received 39 votes, while needing 41 votes. Three Senate Republicans and the Independent unsuccessfully voted with the 35 DFL'ers. The Conflict: The reason given for the conflict over bonding was the level of funding of the different bills, and the Governors position. The Senate bill was for$948 million, the Governor's request totaled $757 million, and the House bill passed was for$682 million. The position of those supporting the higher bonding levels was that interest rates were at an all-time low saving the State millions. Further, the Senate bonding bill would have created 10,000 new jobs in Minnesota according to estimates. If both bills were passed, they would have gone to a Conference Committee that, according to past results, would have resulted in a final bill of about$800 million. Interestingly, the Senate bill included the four priority issues of the Governor, while the House bill did not. (1) S 1111 What Happens Now: It is up to the Governor to call a special session if he so desires. I am sure he will insist on an agreement to be worked out between the Legislative Leaders and his office before calling a Special Session. He has resolved the budget issue with some fiscal manipulation. The stadium issue, however, is still unresolved. I personally believe there will be a Special Session within the next six weeks or so. I have been in contact with Senate Majority Leaders office, and he wants to move forward, and get a bonding bill passed. I am sure the Speaker of the House and the Governor share these views. Since the adjournment of the Legislature, there has been much discussion regarding the Special Session. In an article the Stillwater Gazette, our two Senators were split on their positions. Senator Michele Bachmann supports a special session, while Bryon LeClair is opposed to one. As an organization negatively impacted by the lack of action by the Legislature and the Governor, we need to get this message to our lawmakers. What we can do: I'll put together a draft letter for WMO approval that should be signed by each member of the organization. Separate letters should go to the House and Senate leadership, the Governor, the Chairmen of the Capital Investment Committees, and to our local senators and representatives. We should also schedule some personal meetings with them. If we just sit back and do nothing, some will continue to think no bonding bill is no big deal. This was the year to get our project completed. I still think we can make it happen. Ed • DRAFT Middle St. Croix Watershed Management Organization Regular Meeting May 13, 2004 Washington County Conservation District Present: Chairman John McPherson, Members Robert Kamps, John Jansen, Jim Gilles, David Beaudet, Anders Hansen, Joella Givens, Ron Nelson Others Present: Bob Fossum, Administrator; Elizabeth Vance, Recording Secretary Call to Order: Chairman John McPherson called the meeting to order at 7:00 PM. Approval of the Minutes: The minutes of the April 8th meeting were approved with minor corrections. Mr. Beaudet moved to accept the minutes as corrected, seconded by Mr. Jansen, the motion passed. Treasurer's Report: Mr. Anders presented the treasurer's report for April 2004. Mr. Beaudet moved to accept the treasurer's report as presented. Ms. Givens seconded the motion. The motion can-led. • The invoices were presented for payment. Mr. Beaudet moved to pay the bills, seconded by Mr. Jansen. The motion passed. St Croix River Bridge Crossing: No new developments were presented on this project. Draft Watershed Management Plan: Mr. Fossum had met, as directed, with Attorney LeFevre, to review the standards proposed. He presented the substantive comments to the board for review. The first comments concern Section 5.1.4, which addresses construction within 40 feet of the bluff line. Mr. Lefevre's opinion was that this standard would be difficult to directly tie to the mission of the organization. It is also addressed in other regulations involving the scenic riverway. It was suggested it be removed. After discussion, Mr. Hansen moved to remove this standard. Ms. Givens seconded. The motion carried. Section 5.1.4. Discusses buffer zones. The phrasing of"unmowed natural vegetation" in lieu of"undisturbed"and "upslope of the delineated water edge" as being more clear. The key issue is where would buffers be applicable. It was suggested that a clarification be done so that the review would be triggered where there was physical change affecting the runoff characteristics of the load. The phase "which causes a change in runoff characteristics or disturbance of vegetation"was added to provide that clarification. After discussion, Mr. Jansen moved to adopt the proposed revised language. Mr. Beaudet seconded the motion. The motion carried. Section 5.1.2, policy 2 includes two potential standards. Mr. Lefevre suggested including the phrase "whichever is less"to ensure that the appropriate standard was Page 1 of 3 April 8, 2004 DRAFT • Middle St. Croix Watershed Management Organization Regular Meeting May 13, 2004 Washington County Conservation District applied. Ms. Givens moved to adopt the language. Mr. Gilles seconded the motion. The motion carried. Section 6.3, standard #4, discusses redevelopment. The concern was to appropriately scope the trigger so that minor work, such as a picnic stand or curb repair on a large parking lot, on a large site would not necessarily trigger review. Suggested that the trigger might be a 1000 sq ft increase in impervious surface. Curbing could affect drainage, so that change would be appropriate for review, whereas repaving may not be applicable. Ms. Givens suggested using the same phase, "causing a change in runoff characteristics or disturbance in vegetation"used above to provide the scooping. A combination of increase in size of impervious surface by some amount or a percentage change in runoff was suggested. The original language was adopted from Brown's Creek, and added at the suggestion of BWSR to address redevelopment. It was agreed that the suggestions for scooping language be reviewed with Mr. LeFevre. Mr. Gilles moved to direct Mr. Fossum to review with Mr. LeFevre. Seconded by Mr. Jansen, the motion carried. The last discussion point was the variance and waiver processes. It was suggested to review Shingle Creek or Middle Mississippi for appropriate language. Mr. Beaudet moved that Mr. Fossum review both documents, and select the most appropriate. Mr. Jansen seconded the motion. The motion carried. • Mr. Fossum presented a revision to the completion timeline,putting back the completion date by one month. Mr. Jansen suggested Mr. Fossum communicate the new timeline to BWSR and Washington County. Mr. Fossum was directed to, if appropriate, after review with Mr. LeFevre; distribute the draft copy to the member communities for review. Phase III and Bonding Update Mr. Cain provided an updated status of the bonding bill. No resolution was yet available. Wesley Bay Ridge After receipt of the comments, the developers of Wesley Bay Ridge increased the outlet pipe as suggested. Red Prairie Acres Baytown Township received notification of a subdivision on the Seim property on Osgood Avenue. This is a replatting, with no grading expected. The plan includes no road construction, and no significant impact on drainage. This is only a creation of 4 lots. Mr. Beaudet suggested a comment letter be drafted, suggesting that soil erosion be considered. Mr. Beaudet moved to approve the comments for the Red Prairie Acres development. Seconded by Ms. Givens, the motion carried. Oakgreen Village Mr. Beaudet provided an update on the Oakgreen Village development. There were adjustments in the final plan since the review. Final plans are enroute for review. Page 2 of 3 April 8, 2004 • DRAFT Middle St. Croix Watershed Management Organization Regular Meeting May 13, 2004 Washington County Conservation District Adjourn: Having no additional business, Mr. Hansen moved to adjourn the meeting. Seconded by Mr. Gilles, the motion carried. Chairman McPherson adjourned the meeting at 7:30 PM. Respectfully Submitted,// Elizabeth A. Vance Recording Secretary Page 3 of 3 April 8, 2004 • . APPROVED Middle St. Croix Watershed Management Organization Regular Meeting April 8, 2004 Washington County Conservation District Present: Chairman John McPherson, Members Robert Kamps, John Jansen, Jim Gilles, David Beaudet, Anders Hansen, Nancy Jacobsen, Joella Givens Absent: Ron Nelson Others Present: Bob Fossum, Administrator; Elizabeth Vance, Recording Secretary Call to Order: Chairman McPherson called the meeting to order at 7:06 PM,April 8, 2004. Approval of the Minutes: Mr. Jansen noted a typographical error in the minutes. Mr. Beaudet moved, seconded by Mr. Hansen, to approve the minutes as corrected. The motion carried. Treasurer's Report Mr. Hansen presented the treasurer's report, recognizing receipt of payment of member communities Baytown, Lakeland, Stillwater, West Lakeland, St Mary's Point Oak Park Heights and Lakeland Shores. The previously authorized invoice for insurance was received and paid. Invoices presented include for the Washington County Conservation District and Mr. LeFevere, for legal services performed. Mr. Beaudet moved to authorize payment. Seconded by Mr. Jansen, the motion carried. Mr. Beaudet moved to accept the treasurer's report. Seconded by Ms. Givens, the motion carried. St Croix River Bridge Crossing Chairman McPherson asked for an update on the St. Croix River Bridge Crossing. Mr. Fossum reported that he has received a final scoping document,but the information therein was previously discussed by the Board. The members reviewed the discussion, but no clear new information was available at this time. Watershed Management Plan: Chairman McPherson reported on the review by the subcommittee appointed at the March meeting. Mr. Fossum presented a summary of the changes made. Page 60, listing performance standards, was modified with regards to the measurement of land disturbed to qualify for review, and clarification of the specification of minimum lowest floor. It was suggested that the restriction for construction around landlocked basins be 2 ft above the overflow elevation. The board discussed the comparison between Valley Branch Watershed plan specifications, and those of the draft Middle St Croix plan. Mr. Fossum will obtain a copy of the Valley Branch plan for further information. It was suggested that section 8 refer to a delineated wetland edge or ordinary high water mark for greater clarification. Mr. Beaudet suggested that language be provided for local zoning ordinances to refer to the plan. In addition it was suggested that a disclaimer be added reflecting that, in the event of conflict in the rules, the more restrictive standard applies. Standard number 5 was reduced from 18% slope to 12% slope to match the Page 1 of 3 April 8, 2004 l • • APPROVED Middle St. Croix Watershed Management Organization Regular Meeting April 8, 2004 Washington County Conservation District standards of the Scenic Riverway District. This may be more restrictive for communities outside that district. Section 6.3 was modified to add a statement to include redevelopment projects as being subject to review when 5 or more acres in size, or final impervious surface exceeds 1 acre or 5%. Discussion followed on clarification of the definition of a 12% slope. Mr. Fossum's research indicates there is no formal definition, but relies on reasonable interpretation. Although there have been no issues on record, the board felt it important to develop a consistent understanding. Mr. Gilles suggested a strict definition, and allowing for variances to adopt for particular circumstance. Mr. Fossum suggested that the attorney review specific portions of the performance standards to ensure that the rules are enforceable. Mr. Beaudet moved to allow a legal review of the performance standards, selected at Mr. Fossum's discretion, to not exceed 4 hours of legal review. Mr. Gilles seconded the motion. The motion carried. Mr. Fossum presented a revised timeline for plan completion. The next formal step is member community comment, followed by a formal 90-day review and public hearing, and final review. This would complete the plan about February 2005. The board directed Mr. Fossum to send the updated schedule to BWSR and the Washington County Board. Mr. Beaudet asked about the mapping to support the plan. Mr. Fossum has been notified that the mapping has been completed, and available from the surveyors. State of Minnesota Storm Sewer Project Phase 3: No clear update was available on the progress of the project through the bonding bill. Mr. Beaudet will follow up. Mr. Kamps suggested Mr. Cain be contacted for a status report at the next meeting. Wesley Bay Ridge: Mr. Fossum presented a draft review of the Wesley Bay Ridge development in Baytown. The development will connect 44th Street to Paris Avenue. From a storm water control and erosion management perspective, the project is sufficient. Drainage ponds will collect runoff to the northeast,be piped beneath the road to a second pond, and released along the railroad tracks at Stagecoach. The plan limits peak flow to the same level as prior to development. Currently rock overflow control point is drafted to be at an elevation of 849.5. It was suggested that it be increased to 850 so that the pipe is full before any overflow occurs. There is concern about the level of runoff in this area,but this design should lessen the peak flow. Drainage after development will be no worse, and maybe slightly improved after the development is completed. Mr. Beaudet moved to approve the letter of recommendation drafted by Mr. Fossum. Seconded by Ms. Givens, the motion carried. Other Business: Mr. Hansen reported on a home site in Huntington Meadows where percolation could not be established. The local authority was being presented with a request to pipe under the roadway to expand the area for potential drain field. Page 2 of 3 April 8, 2004 • • APPROVED Middle St. Croix Watershed Management Organization Regular Meeting April 8, 2004 Washington County Conservation District Mr. Jansen brought forward the status of the Lower St Croix Scenic Riverway Advisory Board. Budget constraints on the part of the Minnesota Department of Natural Resources will restrict staff support available for the project. Mr. Jansen expressed concern that the board continue, to allow for local community input into the management of the riverway. Adjourn: Mr. Hansen moved to adjourn the meeting. Seconded by Mr. Beaudet, the motion passed. The meeting was adjourned at 8:11 PM. Respectfully Submitted, ?i, Ice Elizabeth A. Vance Recording Secretary Page 3 of 3 April 8, 2004 • y MIDDLE ST. CROIX RIVER WATERSHED MANAGEMENT ORGANIZATION 1380 West Frontage Road, Hwy 36 Phone: 651-275-1136, ext.21 Stillwater, MN 55082 Fax: 651-1254 D A Joint Powers Watershed Management Organization composed of ten St. Croix Valley Communities that was established under State Statute 103E to cooperatively manage water resources within the watershed. June 2, 2004 Washington County Board of Commissioners 14949 62nd Street North, P.O. Box 6 Stillwater, Minnesota 55082-0006 RE: MSCWMO Watershed Management Plans. Dear Commissioner: As you are aware, the Middle St. Croix Watershed •emli (MSCWMO) is a Joint Powers WMO consisting of 10 St. Croix River co 'ties 1 St g m in ( north to Afton in the south. The > MSCWMO has, for the past 16 monthn i c- �, :"of deve ang its 2nd Generation Watershed Management Plan. The purpose o § � l is gi i date ofour progress. Currently, we have the first draft of the Plan distribute# ' to em;er cb m v� ,it a We are distributing this draft to all member communities for their informal er ,:P This is 'OT part of the formal review process, which includes the member communities a t �• I state agencies. The intent is to address any issues that may need to be resolved amongst the membe 711 munities prior to the formal review process. An updated timeline our progress and the fob evie .t meline(as of 5/26/04)have been included below. k Distribute to communitiesfor review. (June 2004) Make changes based on communities input(Early July 2004) Distribute for formal 90-day DRAFT review (Late July-- Early October 2004) MSCWMO response to comments (October-November 2004) Public Hearing on Plan(November 2004) Distribute for formal 45-day FINAL review(December 2004—Early January 2005) MSCWMO makes final changes (January—February 2005) Submit to BWSR for approval, 90-day (February—April 2005) Adoption by MSCWMO Board(April 2005) Concurrent with the formal review of the Plan, MSCWMO will seek special legislation to be given levy authority for its operating costs. The MSCWMO Board of Commissioners believes this is the most equitable funding mechanism for the organization, especially in regard to communities that are not fully contained within MSCWMO. The MSCWMO Board of Commissioners would appreciate your support it seeking this legislation as it would be a minor additional tax ($35,000 annually). Additionally, there would be a high level of accountability to the constituents because nearly all of the board members are elected officials from their Middle St. Croix Watershed Management Organization MEMBER COMMUNITIES: Afton,Bayport,Baytown Township,Lakeland,Lakeland Shores,Lake St.Croix Beach,Oak Park Heights,St.Mary's Point,Stillwater and West Lakeland Township • • respective community. We encourage you to attend one of our board meetings, which are held the second Thursday of the month at 7pm at the address listed above. Thank you and please feel free to call me with any questions. Sincerely, John McPherson, Chairman Cc: Jim Shug, County Administration Jane Harper, County Administration Les Lemm, BWSR Steve Wood, BWSR MSCWMO Board Members Y >jj4 Ai �h r y ' Middle St. Croix Watershed Management Organization MEMBER COMMUNITIES: Afton,Bayport,Baytown Township,Lakeland,Lakeland Shores,Lake St.Croix Beach,Oak Park Heights,St.Mary's Point,Stillwater and West Lakeland Township • S I y " MIDDLE ST. CROIX RIVER WATERSHED MANAGEMENT ORGANIZATION Imo, 1380 West Frontage Road, Hwy 36 Phone: 651-275-1136, ext. 21 13i ' Stillwater, MN 55082 Fax: 651-1254 t A Joint Powers Watershed Management Organization composed of ten St. Croix Valley Communities that was established under State Statute 103B to cooperatively manage water resources within the watershed. 111 r h LETTER OF TRANSMITTAL DATE: August 2,2004 TO: Middle St.Croix River Watershed Management Organization FROM: Melissa Lewis RE: August 12,2004 Meeting Packet WE ARE SENDING: Via Mail: X Courier: Fax: Agenda Item DESCRIPTION 1 Agenda—August 12,2004 MSCWMO meeting Minutes 2 Draft minutes for the July 8,2004 Board meeting Approved minutes for June 10,2004 Board meeting Old Business Response to Comment letter from Stillwater regarding draft 2nd Generation Watershed Management Plan 4 Minnesota Department of Public Health letter regarding Watershed Management Plan Draft Resolution to County regarding levy authority. Draft Legislation for levy authority 5 New Business Memo from Konrad Koosmann regarding staffing changes at WCD. Please call me with any additional agenda items or agenda changes at 275-1136,ext.22. Sincerely, Melissa Lewis Cc: Betsy Vance,Recording Secretary Charlie LeFevere,Kennedy&Graven Konrad Koosmann,WCD City of Oak Park Heights(Agenda and Minutes Only) City of Stillwater(Agenda and Minutes Only) Jeff Davis,SEH(Agenda and Minutes Only) Middle St. Croix Watershed Management Organization MEMBER COMMUNITIES: Afton,Bayport,Baytown Township,Lakeland,Lakeland Shores,Lake St.Croix Beach,Oak Park Heights,St.Mary's Point,Stillwater and West Lakeland Township 0 Regular Meeting Agenda • Middle St. Croix Watershed Management Organization May 13, 2004 Washington Conservation District (Located in River Heights Plaza, Stillwater,next to the Washington County License Center)77:00 P -Regular Meeting Agenda Call to Order 7. Approval of Minutes tiC a) April 8, 2004 Minutes el,e 6 1,1 3. reasurer's Report(Anders Hansen) i,,,`te 6''� Lf Report of Savings Account, Assets iltt( Approve payment of bills 4. Old Business 7 St. Croix River Bridge Crossing Project Update jer Watershed Management Plan Current Timeline Update 5. New Business State of MN Storm Sewer Project, Phase III & Bonding Update Development Review Updates 6. Other Agenda Items 7. Adjourn Middle St. Croix Watershed Management Organization MEMBER COMMUNITIES: Afton,Bayport,Baytown Township,Lakeland,Lakeland Shores,Lake St.Croix Beach,Oak Park Heights,St.Mary's Point,Stillwater and West Lakeland Township • • tJf MIDDLE ST. CROIX RIVER WATERSHED MANAGEMENT ORGANIZATION 1380 West Frontage Road, Hwy 36 Phone: 651-275-1136, ext. 21 D ` � . Stillwater, MN 55082 Fax: 651-1254 1 1 A Joint Powers Watershed Management Organization composed of ten St. Croix Valley fi Communities that was established under State Statute 103E to cooperatively manage water ), ,M resources within the watershed. LETTER OF TRANSMITTAL DATE: May 7,2004 TO: Middle St.Croix River Watershed Management Organization FROM: Bob Fossum RE: May 13,2004 Meeting Packet WE ARE SENDING: Via Mail: X Courier: Fax: Agenda Item DESCRIPTION 1 Agenda—May 13,2003 MSCWMO meeting 2 Minutes—Draft minutes for the April 8,2004 Board meeting Approved minutes for March 11,2004 Board meeting Informational Letter from Ed Cain RE:Bonding Bill Item The latest information on the status of the Bonding Bill will be available at the meeting. Please call me with any additional agenda items or agenda changes at 275-1136,ext.21. Sincerely, Bob Fossum ! � Cc: Betsy Vance,Recording Secretary Charlie LeFevere,Kennedy&Graven Konrad Koosmann,WCD City of Oak Park Heights(Agenda and Minutes Only) City of Stillwater(Agenda and Minutes Only) Jeff Davis,SEH(Agenda and Minutes Only) Middle St. Croix Watershed Management Organization MEMBER COMMUNITIES: Afton,Bayport,Baytown Township,Lakeland,Lakeland Shores,Lake St.Croix Beach,Oak Park Heights,St.Mary's Point,Stillwater and West Lakeland Township MIDDLE ST. CROIX RIVER WATERSHED MANAGEMENT ORGANIZATION / , irk s 1380 West Frontage Road, Hwy 36 Phone: 651-275-1136, ext. 21 Stillwater, MN 55082 Fax: 651-1254 D A Joint Powers Watershed Management Organization composed of ten St. Croix Valley WM- Communities that was established under State Statute 103B to cooperatively manage water4.71 „,t( e resources within the watershed. May 26,2004 Erik Johnson,Administrator City of Oak Park Heights 14168 North 57th Street,P.O.Box 2007 Oak Park Heights,MN 55082-2007 RE: MSCWMO Watershed Management Plan Dear Mr.Johnson: As you are aware, your City is a member of the Joint Powers Agreement, which forms the Middle St. Croix Watershed Management Organization (MSCWMO). The MSCWMO has, for the past 16 months, been in the process of developing its 2nd Generation Watershed Management Plan. We have enclosed for your initial review,the first draft of the Plan. We are distributing this draft to all member communities for their informal review and comment. This is NOT part of the formal review process, which includes the member communities and other local and state agencies. It is being done to give the member communities an early chance to comment before the plan goes to a more broad audience. The intent is to address any issues that may need to be resolved amongst the member communities prior to the formal review process. Please review the plan and return all comments to the MSCWMO by July 1, 2004. At that time we will respond to any issues and begin the formal review process. The review process and timeline (as of 5/26/04)have been included below. Distribute to communities for review.(June 2004) Make changes based on communities input(Early July 2004) Distribute for formal 90-day DRAFT review(Late July--Early October 2004) MSCWMO response to comments(October-November 2004) Public Hearing on Plan(November 2004) Distribute for formal 45-day FINAL review(December 2004–Early January 2005) MSCWMO makes final changes(January–February 2005) Submit to BW SR for approval,90-day(February–April 2005) Adoption by MSCWMO Board(April 2005) Questions and comments should be directed to Bob Fossum,MSCWMO Administrator,at the address and phone number below. We have enclosed two paper copies of the plan for your use; additional copies will be made available upon request. The MSCWMO Board of Commissioners thanks you and your community for its continued support of its organization. Sincerely, John McPherson,Chairman Cc:haMieltlideeMSICWMOSCAid**Aber Enc: Draft l—MSCWMO 2nd Generation Watershed Management Plan Middle St. Croix Watershed Management Organization MEMBER COMMUNITIES: Afton,Bayport,Baytown Township,Lakeland,Lakeland Shores,Lake St.Croix Beach,Oak Park Heights,St.Mary's Point,Stillwater and West Lakeland Township May- 14-04 04 : 1OA Legislative Associates 612 4397319 P . 01 LEGISLATIVE ASSOCIATES, INC. P.O. Box 2131 Stillwater, MN 55082 (651) 439-7681 Fax (651) 439-7319 Cell Phone (651) 303-2424 ec7453@aol.com FACSIMILE TRANSMITTAL • Fax No. Z 7.r.- / Z 17 To the Immediate Attention of: its,t; I rosesolip Title: Phone No. Organization: u L I� $ i I/it.s-ra Address: City, State, Zip Code: From: ei eftIdor Date: 3 d _ Number of Pages (including cover sheet): Subject: 1 • . i -Si 6 ,SVIMfts j1. •.. .. Comments or Message: ww a ‘ .1'4 Ie el 4 y rtiii•• ld.'1'a sib ►•A Err Z o 3- t * * * * * * * If this transmittal is not being received properly, please contact the sender at one of the phone numbers listed above. May- 14-04 04: 1OA Legislative Associates 612 4397319 P . 02 BOB- Currently, the Legislature is making some attempt to get a bonding bill out, with little progress to show for it. The Senate Republicans, less three or four, all voted against the Senate Bonding Bill including Bachmann and LeClair. They needed 60% or 41 votes, and only got 39 votes. The Governor, the Senate, and the House all want a bill - - however, it will have to be done as it was last year. That is, the leadership will have to put one together and the House and the Senate will have to vote it either up or down -- -no amendments from the floor. We are currently in the House bill for$1.55 million. We're not in the Senate Bill, however, I talked with Chairman Langseth and his staff several times, and they are willing to go along with the House. Sviggum is a very strong supporter and I am confident that he will see that it is in the final bill after he screwed up last year. Sorry I couldn't be with you tonight, but I thought it would be better to be at the Capitol as things are moving very fast. There is still the possibility that they won't get it done in a regular session. If not, I am confident the Governor will call a special session for everything not done. I'll let you all know as soon as something comes out of all this negotiation. . • DRAFT Middle St. Croix Watershed Management Organization Regular Meeting April 8, 2004 Washington County Conservation District Present: Chairman John McPherson, Members Robert Kamps, John Jansen, Jim Gilles, David Beaudet, Anders Hansen, Nancy Jacobsen, Joella Givens Absent: Ron Nelson Others Present: Bob Fossum, Administrator; Elizabeth Vance, Recording Secretary Call to Order: Chairman McPherson called the meeting to order at 7:06 PM, April 8, 2004. Approval of the Minutes: Mr. Jansen noted a typographical error in the minutes. Mr. Beaudet moved, seconded by Mr. Hansen, to approve the minutes as corrected. The motion carried. Treasurer's Report Mr. Hansen presented the treasurer's report,recognizing receipt of payment of member communities Baytown, Lakeland, Stillwater, West Lakeland, St Mary's Point Oak Park Heights and Lakeland Shores. The previously authorized invoice for insurance was received and paid. Invoices presented include for the Washington County Conservation District and Mr. LeFevere, for legal services performed. Mr. Beaudet moved to authorize payment. Seconded by Mr. Jansen, the motion carried. Mr. Beaudet moved to accept the treasurer's report. Seconded by Ms. Givens, the motion carried. St Croix River Bridge Crossing Chairman McPherson asked for an update on the St. Croix River Bridge Crossing. Mr. Fossum reported that he has received a final scooping document,but the information therein was previously discussed by the Board. The members reviewed the discussion, but no clear new information was available at this time. Watershed Management Plan: Chairman McPherson reported on the review by the subcommittee appointed at the March meeting. Mr. Fossum presented a summary of the changes made. Page 60, listing performance standards, was modified with regards to the measurement of land disturbed to qualify for review, and clarification of the specification of minimum lowest floor. It was suggested that the restriction for construction around landlocked basis be 2 ft above the overflow elevation. The board discussed the comparison between Valley Branch Watershed plan specifications, and those of the draft Middle St Croix plan. Mr. Fossum will obtain a copy of the Valley Branch plan for further information. It was suggested that section 8 refer to a delineated wetland edge or ordinary high water mark for greater clarification. Mr. Beaudet suggested that language be provided for local zoning ordinances to refer to the plan. In addition it was suggested that a disclaimer be added reflecting that, in the event of conflict in the rules, the more restrictive standard applies. Standard number 5 was reduced from 18% slope to 12% slope to match the Page 1 of 3 April 8, 2004 • DRAFT • Middle St. Croix Watershed Management Organization Regular Meeting April 8, 2004 Washington County Conservation District standards of the Scenic Riverway District. This may be more restrictive for communities outside that district. Section 6.3 was modified to add a statement to include redevelopment projects as being subject to review when 5 or more acres in size, or final impervious surface exceeds 1 acre or 5%. Discussion followed on clarification of the definition of a 12% slope. Mr. Fossum's research indicates there is no formal definition,but relies on reasonable interpretation. Although there have been no issues on record, the board felt it important to develop a consistent understanding. Mr. Gilles suggested a strict definition, and allowing for variances to adopt for particular circumstance. Mr. Fossum suggested that the attorney review specific portions of the performance standards to ensure that the rules are enforceable. Mr. Beaudet moved to allow a legal review of the performance standards, selected at Mr. Fossum's discretion, to not exceed 4 hours of legal review. Mr. Gilles seconded the motion. The motion carried. Mr. Fossum presented a revised timeline for plan completion. The next formal step is member community comment, followed by a formal 90-day review and public hearing, and final review. This would complete the plan about February 2005. The board directed Mr. Fossum to send the updated schedule to BWSR and the Washington County Board. Mr. Beaudet asked about the mapping to support the plan. Mr. Fossum has been notified that the mapping has been completed, and available from the surveyors. State of Minnesota Storm Sewer Project Phase 3: No clear update was available on the progress of the project through the bonding bill. Mr. Beaudet will follow up. Mr. Kamps suggested Mr. Cain be contacted for a status report at the next meeting. Wesley Bay Ridge: Mr. Fossum presented a draft review of the Wesley Bay Ridge development in Baytown. The development will connect 44th Street to Paris Avenue. From a storm water control and erosion management perspective, the project is sufficient. Drainage ponds will collect runoff to the northeast,be piped beneath the road to a second pond, and released along the railroad tracks at Stagecoach. The plan limits peak flow to the same level as prior to development. Currently rock overflow control point is drafted to be at an elevation of 849.5. It was suggested that it be increased to 850 so that the pipe is full before any overflow occurs. There is concern about the level of runoff in this area,but this design should lessen the peak flow. Drainage after development will be no worse, and maybe slightly improved after the development is completed. Mr. Beaudet moved to approve the letter of recommendation drafted by Mr. Fossum. Seconded by Ms. Givens, the motion carried. Other Business: Mr. Hansen reported on a home site in Huntington Meadows where percolation could not be established. The local authority was being presented with a request to pipe under the roadway to expand the area for potential drain field. Page 2 of 3 April 8, 2004 • • DRAFT • Middle St. Croix Watershed Management Organization Regular Meeting April 8, 2004 Washington County Conservation District Mr. Jansen brought forward the status of the Lower St Croix Scenic Riverway Advisory Board. Budget constraints on the part of the Minnesota Department of Natural Resources will restrict staff support available for the project. Mr. Jansen expressed concern that the board continue, to allow for local community input into the management of the riverway. Adjourn: Mr. Hansen moved to adjourn the meeting. Seconded by Mr. Beaudet,the motion passed. The meeting was adjourned at 8:11 PM. Respectfully Submitted, gi,SAAIAL lealCA Elizabeth A. Vance Recording Secretary Page 3 of 3 April 8, 2004 • • Middle St. Croix Watershed Management Organization Regular Meeting May 13, 2004 Washington County Conservation District Present: Chairman John McPherson, Members Robert Kamps, John Jansen, Jim Gilles, David Beaudet, Anders Hansen, Joella Givens, Ron Nelson Others Present: Bob Fossum, Administrator; Elizabeth Vance, Recording Secretary Call to Order: Chairman John McPherson called the meeting to order at 7:00 PM. Approval of the Minutes: The minutes of the April 8th meeting were approved with minor corrections. Mr. Beaudet moved to accept the minutes as corrected, seconded by Mr. Jansen, the motion passed. Treasurer's Report: Mr. Anders presented the treasurer's report for April 2004. Mr. Beaudet moved to accept the treasurer's report as presented. Ms. Givens seconded the motion. The motion carried. The invoices were presented for payment. Mr. Beaudet moved to pay the bills, seconded by Mr. Jansen. The motion passed. St Croix River Bridge Crossing: No new developments were presented on this project. Draft Watershed Management Plan: Mr. Fossum had met, as directed, with Attorney LeFevre, to review the standards proposed. He presented the substantive comments to the board for review. The first comments concern Section 5.1.4, which addresses construction within 40 feet of the bluff line. Mr. Lefevre's opinion was that this standard would be difficult to directly tie to the mission of the organization. It is also addressed in other regulations involving the scenic riverway. It was suggested it be removed. After discussion, Mr. Hansen moved to remove this standard. Ms. Givens seconded. The motion carried. Section 5.1.4. Discusses buffer zones. The phrasing of"unmowed natural vegetation"in lieu of"undisturbed" and"upslope of the delineated water edge" as being more clear. The key issue is where would buffers be applicable. It was suggested that a clarification be done so that the review would be triggered where there was physical change affecting the runoff characteristics of the load. The phase"which causes a change in runoff characteristics or disturbance of vegetation"was added to provide that clarification. After discussion, Mr. Jansen moved to adopt the proposed revised language. Mr. Beaudet seconded the motion. The motion carried. Section 5.1.2, policy 2 includes two potential standards. Mr. Lefevre suggested including the phrase"whichever is less"to ensure that the appropriate standard was applied. Ms. Givens moved to adopt the language. Mr. Gilles seconded the motion. The motion carried. / 4 1yo� G7'"l( 10 y- yew Page 1 of 3 April 8, 2004 l �/ 33 . ft0 iddle St. Croix Watershed Management Organization 41111M • Regular Meeting May 13, 2004 Washington County Conservation District Section 6.3, standard#4, discusses redevelopment. The concern was to appropriately scope the trigger so that minor work, such as a picnic stand or curb repair on a large parking lot, on a large site would not necessarily trigger review. Suggested that the trigger might be a 1000 sq ft increase in impervious surface. Curbing could affect drainage, so that change would be appropriate for review, whereas repaving may not be applicable. Ms. Givens suggested using the same phase, "causing a change in runoff characteristics or disturbance in vegetation"used above to provide the scooping. A combination of increase in size of impervious surface by some amount or a percentage change in runoff was suggested. The original language was adopted from Brown's Creek, and added at the suggestion of BWSR to address redevelopment. It was agreed that the suggestions for scooping language be reviewed with Mr. LeFevre. Mr. Gilles moved to direct Mr. Fossum to review with Mr. LeFevre. Seconded by Mr. Jansen, the motion carried. The last discussion point was the variance and waiver processes. It was suggested to review Shingle Creek or Middle Mississippi for appropriate language. Mr. Beaudet moved that Mr. Fossum review both documents, and select the most appropriate. Mr. Jansen seconded the motion. The motion carried. Mr. Fossum presented a revision to the completion timeline, putting back the completion date by one month. Mr. Jansen suggested Mr. Fossum communicate the new timeline to BWSR and Washington County. Mr. Fossum was directed to, if appropriate, after review with Mr. LeFevre; distribute the draft copy to the member communities for review. Phase III and Bonding Update Mr. Cain provided an updated status of the bonding bill. No resolution was yet available. Wesley Bay Ridge After receipt of the comments, the developers of Wesley Bay Ridge increased the outlet pipe as suggested. Red Prairie Acres Baytown Township received notification of a subdivision on the Seim property on Osgood Avenue. This is a replatting, with no grading expected. The plan includes no road construction, and no significant impact on drainage. This is only a creation of 4 lots. Mr. Beaudet suggested a comment letter be drafted, suggesting that soil erosion be considered. Mr. Beaudet moved to approve the comments for the Red Prairie Acres development. Seconded by Ms. Givens, the motion carried. Oakgreen Village Mr. Beaudet provided an update on the Oakgreen Village development. There were adjustments in the final plan since the review. Final plans are enroute for review. Adjourn: Page 2 of 3 April 8, 2004 ! # Middle St. Croix Watershed Management Organization Regular Meeting May 13, 2004 Washington County Conservation District Having no additional business, Mr. Hansen moved to adjourn the meeting. Seconded by Mr. Gilles, the motion carried. Chairman McPherson adjourned the meeting at 7:30 PM. Respectfully Submitted Elizabeth A. Vance Recording Secretary Page 3 of 3 April 8, 2004 III Re •ular g g enda g • Meetin A Middle St. Croix Watershed Management Organization April 8, 2004 Washington Conservation District (Located in River Heights Plaza, Stillwater,next to the Washington County License Center)>SL6 7:00 PM-Regular Meeting Agenda O Pt 1. Call to Order Approval of Minutes a) March 11, 2004 Minutes Oco LI c 19 t,„3, / Treasurer's Report(Anders Hansen) 4?.. j iil `i Report of Savings Account, Assets b 2. 1 • Approve payment of bills . U 4. Old siness 1 St. Croix River Bridge Crossing Project Update '7 da Uvc� v ��j�. )i Watershed Management Plan 2 a. Results of WMP subcommittee meeting 5. New Business State of MN Storm Sewer Project, Phase III & Bonding Update L5/9. 11/ Wesley's Bay Ridge, Baytown Township 6. Other Agenda Items 7. Adjourn 10 btiV Middle St. Croix Watershed Management Organization MEMBER COMMUNITIES: Afton,Bayport,Baytown Township,Lakeland,Lakeland Shores,Lake St.Croix Beach,Oak Park Heights,St.Mary's Point,Stillwater and West Lakeland Township 4110 • MIDDLE ST. CROIX RIVER WATERSHED MANAGEMENT ORGANIZATION / ._ 1380 West Frontage Road, Hwy 36 Phone: 651-275-1136, ext. 21 e i Stillwater, MN 55082 Fax: 651-1254 ° "► A Joint Powers Watershed Management Organization composed of ten St. Croix Valley Communities that was established under State Statute 103B to cooperatively manage water „ ,� resources within the watershed. i LETTER OF TRANSMITTAL DATE: April 2,2004 TO: Middle St.Croix River Watershed Management Organization FROM: Bob Fossum RE: April 8,2004 Meeting Packet WE ARE SENDING: Via Mail: X Courier: Fax: Agenda Item DESCRIPTION 1 Agenda—April 8,2003 MSCWMO meeting 2 Minutes—Draft minutes for the March 11,2004 Board meeting Approved minutes for February 12,2004 Board meeting Informational Letter from St.Mary's Point,RE:New MSCWMO representative Item I will complete the review and present a draft comment letter for the Wesley's Bay Ridge in Baytown Township at the meeting. Please call me with any additional agenda items or agenda changes at 275-1136,ext.21. Sincerely, ,R- Bob Fossum Cc: Betsy Vance,Recording Secretary Charlie LeFevere,Kennedy&Graven Konrad Koosmann,WCD City of Oak Park Heights(Agenda and Minutes Only) City of Stillwater(Agenda and Minutes Only) Jeff Davis,SEH(Agenda and Minutes Only) Middle St. Croix Watershed Management Organization MEMBER COMMUNITIES: Afton,Bayport,Baytown Township,Lakeland,Lakeland Shores,Lake St.Croix Beach,Oak Park Heights,St.Mary's Point,Stillwater and West Lakeland Township • 0 Legislative Associates, Inc. P.O.Box 2131 110130th Street,Suite 500 Stillwater,MN 55082 W asl1ington,D.C.20007 1651)439-7681 April 21, 2004 (202)625-4356 Fax(651)439-7319 Fax(202)625-4363 To: St. Croix WMO Representatives, John McPherson, Chair Mike McGuire, Project Administrator From:Ed Cain, LAI Subject: State Storm Sewer Project at Bayport: Legislative Update It seems nothing comes easy for us in obtaining funding for this project. I was confronted at the Capitol by a young lady from the Corrections Department who demanded that I quit telling Legislators that the State Storm Sewer Project was a State project. I told her that the Prison Pond was owned by the State, the sewer line was constructed by the State in 1907, and that is was designed to serve the needs of the State Prison. "And you mean to tell me it's not a State project?" This led to a meeting with top Corrections officials including the Deputy Commissioner, and several Assistant Commissioners, John McPherson, Dave Baudet, John Anders, Bob Fossum, and myself. It soon became evident that they were not so much opposed to the project, they didn't want the cost attributed to their Corrections budget. After a good discussion, they finally agreed that we should get the funding to complete the project, but they didn't want it to come out of their budget. I agreed to go with the Deputy Commissioner to meet with Senator Langseth, Chair of the Capital Investment Committee. Langseth agreed that the funding would not be taken from Corrections budget, so now they are happy. Good News! The House Capital Investment Committee marked up the House Bonding Bill today, and their bill included $1.55 million for our project. Furthermore, they gave it their highest priority ranking. (I have included a copy of the part of the Bill that has our provision in it.) The bill will now go to Ways and Means Committee for a final review before it goes on the floor for action by the House Members. I really don't expect that our provision will be included in the original version of the Senate Bonding Bill. The Senate Bill is about$300 million bigger than the House Bill. That means the Senate will want to leave out projects that are in the House bill to give them room for negotiation in Conference Committee. I've spent a considerable amount of time with Chairman Langseth and his Committee Staff. They have visited our site, and are very much aware of the need to complete the project. I'm sure they will want to see our provision in the final bill, but will want to get something in exchange from the much more conservative House Bill. Constitutionally, the Legislature must adjourn by May 17th. The Bonding Bill is usually the last issue to be acted on, however, the last issue this year may be the Stadium Bills. I'll keep you informed as the process moves forward. Call me if you have any questions. (651) 303-2424. Ed • • 1 Washington Conservation District 440 1380 W Frontage Road, Hwy 36, Stillwater, MN 55082 Tel: 651-275-1136 Fax: 651-275-1254 MEMORANDUM TO: MSCWMO Board Members FROM: Bob Fossum RE: 2"d Generation Watershed Management Plan Status Report DATE: April 8, 2004 Substantive changes have been made to pages 59 & 60 the WMP regarding performance standards and the implementation of those standards. Those pages are attached. The revised timeline for the WMP (as of 4/6/04) is as follows: WI- Distribute to communities for review. (late April-early) Make changes based on communities input(late May Distribute for formal 90-day DRAFT review(June -- August) MSCWMO response to comments (Sept) Public Hearing on Plan(Sept) Distribute for formal 45-day FINAL review(Oct—Early Nov.) MSCWMO makes final changes (late Nov—Early Dec) Submit to BWSR for approval, 90-day(Dec–Feb) Adoption by MSCWMO Board(Feb) Supervisors:Louise Smallidge,President • Gary Baumann,Secretary • Tom Meyer,Treasurer • Jane Krentz • Tom Armstrong,Jr. • activities as requested by the Board. Legal, Accounting, and Engineering services will also be contracted for on a bi-annual basis. 6.3 Implementation of Performance Standards Performance Standards will apply to development within the Middle St. Croix watershed and focus on stormwater management, erosion and sediment control, and wetland protection. The performance standards listed in Table 6.1 will apply to activities listed below: 1. Any project disturbing greater than ten thousand square feet. 2. All major subdivisions. Major subdivisions are defined as subdivisions with 4 or more lots. 3. Any project with wetland impacts and any project with grading within the wetland/public water buffer or within 40 feet of the bluffline. 4. Redevelopment on a site of 5 acres or more, where pervious surface is disturbed and final impervious surface, in aggregate, exceeds one acre or five percent of a site. Middle St. Croix Watershed Management Organization 59 4/8/2004 • • Table 6.1 Performance Standards MSCWMO Priority Concerns Water Water Erosion and Performance Standard Quality Quantity Sedimentation Wetlands 1 All new developments and redevelopments shall use sediment basins or other proven techniques to remove coarse grained sediments and other contaminants from stormwater runoff before leaving the site or discharging to wetlands, ponds, lakes, and streams. (See MPCA document "Protecting Water Quality in Urban Areas") 2 No increase in rate of runoff leaving the site from pre- to post-development conditions generated by the 2-, 10-, and 100-year rainfall. 3 An erosion and sediment control plan must be submitted and approved for all projects disturbing greater 10,000 square feet. 4 Lowest floor elevations of structures built adjacent to stormwater ponds and other water bodies must be a minimum (��I of 2 ft. above the 100-yr flood ojv elevation, and at the overflow in landlocked basins. ,l 5 Construction is prohibited on slopes> Yt)33‘,/ 6 Construction is prohibited within 40 ft. of the bluffline. _ 7 Direct discharge of stormwater to wetlands and all other water bodies without water quality treatment is prohibited. 8 Buffer zones of 20 feet of undisturbed vegetation shall be maintained 20 feet upslope of the OHW of all water bodies (wetland, stream, lake). The MSCWMO Board has the power to waive any performance standard if the waiver is determined not to have a detrimental impact on the water resources of the watershed. Middle St. Croix Watershed Management Organization 60 4/8/2004 • • LCjSati' J9 i iLt-. . rj APR 2 3 2004 P.O.Box 2r31 r Jt1Lt111 dtBY, MN 5508-7 11-01 301167 Ctr„t r;1ii co5 1651) :'g 7681 yt Oji c1to11 0 D.C. =0007 ram 439 t;?— 319 Fax April 21, 2004 i2c.) 2>-4 ;O a' —0=t To: St. Croix WMO Representatives, John McPherson, Chair Mike McGuire, Project Administrator From:Ed Cain, LAI Subject: State Storm Sewer Project at Bayport: Legislative Update It seems nothing comes easy for us in obtaining funding for this project. I was confronted at the Capitol by a young lady from the Corrections Department who demanded that I quit telling Legislators that the State Storm Sewer Project was a State project. I told her that the Prison Pond was owned by the State, the sewer line was constructed by the State in 1907, and that is was designed to serve the needs of the State Prison. "And you mean to tell me it's not a State project?” This led to a meeting with top Corrections officials including the Deputy Commissioner, and several Assistant Commissioners, John McPherson, Dave Baudet, John Anders, Bob Fossum, and myself. It soon became evident that they were not so much opposed to the project, they didn't want the cost attributed to their Corrections budget. After a good discussion, they finally agreed that we should get the funding to complete the project, but they didn't want it to come out of their budget. I agreed to go with the Deputy Commissioner to meet with Senator Langseth, Chair of the Capital Investment Committee. Langseth agreed that the funding would not be taken from Corrections budget, so now they are happy. Good News! The House Capital Investment Committee marked up the House Bonding Bill today, and their bill included $1.55 million for our project. Furthermore, they gave it their highest priority ranking. (I have included a copy of the part of the Bill that has our provision in it.) The bill will now go to Ways and Means Committee for a final review before it goes on the floor for action by the House Members. I really don't expect that our provision will be included in the original version of the Senate Bonding Bill. The Senate Bill is about$300 million bigger than the House Bill. That means the Senate will want to leave out projects that are in the House bill to give them room for negotiation in Conference Committee. I've spent a considerable amount of time with Chairman Langseth and his Committee Staff. They have visited our site, and are very much aware of the need to complete the project. I'm sure they will want to see our provision in the final bill, but will want to get something in exchange from the much more conservative House Bill. Constitutionally, the Legislature must adjourn by May 17th. The Bonding Bill is usually the last issue to be acted on, however, the last issue this year may be the Stadium Bills. I'll keep you informed as the process moves forward. Call me if you have any questions. (651) 303-2424. Ed i • 1 moves to amend H. F. No. . . . . as follows: 2 Delete everything after the enacting clause and insert : 3 "ARTICLE 1 4 APPROPRIATIONS AND RELATED LANGUAGE 5 Section 1. (CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT APPROPRIATIONS. ] 6 The sums in the column under "APPROPRIATIONS" are 7 appropriated from the bond proceeds fund, or another named fund, 8 to the state agencies or officials indicated, to be spent for 9 public purposes. Appropriations of bond proceeds must be spent 10 as authorized by the Minnesota Constitution, article XI, section 11 5, paragraph (a) , to acquire and better public land and 12 buildings and other public improvements of a capital nature, or 13 as authorized by the Minnesota Constitution, article XI, section 14 5, paragraphs (b) to ( j ) , or article XIV. Unless otherwise 15 specified, the appropriations in this act are available until 16 the project is completed or abandoned subject to Minnesota 17 Statutes, section 16A.642. 18 SUMMARY 19 UNIVERSITY OF MINNESOTA $ 90,480 ,000 20 MINNESOTA STATE COLLEGES AND UNIVERSITIES 145,817 ,000 21 PERPICH CENTER FOR ARTS EDUCATION 1,100 ,000 22 EDUCATION 1,054 ,000 23 MINNESOTA STATE ACADEMIES 4,255 ,000 24 NATURAL RESOURCES 49,400 ,000 1 . Immo! • III III _ _, _, k i , . . ,, 04/20/04 ,.,„;„ , [REVISOR ] RJS/KJ A04-1354 itt 1 1 for Phase I of the Rochester Regional 2 Public Safety Training Center to 3 develop a live burn training simulator 4 adjacent to the existing National Guard 5 'facility in Rochester . 6 The appropriation is not available 7 until the commissioner determines that 8 an equal amount has been committed to 9 the project from nonstate sources. 0 Subd. 6. Middle St. Croix River 11 Watershed Management Organization 1,550,000 12 For a grant to the city of Bayport for 13 the Middle St. Croix River Watershed 14 Management Organization to complete the 15 sewer system extending from Minnesota 16 department of natural resources pond 17 82-310P ( the prison pond) in Bayport 18 through the Stillwater prison grounds 19 to the St. Croix River. 20 Subd. 7 . City of Rushford 600,000 21 For a grant, subject to Minnesota 22 Statutes, section 16A.695, to the city 23 of Rushford for construction, 24 renovation, remodeling, and 25 infrastructure for capital improvements 26 to and for the facility to be used by 27 the Rushford Institute for 28 Nanotechnology, Inc. 29 Subd. 8. City of St. Paul 2,000,000 30 For a grant to the city of St. Paul to 31 acquire land for right-of-way and to 32 complete contamination remediation on 33 Phalen Boulevard between Interstate 34 Highway I-35E and Johnson Parkway. 35 Subd. 9 . Hennepin County 1,200,000 36 For a grant to Hennepin County for 37 Phase I capital improvements to the 38 Lowry Avenue corridor from Girard 39 Avenue North to the I-94 bridge in 40 Minneapolis. 41 Subd. 10. City of Two Harbors 1,071,000 42 To the Minnesota Pollution Control 43 Agency for a grant to the city of Two 44 Harbors to acquire land for, design, • • . 4 4/20/20044:18 PM John Walz House Fiscal Analysis (651)296-8236 2004 House Capital Budget AGENCY Strat Gov House Comm Mouse # Project Title Fund Score Prior Gov's Rec Comm Rec Priority Cap Invest. County 308 309 GRANTS to POLITICAL SUBDIVISIONS 310 Buffalo Lake Maintenance Garage/Street Repair GO $ 635 $ 635 econ med $ 635 Renville 311 Cohn Powell Youth Leadership Center GO $ 4,230 $ 6,350 econ high $ - Hennepin 312 Lewis and Clark Rural Water System GO $ 2,000 $ 2,000 econ med $ - Lincoln/Pipes 313 Roseau Infrastructure Repair and Improvements GO $ 10,000 $ 13,160 econ high $ 10,000 Roseau 314 Regional Adult Detention,Facilities GO $ - $ 40,000 ud neutra $ - statewide 315 North Central Correctional Facility GO $ - $ 6,000 ud neutra $ 6,000 Cass 316 Rochester Public Safety Training Center GO $ - $ 627 ud neutra $ 627 Olmstead 317 Rice County Jail ' GO $ - $ 10,550 ud neutra $ - Rice 318 Blue Earth Fire and Police Station GO $ - $ 642 ud neutra $ - Blue Earth 319 County Courthouse Capital Grants GO $ - $ 10,000 ud neutra $ • - statewide 320 Sauk Center Minimum Security GO $ - $ 4,000 ud neutra $ - Stearns 321 Hopkins Haz-mat Training Center GO $ - $ _ 500 ud neutra $ - Hennepin 322 HCMC Crisis Intervention Center Expansion GO $ - $ 1,400 HHS12 $ Hennepin I'323 Bayport Sewer System GO $ - $ 1,550 econ high $ 1,550 Washington 324 St Stephen Water System GO $ - $ 7,021 econ high $ - Stearns 325 Institute for Nanotechnology GO $ $ 600 econ high $ 600 Fillmore 326 Biotechnology and Health Science Facilities GO $ - $ 40,000 econ high $ - statewide ' 327 Wastewater Treatment Maximum Daily Load Grar GO $ - $ 25,000 econ high $ - statewide 328 Phalen Boulevard GO $ - $ 4,000 econ med $ 2,000 Ramsey 329 Minnesota Planetarium GO $ - $ 24,000 econ med $ - Hennepin 330 Ordway Renovation GO $ - $ 10,000 econ med $ - Ramsey 331 Lowry Avenue Corridor GO $ - $ 5,000 econ med $ 1,200 Hennepin 332 Laurentian Energy Authority GO $ - $ 2,500 econ med $ - St Louis 333 East Phillips Cultural and Community Center GO $ - $ 3,500 econ med $ - Hennepin 334 Walker Community Center GO $ - $ 200 econ med $ - Cass 335 Central Iron Range Sewer District GO $ - $ 1,600 econ med $ - St Louis 336 Sears Site Cleanup GO $ - $ 5,000 econ med $ - Hennepin • 337 Two Harbors Wastewater - GO $ - $ 1,571 econ med $ 1,071 Lake 338 Crookston Emergency Riverbank Protection GO $ - $ 3,500 econ med $ 2,000 Polk 339 Little Falls Pine Grove Zoo GO $ - $ 812 econ med $ - Morrison 340 JD Rivers Urban Agriculture Center GO $ - $ 2,500 econ med $ - Hennepin 341 Heritage Park Empowerment Zone GO $ - $ 9,625 econ med $ - Hennepin 342 Raspberry Island&Upper Landing GO $ - $ 5,000 econ med $ - Ramsey 343 Virgina District Heating System GO $ - $ 5,000 econ med $ - St Louis 344 Contaminated Site Cleanup South St Paul GO $ - $ 3,000 econ med $ 500 Dakota 345 Great River Shakespeare Festival Theater GO $ - $ 125 econ med $ - Winona 346 Askov Wastewater Treatment GO $ - $ 2,215 econ med $ 1,215 Pine 347 Olivia Ag Innovation Center GO $ - $ 2,000 econ med $ - Renville 348 Broadband Infrastructure Grant GO $ - $ 2,000 econ med $ = statewide 349 Duluth Sanitary Sewer Overflow GO $ - $ 4,950 econ med $ 4,950 St Louis 350 Bruentrup Farm Restoration GO $ - $ 150 econ med $ 100 Ramsey ' 351 Bumsville Water Treatment GO $ - $ 6,000 econ med $ 2,000 Dakota 352 Itasca County Training and Technology GO $ - $ 2,000 econ med $ - Itasca 353 University Research Park GO $ - $ 9,000 econ med $ - Hennepin 354 Shubert Theater GO $ - $ 10,000 econ med $ - Hennepin 355 Biomass Community Energy Center GO $ - $ 1,000 con neutra $ - statewide 356 Duluth DECC GO $ - $ 3,331 con neutra $ - St Louis 357 Heritage Hjemkomst Center Repair GO $ - $ 1,000 con neutra $ - Clay 358 River Flats Interpretive Facility GO $ - $ 1,000 con neutra $ - Dakota 359 Como Park Zoo GO $ - $ - $ 300 Ramsey 360 361 Total $ 16,865 $ 301,614 Total $ 34,748 7 . • Middle St. Croix Watershed Management Organization Regular Meeting March 11, 2004 Washington County Conservation District Present: Chairman John McPherson, Members Robert Kamps, John Jansen, Ron Nelson, JimGilles, and David Beaudet Absent: Pat Tinuccii, Judy Bellairs, Joella Givens, and Anders Hansen Others Present: Bob Possum, Administrator; Elizabeth Vance, Recording Secretary Call to Order: Chairman McPherson called the meeting to order at 700 P.M. on March 11, 2004. Approval of the Minutes: Members annotated minor corrections. Mr. Beaudet moved to approve the minutes as corrected. Mr. Gilles seconded the motion. The motion carried. Treasurer's Report: Mr. Fossum gave the treasurer's report in Mr. Hansen's absence. The current balance on hand is $70,561.80. First half payments were received from Stillwater, Lakeland and West Lakeland. Bills presented included an invoice from the Washington County Conservation District and from Mr. LeFevere for legal services. The invoice for Campaign Lobbyist Fee Filing was received. Funds for this invoice are included in project administrative fees currently paid to Bayport. However, because of the imminent due date, Mr. Nelson suggested the invoice be paid, and reimbursement requested from the City of Bayport. Mr. Beaudet moved to pay the invoices as presented, and initiate reimbursement from Bayport. Seconded by Mr. Jansen, the motion carried. Mr. Beaudet also moved to accept the treasurer's report as presented. Mr. Gilles seconded the motion. The motion carried. St Croix River Bridge Crossing: Mr. Fossum presented an update on the status of the St. Croix River Bridge Crossing Project. A letter was received from the Minnesota Department of Transportation requesting cooperation in finalizing plans. No additional clarification of the direction of the project has been forthcoming. Watershed Management Plan: Mr. Possum distributed the draft watershed management plan. He summarized comments received on the plan review to date. The plan needs to detail more milestones and measurable objectives. There are a few items which need additional detail or direction. Section 5.0, on goals and policies, need to have metrics to measure local community compliance stated more clearly. Mr. Beaudet suggested that the clean up of Lily Lake should be addressed in the plan. Actions can be included that are delegated to other organizations for implementation. Mr. Fossum also suggested a gully inventory, with erosion management, be added to the plan. Discussion followed on how to incorporate the variety of jurisdictions that impact the Watershed Management Organization. The overlapping jurisdictions should also be Page 1 of 1 r fiddle St. Croix Watershed Management Organization I Regular Meeting March 11, 2004 Washington County Conservation District addressed in the plan. The state, Department of Natural Resources, Federal Emergency Management Agency, and local government agencies have varying specifications. There are existing Cooperative Management Plans, with varying levels of agreement and detail. Mr. Jansen provided an overview of activity in current work in the cooperative management plan. Discussion of the drafted performance standards followed. Definition of the "lowest floor"needs additional clarification. Multiple tiered standards are possible, and may be more appropriate, based upon the classification of the wetland. The fourth standard, dealing with the impact of drainage between member communities, needs to e more specifically worded to delineate the application to new and existing construction, and what scale of projects would be reviewed. Mr. Beaudet suggested that cable access be considered as an information medium, and mapping of the water drainage and riverway flow should be included in the plan. As part of the implementation standards, the board discussed the advantages and disadvantages of administrative permits as a vehicle for managing smaller projects. Finally, the processes for variances and financing need additional detail. Mr. Fossum suggested the board consider convening a subcommittee to review the comments in more detail. Mr. Beaudet, Mr. Jansen and Chairman McPherson volunteered to convene a subcommittee for review. Mr. Beaudet moved to appoint himself, Mr. Jansen and Chairman McPherson to a subcommittee to provide for more detailed review of the Draft Management Plan in coordination with Mr. Fossum to report back at the next regular meeting. The motion was seconded by Mr. Nelson, and passed. Minnesota Storm Water Sewer Project, Phase III. Chairman McPherson reported on the status of this project in relation to the State Bonding Bill. The project is included in the draft released from the Economic Development Committee. Mr. Beaudet volunteered to contact Senators Langseth and Bachmann. Stillwater Mills Mr. Fossum presented a review of the Stillwater Mills Development Project on Main Street and Mulberry in Stillwater. The project has first floor retail space, with 3 or 4 stories of residences above. Parking will be underneath the structure. Baysaver stormwater ponding will be installed underneath the structure before releasing into the city storm sewer system. The plaza serves as additional storage, designed to hold an additional 6 inches of water. The recommendation suggests the city engineer should verify the emergency overflow. Emergency overflow has been required on every other storm water ponding system. For erosion control, the silt fence should be installed at the start of demolition and remain in place throughout the construction. After discussion, Mr. Beaudet moved the recommendation be approved, and forwarded to the City of Stillwater. Mr. Jansen seconded the motion. The motion carried. Page 2 of 2 • • Middle St. Croix Watershed Management Organization Regular Meeting March 11, 2004 Washington County Conservation District Adjourn: Having no more business, Mr. Kamps moved to adjourn the meeting. Mr. Jansen seconded the motion. The motion carried. Chairman McPherson adjourned the meeting at 9:00 PM Respectfully Submitted, Elizabeth A. Vance Recording Secretary Page 3 of 3 • 1/2 Legislative Associates, Inc. P.O.Box 2131 11o1 3oth Street,Suite 500 StiIiwater,MN 55082 Washington,D.C.20007 (651)439-7681 March 5,2004 (2o2)625-4356 Fax(651)439-7319 Fax(202)625-4363 To: St. Croix WMO Representatives, John McPherson, Chair Mike McGuire, Project Administrator From: Ed Cain, LAI Subject: State Storm Sewer Project at Bayport: Request for Legislative Funding Since this year is the second year of the Biennium Session, our bills submitted in the House and the Senate in 2003, carried over into the 2004 Session of the Legislature. Changes in the amount of the funds requested from $1.55 in 2003,to$2.2 million in 2004, will be made in Committee as amendments to the bills. The House Bill has been referred to the Jobs, Economic Development Finance Committee for action, and the Senate Bill to the Senate Finance Committee. Hearings have been requested in both Committees, but not scheduled as yet. We continue to be told by the House leadership that our request is a high priority, and will be included in the House Bonding Bill. The House will be marking up their bonding bill in the next few weeks. Representative Eric Lipman is the author of the H.F No. 262,our bill requesting funds in the House. In his meeting with Speaker of the House Steve Sviggum, he was assured that the request for funds for the State Storm Sewer at Bayport would be part of the House Bonding Bill. I have received a similar assurance from Capital Investment Chair, Steve Krinkie, and from Bob Gunther, Chair of the Jobs, Economic Development Committee. No direct action has been taken by the House Members up to this time, on our request for funds. To help keep the pressure on the Members, a letter signed by the WMO Representatives, was sent to each of our local Members, to all of the Legislative Leaders, and to the Governor. A copy of the letter is included in this report. Our situation with in the Senate remains unsettled. Last year nearly all the Repubiican Senators voted against the Senate Bonding Billing, thus denying the Chairman the 60%vote needed to pass the bill. This placed the House Republicans in a position to determine what was to be included in the Bonding Bill, and the Senate could either accept the House version, or have no bonding bill at all. They chose to accept the House Bill, however, a great deal of animosity remains against those Republican Senate Members who voted against the Senate Bill, including Senator LeClair and Senator Bachmann. We have requested a Hearing with the Senate Finance Committee, which may be re- referred to the Senate Capital Investment Committee. Senator LeClair and I are working with Senator Cal Larson, the Republican Ranking Member on the Bonding Committee to give us the strong support we must have. Our request is a valid and deserving one. To deny it would demonstrate blatant partisanship, but so did the Republican vote last year. Our key is to be sure we are in the House Bill, and to be sure we have the House Leadership and Conferees support if the Bonding Bill goes to a Conference Committee for resolution. I will continue to work with the Members and Committee staff. I anticipate we will have Hearings in the next week or two, and will be calling on the WMO representatives to participate through testimony and attendance at the Hearings. • Regular Meeting Agenda • Middle St. Croix Watershed Management Organization March 11, 2004 Washington Conservation District (Located in River Heights Plaza, Stillwater,next to the Washington County License Center) 7:00 P -Regular Meeting Agenda 61).../1-.46". . Call to Order Approval of Minutes 119 ibi-t a) February 12, 2004 Minutespii:se,,/.147 7 Treasurer's Report(Anders Hansen) (--( i‘,./f a) Report of Savings Account, Assets Approve payment of billskkitri 4. Old Business " , ,u" 0 ,' 1Ntip�F, c.n el St. Croix River Bridge Crossing Project Update /' - Watershed Management Plan d yRa. eview of Draft 1 of Watershed Management Plan y"' eview of Joint Powers Agreement • Vill ,D 5. New Business 6 Jh 5 �" 7 tate of MN Storm Sewer Project, Phase III xS. Stillwater Mills on Main, Stillwater Wesley's Bay Ridge, Baytown Township /7 6. Other Agenda Items 7. Adjourn Middle St. Croix Watershed Management Organization MEMBER COMMUNITIES: Afton,Bayport,Baytown Township,Lakeland,Lakeland Shores,Lake St.Croix Beach,Oak Park Heights,St.Mary's Point,Stillwater and West Lakeland Township .'y '...' -.:.. . 4110 MIDDLE ST. CROIX RIVER WATERSHED MANAGEMENT ORGANIZATION 1380 West Frontage Road, Hwy 36 Phone: 651-275-1136, ext. 21 Stillwater, MN 55082 Fax: 651-1254 D 1 1 A Joint Powers Watershed Management Organization composed of ten St. Croix Valley 1' Communities that was established under State Statute 103B to cooperatively manage water w ' resources within the watershed. .11 LETTER OF TRANSMITTAL DATE: March 4,2004 TO: Middle St. Croix River Watershed Management Organization FROM: Bob Fossum RE: March 11,2004 Meeting Packet WE ARE SENDING: Via Mail: X Courier: Fax: Agenda Item DESCRIPTION 1 Agenda—March 11,2003 MSCWMO meeting 2 Minutes—Draft minutes for the February 12,2004 Board meeting Approved minutes for January 15,2004 Board meeting 4.a.a. Response from MNDOT to MSCWMO letter regarding St.Croix River Bridge Crossing 4.b.a. Memo regarding current issues/status of 2"d Generation Plan Informational Copy of letters to legislators regarding bonding for State of MN Storm Sewer Project Item Please call me with any additional agenda items or agenda changes at 275-1136,ext.21. Sincerely, Bob Fossum f O V! I*- I/ Cc: Betsy Vance,Recording Secretary Charlie LeFevere,Kennedy&Graven Konrad Koosmann,WCD City of Oak Park Heights(Agenda and Minutes Only) City of Stillwater(Agenda and Minutes Only) Jeff Davis,SEH(Agenda and Minutes Only) Middle St. Croix Watershed Management Organization MEMBER COMMUNITIES: Afton,Bayport,Baytown Township,Lakeland,Lakeland Shores,Lake St.Croix Beach,Oak Park Heights,St.Mary's Point,Stillwater and West Lakeland Township 411 MIDDLE ST. CROIX RIVER WATERSHED MANAGEMENT ORGANIZATION 1380 West Frontage Road, Hwy 36 Phone: 651-275-1136, ext. 21 Stillwater, MN 55082 Fax: 651-1254 g A Joint Powers Watershed Management Organization composed of ten St. Croix Valley Communities that was established under State Statute 103E to cooperatively manage water resources within the watershed. MEMORANDUM TO: MSCWMO Boar I,.... _ FROM: Bob Fossum RE: Review of Draft of 2nd Generation Plan DATE: March 3, 2004 At the March 11, 2004 meeting of the MSCWMO, I would like to have a formal review of the draft 2nd Generation Watershed Management Plan that was distributed recently.. We would like comments on content of the whole document. Specifically, we are interested and comments on Chapters 5 and 6 of the plan. These •sections deal with the WMO's goals and policies, and the implementation of the plan. From the board's • perspective these are the sections of the plan that are most critical and really matter for the success of the plan and the organization as a whole. BWSR has yet to get me some feedback on the plan. I anticipate that feedback arriving in the next week and I will bring those comments to the meeting on March 11. Please spend some time reviewing these sections thoroughly before the meeting. If you have misplaced your copy I do have extra copies I can send you. Please give me a call at 651-275-1136, ext. 21 if you have any questions or issues regarding the plan. • Middle St. Croix Watershed Management Organization MEMBER COMMUNITIES: Afton,Bayport,Baytown Township,Lakeland,Lakeland Shores,Lake St.Croix Beach,Oak Park Heights,St.Mary's Point,Stillwater and West Lakeland Township • • March 11, 2004 Discussion Items on MSCWMO 2nd Generation WMP, Draft 1: • Sec 5.0—policies/performance standards will need to be adopted by each 1) community, through local water management plan " p .P frcI It Ii G [cam • Table 6.1—Performance Standards �" • Sec. 6.3—Implementation of Performance Standards o Redevelopment, RCWD 50%rule o Variances • General items o More measurable goals (quanitify if possible) o Future land use component (community comp plans) o Annual program review • What was accomplished • Local ordinance adoption (include schedule in plan) • 2nd Draft Review before April meeting o Workshop �,pNESOrq • � Min ota Department of Transportation (.(04.ctz ry° Metropolitan Division pF 7R Waters Edge 1500 West County Road B2 RECEIVED Roseville, MN 55113 February 27, 2004 `}` 0 4 WASHINGTON SWCD Bob Fossum Administrator Middle St. Croix Watershed Management Organization SUBJECT: ST. CROIX RIVER CROSSING PROJECT: RESPONSE TO MIDDLE ST. CROIX WATERSHED MANAGEMENT ORGANIZATION LETTER CONCERNING EARLY COORDINATION OF PROJECT DATED 2/2/04 Thank you for your February 2, 2004 letter expressing a high level of interest in this project. As we have discussed, Mn/DOT is proactively seeking the early coordination of this project with your organization. We are completing the scoping phase and are entering the draft environmental impact stage of this project. During this stage of additional details, one product will be a preliminary drainage design. Establishing water quality and water quantity goals will be the critical design criteria in producing this preliminary drainage design. We have established a number of subgroups and technical committees to assist in developing this preliminary drainage design. The subgroups and committees are made up of agencies, communities, stakeholders, and interested citizens that are meeting over the next couple of months. I recognize that your organization is concerned with the resource commitment of attending the subgroups and committee meetings. • In light of that resource constraint, we will continue to provide your organization with correspondence, meeting agendas, and meeting minutes and there is a project website located at http://www.dot.state.mn.ushnetroiprojectststcroixl. It is my hope that you would be able to review the meeting agendas and minutes and bring any potential issues or concerns to my attention early in our process so that we can see what accommodations can be made to assure early coordination with your organization. And should the opportunity arise, I would still like to encourage you to attend any of the meetings that you feel would have issues of concern to your WMO. I look forward to continuing to work with your organization on this project's preliminary drainage design. If you have any questions on the project, please contact me at (651) 582-1169. Since , Todd Clarkowski,P.E. Mn/DOT Area Engineer An equal opportunity employer 11111 • Cc: MSCWMO Representatives including Afton, Bayport, Baytown Township, Lakeland, Lakeland Shores, Lake St. Croix Beach, Oak Park Heights, St. Mary's Point, Stillwater, and West Lakeland Township Dennis Larson, Mn/DOT Mary Lacho, Mn/DOT Rick Arnebeck, Mn/DOT Alana Getty, Mn/DOT David Filipiak, SRF DRAFT Middle St. Croix Watershed Management Organization Regular Meeting Feb 12, 2004 Wash Conservation District Offices Present: Chairman John McPherson, Members Robert Kamps, Anders Hansen, John Jansen, Ron Nelson, Jim Gilles, Les Abrahamson for David Beaudet Absent: Pat Tinuccii, Judy Bellairs, Joella Givens Others Present: Bob Fossum, Administrator; Elizabeth Vance, Recording Secretary; Mr. Ed Cain; Jeff Davis and Paul Hegre, S.E.H. Inc.; Charles LeFevere, Kennedy& Graven Call to Order: Chairman John McPherson called the meeting to order at 6:58 PM. Approval of the Minutes: Mr. Jansen made minor corrections to the minutes, incorporated into the draft copy. Mr. Hansen moved to accept the minutes as corrected. Seconded by Mr. Kamps, the motion carried. Treasurer's Report • Mr. Hansen presented the treasurer's report. The WMO has a balance of $70,654.54 with no new disbursements. The insurance renewal with the League of Minnesota Cities Insurance Trust is still pending review of the questionnaire. Coverage provides for underinsured and not insured motorists, and general liability. Mr. Kamps moved to approve the report as presented. Mr. Jansen seconded the motion. The motion carried. Mr. Fossum will be sending out requests for the first payment of dues to the member communities. The second payment is due in July. State of MN Storm Sewer Project Phase III Mr. Jeff Davis and Mr. Paul Hegre presented the proposed recommendations for the State of Minnesota Storm Sewer Reconstruction Project, Phase III, in Bayport, Minnesota. Two routes were evaluated. Route A, located and 3d Ave N and 2d Street, proposes a 48" concrete culvert, with outlet to Lake St. Croix. Route B, located at 3d Ave S and Main Street, was reviewed with either a 48" or a 27"concrete culvert, with outlet to Lake St. Croix from Lakeside Drive. All culverts would include gated structures to isolate the storm sewer runoff from high river stages. Route A would require street replacement between 2d Street and Main Street. Installation of the pipe would cause railroad service disruption to Xcel Energy and Andersen Windows. The disruption will be coordinated with those concerned, as was done in the previous phases of the project. Discussion followed as to where the drainage easement might be located. Andersen Corporation has been asked to submit a letter to the City of Bayport with its concern over having 100% of the easement on the corporation property. Mr. Kamps expressed concern over the amount of time the street would be disrupted. Mr. Hegre replied that the plan was to provide improvements with the repair of the street, including curb, gutters and catch basins. Page 1 of 1 DRAFT • Middle St. Croix Watershed Management Organization Regular Meeting Feb 12, 2004 Wash Conservation District Offices Route B would route water from the inlet at Perro Creek and Third Avenue, down Lakeside Drive, and outlet to Lake St. Croix. The access point at Lakeside Drive is across privately owned property. No open cut is proposed for this route, leaving rail service intact at this point. Both a 48" and 27"outlet structures were reviewed for Route B. The culvert at the railroad embankment would be improved,but not replaced, in this proposal. Repairing the structure and providing for improved hydraulics. Mr. Hegre presented the results of the hydraulic studies. Modeling of current conditions predict a high water elevation of 692.4 feet, and critical elevations of 691.6 feet and 691.2 feet. With 48" structures in Both Route A and Route B, the high water elevation is reduced to 687.9 feet. Some high water flooding will exist north of Second Avenue, and flooding beyond the railroad embankment is mitigated. Third, a 48" structure at Route A, and a 27" structure and Route B resulted in water elevation levels of 688.7 feet, and some flooding on the ice road. Finally, a 48" structure at Route A, and no structure at Route B, but making improvements at the railroad embankment and culvert at 3d Avenue forecasted high water elevation at 688.7 feet and 690.7 feet. Cost estimates of the project are for Route A, 48" structure for $1.4 million to a 48" structure at both Route and Route B at approximately $2.8 million. • During Discussion, Mr. Kamps expressed concern that additional storm water not be routed into Perro Creek. The city of Bayport has an injunction against routing any more storm water along this route. Discussion followed as to how to minimize impact on that local area. Mr. Davis suggested that filling and grading to provide better drainage would further minimize any impact. It was also important to the Managers that the project be done only once, with the best alternative implemented. However, funding would be an issue. Mr. Cain commented on the state of the current bonding bill, and provided the history of this project in the previous bonding bill discussions. There is a concern that the amount requested for this project previously was $1.5 million,but additional engineering and design has increased the estimated cost. Mr. Kamps suggested a letter be drafted for signature to the area representatives in the State House and Senate voicing support for the project in the bonding bill. A draft will be circulated among the members • for comment and signature. Contract with Attorney LeFevere Mr. LeFevere introduced himself to the Board, and described his experience and his firm. His involvement with other municipal and public organizations has varied based upon the needs of the organization. Mr. Jansen reported on the meeting held between himself, Mr. Fossum and Mr. LeFevere. It was their joint recommendation that Mr. LeFevere be retained for services on an as-needed basis by the WMO. Contact should be directed through Mr. Fossum. Mr. Jansen moved that the WMO retain Mr. LeFevere pursuant to the contract presented for 2004, on an as-needed basis Mr. LeFevere provided comment to the organization on options for funding based on his experience with different levy options and allowances within the state statutes. Page 2 of 2 DRAFT 4111 Middle St. Croix Watershed Management Organization Regular Meeting Feb 12, 2004 Wash Conservation District Offices The current state statute provides opportunities to levy through the County for capital projects. Joint Powers Agreement Mr. LeFevere provided comment as to his review of the Joint Powers Agreement. Mr. LeFevere's opinion is that the current agreement is sufficient to meet the needs. It may be advisable to work with Valley Branch Watershed District on a boundary change to put the town of Afton into a single watershed authority. This change would be a noncontroversial change, and would not require an amendment. Mr. Jansen will review this proposal with the city of Afton. Mr. Fossum will review with the Valley Branch Watershed District staff Mr. Kamps departed the meeting at 8:30 PM. Agreement with Wash County Conservation District: Mr. Fossum presented the renewal of the contract for services with the Washington Conservation District. Services are the same as the current agreement, with a slight increase in cost per hour. Space rental remains the same as the current agreement. Discussion followed as to the value of need for continued monitoring of . McKusic Lake and Perro Pond. Mr. LeFevere recommended the following statement be added to Paragraph K in both sections: liability "nothing herein shall be deeded a waiver of by either party of the limitationson liability set forth in MN statutes, chap 466; and neither party shall be obligated to indemnity the other party in amount which, when added to the liability of the indemnifying party offer the same occurrence, exceeds the limits on liability set forth in MN statutes 466." Mr. Hansen moved the WMO enter into the agreement, with the amendment listed above. Mr. Jansen seconded the motion. The motion carried. Wesley's Bay Ridge, Baytown Township Mr. Fossum presented the concept plat presented to Baytown Township for Wesley's Bay Ridge, a 13-unit subdivision off Stagecoach Trail. The lots are small, with lots of open space. The largest issue at hand is the tm water pond location in relation to the septic system placement. Detail review will be done when a formal proposal is received. Highway 36 Project: Mr. Fossum reported to the managers the response to his letter to the Minnesota Department of Transportation Engineers. It was clarified that the WMO cannot make any formal response until there is more information. Mr. Abrahamson reported on the status of the review at Oak Park Heights. Concern has been focused on providing for growth, safety, and traffic flow while protecting as many as the current businesses as possible. Other Business: Page 3 of 3 • DRAFT • Middle St. Croix Watershed Management Organization Regular Meeting Feb 12, 2004 Wash Conservation District Offices Mr. Jansen reported that the draft minutes circulated were provided to his city council, and this seemed to be a good communication tool. Mr. Fossum presented a request by a number of the Soil and Water Conservation Districts to gather support for a grant request to complete the MLCCS land-covering mapping in the 4 county area. The area to be covered includes the WMO. The information gathered in this survey would be valuable to the WMO. The watersheds have been asked to provide a letter of support for the grant request. At this time, there is no request for financial support. Mr. Hansen, after discussion, moved to authorize Mr. Fossum to write a letter of support for the grant proposal. Mr. Jansen seconded the request. The request passed. Discussion of the Watershed Management Plan was tabled until the next regular meeting. Mr. Fossum will send out a memo detailing changes to the plan since the last draft distribution. The next regular meeting is scheduled for March 11, 2004. Adjourn: • Mr. Hansen moved to adjourn. Chairman McPherson seconded the motion. The • motion carried. Chairman McPherson adjourned the meeting at 9:00 PM. • Respectfully Submitted, iii),. -olkin L I Cie Elizabeth A. Vance Recording Secretary Page 4 of 4 f • DRAFT Middle St. Croix Watershed Management Organization Regular Meeting March 11, 2004 Wash Co Conservation District Offices Present: Chairman John McPherson, Members Robert Kamps, John Jansen, Ron Nelson, JimGilles, and David Beaudet Absent: Pat Tinuccii, Judy Bellairs, Joella Givens, and Anders Hansen Others Present: Bob Fossum, Administrator; Elizabeth Vance, Recording Secretary Call to Order: Chairman McPherson called the meeting to order at 7:00 P.M. on March 11, 2004. Approval of the Minutes: Members annotated minor corrections. Mr. Beaudet moved to approve the minutes as corrected. Mr. Gilles seconded the motion. The motion carried. • Treasurer's Report: Mr. Fossum gave the treasurer's report in Mr. Hansen's absence. The current balance on hand is $70;561.80. First half payments were received from Stillwater, Lakeland and West Lakeland. Bills presented included an invoice from the Washington County Conservation District and from Mr. LeFevere for legal services. The invoice for Campaign Lobbyist Fee Filing was received. Funds for this invoice are included in project administrative fees currently paid to Bayport. However, because of the imminent due date, Mr. Nelson suggested the invoice be paid, and reimbursement requested from the City of Bayport. Mr. Beaudet moved to pay the invoices as presented, and initiate reimbursement from Bayport. Seconded by Mr. Jansen, the motion carried. Mr. Beaudet also moved to accept the treasurer's report as presented. Mr. Gilles seconded the motion. • The motion carried. St Croix River Bridge Crossing: Mr. Fossum presented an update on the status of the St. Croix River Bridge Crossing Project. A letter was received from the Minnesota Department of Transportation requesting cooperation in finalizing plans. No additional clarification of the direction of the project has been forthcoming. Watershed Management Plan: Mr. Fossum distributed the draft watershed management plan. He summarized comments received on the plan review to date. The plan needs to detail more milestones and measurable objectives. There are a few items which need additional detail or direction. Section 5.0, on goals and policies, need to have metrics to measure local community compliance stated more clearly. Mr. Beaudet suggested that the clean up of Lily Lake should be addressed in the plan. Actions can be included that are delegated to other organizations for implementation. Mr. Fossum also suggested a gully inventory, with erosion management, be added to the plan. Page 1 of 1 • DRAFT • 4' Middle St. Croix Watershed Management Organization Regular Meeting March 11, 2004 Wash Co Conservation District Offices Discussion followed on how to incorporate the variety of jurisdictions that impact the Watershed Management Organization. The overlapping jurisdictions should also be addressed in the plan. The state, Department of Natural Resources, Federal Emergency Management Agency, and local government agencies have varying specifications. There are existing Cooperative Management Plans, with varying levels of agreement and detail. Mr. Jansen provided an overview of activity in current work in the cooperative management plan. Discussion of the drafted performance standards followed. Definition of the "lowest floor" needs additional clarification. Multiple tiered standards are possible, and may be more appropriate, based upon the classification of the wetland. The fourth standard, dealing with the impact of drainage between member communities, needs to e more specifically worded to delineate the application to new and existing construction, and what scale of projects would be reviewed. Mr. Beaudet suggested that cable access be considered as an information medium, and mapping of the water drainage and riverway flow should be included in the plan. As part of the implementation standards, the board discussed the advantages and disadvantages of administrative permits as a vehicle for managing smaller projects. Finally, the processes for variances and financing need additional detail. Mr. Fossum suggested the board consider convening a subcommittee to review the comments in more detail. Mr. Beaudet, Mr. Jansen and Chairman McPherson volunteered to convene a subcommittee for review. Mr. Beaudet moved to appoint himself, Mr. Jansen and Chairman McPherson to a subcommittee to provide for more detailed review of the Draft Management Plan in coordination with Mr. Fossum to report back at the next regular meeting. The motion was seconded by Mr. Nelson, and passed. Minnesota Storm Water Sewer Project, Phase III. Chairman McPherson reported on the status of this project in relation to the State Bonding Bill. The project is included in the draft released from the Econom c Development Committee. Mr. Beaudet volunteered to contact Senators Ligseth and Bachmann. Stillwater Mills Mr. Fossum presented a review of the Stillwater Mills Development Project on Main Street and Mulberry in Stillwater. The project has first floor retail space, with 3 or 4 stories of residences above. Parking will be underneath the structure. Baysaver stormwater ponding will be installed underneath the structure before releasing into the city storm sewer system. The plaza serves as additional storage, designed to hold an additional 6 inches of water. The recommendation suggests the city engineer should verify the emergency overflow. Emergency overflow has been required on every other storm water ponding system. For erosion control, the silt fence should be installed at the start of demolition and remain in place throughout the construction. After discussion, Mr. Beaudet moved the recommendation be approved, and forwarded to the City of Stillwater. Mr. Jansen seconded the motion. The motion carried. Page 2 of 2 r • DRAFT • Middle St. Croix Watershed Management Organization Regular Meeting March 11, 2004 Wash Co Conservation District Offices Adjourn: Having no more business, Mr. Kamps moved to adjourn the meeting. Mr. Jansen seconded the motion. The motion carried. Chairman McPherson adjourned the meeting at 9:00 PM Respectfully Submitted, grifiplahlkt 6tC.-4 Elizabeth A. Vance Recording Secretary • Page 3 of 3 • Middle St. Croix Watershed Management Organization Regular Meeting Feb 12, 2004 Washington County Conservation District Present: Chairman John McPherson, Members Robert Camps, Anders Hansen, John Jansen, Ron Nelson, JimGilles, Les Abrahamson for David Beaudet Absent: Pat Tinuccii, Judy Bellairs, Joella Givens Others Present: Bob Fossum, Administrator; Elizabeth Vance, Recording Secretary; Mr. Ed Cain; Jeff Davis and Paul Hegre, S.E.H. Inc.; Charles LeFevere, Kennedy & Graven Call to Order: Chairman John McPherson called the meeting to order at 6:58 PM. Approval of the Minutes: Mr. Jansen made minor corrections to the minutes, incorporated into the draft copy. Mr. Hansen moved to accept the minutes as corrected. Seconded by Mr. Kamps, the motion carried. Treasurer's Report Mr. Hansen presented the treasurer's report. The WMO has a balance of $70,654.54 with no new disbursements. The insurance renewal with the League of Minnesota Cities Insurance Trust is still pending review of the questionnaire. Coverage provides for underinsured and not insured motorists, and general liability. Mr. Camps moved to approve the report as presented. Mr. Jansen seconded the motion. The motion carried. Mr. Fossum will be sending out requests for the first payment of dues to the member communities. The second payment is due in July. State of MN Storm Sewer Project Phase III Mr. Jeff Davis and Mr. Paul Hegre presented the proposed recommendations for the State of Minnesota Storm Sewer Reconstruction Project, Phase III, in Bayport, Minnesota. Two routes were evaluated. Route A, located and 3d Ave N and 2d Street, proposes a 48" concrete culvert, with outlet to Lake St. Croix. Route B, located at 3d Ave S and Maine Street, was reviewed with either a 48" or a 27" concrete culvert, with outlet to Lake St. Croix from Lakeside Drive. All culverts would include gated structures to isolate the storm sewer runoff from high river stages. Route A would require street replacement between 2d Street and Maine Street. Installation of the pipe would cause railroad service disruption to Xcel Energy and Anderson Windows. The disruption will be coordinated with those concerned, as was done in the previous phases of the project. Discussion followed as to where the drainage easement might be located. Anderson Corporation has been asked to submit a letter to the City of Bayport with its concern over having 100% of the easement on the corporation property. Mr. Kamps expressed concern over the amount of time the street would be disrupted. Mr. Hegre replied that the plan was to provide improvements with the repair of the street, including curb, gutters and catch basins. APPROVED Page 1 of 1 Ilk „, • iddle St. Croix Watershed Management Organization • Regular Meeting Feb 12, 2004 Washington County Conservation District Route B would route water from the inlet at Perro Creek and Third Avenue, down Lakeside Drive, and outlet to Lake St. Croix. The access point at Lakeside.Drive is across privately owned property. No open cut is proposed for this route, leaving rail service intact at this point. Both a 48” and 27" outlet structures were reviewed for Route B. The culvert at the railroad embankment would be improved, but not replaced, in this proposal. Repairing the structure and providing for improved hydraulics. Mr. Hegre presented the results of the hydraulic studies. Modeling of current conditions predict a high water elevation of 692.4 feet, and critical elevations of 691.6 feet and 691.2 feet. With 48" structures in Both Route A and Route B, the high water elevation is reduced to 687.9 feet. Some high water flooding will exist north of Second Avenue, and flooding beyond the railroad embankment is mitigated. Third, a 48" structure at Route A, and a 27" structure and Route B resulted in water elevation levels of 688.7 feet, and some flooding on the ice road. Finally, a 48" structure at Route A, and no structure at Route B, but making improvements at the railroad embankment and culvert at 3d Avenue forecasted high water elevation at 688.7 feet and 690.7 feet. Cost estimates of the project are for Route A, 48" structure for $1.4 million to a 48" structure at both Route and Route B at approximately $2.8 million. During Discussion, Mr. Kamps expressed concern that additional storm water not be routed into Perro Creek. The City of Bayport is prohibited by an injunction from routing any more storm water along this route. Discussion followed as to how to • minimize impact on that local area. Mr. Davis suggested that filling and grading to provide better drainage would further minimize any impact. It was also important to the Managers that the project be done only once, with the best alternative implemented. However, funding would be an issue. Mr. Cain commented on the state of the current bonding bill, and provided the history of this project in the previous bonding bill discussions. There is a concern that the amount requested for this project previously was $1.5 million,but additional engineering and design has increased the estimated cost. Mr. Kamps suggested a letter be drafted for signature to the area representatives in the State House and Senate voicing support for the project in the bonding bill. A draft will be circulated among the members for comment and signature. Contract with Attorney LeFevere Mr. LeFevere introduced himself to the Board, and described his experience and his firm. His involvement with other municipal and public organizations has varied based upon the needs of the organization. Mr. Jansen reported on the meeting held between himself, Mr. Fossum and Mr. LeFevere. It was their joint recommendation that Mr. LeFevere be retained for services on an as-needed basis by the WMO. Contact should be directed through Mr. Fossum. Mr. Jansen moved that the WMO retain Mr. LeFevere pursuant to the contract presented for 2004, on an as-needed basis Mr. LeFevere provided comment to the organization on options for funding based on his experience with different levy options and allowances within the state statutes. The current state statute provides opportunities to levy through the County for capital projects. APPROVED Page 2 of 2 • • Middle St. Croix Watershed Management Organization Regular Meeting Feb 12, 2004 Washington County Conservation District Joint Powers Agreement Mr. LeFevere provided comment as to his review of the Joint Powers Agreement. Mr. LeFevere's opinion is that the current agreement is sufficient to meet the needs. It may be advisable to work with Valley Branch Watershed District on a boundary change to put the city of Afton into a single watershed authority. This change would be a noncontroversial change, and would not require an amendment. Mr. Jansen will review this proposal with the city of Afton. Mr. Fossum will review with the Valley Branch Watershed District staff Mr. Kamps departed the meeting at 8:30 PM. Agreement with Washington County Conservation District: Mr. Fossum presented the renewal of the contract for services with the Washington County Conservation District. Services are the same as the current agreement, with a slight increase in cost per hour. Space rental remains the same as the current agreement. Discussion followed as to the value of need for continued monitoring of McKusick Lake and Perro Pond. Mr. LeFevere recommended the following statement be added to Paragraph K in both contracts: liability "nothing herein shall be deemed a waiver by either party of the limitations on liability set forth in MN statutes, chap 466; and neither party shall be obligated to indemnity the other party in amount which, when added to the liability of the indemnifying party for the same occurrence, exceeds the limits on liability set forth in MN statutes 466." Mr. Hansen moved the MWO enter into the agreement, with the amendment listed above. Mr. Jansen seconded the motion. The motion carried. Wesley's Bay Ridge, Baytown Township Mr. Fossum presented the concept plat presented to Baytown Township for Wesley's Bay Ridge, a 13-unit subdivision off Stagecoach Trail. The lots are small, with lots of open space. The largest issue at hand is the storm water pond location in relation to the septic system placement. Detailed review will be done when a formal proposal is received. Highway 36 Project: Mr. Fossum reported to the managers the response to his letter to the Minnesota Department of Transportation Engineers. It was clarified that the WMO cannot make any formal response until there is more information. Mr. Agrimson reported on the status of the review at Oak Park Heights. Concern has been focused on providing for growth, safety, and traffic flow while protecting as many as the current businesses as possible. Other Business: Mr. Jansen reported that the draft minutes circulated were provided to his city council, and this seemed to be a good communication tool. Mr. Fossum presented a request by a number of the Soil and Water Conservation Districts to gather support for a grant request to complete the MLCCS land-covering APPROVED Page 3 of 3 e Ilk St. Croix Watershed Management Organization Regular Meeting Feb 12, 2004 Washington County Conservation District mapping in the 4 county area. The area to be covered includes the MWO. The information gathered in this survey would be valuable to the MWO. The watersheds have been asked to provide a letter of support for the grant request. At this time, there is no request for financial support. Mr. Hansen, after discussion, moved to authorize Mr. Fossum to write a letter of support for the grant proposal. Mr. Jansen seconded the request. The request passed. Discussion of the Watershed Management Plan was tabled until the next regular meeting. Mr. Fossum will send out a memo detailing changes to the plan since the last draft distribution. The next regular meeting is scheduled for March 11, 2004. Adjourn: Mr. Hansen moved to adjourn. Chairman McPherson seconded the motion. The motion carried. Chairman McPherson adjourned the meeting at 9:00 PM. Respectfully Submitted, i&I glip-Aclinkt Ge Elizabeth A. Vance Recording Secretary • APPROVED Page 4 of 4 • CITY OF ST. MARY'S POINT .Box 846 LAKELAND,MN 55043 www.stmaryspointorg MAYOR: 651436-1099 STEVE POPOVICH g 651-436-5102(fax) �, ".'i E COUNCIL: ?... _.. DON JONES j GARY WILLIAMS MAR R 2 4 2004 NANCY JACOBSON MIKETHEEDE tiV1\SH - O SvII `L) CITY CLERK: HOLLY WHALEN TREASURER: Tom NIEDZWIEKI March 22, 2004 Middle St. Croix River Watershed Management Organization 1380 West Frontage Road, Hwy 36 Stillwater, MN 55082 . ATTN: BOB FOSSUM, ADMINISTRATOR Dear Mr. Fossum: In regards to the mailings the City of St. Mary's Point receives for this Organization, would you please note the following two changes: 1- Judy Bellairs should be removed from the mailing list, and Nancy Jacobson should be substituted. Nancy Jacobson 2900 Itasca Ave St. Mary's Point, MN 55043 2- My last name has changed from Shellabarger to Whalen. Thank you,01.0)(al0 Holly Whalen City Clerk 4111110 • MIDDLE ST. CROIX RIVER WATERSHED MANAGEMENT ORGANIZATION ` ` 1380 West Frontage Road, Hwy 36 Phone: 651-275-1136, ext. 21 +"�= Stillwater, MN 55082 Fax: 651-1254 A Joint Powers Watershed Management Organization composed of ten St. Croix Valley , ► ` Communities that was established under State Statute 103E to cooperatively manage water resources within the watershed. February 17, 2004 Honorable Mayor David Beaudet City of Oak Park Heights 14168 North 57th Street, P.O. Box 2007 Oak Park Heights, MN 55082-2007 RE: 2004 Middle St. Croix Watershed Management Organization Budget Dear Mayor Beaudet: As you are aware, your City is a member of the Joint Powers Agreement, which forms the Middle St. Croix Watershed Management Organization (MSCWMO). The MSCWMO operates on an annual budget funded by the member communities. The MSCWMO, at its August 14, 2003 meeting, adopted its 2004 Budget. At that meeting the 2004 budget was set at $35,000. A breakdown of that budget has been attached for your reference. Based upon the funding formula in Joint Powers Agreement, your community's contribution is 15.9731 % or $5,590.59. The formula was most recently recalculated in January of 2002 using the most updated population and tax capacity information that was available. Also, in accordance with the Joint Powers Agreement, payments are to be received in two equal amounts, the first by January 1, 2004 and the second by July 1, 2004. The first half payment is due upon receipt of this letter. The MSCWMO Board of Commissioners thanks you and your community for its continued support of its organization. If you have any questions,please feel free to contact me at 439-2582. Sinc ly, Anders Hansen, Treasurer Cc: Erik Johnson, Administrator, City of Oak Park Heights Enc: 2004 Adopted Budget and Community Contributions Middle St. Croix Watershed Management Organization MEMBER COMMUNITIES: Afton,Bayport,Baytown Township,Lakeland,Lakeland Shores,Lake St.Croix Beach,Oak Park Heights,St.Mary's Point,Stillwater and West Lakeland Township • Regular Meeting Agenda • Middle St. Croix Watershed Management Organization February 12, 2004 Washington Conservation District (Located in River Heights Plaza, Stillwater,next to the Washington County License Center) 7:00 PM-Regular Meeting Agenda 1. Call to Order 2. Approval of Minutes a) January 15, 2004 Minutes 3. Treasurer's Report(Anders Hansen) a) Report of Savings Account, Assets b) Approve payment of bills 4. Old Business a) Watershed Management Plan a. Review of Draft 1 of Watershed Management Plan b. Review of Joint Powers Agreement 5. New Business a) State of MN Storm Sewer Project, Phase III Proposal, SEH b) Washington Conservation District Technical Assistance for 2004 c) Introduction/Discussion with Attorney LeFevere d) Wesley's Bay Ridge, Baytown Township 6. Other Agenda Items 7. Adjourn Middle St. Croix Watershed Management Organization MEMBER COMMUNITIES: Afton,Bayport,Baytown Township,Lakeland,Lakeland Shores,Lake St.Croix Beach,Oak Park Heights,St.Mary's Point,Stillwater and West Lakeland Township O0 t k Cl) ti a m -a 14 m 2 L =a' �o. C� -4..... 0 a. }� 3 r t ,-,,,,„;1- ;y r a us a. ,` 2-)--O j a. o w, a , r U O /� +'t � s% u c E o et -' c r 1; a o Wo U W > c 415 > > o 0 A 03 s NNU ;01. d 8 r fi Inall 1="te Tv''' :::4:-1;4:::''': .4s 4:' e. co V 7 LO ❑ rt c Ta .'''"i;1 4: r- ♦' t (13 co CD c O O "` ' o Q U INN N co Q '-s C 03 U O 43 z Q�� o • N C ■ t g M CSI -a) ` >% �� W V W ,}:-_-r M Y/ w V mum - T .. N wC) o CC 5N G= o O (---6-U c O x Uma �' �pco� ,. as �, C- a I 0 t Cl) } 110 1 moves to amend H. F. No. . . . . as follows: 2 Delete everything after the enacting clause and insert: 3 "ARTICLE 1 4 APPROPRIATIONS AND RELATED LANGUAGE 5 Section 1. [CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT APPROPRIATIONS. ] 6 The sums in the column under "APPROPRIATIONS" are 7 appropriated from the bond proceeds fund, or another named fund, 8 to the state agencies or officials indicated, to be spent for 9 public purposes. Appropriations of bond proceeds must be spent 10 as authorized by the Minnesota Constitution, article XI, section 11 5, paragraph (a) , to acquire and better public land and 12 buildings and other public improvements of a capital nature, or 13 as authorized by the Minnesota Constitution, article XI, section 14 5, paragraphs (b) to ( j ) , or article XIV. Unless otherwise 15 specified, the appropriations in this act are available until 16 the project is completed or abandoned subject to Minnesota 17 Statutes, section 16A.642. 18 SUMMARY 19 UNIVERSITY OF MINNESOTA $ 90,480,000 20 MINNESOTA STATE COLLEGES AND UNIVERSITIES 145,817,000 21 PERPICH CENTER FOR ARTS EDUCATION 1,100,000 22 EDUCATION 1,054,000 23 MINNESOTA STATE ACADEMIES 4,255,000 24 NATURAL RESOURCES 49,400,000 1 limm • 40 -,, ,„-: 4.4,!i ,w 04/20/04 [REVISOR ] RJS/KJ A04-1354 1 for Phase I of the Rochester Regional 2 Public Safety Training Center to 3 develop a live burn training simulator 4 adjacent to the existing National Guard 5 facility in Rochester. 6 The appropriation is not available 7 until the commissioner determines that 8 an equal amount has been committed to 9 the project from nonstate sources. 0 Subd. 6. Middle St. Croix River 11 Watershed Management Organization 1,550,000 12 For a grant to the city of Bayport for 13 the Middle St. Croix River Watershed 14 Management Organization to complete the 15 sewer system extending from Minnesota 16 department of natural resources pond 17 82-310P (the prison pond) in Bayport 18 through the_ Stillwater prison grounds 19 to the St. Croix River. 20 Subd. 7. City of Rushford 600,000 21 For a grant, subject to Minnesota 22 Statutes, section 16A.695, to the city 23 of Rushford for construction, 24 renovation, remodeling, and 25 infrastructure for capital improvements 26 to and for the facility to be used by 27 the Rushford Institute for 28 Nanotechnology, Inc. 29 Subd. 8. City of St. Paul 2,000,000 30 For a grant to the city of St. Paul to 31 acquire land for right-of-way and to 32 complete contamination remediation on 33 Phalen Boulevard between Interstate 34 Highway I-35E and Johnson Parkway. 35 Subd. 9. Hennepin County 1,200,000 36 For a grant to Hennepin County for 37 Phase I capital improvements to the 38 Lowry Avenue corridor from Girard 39 Avenue North to the I-94 bridge in 40 Minneapolis. 41 Subd. 10. City of Two Harbors 1,071,000 42 To the Minnesota Pollution Control 43 Agency for a grant to the city of Two 44 Harbors to acquire land for, design, • S • let MIDDLE ST. CROIX RIVER WATERSHED MANAGEMENT ORGANIZATION /4 1380 West Frontage Road, Hwy 36 Phone: 651-275-1136, ext. 21 D Stillwater, MN 55082 Fax: 651-1254 ; {, A Joint Powers Watershed Management Organization composed of ten St. Croix Valley Communities that was established under State Statute 103B to cooperatively manage water resources within the watershed. LETTER OF TRANSMITTAL DATE: February 5,2004 TO: Middle St.Croix River Watershed Management Organization FROM: Bob Fossum RE: February 12,2004 Meeting Packet WE ARE SENDING: Via Mail: X Courier: Fax: Agenda Item DESCRIPTION 1 Agenda—February 12,2003 MSCWMO meeting 2 Minutes—Draft minutes for the January 15,2003 Board meeting Approved minutes for December 11,2003 Board meeting 4.a.b. Letter from Attorney LeFevere regarding Joint Powers Agreement Copy of current Joint Powers Agreement 5.b. Draft Contracts for Technical Services from Washington Conservation District 5.c. Contract with Attorney LeFevere Informational Letter to MNDOT regarding St.Croix River Bridge Crossing Item Informational Copy of comment letter for Loramere Development,West Lakeland Township Item Informational Copy of comment letter for Oakgreen Village Phase I,Oak Park Heights Item Please call me with any additional agenda items or agenda changes at 275-1136,ext.21. Sincerel Bob Fossum Cc: Betsy Vance,Recording Secretary Charlie LeFevere,Kennedy&Graven Konrad Koosmann,WCD City of Oak Park Heights(Agenda Only) Jeff Davis,SEH(Agenda Only) Middle St. Croix Watershed Management Organization MEMBER COMMUNITIES: Afton,Bayport,Baytown Township,Lakeland,Lakeland Shores,Lake St.Croix Beach,Oak Park Heights,St.Mary's Point,Stillwater and West Lakeland Township 4I 'kikti MIDDLE ST. CROIX RIVER WATERSHED MANAGEMENT ORGANIZATION 1380 West Frontage Road, Hwy 36 Phone: 651-275-1136, ext. 21 Stillwater, MN 55082 Fax: 651-1254 'rril A Joint Powers Watershed Management Organization composed of ten St. Croix Valley fr, Communities that was established under State Statute 103B to cooperatively manage water °:,,,1,7` resources within the water 77E4443-4, LETTER OF TRANSMITTAL DATE: February 5,2004 TO: Middle St.Croix River Watershed Management Organization FROM: Bob Fossum RE: February 12,2004 Meeting Packet WE ARE SENDING: Via Mail: X Courier: Fax: Agenda Item DESCRIPTION 1 Agenda—February 12,2003 MSCWMO meeting 2 Minutes—Draft minutes for the January 15,2003 Board meeting Approved minutes for December 11,2003 Board meeting 4.a.b. Letter from Attorney LeFevere regarding Joint Powers Agreement Copy of current Joint Powers Agreement 5.b. Draft Contracts for Technical Services from Washington Conservation District 5.c. Contract with Attorney LeFevere Informational Letter to MNDOT regarding St.Croix River Bridge Crossing Item Informational Copy of comment letter for Loramere Development,West Lakeland Township Item Informational Copy of comment letter for Oakgreen Village Phase I,Oak Park Heights Item Please call me with any additional agenda items or agenda changes at 275-1136,ext.21. Sincerely, Bob Fossum Cc: Betsy Vance,Recording Secretary Charlie LeFevere,Kennedy&Graven Konrad Koosmann,WCD City of Oak Park Heights(Agenda Only) Jeff Davis,SEH(Agenda Only) Middle St. Croix Watershed Management Organization MEMBER COMMUNITIES: Afton,Bayport,Baytown Township,Lakeland,Lakeland Shores,Lake St.Croix Beach,Oak Park Heights,St.Mary's Point,Stillwater and West Lakeland Township • Regular Meeting Agenda • Middle St. Croix Watershed Management Organization February 12, 2004 Washington Conservation District (Located in River Heights Plaza, Stillwater,next to the Washington County License Center) 7:00 PM-Regular Meeting Agenda 1. Call to Order 2. Approval of Minutes a) January 15, 2004 Minutes 3. Treasurer's Report(Anders Hansen) a) Report of Savings Account,Assets b) Approve payment of bills 4. Old Business a) Watershed Management Plan a. Review of Draft 1 of Watershed Management Plan b. Review of Joint Powers Agreement 5. New Business a) State of MN Storm Sewer Project, Phase III Proposal, SEH b) Washington Conservation District Technical Assistance for 2004 • c) Introduction/Discussion with Attorney LeFevere d) Wesley's Bay Ridge, Baytown Township 6. Other Agenda Items 7. Adjourn Middle St. Croix Watershed Management Organization MEMBER COMMUNITIES: Afton,Bayport,Baytown Township,Lakeland,Lakeland Shores,Lake St.Croix Beach,Oak Park Heights,St.Mary's Point,Stillwater and West Lakeland Township • • 4 Middle St. Croix Watershed Management Organization December 11,2003 WCD Offices APPROVED 1. Call to Order Meeting called to order at 7:00P.M. by Manager McPherson. Members Present John McPherson,West Lakeland; John Jansen, Lake St. Croix Beach; Anders Hansen, Baytown Township; Jim Gilles, Lakeland; Ron Nelson, Stillwater; Les Abrahamson, Oak Park Heights; Robert Kamps, Bayport; Jo Ella Givens, Lakeland Shores. Absent: Judy Bellairs, St. Mary's Point, Afton Others in Attendance: Dawn Hilde,Recording Secretary, Ed Cain, Bob Fossum, Administrator 2. Approval of Minutes Manager Jansen made a motion to approve the minutes for November 131 2003, seconded by Manager Kamps. Vote: 7/0 3. Treasurer's Report-Anders Hansen • Manager Hansen presented a bill to be paid°from WCD for$11,601.07. This ' billing includes $10,926.00 for the Second Generation Plan. The bank balance is $84,490.98. Bob Fossum stated the Second Generation budget is not to exceed $52,000.00. Manager Jansen made a motion to pay the bills and accept the Treasurer's report, seconded by Manager Kamps. Vote: 7/0. Manager Givens arrived at 7:30P.M. 4. Old Business a. Update of Lobbyist Fees for Bonding Jim Gilles asked Ed Cain to give the MSCWMO a general idea of the process for bills getting through the legislature. He explained that someone representing the bill should be present for every committee hearing to answer any questions on the bill. This could be as many as six committee hearings. This process has to be followed for both the Senate and Legislature. There is no guarantee that your bill will be discussed or at what time it will be discussed. The person representing the bill has to sit through long meetings and may never be needed. Oak Park Heights has voted to not support a lobbyist for 2004. Manager McPherson tried to persuade Lee Abrahamson to change his mind about Draft Minutes for the MSCWMO Meeting December 11,2003 Page 1 of 3 • i this issue. Manager McPherson and one other manager may go to the next Oak Park Heights meeting or a special meeting to discuss this issue. Bob Fossum will be in contact with Oak Park Heights and arrange for this meeting. b. Watershed Management Plan 1) Ordinance Summary and Suggested Review Standards Bob Fossum presented a chart reviewing the existing ordinances in the 10 member communities governing the following three areas: Stormwater, Grading and Erosion Control and Wetlands. Bob stated the design standards will be included in the Management Plan at the January meeting. He suggested that the design standards be presented as part of the Joint Powers Agreement. 5. New.Business • a. Legal Services,RFP for Attorney Manager Jansen reported that a Request for Qualifications has been sent out for legal services for the MSCWMO. Proposals will be presented at the January MSCWMO meeting. b. Croixdale Residence and Apartments,Bayport Bob Fossum did a preliminary review of the Croixdale plans and sent a letter to Mike McGuire, Administrator for Bayport with comments on Drainage and Wetland Issues, and Erosion and Sediment Control. Manager Givens suggested changing the last sentence in the memo from "suggest"to "recommend". c. River Crossing Scoping Document Bob Fossum suggested it is not the time to review the Scoping Document. The MSCWMO should wait until there is a final plan and then comment. Bob felt when the final plan is chosen, the MSCWMO should focus on the Highway 36 Corridor. d. Loramere,West Lakeland Township Bob Fossum reported this will be a 25 lot development. The final plans should be available for review in January. There were some concerns with drainage and erosion because of the steep slopes. 6. Other Agenda Items Manager Hansen made a motion to hold the January MSCWMO meeting on January 15, seconded by Manager Kamps. Vote: 8/0. Draft Minutes for the MSCWMO Meeting December 11,2003 Page 2 of 3 • Jeff Davis from SEH was unable to attend this meeting but asked Bob Fossum to convey the following: Landscaping on the project will be completed next summer. SEH should have some figures available at the January meeting and a final accounting in February. Phase III investigation report should be presented at the February meeting. 7. Adjourn Manager Hansen made a motion to adjourn the meeting, seconded by Manager Kamps. Vote: 8/0 Meeting adjourned at 8:29P.M. Respectfully Submitted, Dawn Hilde • Draft Minutes for the MSCWMO Meeting December 11,2003 Page 3 of 3 DRAFT • Middle St. Croix Watershed Management Organi'�'E on Regular Meeting Jan 14, 2003 Washington County Conservation District Present: Chairman John McPherson, Members Ron Nelson, Robert Kamps, Anders Hansen, John Jansen, David Beaudet Absent: Pat Tinuccii, Jim Gilles, Judy Bellairs, Joella Givens, Others Present: Bob Fossum, Administrator; Elizabeth Vance, Recording Secretary Call to Order: Chairman John McPherson called the meeting to order at 7:00 PM. It was determined a quorum was present. Approval of the Minutes: Mr. David Beaudet moved to approve the minutes as presented. Mr. Jansen seconded the motion. The motion carried. Treasurer's Report: • Mr. Hansen presented the treasurer's report. The current balance is $72,698.14. • Mr. Hansen presented the invoices due for payment, including the Washington County Soil and Water Conservation District,Ms. Dawn Hilde, and League of Minnesota Cities for insurance renewal. Mr. Jansen moved to pay the invoices as presented. Chairman McPherson seconded the motion. The motion carried. Old Business: Lobbyist Fees for Bonding Measure: The board discussed the status of funding for the lobbyist hired to represent the member communities in the State Bonding bill. Mr. Jansen mentioned that he had spoken to Representative Lippman, who had been expected to hear from Mr. Cain, the lobbyist hired to represent the member communities. Mr. Jansen will contact Mr. Cain. The board also discussed possible courses of action to address the ability of the Organization levy taxes to support its effort. Mr. Jansen will arrange a meeting with Representative Lippman and/or Senator LeClair to discuss the options. Chairman McPherson will also attend the meeting. A second option to levy authority would be to have member jurisdictions create special taxing districts within the boundaries of the Middle St. Croix Watershed Organization. Watershed Management Plan Mr. Fossum presented a draft of the Watershed Management Plan for the board to review. He asked the board members focus on Section 5, Goals and Policies, and Section 6, as implementation. The plan review will be discussed at the next regular meeting. Joint Powers Agreement Mr. Fossum reported on the next actions on the Joint Powers agreement. After adoption of the plan, the joint powers agreement will need to be updated. There are DRAFT Page l of 3 "Idle DRAFTSt. Croix Watershed Management Organization g Regular Meeting Jan 14, 2003 Washington County Conservation District eleven communities currently represented in the organization. Legal assistance will be needed to complete this agreement. Legal Representation Mr. Jansen presented the response received from the solicitations for legal representation. The application received was from Charlie LeFevere, of Kennedy and Graven. Mr. Jansen reported that inquiries have not brought only positive comments on Mr. LeFevere and the firm. The board discussed the subject, and debated the alternatives before the board. Although a local firm was desired, there was concern over conflict of interest if the firm represented member communities. Mr. Beaudet moved, seconded by Mr. Kamps,to authorize Mr. Jansen and Mr. Fossum meet Mr. LeFevere for an interview, and discussion, and authorize an offer if appropriate. St. Croix Bridge Alternatives Mr. Beaudet reported on the options presented by the Minnesota Department of Transportation for replacing the Stillwater Bridge across the St. Croix River. It was • determined that plans are not firm enough for a realistic review of the recommendations. Mr. Beaudet moved to direct Mr. Fossum to prepare a letter to the Minnesota Department of Transportation, suggesting that the board will not review any further proposals until the plans are more concrete. The letter should include a notification that the WMO is revising its policies and procedures at the current time. Mr. Kamps seconded the motion. The motion carried. • New Business Loramere Development, West Lakeland Township Mr. Fossum presented a draft of his letter of comments, and a map of the proposed development. The development includes 25 units, 2 1/2 acres in size. The pond recommended is entirely within the plat,with a better drainage design than previously presented. There will be minimal grading, and will keep as many of the quality oak trees as possible. There are issues with erosion and sediment control,with a recommendation for more silt fencing. The issues surrounding the Well Advisory Area from the airport are of concern for this plat, delaying the development activity. Mr. Beaudet moved to approve the report as presented, and forward to the developer and West Lakeland Township. Mr. Hansen seconded the motion. The motion carried. Oakgreen Village, Oak Park Heights Mr. Fossum presented the development proposal for multi-family dwellings in Oakgreen Village. This is a three-phase development, with the second phase scheduled for 2004. The first comment is for grading and drainage inherent in all storm water piping and ponding. It will all need to be installed, despite the phased development,to be effective. The city should require stabilization for the undeveloped portions to control erosion. The second issue is for outlet protection for the pipes into the drainage ponds. It should be required. There is a power line easement over the top of the proposed pond. It DRAFT Page 2of3 DRAFT Management Organiza on Middle St. Croix Watershed ltla Meeting servation District Reg Washington County Con Washing and cannot be installed, ponding. If the p Jan 14,2003ended changes pointed out that the recommended through was uncertain lathe ineffective.wouldMr. Beaud t p frontage road directly the drainage plan is in put a new Highway 36 corridor would bythe MnDOT for the Him w. Mr. additional concerns were to be adddc° the letter oncerns diseussedf ebe Hansen development. The with the additionalMr. Jansen,the motion recommend the letter of review, forwarded to Oak Park Heights and the developer. Seconded by passed. g February th Re ular Meeting: will be held Thursday,February 12 The February � Adjourn: ourn the meeting. Seconded by Mr.Hansen,the motion Mr.Kan1ps moved to adj a at 8:14 PM. carried. Chairman McPherson adjourned the meeting Respectfully submitted, t1,1446-&CA Elizabeth A.Vance Recording Secretary • DRAFT Page 3 of 3 I!!i! ci :n.corn y Center ixtStreECEIVEs 05530teleeN. 004 31fax9310 fax graven.com D G H A R T - R E CHARLES L.LEFEVERE Attorney at Law Direct Dial(612)337-9215 Email:elefevere@kennedy-graven.com January 28,2004 Bob Fossum Water Resource Planner Washington Conservation DishWay 36 1380 West Frontage Road,Highway Stillwater,MN 55082 Re: MSCWMO Joint Powers Agreement Dear Bob: Mr. John Jansen requested that I review the Jot Moo)ers last week, you andManagement Organization (M At our meetingWatershed Manag the 1vISCwMp the authority to o agreement of the Middle necessary Croix end the Agreement to give it determine whether use and development of land. For the reasons explained in this letter, to give adopt rules for the use and not necessary for the member cities to amend the Joint Powers gr opinion that it is lations. the WMO the authority to adopt such regu watershed management 103B.211, Subd. 1(3) provides that a joint powers Minn. Stat. § . organization can be given: "(3) the authority of a watershed when one or more of the following conditions district under Chapter 103D to regulate the use and development of land in the vat exists: (i) planning and the local government unit exercising p water zoning authority over the land...does not have a local d and adopted in accordanCe with the management plan approve requirements of Minn. Stat. § 103B.235, or has not adopted file implementation program described in the plan; application to the local goverment unit for a permit for the use and d (ii) an apprequires an amendmentevado tedllocal waterinanagenlent plan or to, or variance from, th p implementation program of the local unit;or CLL-243198v1 MD165-1 • • • . Bob Fossum Ltr January 28, 2004 Page 2 (iii) the local government unit has authori to require permits for the use and developmentZed the �wMO of land, � The cities forming the MSC Powers Agreement which WMO have exercised this statutory Powers such rules c provides time ase it and ems authority inion a prescribe the Joint Regulations. The Commission may promulgatef this Agreement." necessary and ary to carry out its duties and the p�pose oIn three of the other joint powers watershed management Creek, ofShinglethe Creek and g ent or development West Mississippi) the WMO as adopted ns that I representfthe activities such and. Member cities act has adopted rules for (Bassett under their general permittingthe use and require approvalsuh as bydevelopment, excavation, and projects creating e cove a . proposed the wMO as a condition of city hard surface coverage. approve the proposal). Cities are the direct e approval(unless the g The cities WMO• Although permitting authorities and enforceythe e�lady s o fthe Plan with those h have jot thoroughly compared the standards in the draftDations of on comparable. p ers WMOs, it is my general impression tSecond at the areeratery Y very Therefore,it is my opinion that State law the authority to adopt re and the Joint Powers Agreement confer on the MS Surface Water Management for the use and development of land in accordanceCSO Plan are annagets nt with and those t the proposals for such regulation in the with the of Cher Joint Powers Second Generation � another COs with which I am familiar. . matter, you requested that I services. I have attached thisu proposed a provide you with a agreement for that proposed se Please agreement for legal any questions about either the opinion expressed in p P letter or the . Please let me know if you have this or thattached agreement. Very truly yours, Charles L. LeFevere CLL:peb Enclosures cc: John Jansen, Councilmember(w/encs.) CLL-243198v1 MD1 G5-1 vliddle St. Croix Watershed Management Organizallki Regular Meeting Washington County Conservation District Jan 15, 2004 Anders Present: Chairman John McPherson, Members Ron Nelson,Robert Kamps, Hansen, John Jansen, David Beaudet, Absent Pat Tinuccii, Jim Gilles,Judy Bellairs, Joella Givens Recording Secretary Others Present: Bob Fossum,Administrator; Elizabeth Vance,Rec g Call to Order: Chairman John McPherson called the meeting to order at 7:00 PM. It was determined a quorum was present. Approval of the Minutes: approve the minutes as presented. Mr. Jansen Mr. Dave Baudet moved to seconded the motion. The motion carried. Treasurer's4. Report: ton County Hansenpresented the treasurer's report. The current 1 Mr. presentedspayment, including Mr.Hansen the invoices due for ay nesota C Soil and Water Conservation District,Mr. Dawn Hilde, and a ave'of rMineporand to pay the ies for insurance renewal: Mr. Jansen moved to approve the tr ted. Chairman McPherson seconded the motion. The motion carried. invoices as presen Old Business: Lobbyist Fees for Bonding Measure: lobbyist hired to represent the Lobby' for the The board discussed the status of funding Mr Jansen mentioned that he had member toommunenta inv the Staten Bonding who had expected to hear from Mr. Cain, the lobbyist spoken Representative Lipman, e resent the member communities. Mr. Beaudet of contact onta s Mr. Cain. of the hired torp courses of The board also discussed possiblee a meeting with Organization levy taxes to support its efforts. Mr. Jansen will arrange Chairman tion to levy authority would be to Representative Lipman and/or Senator LeCAlsecond op ir to discuss the op s of the McPherson will also attend the meeting. districts within the boundaries have member jurisdictions hod Organization.l axing Middle St. Croix Watershed Watershed Management Plan Management Plan for the board to Mr. Fossum presented a draft of the Watershed Man 5, cao is and Policies, and Section review. He asked the board members review will be disctussed� at the next regular meeting. 6, as implementation. The plan Joint Powers Agreement ofr sum re the plan,the joint ported on the next actions on the Joint Powers agree ent. areAf eon adoption M . Fos p powers agreement will need APPROVED Page 1 of 3 Ile St. Croix Watershed Management g nt Organization 40 Jan 15, 2004 Regular Meeting Wascommunities currently members of the organization.hLegal assistanceton twill b Conservation District review this agreement. will be needed to Legal Representation Mr. Jansen presented the response received from the solicitations representation. The application received was from Charlie LeFevere, of Graven. for legal Mr. Jansen reported that inquiries have brought onlyKennedy and LeFavre and the firm. The board discussed the subject, and debated positive comments on Mr. before the board. Although a local firm was desired, there was concern the over interest if the firm represented member communities or neighboring Beaudet moved, seconded byoncern over conflict of Mr. Kamps, to authorize Mr. Jansen and Mr.sFossum meet Mr. LeFevere for an interview, and discussion, and authorize an offer St. Croix Bridge Alternatives if appropriate. Mr. Beaudet reported on the options presented by the Minnesota Transportation for replacing the Stillwater Bridge across the St. Croix determined that plans are not firm enough for a realistic Department of Mr. Beaudet moved to direct Mr. Fossum to prepare River. It was review of the recommendations. of Transportation, suggesting the p letter to the Minnesota Department • the plans are more concrete. Thetlettebshoulard dlnotreuiew an is revising its policies and procedures at the cure include a notification that W proposals until The motion carried. current time. Mr. Kamps seconded the motion. New Business Loramere Development, West Lakeland Township Mr. Fossum presented a draft of his letter of comments, and a proposed development. The development includes 25 units, 2 % acres in s' recommended is entirely within the plat, with a better drainagemap of the presented. There will be minimal grading, keepingas m design thanlpreviouze. spy pond possible. There are issues with erosion and sediment control, any of the quality oak trees as more silt fencing. The issues surroundingthe Well Advisory with a recommendation the airport ati are for concern for this plat, delaying the development activity. the report is plat, presented, and forwardthto the developerArea from the aeaudet moved to approve of Hansen seconded the motion. The motion and West Lakeland carred. Township. Mr. Oakgreen Village, Oak Park Heights Mr. Fossum presented the development proposal for multi-family Oakgreen Village. This is a three-phase development, with the sec for 2004. The first comment is for dwellings in piping and ponding. It will all need to be installed, and phase scheduled grading and drainage inherent in all storm water effective. The city should require stabilization for the undeveloped despite the phased development, to be erosion. The second issue is for outlet protection for the pipes into the should be required. There is a power line easementp d portions to control was uncertain if the easement would allow for ponding.over the top of the proposed e ponds. It the drainage plan is ineffective. p ng• If the pond cannot be installed, Mr. Beaudet pointed out that the recommended changes APPROVED Page 2 of 3 410fr Liddle St. Croix Watershed Management Organiza te Regular Jan 15, 2004 g Meeting Washington County Conservation District by MnDOT for the Highway 36 corridor would put a new frontage road directly through the development. The additional concerns were to be added to the letter of review. Mr. Hansen to recommend the letter of review, with the additional concerns discussed, be forwarded to Oak Park Heights and the developer. Seconded by Mr. Jansen, the motion passed. February Regular Meeting: The February regular meeting will be held Thursday, February 12th. Adjourn: Mr. Kamps moved to adjourn the meeting. Seconded by Mr. Hansen, the motion carried. Chairman McPherson adjourned the meeting at 8:14 PM. Respectfully submitted, 20,1/MA.411A4 4AC-02 Elizabeth A. Vance • Recording Secretary • • • • APPROVED Page 3 of 3 • MIDDLE ST. CROIX RIVER WATERSHED ~ MANAGEMENT ORGANIZATION Ai 1380 West Frontage Road, Hwy 36 Phone: 651-275-1136, ext. 21 Stillwater, MN 55082 D Fax 651-1254 's A Joint Powers Watershed Management Organization composed of ten St. Croix ValleyI ° t Communities that was established under State Statute 103E to cooperatively manage water 71 resources within the watershed. SF LETTER OF TRANSMITTAL DATE: February 19,2004 TO: Middle St.Croix River Watershed Management Organization FROM: Bob Fossum RE: February 12,2004 Meeting WE ARE SENDING: Via Mail: X Courier: Fax: Item DESCRIPTION Draft Minutes—February 12,2004 State of MN Storm Sewer Project Phase III,Proposal by S.E.H A fairly comprehensive summary of the discussion from the February meeting regarding the Storm Sewer Project is found in the minutes. Please call me with any additional questions. Sincerely, Vim... Bob Fossum Middle St. Croix Watershed Management Organization MEMBER COMMUNITIES: Afton,Bayport,Baytown Township,Lakeland,Lakeland Shores,Lake St.Croix Beach,Oak Park Heights,St.Mary's Point,Stillwater and West Lakeland Township • DRAFT • Middle St. Croix Watershed Management Organization Regular Meeting Feb 12, 2004 Wash Conservation District Offices Present: Chairman John McPherson, Members Robert Kamps, Anders Hansen, John Jansen, Ron Nelson, Jim Gilles, Les Abrahamson for David Beaudet Absent: Pat Tinuccii, Judy Bellairs, Joella Givens Others Present: Bob Fossum, Administrator; Elizabeth Vance, Recording Secretary; Mr. Ed Cain; Jeff Davis and Paul Hegre, S.E.H. Inc.; Charles LeFevere, Kennedy& Graven Call to Order: Chairman John McPherson called the meeting to order at 6:58 PM. Approval of the Minutes: Mr. Jansen made minor corrections to the minutes, incorporated into the draft copy. Mr. Hansen moved to accept the minutes as corrected. Seconded by Mr. Kamps, the motion carried. Treasurer's Report •• Mr. Hansen presented the treasurer's report. The WMO has a balance of $70,654.54 with no new disbursements. The insurance renewal with the League of Minnesota Cities Insurance Trust is still pending review of the questionnaire. Coverage provides for underinsured and not insured motorists, and general liability. Mr. Kamps moved to approve the report as presented. Mr. Jansen seconded the motion. The motion carried. Mr. Fossum will be sending out requests for the first payment of dues to the member communities. The second payment is due in July. State of MN Storm Sewer Project Phase III • Mr. Jeff Davis and Mr. Paul Hegre presented the proposed recommendations for the State of Minnesota Storm Sewer Reconstruction Project, Phase III, in Bayport, Minnesota. Two routes were evaluated. Route A, located and 3d Ave N and 2d Street, proposes a 48" concrete culvert, with outlet to Lake St. Croix. Route B, located at 3d Ave S and Main Street, was reviewed with either a 48" or a 27" concrete culvert, with outlet to Lake St. Croix from Lakeside Drive. All culverts would include gated structures to isolate the storm sewer runoff from high river stages. Route A would require street replacement between 2d Street and Main Street. Installation of the pipe would cause railroad service disruption to Xcel Energy and Andersen Windows. The disruption will be coordinated with those concerned, as was done in the previous phases of the project. Discussion followed as to where the drainage easement might be located. Andersen Corporation has been asked to submit a letter to the City of Bayport with its concern over having 100% of the easement on the corporation property. Mr. Kamps expressed concern over the amount of time the street would be disrupted. Mr. Hegre replied that the plan was to provide improvements with the repair of the street, including curb, gutters and catch basins. Page 1 of 1 DRAFT • Middle St. Croix Watershed Management Organization Regular Meeting Feb 12, 2004 Wash Conservation District Offices Route B would route water from the inlet at Perro Creek and Third Avenue, down Lakeside Drive, and outlet to Lake St. Croix. The access point at Lakeside Drive is across privately owned property. No open cut is proposed for this route, leaving rail service intact at this point. Both a 48" and 27"outlet structures were reviewed for Route B. The culvert at the railroad embankment would be improved,but not replaced, in this proposal. Repairing the structure and providing for improved hydraulics. Mr. Hegre presented the results of the hydraulic studies. Modeling of current conditions predict a high water elevation of 692.4 feet, and critical elevations of 691.6 feet and 691.2 feet. With 48" structures in Both Route A and Route B, the high water elevation is reduced to 687.9 feet. Some high water flooding will exist north of Second Avenue, and flooding beyond the railroad embankment is mitigated. Third, a 48" structure at Route A, and a 27" structure and Route B resulted in water elevation levels of 688.7 feet, and some flooding on the ice road. Finally, a 48" structure at Route A, and no structure at Route B, but making improvements at the railroad embankment and culvert at 3d Avenue forecasted high water elevation at 688.7 feet and 690.7 feet. Cost estimates of the project are for Route A, 48" structure for $1.4 million to a 48" structure at both Route and Route B at approximately$2.8 million. During Discussion, Mr. Kamps expressed concern that additional storm water not • be routed into Perro Creek. The City of Bayport has an injunction against routing any • more storm water along this route. Discussion followed as to how to minimize impact on that local area. Mr. Davis suggested that filling and grading to provide better drainage would further minimize any impact. It was also important to the Managers that the project be done only once, with the best alternative implemented. However, funding would be an issue. Mr. Cain commented on the state of the current bonding bill, and provided the history of this project in the previous bonding bill discussions. There is a concern that the amount requested for this project previously was $1.5 million,but additional engineering and design has increased the estimated cost. Mr. Kamps suggested a letter be drafted for signature to the area representatives in the State House and Senate voicing support for the project in the bonding bill. A draft will be circulated among the members for comment and signature. Contract with Attorney LeFevere Mr. LeFevere introduced himself to the Board, and described his experience and his firm. His involvement with other municipal and public organizations has varied based upon the needs of the organization. Mr. Jansen reported on the meeting held between himself, Mr. Fossum and Mr. LeFevere. It was their joint recommendation that Mr. LeFevere be retained for services on an as-needed basis by the WMO. Contact should be directed through Mr. Fossum. Mr. Jansen moved that the WMO retain Mr. LeFevere pursuant to the contract presented for 2004, on an as-needed basis Mr. LeFevere provided comment to the organization on options for funding based on his experience with different levy options and allowances within the state statutes. Page 2 of 2 • DRAFT Middle St. Croix Watershed Management Organization Regular Meeting Feb 12, 2004 Wash Conservation District Offices The current state statute provides opportunities to levy through the County for capital projects. Joint Powers Agreement Mr. LeFevere provided comment as to his review of the Joint Powers Agreement. Mr. LeFevere's opinion is that the current agreement is sufficient to meet the needs. It may be advisable to work with Valley Branch Watershed District on a boundary change to put the town of Afton into a single watershed authority. This change would be a noncontroversial change, and would not require an amendment. Mr. Jansen will review this proposal with the city of Afton. Mr. Fossum will review with the Valley Branch Watershed District staff. Mr. Kamps departed the meeting at 8:30 PM. Agreement with Wash County Conservation District: Mr. Fossum presented the renewal of the contract for services with the Washington Conservation District. Services are the same as the current agreement, with a slight increase in cost per hour. Space rental remains the same as the current agreement. Discussion followed as to the value of need for continued monitoring of McKusic Lake and Perro Pond. • Mr. LeFevere recommended the following statement be added to Paragraph K in both sections: liability "nothing herein shall be deeded a waiver of by either party of the limitations on liability set forth in MN statutes, chap 466; and neither party shall be obligated to indemnity the other party in amount which, when added to the liability of the indemnifying party offer the same occurrence, exceeds the limits on liability set forth in MN statutes 466." Mr. Hansen moved the WMO enter into the agreement, with the amendment listed above. Mr. Jansen seconded the motion. The motion carried. • Wesley's Bay Ridge,Baytown Township Mr. Fossum presented the concept plat presented to Baytown Township for Wesley's Bay Ridge, a 13-unit subdivision off Stagecoach Trail. The lots are small, with lots of open space. The largest issue at hand is the tm water pond location in relation to the septic system placement. Detail review will be done when a formal proposal is received. Highway 36 Project: Mr. Fossum reported to the managers the response to his letter to the Minnesota Department of Transportation Engineers. It was clarified that the WMO cannot make any formal response until there is more information. Mr. Abrahamson reported on the status of the review at Oak Park Heights. Concern has been focused on providing for growth, safety, and traffic flow while protecting as many as the current businesses as possible. Other Business: Page 3 of 3 r S DRAFT Middle St. Croix Watershed Management Organization Regular Meeting Feb 12, 2004 Wash Conservation District Offices Mr. Jansen reported that the draft minutes circulated were provided to his city council, and this seemed to be a good communication tool. Mr. Fossum presented a request by a number of the Soil and Water Conservation Districts to gather support for a grant request to complete the MLCCS land-covering mapping in the 4 county area. The area to be covered includes the WMO. The information gathered in this survey would be valuable to the WMO. The watersheds have been asked to provide a letter of support for the grant request. At this time, there is no request for financial support. Mr. Hansen, after discussion,moved to authorize Mr. Fossum to write a letter of support for the grant proposal. Mr. Jansen seconded the request. The request passed. Discussion of the Watershed Management Plan was tabled until the next regular meeting. Mr. Fossum will send out a memo detailing changes to the plan since the last draft distribution. The next regular meeting is scheduled for March 11, 2004. Adjourn: Mr. Hansen moved to adjourn. Chairman McPherson seconded the motion. The motion carried. Chairman McPherson adjourned the meeting at 9:00 PM. Respectfully Submitted, ip4 4AC-,e Elizabeth A. Vance Recording Secretary Page 4 of 4 i ! MIDDLE ST. CROIX RIVER WATERSHED MANAGEMENT ORGANIZATION R110/1 1380 West Frontage Road, Hwy 36 Phone: 651-275-1136, ext. 21 D Stillwater, MN 55082 Fax: 651-1254 A Joint Powers Watershed Management Organization composed of ten St. Croix Valley MIPS Communities that was established under State Statute 103B to cooperatively manage water resources within the watershed. February 2, 2004 Todd Clarkowski, P.E. Area Engineer Mn/DOT, Metro District 1500 West County Road B-2 Roseville, MN 55113 Dear Mr. Clarkowski, Middle St Croix Watershed Management Organization has a high level of interest in the proposed St. Croix River Bridge Crossing project. All of the proposed options would involve significant grading and drainage impacts to the watershed. These water resource issues were discussed at the water resource stakeholder meeting on January 15, 2004 at the Washington Conservation District Offices. However, due to the project's preliminary status, the MSCWMO will have no official comment on the various alternatives at this time. MSCWMO will defer comment until more detailed plans are available for review. In light of budget constraints and efficiency concerns, the MSCWMO feels it will be most effectively involved in the project at later date. As you may know, MSCWMO is in the process of completing a new watershed management plan. The final bridge crossing alternative that is selected will be reviewed and held to the requirements of the watershed management plan of the MSCWMO at the time THE alternative is submitted to the MSCWMO for review. Please continue to send all correspondences regarding pertinent issues of this project to us. Please call me with any questions at 651-275-1136, ext. 21. Sincerely, Bob Fossum Administrator Cc: MSCWMO Representatives Middle St. Croix Watershed Management Organization MEMBER COMMUNITIES: Afton,Bayport,Baytown Township,Lakeland,Lakeland Shores,Lake St.Croix Beach,Oak Park Heights,St.Mary's Point,Stillwater and West Lakeland Township • Contract Number: 04-01 MSCWMO CONTRACT BETWEEN WASHINGTON CONSERVATION DISTRICT AND DLE ST. CROIX WATERSHED MANAGEMENT ORGANIZATION MIDFOR ADMINISTRATIVE ASSISTANCE A. PARTIES (WCD), and the Middle St. Agreement is made and entered into by Washington Conservation District, This (Watershed). Croix Watershed Management Organization B. PURPOSE specified in Fy, l WHEREAS, the Watershed has requested assistanceanfrom the WCD to implement the policies pursuant MINN. STAT. §§ 103A.206 and 103D.201, rovrde such assistance to MINN. STAT. WHEREAS, the WCD is authorized to enter agreements to p §§ 103C.331, SUED. 3 and 7 and 103D.a335,fo5ubd 21. agree NOW,THEREFORE, the parties 3 x C. TERNI OF CONTRACT 'rt � 2004 t� December 31, 2004 unless extended or terminated The term of this agreement shall be from Januar' � earlier as provided herein. D. SCOPE OF SERVICES The WCD will perform all services and furnish and deliver work products generally described in Exhibit A, attached and made part of this agreement E. COST Ih full consideration forthtion for services unor thisam agreement, the WCD shall charge the Watershed for its services by in Section F. The total dollar amount of the work described in Exhibit to performed the rate set the WCD shall not exceed$ 8,000. F. BILLING RATE AND PAYMENTS and described in Exhibit A shall be year 2004, the services provided by WCD hereunderper hour for Task e 1. For calendar Task 4, Task 5; $69.00 billed at the following rate: $53.00 per hour for Task 1, Task 3, Task 6. WCD will provide a monthly invoice singtthe days. performed. Invd lump sum rate of$1,368 for by the Watershed Invoices are billed on the hourly basis set forth herein and are payable ex enses, postage and transportation reproduction p 2. Miscellaneous project costs sucurcas e officee plies, re production, special bulk mailings and other direct costs are to be are included in the hourly rate. Out so P reimbursed at actual cost. Page 1 2004 WCD/MSCWMO Contract MSCWMO 04-01 • • G. EQUAL EMPLOYMENT OPPORTUNITY- CIVIL RIGHTS During the performance of this Agreement, the WCD agrees to the following: No person shall, on the grounds of race, color, religion, age, criminal record, creed or national origin, be excluded from full em sex,memployment marital be deniedtus, public benefits assistance, or be otherwise subjected to discrimination under any allor be otherwise federal andstate olaws againstunderdiscriminationpuce, or rights in, the of, program, service, i activity Act of 1964.provisions of and including the Civil Rights Act 1964. H. STANDARDS The WCD shall comply with all applicable Federal and State statutes and of in effect or hereafter adopted. Failure to meet the requirements of the nowis contract effective he date ofthe ce eeaboveions ase wella s local ordinances may be cause for cancellation of Cancellation. I. DATA PRIVACY All data collected, created, received, maintained, or disseminated, WCD's performance of the Agreement governed by in used for anye purpose in the Practicese of the Minnesota 1984, Section 13.01, et seq. the;,'Minnesota Government Data q Or any other a �ieable state statutes and state rules adopted to Implement the Act, as well as state statutes and federal regulations on data ppAct, by these statutes, rules and regulations and as theymay privacy. The WCD agrees to abide be amended. J. AUDITS, REPORTS,AND MONITORING PROCEDURES The WCD will: 1. , Maintain records that reflect • Agreement. anrevenues cost mimed and services provided in the performance rnlance of the 2• Agree that the County, the State Auditor, or legislative authority, representatives at any time during norxnal business hours, and as often as they ehave access to the rights to ex or any of reasonablyaduly necessary,may deem necessay Buie eof hese C and errel any books, documents, papers, records, etc., and accounting procedures and practices of the WCD which are relevant to the contract. K. INDEMNITY The WCD and the Watershed mutually agree, to the fullest extent arm' other harmless for any and all damages, liability or cost (includingsea other h) arising from their own damsacts, error permitted by law, to indemnify and holdofh this dof agreement, tof the extent each party negligentis acts, errors for such reasonable anteattoof their fees and costsun s oro dam inthe performance of services basis of fault. Parties agree to provide proof of contractual liability insurance upon damages and losses on a comparative of Each party to this Agreement agrees to indemnifyrp n request. agrees to defend and hold the other harmless from nd against any and all de and expenses,fend including Cher harmless a fss s of at partyand its officers, employees damages,am and agents, and cost omissions of t n connectionwiththis Agreement. orNca demands, icgmo errors ors or attorneys, or causes of action arising from the acts, errors or be responsible for indemnifying or defending the other partyas to such intentionalsnacts, errors a omissions, or tof its o to the foregoing,rty's neither party shall, o othereparty's negligent, reckless, or officers, agents or employees. 2004 WCDiMSCWMO Contract MSCWMO 04-01 Page 2 • L. INDEPENDENT CONTRACTOR as creating or 0 or as constituting mannera WCD as the agent, herein contained is intended or should s hdre e construed in anyCD is to be and It is agreed that nothing co-partners between the p establishing the relationship of u ose or in any manner whatsoever. T \VC representative, or employee of Watershed for any p � independent contractor with respect to all services performed under thisAgreement. in services shall remain an performing expense, all personnel required in p while engaged in e performance cervi of nd WCD represents that it has,dall ers nnel at its own sop shallrhave noi contractualnged the perfor anh theo under this Agreement. Any and personnel of the WCDe or erson, the WCD under this Ag any work or services required by to eel of the Watershed. Watershed and shall not be considered employees M. MODIFICATIONS the parties. Any ,,written ntaand signedgt the WCD and the variation shall be reduced to writing as an amendment and y Any material alteration or alteration, modification, or variation deemed not to be material by royal. Watershed shall not require written app N. MERGER except as modified during is contained here, understood and agreedh'M above concerning anon-material and that is that the entire dParat a the partiesLatin to this subject change,matter.and Allt ItAgreement by a writing under Paxagrap_ the term of the negotiations between the parties relating of the contract. this contract dupersehes oralnagreements and net items referred to in this contract are incprporated or attached' and deemed to be p O. TERMINATION the other party terminate this Agreement with or without cause by giving the WCD or the Watershed prior may ctive date of such termination. If the Watershed CD receivesterminates the this Either the WCD up to the eat Athcre me days writtenpy notice D to the e e performed by ce Agreement, it shall pay to the WCD for services p of termination. P. OWNERSHIP OF DOCUMENTS AND INTELLECTUAL PROPERTY meat, acquired or created in the performance of work under this Agree rt of the Watershed used, q ro ert of the Watershed. The Agreat, All props y kind, shall remain the p P . y developed. Th Watershedin whole or in l including documentshand recordseof any publish, or otherwise disseminate any product have the sole right to use, sell, license, p eement. part during the performance of work under this Age APPROVAL AND NON-ASSIGNMENT OF SERVICES ,s selection of any individual to Q. prove of the WCD to rove or disa p Agreement orl anytioaf any hereunder The Watershed shall have the authority e t. The WCD shall not assign this provide work underoval ohis f the Watershed. without written app Page 3 2004 WCD!MSCWMO Contract MSCWMO 04-01 • i IN TESTIMONY WHEREOF the parties have duly executed this agreement by their duly authorized officers. APPROVED: Watershed WCD BY: Board Chair BY: Date Board Chair BY: Date Secretary BY: Date WCD Manager Date APPrn to form: rm: f rg fi Assxsnt Ginty Attorney w Date 2004 WCD/MSCWMO Contract MSCW MO 04-01 Page 4 • I EXHIBIT A 2004 SCOPE OF SERVICES - ADMINISTRATIVE SERVICES AGREEMENT BETWEEN THE WASHINGTON CONSERVATION DISTRICT (WCD) AND THE MIDDLE ST. CROIX WATERSHED MANAGEMENT ORGANIZATION (Watershed) At the request of the Watershed the WCD shall furnish the following services under the terms of the AGREEMENT. TECHNICAL SERVICES: Task 1. Administrative Services The WCD will provide administrative services to the Watershed. A IUCD staff member shall serve as the Administrator of the Watershed. This staff member will be appointed by'the WCD. The Administrator shall periodically act on behalf of the Board of Managers to'implement Watershed policies and actions. Administrative services will include: agenda preparation, board^ packet distribution, receiving and sending official Watershed's correspondence, submitting official"notices for publication, coordinating meetings for the board, committees and other groups as necessary, maintaining the Watershed files (except for finance records, projects conducted by the Watershed's Engineer or confidential legal reeords) and direct activities between the Watershed Board, Engineer, Attorney, Recording Secretary,,Local and State Units of Government and the public. TASK 2. Review of Development plans The WCD will provide review and comment on development plans. Comments and recommendations for erosion and sediment control, grading, drainage, and wetland protection will be made. Follow-up development site inspections will be done if deemed appropriate. TASK 3. Respond to inquiries from the public The WCD will act as the primary and first response to inquiries from the public as to programs, projects and written policies or rules and other questions on Watershed issues. The WCD will notify the Board Chair of atypical information requests to receive instructions for response. 2004 WCD/MSCWMO Contract MSCWMO 04-01 Page 5 • . EXHIBIT A 2004 SCOPE OF SERVICES ADMINISTRATIVE SERVICES AGREEMENT (Cont.) TASK 4. Meetings Attendance and reporting at monthly Watershed meetings, Technical Advisory Committee, Intergovernmental Coordination, Second Generation Plan Work Group and other meetings as directed by the Watershed. TASK 5. Miscellaneous Services Other services requested by the Watershed necessary to implement and carry out the Middle St. Croix Watershed Management Plan. TASK 6. Office Rent An office of 73 square feet will be provided to the Watershed at the WCD Offices. The space will be a cubicle with a desk, phone, and telephone number provide. It will provide MSCWMO a mailing address, file storage area, and its own phone number and will be rented at an annual fee of$1,368 ($18.75/square foot). . Y • i L n. 2004 WCD/MSCWMO Contract MSCWMO 04-01 Page 6 4 • • Contract Number: MSCWMO 04-02 CONTRACT BETWEEN WASHINGTON CONSERVATION DISTRICT AND THE MIDDLE ST.CROIX WATERSHED MANAGEMENT ORGANIZATION FOR TECHNICAL ASSISTANCE 2004 Water Monitoring Program A. PARTIES This Agreement is made and entered into by Washington Conservation District, (WCD), and the Middle St. Croix Watershed Management Organization(WMO). B. PURPOSE WHEREAS, the WMO has requested assistance from the WCD to implement the policies specified in MINN. STAT. § 103A.206; and WHEREAS, the WCD is authorized to enter agreements to provide such assistance pursuant to MINN. STAT. § I03C.331, SUBD. 3 and 7. NOW,THEREFORE,the parties agree as follows: C. TERM OF CONTRACT • The term of this agreement shall be from April 1,2004 to December 31 2004 unless terminated earlier as provided herein. D. SCOPE OF SERVICES The WCD will perform lake water quality monitoring for i1!1tcKusick Lak72 The lake shall be monitored 14 times, on a bi- weekly basis through the season and will be conducted tri accordance with the Met Council CAMP program. Monitoring shall consist of lake level readings,Seccht disk,total phosphorous,'total Kjeldahl nitrogen and Chlorophyll-a. In addition a temperature and dissolved oxygen profile will"be taken during each round and the CAMP program data sheet will be completed and submitted along with all samples`to the'Metropolitan Council. Reporting will be in the form of the annual Met Council Lake Monitoring Report 'In addition to water quality monitoring at McKusick Lake, a lake gage will be installed and readings will be made at:Perro Pond 14 times throughout the season. Work for lake gage readings include installation,surveying the gage into:. DNR benchmark, taking readings,removing the gage and storing the gage. E. COST In full consideration for services under this agreement,the WCD shall charge the WMO a lump sum fee for its services. The total dollar amount of the work for staff as described in item D above to be performed by the WCD shall not exceed$2,330. F. BILLING PAYMENTS 1. WCD will bill the WMO for staff services in two payments of$1,165. Invoices will be sent in May and August. Invoices are payable by the WMO net 60 days. 2004 WCD/1V1SCWMO Contract MSCWMO 04-02 Page 1 • i :. G. EQUAL EMPLOYMENT OPPORTUNITY-CIVIL RIGHTS During the performance of this Agreement,the WCD agrees to the following: No person shall, on the grounds of race, color, religion, age, sex, disability, marital status,public assistance, criminal record, creed or national origin, be excluded from full employment rights in, be denied the benefits of, or be otherwise subjected to discrimination under any program, service, or activity under the provisions of and all applicable federal and state laws against discrimination including the Civil Rights Act of 1964. If during the term of this Agreement, it is discovered the WCD is not in compliance with the applicable regulations as aforesaid, or if the WCD engages in any discriminatory practices, then the WMO through the office, may cancel said Agreement as provided by the cancellation clause of this Agreement. H. STANDARDS The WCD shall comply with all applicable Federal and State statutes and regulations as well as local ordinances now in effect or hereafter � adopted. p Failure to meet the requirements of the above may be cause for'earicellatiorf of this contract effective the date of receipt of the Notice of Cancellation. I DATA PRIVACY All data collected, created, received, maintattted, or dissetntnated, or used for any purpose in the course of the WCD's performance of the Agreement is govemed^,by the Minneitota Government Data Practices Act, Minnesota 1984, Section 13.01, et seq. Or any other applicable state statutes and state7ules adopted to implement the Act,as well as state statutes and federal regulations on data privacy The WCD agrees to abide by these statutes, rules and regulations and as they may be amended. J. AUDITS,REPORTS,AND MONi TORING PROCEDURES The WCD will: 1. Maintain records which reflect all revenues, cost incurred and services provided in the performance of the Agreement. 2. Agree that the County, the State Auditor, or legislative authority, or any of their duly authorized representatives at any time during normal business hours, and as often as they may deem reasonably necessary, shall have access to the rights to examine audit, excerpt, and transcribe any books, documents, papers, records, etc., and accounting procedures and practices of the WCD which are relevant to the contract. 2004 WCD/MSCWMO Contract MSCWMO 04-02 Page 2 • • K. INDEMNITY The Washington WCD and the WMO mutually agree, to the fullest extent permitted by law, to indemnify and hold each other harmless for any and all damages, liability or cost (including reasonable attorneys' fees and costs of defense) arising from their own negligent acts, errors or omissions in the performance of their services under this agreement, to the extent each party is responsible for such damages and losses on a comparative basis of fault. Parties agree to provide proof of contractual liability insurance upon request. L. INDEPENDENT CONTRACTOR It is agreed that nothing herein contained is intended or should be construed in any manner as creating or establishing the relationship of co-partners between the parties hereto or as constituting the WCD as the agent,representative,or employee of WMO the for any purpose or in any manner whatsoever. The WCD is to be and shall remain an independent contractor with respect to all services performed under this Agreement. The WCD represents that it has, or will secure at its own expense, all persennet required in performing services under this Agreement. Any and all personnel of the WCD or other person,while engaed in the performance of any work or services required by the WCD under this Agreement, shall haze=no Contractual'r'elationship with the WMO and shall not be considered employees of the WMO. M. MODIFICATIONS ; Any material alteration or variation haft be i'educed to wntung � ' by the parties. Any a an amendment and signed alterations modification, or variations deemed'',not'te be atenal. t y agreement of the WCD and the WMO shall not require written approval. N. MERGER It is understood and agreed that the entire agreement of the parties is contained here and that this contract supersedes oral agreements and negotiations between the parties relating to this subject matter. All items referred to in this contract are incorporated or attached and deemed to be part of the contract. O. TERMINATION Either the WCD or the WMO may terminate this Agreement with or without cause by giving the other party thirty(30) days written notice prior to the effective date of such termination. If the WMO terminates this Agreement, it shall pay to the WCD for services performed by the WCD up to the date WCD receive the notice of termination. 2004 WCD/MSCWMO Contract MSCWMO 04-02 Page 3 4 IN TESTIMONY WHEREOF the parties have duly executed this agreement by their duly authorized officers. APPROVED: Middle St. Croix NVMO WCD BY: BY: Board Chair Date Board Chair Date BY: BY: Secretary Date WCD Manager Date a;r 9 Approval as toorm: 4rej , . 4 Date Ed 1� Assistant County Attorney f WF3 q g� q � �3cs1� 2004 WCD/LViSCWMO Contract MSCWMO 04-02 Page 4 MIDDLE ST. CRO RIVER WATERSHED r .F MANAGEMENT ORGANIZATION 4/1111:1111 1380 West Frontage Road H 36 Stillwater, MN 55082 � � Phone: 651-275-1136, ext. 21 � Fax: 651-1254 A Joint Powers Watershed Management Organization composed of ten St. Croix Valley Communities that was established under State Statute 103E to cooperatively manage water resources within the watershed. January 16,2004 Larry Hansen,Administrator City of Stillwater 216 North Fourth Street Stillwater,MN 55082 RE: Review of Stillwater Mills on Main—City of Oak Park Heights Dear Mr.Hansen: Our office has received the preliminary plat plan submittal and the stormwater management plan dated 02-27-2004, for the proposed Stillwater Mills on Main located in Section 21, Town 30 North, Range 20 West, in the City of Stillwater. Based on the plans submitted and a visit to the site,Middle St. Croix Watershed Management Organization offers the follows comments. Stormwater Management Issues Based on the plans received the stormwater plan for the site appears adequate. We commend the use of the Bay Saver technology for stormwater management. With a site of this nature, utilizing underground treatment facilities and the plaza area of the site for stormwater management is quite advantageous. In other more standard detention/retention ponds an emergency outlet/overflow is typically provided for all ponding areas. The emergency overflow for the plaza area (up to 6"of ponding) is not apparent from the plans submitted. We would ask that additional plans be submitted showing how the plaza area would safely drain if the multiple 4" drainage orifices were to become inoperable due to ice or other blockage. The existence of a safe emergency outlet should be verified by the city engineer before approval is granted. Erosion and Sediment Control Regarding the erosion and sediment control on-site, the erosion control plan appears to be adequate. We would suggest that all temporary erosion control measures (silt fence) to be in place prior to the demolition of the existing building to ensure that soil and other building materials stay on site. We would also emphasis that continued maintenance would be needed to maintain these erosion control measures. Silt fence maintenance will likely be needed after significant rainfall events. Middle St. Croix WMO appreciates the opportunity to review development plans in your city. Please call me with any questions you may have at 651-275-1136,ext.21. Sincerely, Bob Fossum MSCWMO Administrator cc: Middle St. Croix Watershed Management Organization Board Members Klayton Eckles,Engineer,City of Stillwater Michele Jackson Caron,PE,RLK-Kuusisto,Ltd.,6110 Blue Circle Drive, Ste. 100,Minnetonka,MN 55343 Middle St. Croix Watershed Management Organization MEMBER COMMUNITIES: Afton,Bayport,Baytown Township,Lakeland,Lakeland Shores,Lake St.Croix Beach,Oak Park Heights,St.Mary's Point,Stillwater and West Lakeland Township • • Middle St. Croix Watershed Management Organization December 11, 2003 WCD Offices APPROVED 1• Call to Order Meeting called to order at 7:00P.M. by Manager McPherson. Members Present John McPherson, West Lakeland; John Jansen, Lake St. Croix Beach; Anders Hansen, Baytown Township; Jim Gilles, Lakeland; Ron Nelson, Stillwater; Les Abrahamson, Oak Park Heights; Robert Kamps, Bayport; Jo Ella Givens, Lakeland Shores. Absent: Judy Bellairs, St. Mary's Point, Afton Others in Attendance:. Dawn Hilde, Recording Secretary, Ed Cain, Bob Fossum, Administrator 2. Approval of Minutes Manager Jansen made a motion to a. 'rove the minutes for November 13 2003 seconded b Manager Kam s. Vote: 7/0 3. Treasurer's Report—Anders Hansen • Manager Hansen presented a bill to be paid from WCD for$11,601.07. This billing includes $10,926.00 for the Second Generation Plan. The bank balance is $84,490.98. Bob Fossum stated the Second Generation budget is not to exceed $52,000.00. Mana.er Jansen made a motion to la the bills and acce.t the Treasurer's re.ort seconded b Mana!er Kam.s. Vote: 7/0. Manager Givens arrived at 7:30P.M. 4. Old Business a. Update of Lobbyist Fees for Bonding Jim Gilles asked Ed Cain to give the MSCWMO a general idea of the process for bills getting through the legislature. He explained that someone representing the bill should be present for every committee hearing to answer any questions on the bill. This could be as many as six committee hearings. This process has to be followed for both the Senate and Legislature. There is no guarantee that your bill will be discussed or at what time it will be discussed. The person representing the bill has to sit through long meetings and may never be needed. Oak Park Heights has voted to not support a lobbyist for 2004. Manager McPherson tried to persuade Lee Abrahamson to change his mind about Draft Minutes for the MSCWMO Meeting December 11,2003 Page 1 of 3 • this issue. Manager McPherson and one other manager may go to the next Oak Park Heights meeting or a special meet in hts and arrange for to issue.uss this thBob Fossum will be in contact with Oak Park He g meeting. b. Watershed Management Plan 1) Ordinance Summa and Su.•ested Review Standards Bob Fossum presented a chart reviewing the existing ordinances in the 10 member communities governing the following three areas: Stormwater, Grading and Erosion Control and Wetlands. Bob stated the design standards will be included in the Management Plan at the January meeting. He suggested that the design standards be presented as part of the Joint Powers Agreement. 5. New Business a. Legal Services, RFP for Attorney Manager Jansen reported that Request� OfoP Qualifications Proposals will be presented at out for legal services for th the January MSCWMO meeting. b. Croixdale Residence and Apartments,Bayport Bob Fossum did a preliminary review of the Croixdale plans and sent a letter to Mike McGuire, Administrator for Bayport with comments on Drainage and Wetland Issues, and Erosion and Sediment Control. Manager Givens suggested changing the last sentence in the memo from "suggest" to "recommend". c. River Crossing Scoping Document Bob Fossum suggested it is not the time to review the Scoping Document. The MSCWMO should wait until there is a final plan nd then comment. should focus on the Bob felt when the final plan is chosen, the MSCWMO Highway 36 Corridor. d. Loramere,West Lakeland Township Bob Fossum reported this will be a 25 lot development. The final plans should be available for review in January. There were some concerns with drainage and erosion because of the steep slopes. 6. Other Agenda Items Mana_er Hansen made a motion to hold the Januar 8/OMSCWMO meeting on Januar 15 seconded b Mana ler Kam►s. Draft Minutes for the MSCWMO Meeting December 11,2003 Page 2 of 3 • Jeff Davis from SEH was unable to attend this meeting but asked Bob Fossum to convey the following: Landscaping on the project will be completed next summer. SEH should have some figures available at the January meeting and a final accounting in February. Phase III investigation report should be presented at the February meeting. 7. Adjourn Manager Hansen made a motion to adjourn the meeting, seconded by Manager Kamps. Vote: 8/0 • Meeting adjourned at 8:29P.M. Respectfully Submitted, Dawn Hilde • Draft Minutes for the MSCWMO Meeting December 11,2003 Page 3 of 3 • • MIDDLE ST. CROIX RIVER WATERSHED4 MANAGEMENT ORGANIZATION v' 1380 West Frontage Road, Hwy 36 Phone: 651-275-1136, ext. 21 Stillwater, MN 55082 Fax: 651-1254 D , A Joint Powers Watershed Management Organization composed of ten St. Croix Valley Communities that was established under State Statute 103E to cooperatively manage 'tater resources within the watershed. January 16, 2004 John McPherson, Chairman West Lakeland Township 13520 Greenwood Trail N. Stillwater, MN 55082 RE: Loramere Major Subdivision—West Lakeland Township Dear Mr. McPherson: Our office has received the drainage, grading, and erosion and sediment control plans dated 12-17-03, for the proposed Loramere Major Subdivision, located in Sections 22 and 27, Town 29 North, Range 20 West, in West Lakeland Township. Based on the plans submitted and a visit to the site, Middle St. Croix Watershed Management Organization offers the follows comments. Drainage and Grading Issues The proposed stormwater management plan adequately maintains the rate of runoff to preexisting conditions as well as provides water quality treatment. The inlets (storm sewer outfalls) to all ponds on the site should have riprap or similar stabilization methods installed to prevent erosion and potential failure of the pipe. MSCWMO commends the use of the natural topography and infiltration to manage the stormwater runoff generated by the additional impervious surfaces. Erosion and Sediment Control The sediment and erosion control plan submitted will require the following additions. There are two road sections in the plat that are on steep slopes: a section of Palisade Court and the north portion of Palisade Trail. The ditches and grading adjacent to these areas will require ditch checks and erosion control matting or similar erosion control measures to stabilize the area. Silt fence will need to be added to the plan and installed south of the grading building pads on Lots 10, 11, 12, and 13 of Block 1. The erosion and sediment control plan should include types and volumes of seed and mulch to achieve site stabilization. We would emphasis the need for all temporary erosion control measures to be in place before grading of the site begins. We would also emphasis that continued maintenance will be needed to maintain these erosion control measures. Silt fence maintenance will likely be needed after significant rainfall events as well. Middle St. Croix Watershed Management Organization MEMBER COMMUNITIES: Afton,Bayport,Baytown Township,Lakeland,Lakeland Shores,Lake St.Croix Beach,Oak Park Heights,St.Mary's Point,Stillwater and West Lakeland Township • Tree Preservation and Protection A tree inventory was completed in the wooded southeastern portion of the site. The placement of Palisade Court and the stormwater pond in this area of the plat were placed to minimize the removal of the largest oaks. The grading plan should show a grading limits boundary throughout the whole site. This is especially important in the southeastern treed portion of the plat to prevent excess grading and removal or damage to trees that are intended to be preserved. Further the grading limits in this section of the plat should be identified and staked in the field prior to the commencement of grading to ensure the contractor is aware of the boundaries. No grading and/or filling should take place within the drip line of each tree to be preserved so that the root zone will be protected. If you have any questions, please feel free to call me at 275-1136 ext. 21. Sincerely, zry: Bob Fossum Water Resource Planner cc: Cara Gehren, TKDA, Inc., West Lakeland Township Engineer Todd Erickson, Folz, Freeman, Erickson, Inc., 5620 Memorial Avenue North, Stillwater, MN 55082 Middle St. Croix Watershed Management Organization Board Members Middle St. Croix Watershed Management Organization MEMBER COMMUNITIES: Afton,Bayport,Baytown Township,Lakeland,Lakeland Shores,Lake St.Croix Beach,Oak Park Heights,St.Mary's Point,Stillwater and West Lakeland Township • MIDDLE ST. CROIX RIVER WATERSHED MANAGEMENT ORGANIZATION •4 A 1380 West Frontage Road, Hwy 36 Phone: 651-275-1136, ext. 21 D V� ^ Stillwater, MN 55082 Fax: 651-1254 N A Joint Powers Watershed Management Organization composed of ten St. Croix Valley Communities that was established under State Statute 103E to cooperatively manage water resources within the watershed. "1T January 16, 2004 Eric Johnson, Administrator City of Oak Park Heights 14168 Oak Park Boulevard Oak Park Heights, MN 55082-2007 RE: Review of Oakgreen Village Phase 1 —City of Oak Park Heights Dear Mr. Johnson: Our office has received the general plans dated 12-08-03, for the proposed Oakgreen Village, Phase 1 located in Section 5, Town 29 North, Range 20 West, in the City of Oak Park Heights. Based on the plans submitted and a visit to the site, Middle St. Croix Watershed Management Organization offers the follows comments regarding Phase 1 ONLY. Drainage and Grading Issues The proposed grading plan calls for a phased approach that includes the construction and grading of the streets, Pond 1 and Outlot E in 2004. The remainder of the site east of Novak Ave and north of 58th Street will be constructed in 2005 or later. Although it is not specifically stated in the plans, we would assume that all stormwater management infrastructure (storm sewer/inlet and outlet structures) would be in place during the 2004 construction season of the Phase 1 proposal. Based on the plans received the drainage and stormwater plan for the site appears adequate. The sizing, location, and elevations of the ponds and outlet structures are appropriate. Multiple inlets (storm sewer outfalls) exist in all ponds on the site. Riprap or similar stabilization should be placed at these inlets to prevent erosion and potential failure of the pipe. Placement of a stormwater pond in the utility easement on the northern extent of the site should be verified with the utility company. Adequate setbacks from the wetland are provided. Erosion and Sediment Control Regarding the erosion and sediment control on-site, the erosion control plan in not adequate. We would request that a more detailed site stabilization plan be submitted and reviewed. This plan is important because grading will occur to put in streets, utilities, and ponds in 2004 and the remainder of the construction of residential dwellings will not occur until 2005 or later. It is important that the site is stabilized with vegetation in the Middle St. Croix Watershed Management Organization MEMBER COMMUNITIES: Afton,Bayport,Baytown Township,Lakeland,Lakeland Shores,Lake St.Croix Beach,Oak Park Heights,St.Mary's Point,Stillwater and West Lakeland Township • S interim between road/utility construction and residential construction. A more detailed site stabilization plan should include types and volumes of seed and mulch to achieve site stabilization. We would emphasis the need for all temporary erosion control measures to be in place before grading of the site begins. We would also emphasis that continued maintenance would be needed to maintain these erosion control measures. Silt fence maintenance will likely be needed after significant rainfall events as well. Middle St. Croix WMO appreciates the opportunity to review development plans in your city. Please call me with any questions you may have at 651-275-1136, ext. 21. Sincerely, 7/7;7-7 Bob Fossum MSCWMO Administrator cc: Middle St. Croix Watershed Management Organization Board Members Todd Erickson, Folz, Freeman, Erickson, Inc., 5620 Memorial Avenue North, Stillwater, MN 55082 Middle St. Croix Watershed Management Organization MEMBER COMMUNITIES: Afton,Bayport,Baytown Township,Lakeland,Lakeland Shores,Lake St.Croix Beach,Oak Park Heights,St.Mary's Point,Stillwater and West Lakeland Township 470 Pillsbury Center L1eilne y 200 South Sixth Street RECEIVED Minneapolis MN 55402 . ,JJ A N 2 2004 (� (612) 337-9300 telephone Graven (612)337-9310 fax pEI CHARTER ED http://www.kennedy-graven.com t WASHINGTON SWCD CHARLES L.LEFEVERE Attorney at Law Direct Dial(612)337-9215 Email:clefevere@kennedy-graven.nom January 28, 2004 Bob Fossum Water Resource Planner Washington Conservation District 1380 West Frontage Road, Highway 36 Stillwater, MN 55082 Re: MSCWMO Joint Powers Agreement Dear Bob: At our meeting last week, you and Mr. John Jansen requested that I review the Joint Powers Agreement of the Middle St. Croix Watershed Management Organization (MSCWMO) to determine whether it is necessary to amend the Agreement to give the MSCWMO the authority to adopt rules for the use and development of land. For the reasons explained in this letter, it is my opinion that it is not necessary for the member cities to amend the Joint Powers Agreement to give the WMO the authority to adopt such regulations. Minn. Stat. § 103B.211, Subd. 1(3) provides that a joint powers watershed management organization can be given: "(3) the authority of a watershed district under Chapter 103D to regulate the use and development of land in the watershed when one or more of the following conditions exists: (i) the local government unit exercising planning and zoning authority over the land...does not have a local water management plan approved and adopted in accordance with the requirements of Minn. Stat. § 103B.235, or has not adopted the implementation program described in the plan; (ii) an application to the local government unit for a permit for the use and development of land requires an amendment to, or variance from, the adopted local water management plan or implementation program of the local unit; or CLL-243198v1 MD165-1 Bob Fossum Ltr January 28, 2004 Page 2 (iii) the local government unit has authorized the [WMO] to require permits for the use and development of land." The cities forming the MSCWMO have exercised this statutory authority in Section 4.2 of the Joint Powers Agreement which provides "Rules and Regulations. The Commission may prescribe and promulgate such rules from time to time as it deems necessary to carry out its duties and the purpose of this Agreement." In three of the other joint powers watershed management organizations that I represent (Bassett Creek, Shingle Creek and West Mississippi) the WMO has adopted rules for the use and development of land. Member cities act under their general permitting authority on proposed activities such as development, excavation, and projects creating hard surface coverage. The cities require approval by the WMO as a condition of city approval (unless the WMO has already acted to approve the proposal). Cities are the direct permitting authorities and enforce the regulations of the WMO. Although I have not thoroughly compared the standards in the draft Second Generation Plan with those of other joint powers WMOs, it is my general impression that they are very comparable. • Therefore, it is my opinion that State law and the Joint Powers Agreement confer on the MSCWMO the authority to adopt regulations for the use and development of land in accordance with the Surface Water Management Act and that the proposals for such regulation in the Second Generation Plan are generally consistent with those of other Joint Powers WMOs with which I am familiar. On another matter, you requested that I provide you with a proposed written agreement for legal services. I have attached this proposed agreement for that purpose. Please let me know if you have any questions about either the opinion expressed in this letter or the attached agreement. Very truly yours, Charles L. LeFevere CLL:peb Enclosures cc: John Jansen, Councilmember(w/encs.) CLL-243198v1 MD165-1 • AGREEMENT FOR LEGAL SERVICES This Agreement is entered into between the MIDDLE ST. CROIX WATERSHED MANAGEMENT ORGANIZATION, a Minnesota joint powers organization(MSCWMO) and the law firm of KENNEDY & GRAVEN, CHARTERED (Attorney) as of this 21st day of January, 2004. SECTION 1. Background: Findings. 1.01. The Board of Commissioners of the MSCWMO has determined that the firm of Kennedy & Graven, Chartered should be engaged as Attorney, with Charles L. LeFevere of that firm serving as primary legal counsel for the MSCWMO. SECTION 2. Terms and Conditions. 2.01. Consideration. In consideration of the mutual promises contained in this Agreement,the MSCWMO and the Attorney agree to the terms and conditions set forth herein. 2.02. Attorney Appointment. The MSCWMO appoints the firm of Kennedy & Graven, Chartered as Attorney, with Charles L.. LeFevere acting as primary legal counsel for the MSCWMO. 2.03. Usual and Customary Legal Services. The Attorney agrees to perform all usual and customary legal services for the MSCWMO in accordance with the terms of this Agreement, and at the direction of the MSCWMO or its authorized representative. Such services may include, but are not limited to the following: a) Attend MSCWMO meetings and other committee meetings. b) Draft agreements, resolutions, and correspondence. c) Review MSCWMO and committee agenda packets and minutes and provide email comments and suggestions regarding the same. d) Conduct meetings and/or telephone conversations with and advise MSCWMO and designated staff on general legal matters. e) Review contracts, joint powers agreements, and agreements for construction, purchase of equipment, etc. f) Represent the MSCWMO in the acquisition of properties. g) Represent the MSCWMO in employment related issues, administrative hearings, and in litigation involving the same. h) Represent and advise the MSCWMO with respect to municipal employment matters including, but not limited to: personnel policy, FLSA, FMLA, veteran's preference, and unemployment compensation. i) Render legal options on municipal or other legal matters requested by MSCWMO. j) Meet with the MSCWMO to review the status of legal matters before the MSCWMO. CLL-2431317v1 MD165-1 • • . _ k) Provide legal briefings to the MSCWMO and staff regarding new or proposed legislation affecting its operations and activities. 1) Defend the MSCWMO in litigation, except in those cases where insurance companies provide defense. m) Review bonds and insurance requirements required by or for MSCWMO contracts or activities. n) Perform other legal duties as assigned. 2.04. Compensation for Legal Services. For legal services, the MSCWMO agrees to compensate the Attorney at the following hourly rates for services indicated below: a) For all attorneys: $155/hr. b) For all law clerks: $85/hr. c) For all paralegals: $90/hr. 2.05. Compensation for Expenses. The MSCWMO will compensate the Attorney for the following actual and necessary expenses incurred by the Attorney on behalf of the MSCWMO: The firm will bill its out-of-pocket costs for such things as postage, long distance telephone calls,photocopying, filing fees and witness fees, and similar items. Photocopying: $.20 per page Facsimiles $.50 per page Mileage: $.36 per mile Westlaw or Lexis fees: Actual cost charged Other charges such as: Actual cost charged Messenger service Express mail Long distance telephone calls Filing fees Monthly billing statements will provide detail for all fees and costs. Reimbursement will be made from time to time upon submission of appropriate invoices in a form approved by the MSCWMO. 2.06. Billing Statements. Billings by the Attorney to the MSCWMO for services will be on a monthly basis, except as may otherwise be agreed by the parties. The billing statement shall be of sufficient detail to adequately inform the MSCWMO concerning the tasks performed, the attorney or staff performing them, the time spent on each task and the nature and extent of costs and disbursements. The statement shall also contain a summary that shows the total time spent for each category and the total fees, charges and disbursements for each category. 2.07. Term of Agreement The term of this Agreement shall be indefinite until terminated in accordance with Section 2.10. The hourly rates specified in this Agreement will remain in effect for the calendar year 2004 and will be adjusted no more often than annually thereafter. CLL-243017v1 2 MD165-1 • 2.08. Primary Legal Counsel. It is the intention of the parties and it is hereby agreed by the Attorney, that the term "primary legal counsel" as used herein means and refers to Charles L. LeFevere who will, except in the case of extraordinary circumstances involving disability, unavoidable conflict or other good and substantial reasons,perform, supervise and be responsible to the MSCWMO for the legal services to be provided. 2.09. Entire Agreement. This Agreement, any attached exhibits and any addenda or amendments signed by the parties shall constitute the entire agreement between the MSCWMO and the Attorney, and supersedes any other written or oral agreements between the MSCWMO and the Attorney. This Agreement can only be modified in writing signed by the MSCWMO and the Attorney. 2.10. Termination. This Agreement may be terminated by the MSCWMO at any time or by the Attorney upon 60 days written notice. 2.11. Conflict of Interest. The Attorney shall use best efforts to meet all professional obligations to avoid conflicts of interest and appearances of impropriety in representation of the MSCWMO. In the event of a conflict, the Attorney, with the consent of the MSCWMO, shall arrange for suitable alternative legal representation. It is the intent of the Attorney to refrain from handling legal matters for any other person or entity that may pose a conflict of interest. 2.12. Agreement Not Assignable. The rights and obligations created by this Agreement may not be assigned by either party. 2.13. Agreement Not Exclusive. The MSCWMO retains the right to hire other legal representation for specific legal matters. 2.14. Independent Contractor Status. All services provided by the Attorney pursuant to this Agreement shall be provided by the Attorney as an independent contractor and not as an employee of the MSCWMO for any purpose, including but not limited to: income tax withholding, workers' compensation, unemployment compensation, FICA taxes, liability for torts and eligibility for employee benefits. 2.15. Work Products. All records, information, materials and other work products prepared and developed in connection with the provision of services pursuant to this Agreement shall become the property of the MSCWMO. 2.16. Insurance. The Attorney shall maintain professional liability (malpractice) insurance in the minimum amount of$1,000,000. 2.17. Data Practices Act Compliance. Data provided to the Attorney under this Agreement shall be administered in accordance with the Minnesota Government Data Practices Act, Minnesota Statutes, Chapter 13. CLL-243017v1 3 MD165-1 • • 2.18. Choices of Law and Venue. This Agreement shall be governed by and construed in accordance with the laws of the state of Minnesota. Any disputes, controversies, or claims arising out of this Agreement shall be heard in the state or federal courts of Minnesota, and all parties to this Agreement waive any objection to the jurisdiction of these courts, whether based on convenience or otherwise. 2.19. Non-discrimination. Attorney will comply with all applicable federal and state laws, rules and regulations related to civil and human rights and will not discriminate against any employee or applicant for employment because of race, creed, color, religion, ancestry, national origin, sex, affectional preference, disability or other handicap, age, marital status, or status with respect to public assistance. IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the parties have caused this agreement to be duly executed by their proper officers and representatives as of the day and year first above written. MIDDLE ST. CROIX WATERSHED MANAGEMENT ORGANIZATION By: Its Chair By: Its Executive Director KENNEDY& GRAVEN, CHARTERED By: Q Principal CLL-243017v1 4 MD165-1 z� .,. __ Ute- v en j 411)rM a ^"x+ pular Meeting Agenda -------` 01w 4-(S� Middle St. Croix Watershed Management Organization 46119jt:;1-'-----itAA.v9 January 15, 2003 'P,Wv 441 Washington Conservat><o District Z (Located in River Heights Plaza, Stillwater, n e Washington County License Center) 7:00 PM- Regular Meeting Agenda V i ti6z,t_. /, I/4f vI. Call to Order �JL� �,�telt/ 0 , 2. Approval of Minutes /'. ver December 11, 2003 Minuteslitt `` 7 c�, r . 1 3. reasurer's Report (Anders Hansen) 7)'` Report of Savings Account, Assets , . (� S c,,V Piiiik 5 W X. Approve payment of bills 2.. 3 ,11 c,,)/' LMCIT Annual Renewal 1,,1 f l% „-- (\it f() P11;0 Pimia) 4).60 4. Old Business , Uv 9'6 lie Update of Lobbyist Fees for Bonding Litil -- 1`''' /13'r Watershed Management Plan (A)6 a. Review of Draft 1 of Watershed Management Plan eat Lca,L.4- 52 c t Ska"- ,` P/Miser 5. New Business vweas dtt. - - 00 - Legal Services, RFP for Attorney at.--4/ St. Croix River Crossing Meeting Summary iel- Loramere, West Lakeland Townshi. K ait • Oakgreen Village, Oak Park Heights ��,�t/ I 7 Other Agenda Items (43 r2- >/ ••• ciffilnuiLiA av- Adjourn ,/ Middle St. Croix Watershed Management Organization MEMBER COMMUNITIES: Afton,Bayport,Baytown Township,Lakeland,Lakeland Shores,Lake St.Croix Beach,Oak Park Heights,St.Mary's Point,Stillwater and West Lakeland Township • • MIDDLE ST. CROIX RIVER WATERSHED MANAGEMENT ORGANIZATION r it� ■4 1380 West Frontage Road, Hwy 36 Phone:651-275-1136,ext.21 Stillwater, MN 55082 Fax: 651-1254 D 2.017 A Joint Powers Watershed Management Organization composed of ten St. Croix Valley 'k • Communities that was established under State Statute 103B to cooperatively manage water resources within the watershed. January 13, 2004 John McPherson, Chairman West Lakeland Township 13520 Greenwood Trail N. Stillwater, MN 55082 AtiVIR RE: Loramere Major Subdivision—West Lakeland Township Dear Mr. McPherson: ,Y; Our office has received the drainage, grading,„V eros i. me ._, Control plans dated 12-17-03, for the proposed Loramere Major Subdivision, loca Sec s 22. d 27, T 29 North, Range 20 West, in West Lakeland Township. Based on tt! ,plan u Ott jIi a r sit to `'e site, Middle St. Croix Watershed Management Organization offers th 'pw men 3 Drainage and Grading Issues a= The proposed stormwater manag men ar dequately maintains the rate of runoff to preexisting conditions as well as provides water quality tr-7 The inlets (storm sewer outfalls) to all ponds on the site should have riprap or similar stabilization metha+s installed to prevent erosion and potential failure of the pipe. MSCWMO commends the use of the natural topography and infiltration to manage the stormwater runoff generated by the additional impervious surfaces. Erosion and Sediment Control The sediment and erosion control plan submitted will require the following additions. There are two road sections in the plat that are on steep slopes: a section of Palisade Court and the north portion of Palisade Trail. The ditches and grading adjacent to these areas will require ditch checks and erosion control matting or similar erosion control measures to stabilize the area. Silt fence will need to be added to the plan and installed south of the grading building pads on Lots 10, 11, 12, and 13 of Block 1. The erosion and sediment control plan should include types and volumes of seed and mulch to achieve site stabilization. We would emphasis the need for all temporary erosion control measures to be in place before grading of the site begins. We would also emphasis that continued maintenance will be needed to maintain these erosion control measures. Silt fence maintenance will likely be needed after significant rainfall events as well. Middle St. Croix Watershed Management Organization MEMBER COMMUNITIES: Afton,Bayport,Baytown Township,Lakeland,Lakeland Shores,Lake St.Croix Beach,Oak Park Heights,St.Mary's Point,Stillwater and West Lakeland Township • Tree Preservation and Protection A tree inventory was completed in the wooded southeastern portion of the site. The placement of Palisade Court and the stormwater pond in this area of the plat were placed to minimize the removal of the largest oaks. The grading plan should show a grading limits boundary throughout the whole site. This is especially important in the southeastern treed portion of the plat to prevent excess grading and removal or damage to trees that are intended to be preserved. Further the grading limits in this section of the plat should be identified and staked in the field prior to the commencement of grading to ensure the contractor is aware of the boundaries. No grading and/or filling should take place within the drip line of each tree to be preserved so that the root zone will be protected. If you have any questions,please feel free to call me at 275-1136 ext. 21. Sincerely, Bob Fossum Water Resource Planner cc: Cara Gehren, TKDA, Inc o> neer Todd Erickson, Folz, Free'4 , c c emorial Avenue North, Stillwater MN 55082 Middle St. Croix Watershed Management Organization MEMBER COMMUNITIES: Afton,Bayport,Baytown Township,Lakeland,Lakeland Shores,Lake St.Croix Beach,Oak Park Heights,St.Mary's Point,Stillwater and West Lakeland Township • MIDDLE ST. CROIX RIVER WATERSHED MANAGEMENT ORGANIZATION �►�r 1380 West Frontage Road, Hwy 36 Phone:651-275-1136,ext.21 Stillwater, MN 55082 Fax: 651-1254 A Joint Powers Watershed Management Organization composed of ten St. Croix Valley '1 Communities that was established under State Statute 103E to cooperatively manage water , resources within the watershed. ' January 13, 2004 Eric Johnson, Administrator City of Oak Park Heights 14168 Oak Park Boulevard Oak Park Heights, MN 55082-2007 RE: . Review of Oakgreen Village Phase 1 —City of Oak Park H Dear Mr. Johnson: Our office has received the general plans date. r akgreen Village, Phase 1 located in Section 5, Town 29 North, Range 20 West,, ,Cit d alp Park Heig . Based on the plans submitted and a visit to the site, Middle St Croix Waters �� Management Organization offers the follows comments regarding Phase 1 ONLY. t61ro a Drainage and Grading Issues �; 1 The proposed grading plan calls for phasedLapproach that includes the construction and grading of the streets, Pond 1 and Outlot E in 2004. Tle;`rehainder of the site east of Novak Ave and north of 58th Street will be constructed in 2005 or later. Although it is not specifically stated in the plans, we would assume that all stormwater management infrastructure (storm sewer/inlet and outlet structures) would be in place during the 2004 construction season of the Phase 1 proposal. Based on the plans received the drainage and stormwater plan for the site appears adequate. The sizing, location, and elevations of the ponds and outlet structures are appropriate. Multiple inlets (storm sewer outfalls) exist in all ponds on the site. Riprap or similar stabilization should be placed at these inlets to prevent erosion and potential failure of the pipe. Adequate setbacks from the wetland are provided. Erosion and Sediment Control Regarding the erosion and sediment control on-site, the erosion control plan in not adequate. We would request that a more detailed site stabilization plan be submitted and reviewed. This plan is important because grading will occur to put in streets, utilities, and ponds in 2004 and the remainder of the construction of residential dwellings will not occur until 2005 or later. It is important that the site is stabilized with vegetation in the interim between road/utility construction and residential construction. A more detailed site stabilization plan should include types and volumes of seed and mulch to achieve site stabilization. We would emphasis the need Middle St. Croix Watershed Management Organization MEMBER COMMUNITIES: Afton,Bayport,Baytown Township,Lakeland,Lakeland Shores,Lake St.Croix Beach,Oak Park Heights,St.Mary's Point,Stillwater and West Lakeland Township II 1111 for all temporary erosion control measures to be in place before grading of the site begins. We would also emphasis that continued maintenance would be needed to maintain these erosion control measures. Silt fence maintenance will likely be needed after significant rainfall events as well. Middle St. Croix WMO appreciates the opportunity to review development plans in your city. Please call me with any questions you may have at 651-275-1136, ext. 21. Sincerely, Bob Fossum MSCWMO Administrator cc: Middle St. Croix Watershed Management Organization Board Members Todd Erickson, Folz, Freeman, Erickson, Inc., 5620 Memorial Avenue North, Stillwater, MN 55082 tits 4-ss Middle St. Croix Watershed Management Organization MEMBER COMMUNITIES: Afton,Bayport,Baytown Township,Lakeland,Lakeland Shores,Lake St.Croix Beach,Oak Park Heights,St.Mary's Point,Stillwater and West Lakeland Township • • Legislative Associates1 Inc. P.O.Box 2131 II013oth Street,Suite 500 Stillwater,MN 55082 Washington,D.C.20007 (651)439-7681 (202)625-4356 Fax(651)439-7319 January 8, 2004 Fax(202)625-4363 David Beaudet, Mayor City of Oak Park Heights 6400 North Lookout Trail Oak Park Heights, MN 55082 Dear Dave: I want to thank you for the opportunity to come before the Council and discuss the participation of Oak Park Heights in the effort to obtain the funds to complete the sewer project. Stage 3 of the project has been redesigned to accommodate the specific needs of Oak Park Heights by protecting the trails and other issues. We had hoped to be able to request sufficient funds from the State in the 2004 Session to complete the project. Bayport, Stillwater, and Baytown Township have all determined that it will be better to spend a few thousand dollars this year to obtain the funds from the State, rather than to have their communities be responsible for the$2.2 million to complete the project next year. Legislative Associates has already obtained $3.5 million in two appropriations for the St. Croix Watershed Management Organization to complete Stages 1 and 2. Discussions with the House and Senate leadership have indicated their support for funds to complete the project in the 2004 Legislative Session. As explained in the meeting with the Council, our Members simply do not have the time available to follow the bill through the Legislative process with the care that is necessary to assure passage. You will be making a decision on this matter during the next meeting of the Council. As a citizen of this community for 35 years, and one whose taxes will be required to contribute to paying for a portion of the$2.2 million if the funds are not received from the State this year, I urge your to approve the participation of Oak Park Heights in cooperation with the three other communities in this legislative effort. Thank you for your consideration of this matter. If you have any questions, or need clarification of the issues, please call me at 439-7681 or 303-2424. Sincerely yours, Edwin E. Cain • • AGENDA ST.CROIX RIVER CROSSING UPPER BLUFF AREA Project Criteria Meeting Washington Conservation District Office Thursday,January 15,2004 at 1:00 pm I. Introduction II. Existing Drainage System III. Proposed Criteria a. Stormwater Quality Goals b. Stormwater Quantity Goals IV. Proposed Upper Bluff Drainage System a. Stormwater Quality Treatment b. Stormwater Conveyance V. Proposed River Crossing Alternatives VI. Wetlands a. Impacts b. Mitigation VII. Schedule PN1 H:\Projects\4686\WR\DOC\Agenda011504.doc CONSULTING GROUr.INC. SRF No.0034686 • • a °' g • O U Q co• co O • M M O O co N co u O O r O r Q '3 °• «f � Q Q Q Q NN Q Q Q Q Cl) C U o co o Z Z Z Z o z Z Z Z Z O Q _ °' o m a m 6 T W flu f4y r O Z c6 O 0 CW I- co,� I . rNi v in Q co o in co cry pOp Q ��H , - cv o Z r r o .--- Ill 2 U C 0 it = m U Q a " pOp O O co .: cn co Z (n O Q "O T F . O Z 00 O O c m 4 O a U L W O 4t { "y'` O 4 m U• •-• Q to co O , ,• co to • N m 0 a J p o O O O O:'. " Z N O O CO O 5 EL cc .-r.,-`. D +. O LLU- cc O O T M N Q to r' n m U J yh, - O Pi IP' LU ir^fr �w':,� - c; C >. • 11 CL ck. N E ma o o°. as a c 100. mj:,- as 0 2. C7z! 1a.. °' �0 3 a ° m ° o ". �� c • E pE rs c U o c °'ri; C c c c o o0 a- M Cl) m o ' a a��i ma gra a o c`ai000 LU 0 a$ rn 0 � 0 y � � on CO N m m m m mrnrnrn 0 ca o > � t`ac`o �. * 000 m Ts Q E = rn 3 a) as eTo. VI ~ C 'p C> m m J a) ccs ctj > 1:-) Y U Q U 3- as co co o - - - 0 — C >. C 13 0 O cotn � QQQ Ti_' m m 3 Z 0 O ZrcV (1) v v i 2 0 9, MIDDLE ST. CROIX RIVER WATERSHED MANAGEMENT ORGANIZATIONcc Pk 11 1380 West Frontage Road, Hwy 36 Phone: 651-275-1136, ext.21 Stillwater, MN 55082 Fax: 651-1254 D A Joint Powers Watershed Management Organization, composed of ten St. Croix Valley Communities that was established under State Statute 103B to cooperatively manage water resources within the watershed January 16,2004 Penny Huonder,Clerk Baytown Township 4220 Osgood Ave. Stillwater,MN 55082 RE: Review of Wesley's Bay Ridge—Baytown Township Dear Ms.Huonder: Our office has received the grading and drainage plans dated 03-0-04, for the proposed Wesley's Bay Ridge located in Section 10, Town 29 North, Range 20 West, in Baytown Township. Based on the plans submitted and a visit to the site, Middle St. Croix . Watershed Management Organization offers the follows comments, " Drainage and Grading Issues The proposed grading and drainage plan calls for a 4-pond treatment train to maintain the current peak rate of discharge leaving the site. This ponding scheme also provides water quality treatment of the stormwater generated by the development. Pond 1 (the lowest pond and outlet pond for water leaving the site)has two outlets proposed`. A 12" RCP at an outlet elevation of 849.00, and a rip-rap overflow swale with an outlet elevation of 8490. Ve request that the rip-rap overflow swale have an outlet elevation increased to 850.00. This would hold more water in the pond;accomplish"ing two objectives: increased treatment of stormwater and increased infiltration and less water moving off-site. The decrease in flow off-site is especially desirable because of drainage concerns voiced by down stream residents in previous years. Based on the plans received all other aspects of the drainage and stormwater plan for the site appear adequate. Erosion and Sediment Control Regarding the erosion and sediment control on-site, the erosion control plan in not adequate. We would request that a more detailed site stabilization plan be submitted and reviewed. This plan should include appropriately placed rock construction entrances, silt fence, and seeding/mulching specifications. We would emphasis the need for all temporary erosion control measures to be in place before grading of the site begins. We would also emphasis that continued maintenance would be needed to maintain these erosion control measures. Silt fence maintenance will likely be needed after significant rainfall events as well. Middle St. Croix WMO appreciates the opportunity to review development plans in your township. Please call me with any questions you may have at 651-275-1136,ext. 21. Sincerely, Bob Fossum MSCWMO Administrator cc: Middle St.Croix Watershed Management Organization Board Members Todd Erickson,Folz,Freeman,Erickson,Inc.,5620 Memorial Avenue North,Stillwater,MN 55082 Middle St. Croix Watershed Management Organization MEMBER COMMUNITIES: Afton,Bayport,Baytown Township,Lakeland,Lakeland Shores,Lake St.Croix Beach,Oak Park Heights,St.Mary's Point,Stillwater and West Lakeland Township f E } d w x , t*- . ... ; .. ` Y„„ ak ai,. .. '4 ....amu .. .�, ,, 3l SII R±p� W : i 04 g .. e •' 6..y,.,� }, S � # i e • f s y., �� i4 s�x .5;47],;',4 •s< c. -ci �sa s Y:�, t 't, '*� �t '��, E hk�'rix" � h ,. .11,'`' .•fit• �. �' "^ . :.. it y}�l b V 0 do , .ro^ x 3kb A +ay ' J, *uk , #. y+s s x r 4.,„.r„pr.+,,,,,,,....7_„,,,--**+, p 'c` k skis ' - 41' t 19'. z Ea �y � �3+�`�;id "::!�:w4 4:,-*::' � ' k� f,S 4..- y°.-4.44; u 'gt._a4y,ie, . Zri.;".' .„..",:-•iF',.'t';'''' '' !iaS, ti a43 'A 3, i ,,i m. ' di zsr. " ,4 . „ m a :.e.. ' ''''' '' irot 0 • I v a. Z A W N i � 0 o O cct O o 0 < < < m N ^p' Q 3 �4713N 33 p1 Q1 N O (D U) o 1D RI C n D a - p N X Al A� N ? < ? O y t0 C) Q cD p) aD p> m 7 p r O O Q 7 7 f0 7 D '� ) 02 co 23 �D m p ID (Q m O O O 0 pt a cp c0 co m - to 0 o m Z w � m � p O Do -v � O cn0 Z Ami - a) tb CO 0000 0 SD scr ,� H ro Q; c�cr N p 13o O y El-pa Q pzet, ® Op O rr-. -a C 7Q • p O (D <D F. Q U O p C O v — Q Q � � -o 13 � � D p1 p1 p 0 Q y 7 Q 13 . C CXI.+ ° O Q Q coO (D z 13 co (DD jj --n=',. va po fl Cs r mO o —► Z •O •O tQ C o co � C _I 33 O Br- Q 0 MI 7 -+ O O N z 0 O O O Q p p v D v p vNi ca ccoo D N :to co m w ('� $ 0-13 m � � D 141-4 CD > O cn Z a> -• 0 0 co yr 0 -. -« CD • (D N 33 O w w co Co D co', o 5> ai m cQ D m —I ,. m 3 - .c Met t;,... n N z O tNn- in cU'n O bp D rn rn N y�r ="fi E w w; m - z v D -� O - O -� 1 pp p) p p) co. N 6 in o z w w 'oq w w Q pi 111 cn co cn o D =ip "3 6 0 c0 ' Dno <.0 No D D D D D N D D D D o 0.o cn o D -+ O O O O W W 1 p < m N N O kg W �' • W N O W c') O W m O � j� o pb ill K3 W 0 0 A /6y 044 PePA// fd ALI Ce0 etgais. /1-0-1 "— MIL-s- fru-E) et c( ,et"-e q/c, p yreol? 502/x7 ) 11, (eve7 0404-, pito() tat ,ei (kit( - .40/ pPN w.lS H"' 7.el!£Lc1 /64.te S/tGF.v arn-1-6 ( ( 1 0 T 0 ol 03 I O 7 < rmUmD rp r23 )� � ZZ M0n� DW DRDg zzn mOT n ox � 3 � p rA-x�m rA m o -im o zo z oNm z o ro< ctnx -a PAlit A . PI w F m m ° z g o a w o a m n m ` m ° m m a o w e m 3 a p m g ` m m d w o . g z -2w ro < m 13 x5,0 E'' o ift O o, g 'i 3m w oa' m 9' v c < gm o ilii ma �S3 w mm rn � 3O �. Zc � 5. a O Q�j �8 m �° g 6 o m e m w �_fA 5' 11111111 Qw $3 m S. < ° § g p gm ° A omo oa' 9'Z2 fit' b m g 2gm S�' to ; 0 . z ° c . � w m �C' m a) 4'4 m a �' m s.e. xtn .9O1s II 8 # D mma reNm , ym3 3 $ ga3 . w 3 c "'R' Boom cr 3 Oma ., ga i / m m t gip eg . :, gEa�'mo I �(pa • w 3 m' to 0 c y w 8 3 3 0 o 7.? w• m g H N a �n z m f a ID ° � 3w � si $ om „ g �(�0 13 8@ tln ' 2° om+ 3 '3 c� nfb' F. ° 3R mD igw �3. m3$ ag12 6Agg•• Oc.1�m .P a °° a v ° m3 •as . Oc • 25 m 3 rn o m 3 !a-3a N ? < 8 • D m G a Qa m 0. ca 5, 5' 8'1 .•11 m w _ A a m a 2 3 Da me �B� gmo z z 3mm o g Q m, o m °' ° m s 3 m g P. H Q l o g t,; m 3 3 o m & o `, o 0 a '» ari8ff m m moa � °. m •Kw 4dg8 a08 aw, • mwm. �'� m mm = 13 0c LI 5 < w p 5 3 0 o r m2 m'} !^ x ' O m m x g a Gs m 8 n + w w 3''w g g– m �� � mo .,--5-3.,•a.So 8 am 4 ", v» 3 g xf` 53 oN _ v �.. 5m a 3 c :g a 1-6'1°)g 5' (� '11";.7 a° m a (114;1-":'-'7-.;,: ti� :3 m g >g +.• ° g c IIIj : 8 2'g1! 47 i-1 QNgo 3 Oy V� � .5 O o Z � �a2'3 o �■ m S o� z m ~ —7 mt V. > m 2 `y 3 g A xg ,V �+ • a d m �; 3 m . �� m 5'as ° a m � il z z z 0 o ysx o- a a s '' k '' " a3 8` 'a N D9 ]o� 1 !!I cA..� +tu eo s -,, Dii a z' 3 3 3 'a m� > > > 4,,„5:',:g.,,,, �a v° N ,fl �� a g ...,,- ,.4's m mti , r o htii• n III „r yg ro i ao a w m 0 0 0 1Wnm 9a 3 m � � m 6pt '4) t .1m 'm m c m a / w $ ozw • • . y r ,c m w *JO, f°t ; }g rpm j�� liI 73 s` " • &i �$ • m `�' J m ` 3 a, d §.--- -,i'''', 7 o a P. g� -r ,v,',,-f„..-s-''''-"y lea + x F Y 'as € re,, '.1',-,..,' #° s t "' x :''"3"9`,-„" "+,e :,...,,,,„;;,_,; -°, t § '-1. w ;fa 4�s '`",x�.. a Q C '*..! ''.',$;;,..' x` t aha o ' :IPT g z' � a ... x,'17- ; ''''' ' ' *2-..'A i ' '' ' ' ''"'''''" ° 4k H°C' .2... a „ t :I W 5 Is f' :'7. ee � :)Q, N ,',1-.2;,„,,a, - ,..:.;,-.4,42..=i+ ° r Or -4.--,c-44',1- fR t t.� ,. • M a 4, b w .c , ,(1,,, IA a ,._ m. M a ' tq s 43 • e; 11 N Z Z W m v S a w w p p _g » 2 N S O� m ti ? w n CC opp , x 3 5 g0m•p2 Rx m N 0 m 3 3 „-,.',-'1,-`,. ` 31 7 O fo ` �. N N C) C) fv w e ao 3 3 m N g ag3 wm •o_co �•tvoo3 -#. �� Z Zit e, 3 g y W $ � 3m m 0 //1 f1 3 p N a p IIi:i >x��', .g. V' 0. A T. - Z . 5g ' Ii''-- 12-' 5' 2. i + iN\�\ �` is '. I v • yi{ .:.,4. - A v,- A;a � A AVv\v V AVA v v v� A��A' t,'j VA \ 1+lA ,-„\-\\-\\-\\•vv .'''..Z:.::<\\\‘'N. ,,,,,\\N,,s.\\*.‘ ‘.,P' '‘‘` .1.4 ,-'‘. ', .','' ,\•:*.' ..' ‘,`.'S :, , ‘,`- . \ ‘; \‘\\ ,• \\N\'' s..\` -v• •N�• ',�Vwyy AVA\\\ \ V �V�� vv \•,\�\\ VAV A � vAvA` v vv A• AVA�\ A• ,..-..,.\,\-` V A A, AV \\,AAS\I. \v\'\AAV``Vv v A \ A Av Vy\, V A A • AA\ v v AA v vA \ v v • my\�,.,\AVAy,\ 'I-I\‘ V \ v� „\\<„:\Vv ,VVw vvv �`vA\�.�yvAV���\VA AyA\,\ ;\v AAvA�, 1 \v v� r dv vw�w A v�wv�A SVA\V��VvA\ v�\ �\s II \\y\\ ,N. �. ` vv' \v vvv ,��AvyVw A\\'\\\ '‘ ‘‘\\\\\, �y vvv VA��vw 1A`\ `' "\-'`I‘ • `-V \A_.Av,'Av v Vv \V \\\-- 'y A`�A\y\V' AvV . v\\ AA \Vv Vv\ v • r'V`'• "���\• \ .-. v A v�V ,AA�\ • �A \,•-•\:' \,,‘\•,\\\•,\-•\-,,,',,,‘;'`‘`‘,‘-‘\,'„\\:,,,,,,, ,‘A, A�\ 1,.\\,,Vv,` �, \•.\\\\!.\A A • P \VI'‘N\\\\‘`‘VVAII‘sVAA 14VA' A VA AA\\-\\'‘''A\, A�ICII ,,,\'‘ \��' — _— v • `V V A vA V AV A h I \\ X III\\'\I ,e'I \\\I I',I' 4 \ sx.` > V A\ �v iso �� A �.\\\\\ \\v \vA A \\\ A\VvV v AI'l AIIII II A�• A \\\\ \'. .'\L\ \�\\.N' •�\.\\\� \\\\\ \\,,\\V\\\\\I'\,\• \C,\\\I'• ,'''',k�1 �72Iy \ \\� f'V A -' ‘`'''' ''‘‘•‘'V v vA v , v•• v \ ', v\\A A` M _— I �\\\ �v V A A \\ ,\ V•w v A• v�V Vv v v v� v S�\ `\v \\\�\\\ ��•••\, V \\121 a \ •• \ T.. nn,. eltill ` \‘...'„1:1". „;‘,,, �;vwv . � v .VA \vA� \\ A\ '‘\'vw • AI . \ \ � A \\V\\\ NV,.V\— A�\ v v V \ , AV� A V \ •\ v AA` AvvvA�_ v � � Av� \ vJr..-,,A ,, ‘A Vv ;�\v v\ v- yA v ,‘•'`. �, v v � \L e\ \t ` v �I,'\U''' .\\\\`\\ ''' V v .,..\\'‘Vn• • 0 t \` V'` v \Avv AVA \VvV V• A•'> AvA A• vA, \\\•:.,‘I‘ T� AVAiy A pllok If.:4,1414 �►'►� v V\ V` v ., AVA V A ►�Is\ \vvv,` \vyV vvw, ,;.A ‘ -,•,.•',.., :-v V' ;•N• ', V • VAA V A A w �Vvii ••:::::,\-, V�� VAS\ aa�\ ►C,` A v \ '‘,..\‘`‘'‘.' \�w yVAv ;��„\,,,, ,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,\` ...,\„,, vy 4` �, A v,!...,,4 Nvv ...- \ '\''''\‘',. A 1 vAV\ \vAAV. VA\VA VA ti, v'-• yA t Vv. v '1's \• vv:`� ' Av w•A \V�V' •A\ �..4 v •\v Aii y ‘ .\\„,-, � M�� . 1' \C C.\\\\\ \ , \ !1 \�• \ \\ \ \ •\\' \. ,• \\ Imo' �� \\v..\\\\\‘',,,v \y A Vv • ..►J 1: �1 '''\- -..:.1,,‘' \v III A\ vvvv IX' , eill till �\ �., vvv vy V A\ AAv\XX >--<---v�\\ v ! \V��\\� ►w �\_� v , Vv � A \ vVA A"'' :�\ + ''v"`�V l: A `_\ •i.1 1, vv VAy ,v\ \� vvAv' i„.. .. AvA A L . vv I is. R. '',::1,,,,,,,,... 1 , I VAV \\ AV, y.A�VA\ V,`,A A A �` ., 1.A. .: lI!i:i a!!!I!li!,!!!iI''I•!III:I'!':!!'I'I!I:I:!:.,.::!i!,,,!iuli:::;I,:!::::.:!.::..: !!!:•.• A . AVA v gg yv XV'V v v\c� !;I!. ! ! ti, ri -t. 'd;8yi ::•:•.::1.1.!:,!y! :::l:!n, iii'ii:ii!:i:;:il!Ii:!:I:!a:......:::i!:,:::i::I ,.,„,!!i `•::y`'• .A'`, 1 v A,.Ai vas y ....; I! .i ,; ::i I,i,::::�:iilwl ..;,;Iii::I!1!!!!!: !i ::•q;:..,,,.I... .., \ A., ' I ►d 1 ,i_ < 3'i !'I# 1 II! !►ARO� ,.,�I iii "1.,i'!'i!01il'!11`I 1�I,I I l i , ,\s • yV,A I ..':.,..•---1-6111'.'44L.1 Bk.-. l ii ►' .-”►�i1 i'.IiiI, h I Ii i'iil:iiliiili!ii!: '! :.ii g• \s",,,,, V V ��� I'..:;:4•41:::;'''',.;.,i...i i.jR +) . ►I►U�♦►itC t - %, :i 1 � vr' v ,ai ' ,e I I �w� _,Ii r""!.ii; ,\AA,�\A� ,,ot1i I ' '" •:: moi i'�i►i��►YA!'i ri�jAwjp�;�iii�Ll! iI ��'►AAA.AAAYA.AAA4taimal ,.�!i i!: \:, ,, •,• \\;AA A !!!:Illi ilia i1:I;t1::!: a:l.w i:::: I:!:!:!:I .-- -4, I:z.`Y.O.A, ,�r 05, :I ��►►.AA., .Y.�._ 7 4I i'1, h„i'!,,,, , V Vy\. \ I ! ! ! I,:!'•:•.:,:•i:Y:�: I tIi v.-.��. �. �1►�.il►prwPi I! 1► ►♦ ♦...1 ♦ �\ \, ilii ii, � ... I ;,II .e.� 4K44104,.; '.7AAVA33-0..$1110!!1 U► ttE;ArN'••J'il !i,iiiiv•\,,, ,; !i r►4►,!!,r �06.•►`� .4. ►s,.o' !ill ,1,► 1►► ....7 . `.yA ,!C; + li lI p!;!!i..`i0;►'4"s �'M��t��0A���i►�.�'-',o (j ;1 �i !i►.,��i'•i1I'{ �`� !( A ; ��-v. tri li tl,11r.��•►1►.dr�`�i►tr4;'.�t.►:,.:tm,,� 4,,,�r_�ii ••4mA Ili'i�11111,i'I! !i.y`\', M"1 tril ! � p L �:!”L..L...!��,ii'i iii�� v v,M71.�,s'=a�oIi`"Ii ;1,►•.•v-�.<►�,,��.I►Ii,II 1, ag.�li(;,�y �'•,',•..;,L...�� u..,.'. ' . a' '-i1,.dam .",„„,„„„,.14,,, ,,,,,,,,.,„,i.1'n+�I/iv .-.v•:►��J►A4•4r'►�U 711.1 �1•/♦.•.►.►��.�.`Vi.!! !III!:iliiI!1!i\ \\�\\\. �fi .xxn.w ." sr�N.9�di:0 r 1 ►....1kr 4,..n !1!tIIII!t II viiiiIiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiipiiiiii, ,A\� Il �`� -l` ��_. O '*1 wr ,! �.�y�i�1.��'s"�•w�l :: 40'0i ;.0!Oil * !' "i!!!!!:!:!!fi�I!!i; \\` '' I / - �9 IP� .�A►.►2 1R► 1n�►.•.•.♦k,►�.•`••1 I I I I!i!ilil iiiiiiiI !I!I.',:,.:\•,.. !t \33k li►•.`�v�•,•-. //?Ji N1 I►'►..� �... , i I I11 i I I \\ ' 1►x..4'4. ,�i►.f.t.-VA/�'!1 or 3..•.•.,4..4 ,i '„I!!;I 111 I! !III I \ \ \ \ a € I .h 1�.���1�1►��:►•���Ji) !:i.:= I���.�.�.A�7.�.�►�61' i I I I I!lEiEl::rij!i!I! ''.'\\ \ \\,:,,\\\ ',..',N\ \• �` \A \ M s ►dpi " 74t�f,��41': I� ...�. ��Q't041iI..I:ri:..i: VIII I II \•\\ \\\\\ ,..:‘,N,,,,,, \▪ \ ` \\ �� \ \ 'Oq�►v'>►.�11-71' ►1 I h >...•�•I►^•i 1•.h... 7iiiii!III.,?:I; I I,I. . L \\\.\•�\ \\\, \\\\\• \,U \ \1 2 0/k., �� - �r�� ,.,I, �IiY.�.A.A.A.A.• .�►N/I I i I 1,' ' I! ' \ !\ \ \\ \\\\\\ \ \\ $ ! ►n�o4►Aeq�.�,4440. LIi!,!' I�'-►-p= ' - - - rte "?' i y ty r� �� • " khF 7i� = y- I p} _ II i , ' 41, ; \ I' 1 iS - - [_. 1 n� I I I.. • • I i.kf i 6 1 yr p�� pppp/� p _ �� Jay[ 13 J°I I I I I !TTI I�I�H ! III "�� ,ry ,�,‘06v I -_ 11 w I 5r „Ir i �,� �� 11 l� 11 1 J._ , 1! I 111 � i -) y -.4 rI _ 1I ' e. ,I z I.' hl 1 1"� • I • } I I 1) -1- ' ' !Pk ,1 �T \ , II I I t' IT . i__ 4 L. . ,/ , 1111111 IID y 1 r�' r ; , ILLI_I��� �'1� ) _ _ 11 I; �, � '� . - ter- ' 1�9a in.,I .1.1- i I ,' _i 1 ��• I j� � \� X11 _ _ _ 1 ----1 I,\ i 9T i I , I y �' --4° - " ... )3' 24" AS, / b. _Agar _ _ _- - 7 - -1_ _. „ 1 948Cr■ arrrirrr�ri�rOlifiliiiillk----z,--,_, r �� "�_ I I 10 ^_ lira M IR 1 r I TE®I MEMEN�� Imo..KIIII ..it.= m.--_�i�+ I jl. \ 1 0 11 11PPON00104 - pail' g' I _ ' � 1 rI -/ - I y\•`73. I ^ ' , •:'1 ,� ti a.-. 08.:C .Z.yrs � ��► � Jii•��rnlilLiatii l ��. t' '`\ 9 I 1 6L-_,J_.' \ 4/ -mow. _71671 Milli . �''� Gsr �i _... T- daterT hey )71 1 �I z/ ,- ,- --ma . b ,� 1 , ` p ,_ O %, . ! ;- PITAIlliM 1 0 1 - - Imo'', A 0111©11 , • -I,„- �� z > Z tzo\ 1 1 � ' � - 9 - - \ ,\, \\ r 1 ; MOM ,w.. .H ili__:_1111; 461.111...A- ..,.. . 4-.--1'), c'm o tri.ik ' \ �� ,.1�1 pr .;4 , s\,'\\\ ',4 , \', 1 ...,,k,D,Ii,.. II . ill /114X_ '\\A '',\'''',-,. 5. Hi i ' ((-Ti.' 1 i .. );";' 4 > . N _,or.. . Frio,em, ►—+ \�,� \ ' �' 11F l i� I ro ' : . _ ! ' 1 I �I�F (1' 15. o , a� � , v- ,-hr ', , \,, , � ' Ii ®i i 1 1'1 ia I 1 \ - __ _ _ ., 1 .i� , , „gym, ( v.„:„ I , \, , , ,, ‘ ,\ ,„ , \„, , ,_ __ _, _ QCs I \\\ -- - r ..,; "\-,:: : ‘ '\\\ •\, ' \ - tl i t I - I "poi, \\s,, \ \\\ \. \ Y iii` N .42€ —�' /, / -at L ' ,,, \ -,,, \ \ '', __ moidadmiset __ _____,- _4,2' // / ,, 10 t , ,r_,., I r ...„--'----1- - I � CO i'=%ion`®'�,...........-AM �:��,.��� • /� C E N. : , 1\ ,, _ -too) ,,,,,,,, ,...».„, „„ , 1 ,, .0 - ,1 .„, cotiiimmaieB,4 le A orq. p--II . - - ,, . ,,.,!I a-z,- j ww�.�ww.r'�wBrij r ina �� u ,4 I 1 V 1/I D _. _ __ _ J 140.4rill1 4 f � PoNI 2 r_________,_ �49.... _ _ �' �i 1, i1 ' .. . � :414 940. Y I \I 1/ T ' ' . alb. j II I' 1 '- ]arc, _ I lrr.l �� — q .11 III ” - s 1 >- -..mor _. .r. • $ I 1 r ■ I [ q 5-11-1 it '! y N a\ -'ill 1 p • 096-/ , 1 I — - 1 - ,,, \ , urR1- - --.,---,1i. +Ir. j� F 1 I i 1 fig l { c:$ /, _ -� r =, r______ \, Q - - _ DAKtREEN_ - � -AVENUE ---s---p--.0 :N URTH b y , ,; __..-<.°C ` _ --_ d" �-- --tom=— _ - � - -� ,rz FlO, , SSI ' ••'1 \ _ / / ' 11 0 \ 14 a1 GGG x i N" 1 to 1 g/ \ 'G I. o, BI 6 L 1 §q' .:.,,,, 5 % se min iimom § 1 I\ y2 t1\1 1 I. w y..� p i 11 11 .:`::','),•••:',..:1::::k -1- ''. lig i 8 5i -ag 33 1 Cji I- :: I c.) T. i ,. (S] \l n O 1 S O� O . Z 1 i 4,;'7V :1 2 ;,1 1• •��p •�mo �g e o o ,^I A21 0 6 6 Q 6R 'J O g [23'7 ♦i'1 i foiaim wN-. g s S 20 'S N -' " v°o co i = w 9 z 01�, A .4.,,,..;.,e,.,1',/ a ' MIN MUM o4a - y`4°Y '' 8 * ; C m 8 Q i b `. L :.1i;,;�•, 18 POST EMBEDMENT S g 4 N, I: A m A T) A CI to t,, �� g wFy� cl N The Wetland Conservation Act of 199110the Interim Program The Minnesota Board of Water and Soil Resources(BWSR)is the state administrative agency for the Wetland Conserva- tion Act of 1991.Because we have received so many questions regarding the act,and the interim program beginning Jan. 1, 1992, the BWSR is mailing this document to many of the organizations and people affected by the act.Any further ques- tions can be directed to the BWSR,612-296-3767,or 1-800-652-9747. The regulatory provisions of the Wetland Conservation Act take place in two phases. The first phase is an interim program prohibiting wetland alteration that begins Jan. 1, 1992, and lasts through July 1, 1993. After July 1, 1993, a permanent program begins. The programs provide exemptions and also allow landowners to "replace"wetlands through an approved replacement plan. So what exactly does the Wetland Conservation Act mean for local governments and landowners? And when do their responsibilities begin? Between now and Jan. 1, 1992... •Local government units (LGUs) must decide which LGU will administer the interim provisions of the act. (BWSR is available to facilitate this discussion between LGUs.) Although soil and water conservation districts (SWCDs) or any LGU with permitting authority can administer the interim provisions, the permanent program is more restrictive: only counties and cities can administer the permanent program in Greater..Minnesota, and only cities, townships and water management organizations can administer the permanent program in the Metro Area. It seems logical to consider giving responsibility for the interim program to the LGU that will ultimately administer the permanent program. •The designated LGU should notify the BWSR that they have accepted responsibility for administering the act. If no LGU takes responsibility for the program, landowners with nonexempt wetlands will be prohibited from altering them. Moreover, since the BWSR will not assume local administration of the program, landowners will have no one to determine exemptions or approve replacement plans. •The BWSR will develop administrative guidelines for the interim program. After Nov. 11, 1991, a copy of the guidelines may be obtained from the BWSR (612-296-3767).The guidelines will be open to written comment until Dec. 6, 1991. The comments and adoption of the..guidelines will be considered at the Dec. 18, 1991, meeting of the BWSR. After Jan. 1, 1992... •After consultation with the Wetland Heritage Advisory Committee (a nine-member committee consisting of the commissioners of agriculture and natural resources, and seven others appointed by the governor), rule making for the permanent program will begin. •The BWSR will provide training to LGUs concerning the interim program. •The BWSR and LGUs will work together to let landowners know that they must get approval from the LGU before altering a wetland. •The LGU must decide if a wetland activity is exempt; if it is,the LGU might want to consider issuing a"certificate of exemption." Although this certificate is not required, it will help the landowner quickly explain the wetland's status to enforcement officials. •The commissioner of the Department of Natural Resources (DNR) is responsible for enforcement ' of the act.Although conservation officers are primarily responsible for this enforcement, other peace officers will assist the DNR. •Exemptions include: * the proposed activity is in a wetland subject to federal farm program Swampbuster require- ments; * the wetland has a cropping history or was in "set aside"six of 10 years prior to Jan. 1, 1991; the activity is in a wetland that was enrolled in the federal Conservation Reserve Program, was cropped six out of 10 years prior to enrollment,and has not been restored with public or private assistance; * the activity is in a wetland that has received a commenced determination by the A ricultural Stabilization and Conservation Service (RSCS); g * the activity is in a type 1 wetland on agricultural land, except for bottomiand hardwood type 1 wetlands; * the activity is in a type 2 wetland that is two acrgs qg joss located on agricultural land; * the activity is in a wetland created solely as a result of beaver dam construction, or blockage of culverts through public or private roads; g * the activity is necessary to repair and maintain public or private drainage systems, as lon as wetlands that have been in existence for more than 20 years are not drained; g * the activity is related to development projects and ditch improvement projects that have received at least preliminary approval within five years before Aug. 1, 1991; * certain activities related to Corp. of Engineer permits, forest management, aquaculture, wild rice production, and routine maintenance of highways, streets and utilities. •Landowners proposing nonexempt activities have these options: * The landowner and the LGU can agree that the landowner will replace the wetland within one year of the effective date of the rulesovernin the replacement will abide by those rules. g g permanent program and. that the (The rules will be effective about July 1, 1993.) * The landowner can replace the wetland acre for acre(at a 2:1 ratio for non-agricultural wetland and at a 1:1 ratio for agricultural wetlands)and type for s type before or during the wetland activity. * If the replacement is required by a permitting authority other than the LGU,the LGU maydefer to that replacement plan, providing that the replacement requirements are at least 1:1 (a ) and 2:1 (non-ag). •The LGU must establish a technical evaluation panel. The panel is responsible for makingwetland delineations, resolving questions concerning exemptions andproviding plans. The LGU approves the replacement plans. Bystatute, this guidance on replacement employee of the SWCD, a BWSR employee and an egineer from the LGU.. (Thes of a sts mssion d other members from the public or private sectors to provide additional panelists may add expertise.) •The legislature appropriated funds to SWCDs to serve as an information clearinghouse about t act and to provide training to local officials. he