HomeMy WebLinkAbout2009-04-07 ENR Packet
AGENDA
CITY OF MAPLEWOOD
ENVIRONMENTAL AND NATURAL RESOURCE COMMISSION
Tuesday, April 7, 2009
5:15 p.m.
Council Chambers - Maplewood City Hall
1830 County Road BEast
1. Call to Order
2. Roll Call
3. Approval of Agenda
4. Approval of Minutes:
a. February 3, 2009
5. New Business
a. Ramsey County Groundwater Protection Plan
b. Public Improvement Process Overview
c. Stormwater Management Enhancements at Spoon Lake Preserve and Kohlman
Park
d. Silver Lake Improvement Association Request for Herbicide Treatment Funding
for Silver Lake
e. University of Minnesota Urban Tree Management Program (Presentation by Dr.
Gary Johnson)
6. Unfinist]ed Business
a. Wind Turbine Ordinance (Presentation by Felicia Szott, Hamline University
Student)
b. Environmental Protection Ordinance (To Be Continued in May)
7. Visitor Presentations
8. Commission Presentations
a. Subcommittee Reports
1) Stormwater
2) Greenways
3) Trash Hauling
9. Staff Presentations
a. Marshland Project Update
b. Spring Clean Up (April 25)
c. Waterfest (May 16)
d. Wetland Ordinance (First and Second Reading Scheduled for April 13 and 27)
e. Sustainable Communities Seminar Update
f. Dog Park Environmental Liaison Update
g. Conservation Easement Update
h. Environmental Commission Annual Report Update
i. Nature Center Programs
10. Adjourn
Agenda Item 4.a.
DRAFT
CITY OF MAPLEWOOD
ENVIRONMENTAL AND NATURAL RESOURCE COMMISSION MEETING MINUTES
February 3, 2009
5:15 p.m.
COUNCIL CHAMBERS - MAPLEWOOD CITY HALL
1830 COUNTY ROAD BEAST
1. CALL TO ORDER - 5:30 p.m.
2. ROLL CALL
Present
Chair Carol Mason Sherrill
Commissioner Judith Johannessen
Commissioner Frederica Musgrave (Arrived at 5:30)
Commissioner Dale Trippler
Absent
Commissioner Bill Schreiner
Commissioner Carole Lynne
Commissioner Ginny Yingling
Staff Present
DuWayne Konewko, Community Development and Parks Director
Shann Finwall, Environmental Planner
Alan Kantrud, City Attorney
3. APPROVAL OF AGENDA
Commissioner Musgrave requested that Legai Issues and Protocol be added under Commissioner
Presentations. Planner Finwall requested that four items be added under Staff Presentations including the
Wetland Ordinance Update, Park Commission Dog Park Subcommittee, Wind Turbine Ordinance Update,
and Environmental and Natural Resources Commission calendar. Commissioner Musgrave made a motion
to approve the agenda as amended, seconded by Commissioner Trippler. The motion carried by a
unanimous vote.
4. APPROVAL OF MINUTES
Chair Mason Sherrill stated there were no minutes to approve.
5. CITY ATTORNEY UPDATE - OPEN MEETING LAW
Attorney Alan Kantrud was introduced to take questions and comments regarding the Minnesota open
meeting law. He explained that the law was passed in Minnesota to bring transparency to government
meetings. He said standing committees of the city council are subject to the law, and compliance is made
by conducting deliberations and votes in an open forum, informing the public when the meetings are held,
1
and having public information available regarding the discussions at the meetings. He then asked for
questions from the commission.
Commissioner Musgrave said she had previously asked to have specific items included in the meeting
minutes, and one item was regarding subcommittees and if those were bound by the open meeting law.
She had requested a legal opinion on this matter. Mr. Kantrud said the creation of subcommittees is legal,
and unless there is quorum of the full commission on the subcommittee it does not violate the open meeting
law.
Commissioner T rippler said there was a memorandum in their packets of a paper put together by Debra A.
Dyson, Legislative Analyst for the House of Representative's Research Department of the State of
Minnesota. In a 1993 case, the Minnesota Court of Appeals held that the Open Meeting Law was not
violated when two of five city council members attended private mediation sessions related to business.
The court determined that the two council members did not constitute a committee or subcommittee of the
council because the group was not capable of exercising decision making powers. He stated that as long
as committees or subcommittees do not have the power to make decisions, they can meet and gather
information without meeting the requirements of the open meeting law.
Chair Mason Sherrill said they would give a few more minutes to questions from Commissioner Musgrave,
and if there were any more questions or issues, she requested addressing them to city staff or Mr. Kantrud
at another time.
Commissioner Musgrave indicated that she had asked a question and was not getting answers.
Commissioner Musgrave left the meeting, leaving only three commissioners in attendance. Since there was
no longer a quorum of the commissioners, Chair Mason Sherrill adjourned the meeting at 5:45 p.m.
2
Agenda Item 5.a.
MEMORANDUM
TO:
FROM:
SUBJECT:
DATE:
Environmental and Natural Resources Commission
Michael Thompson, Assistant City Engineer
Ramsey County Groundwater Protection Plan
March 31,2009
INTRODUCTION
Geoff Nash, Groundwater Specialist! Geologist with the Ramsey Conservation District, will be
attending the April 7 Environmental and Natural Resources (ENR) Commission meeting and the April
13 City Council meeting regarding the Ramsey County Groundwater Protection Plan. Mr. Nash was
the lead on this effort and will give a brief presentation to the ENR Commission and also address
questions.
DISCUSSION
The Board of Commissioners at Ramsey County delegated the responsibility of updating the county's
Groundwater Protection Plan to the Ramsey Conservation District. Minnesota Water Law Statute
1038.255 provides the authority for metropolitan counties to prepare and adopt county groundwater
plans. As part of the update the District commissioned both a local and technical advisory committees
made up of representatives from various stakeholders including the City of Maplewood. The advisory
committees were closely involved with developing the detailed plan, which was issued in draft form on
March 4.
The Groundwater Plan Executive Summary is attached for the ENR Commission's review. The full
report can be found at http://www.ramsevconservation.orq/. The report discusses implementing a
system-wide approach in addressing protection of groundwater and identifying potential funding
sources.
CONCLUSION
It is requested that the ENR Commission review and offer feedback on the Groundwater Protection
Plan during the 60-day review period, which ends May 7. Once comments are received, the Ramsey
Conservation District will hold a public hearing on the plan, after which time the plan is then submitted
to state agencies and the Board of Water Soil and Resources. With this timeframe, the earliest the
Ramsey Conservation District can adopt the plan is September 2009.
Attachment: Ramsey County Draft Groundwater Protection Plan Executive Summary Dated March 4, 2009
Ramsey County Groundwater Protection Plan - 2009
DRAFT (3/4/09)
1.0 Executive Summary
On behalf of the Ramsey County Board of Commissioners, the Ramsey Conservation District
has updated the Ramsey County Groundwater Protection Plan in an effort to protect the vital
drinking water and industrial water resources of Ramsey County. The previous plan was
published in 1996. Because groundwater is not limited by political boundaries, a County
Groundwater Protection Plan is needed to coordinate groundwater protection policies and
activities on a wider basis than the municipal level.
Minnesota Water Law Statute g103B.255 provides the authority for metropolitan counties to
prepare and adopt county groundwater plans, and impliment their policies. Pursuant to this
statute, the Ramsey County Board of Commissioners passed Resolution No. 90-294 which
delegated preparation of a groundwater plan to the Ramsey Conservation District. Plans are to
cover periods of at least five years but no more than ten years from the date the Board of Water
and Soil Resources (BWSR) approves the plan. Cities must adjust their Comprehensive Plans to
address provisions outlined in the County Groundwater Protection Plan.
The original Plan was written in response to the Minnesota Groundwater Protection Act of 1989
that emphasized the importance of protecting groundwater resources, as well as to the conserns
that local involvement was a necessary part of this protection. Like this revised Plan, that 1996
Plan was generated through an open process involving meetings with a diverse Technical
Advisory Committee. The 1996 Plan definded the resource and recommended several policies
and activities to protect groundwater. These policies were not required to be adopted by any
level of local government. As a result, few of the ideas were implemented. The approach for
this Plan differs from that of the former Plan, in that it advocates specific initiatives, policies and
programs.
Ramsey County is fortunate to have an adequate supply of groundwater which helps to sustain its
potable, industrial, and commercial water use base as well as providing water to our lakes,
streams, and wetlands. According to the Metropolitan Council municipalities and businesses in
Ramsey County extract approximately 33 billion gallons of groundwater each year from several
aquifers that lie beneath the County. The Metropolitan Council also states that as of 2005,
Ramsey County is the only Minnesota county for which the "net water use" is more than 100
percent of recharge.
The Surface Water Management section ofthe Ramsey County 2008 Comprehensive Plan stated
that "Baseline water quality monitoring'm~ other data. c()llection will continue to quantify
problems and prioritize management strategies". The County has been conducting surface water
monitoring since the early-I 980s. This type of resource management should be extended to
groundwater monitoring in order to define the long-term status ofthis vital, but vulnerable, asset.
I
Ramsey County Groundwater Protection Plan - 2009
DRAFT (3/4/09)
Groundwater contamination and sustainable water volume usage are also issues facing Ramsey
County. Groundwater plumes (contaminants carried downgradient with moving groundwater)
from the Twin Cities Army Ammunition Plant and 3M have impacted our county's aquifers, as
shown below in Figure I-I. There have been two results: fewer options for future groundwater
resource expansion at a time of projected increasing groundwater demand and also more
expensive cleanup requirements.
State and local agencies with groundwater responsibilities are not focused on county-wide
protection of the water resource. County government is best positioned to protect groundwater
and has the greatest opportunity to achieve it through partnerships with cities, water supply
authorities, St. Paul Regional Water Authority, water management organizations, the
Metropolitan Council, and state agencies.
This Plan conveys the message of aquifer vulnerability in the face of current and future land use,
as well as the sense of how little is known about the quality and quantity of groundwater in
Ramsey County. Management of this vital resource is not possible without investment. This
Plan sets out to rectify this deficiency.
Identification of sources of funding has yet to be completed. Cost sharing relationships between
Ramsey County, water management organizations, cities, State agencies, and the 2008 Clean
Water Land and Legacy Amendment sales tax funds are all possible sources of funding for the
type of groundwater protection programs proposed in this Plan.
Remsey Conservation District, as the author of this Plan, has the capacity to be the center of the
Plan's implementation. Following plan approval, implemention is the phase that will put the
recommendations in place and provide the institutional structure for protecting Ramsey County's
groundwater.
2
Ramsey County Groundwater Protection Plan - 2009
DRAFT (3/4/09)
SPRING
THE COUNTY DOES
NOT WARRANT
OR GURANTEE THE
ACCURACY OFTHIS DATA.
~
Generalized Groundwater
Plume Map
Ramsey County, MN
. Hwy 96 Dump Supertund Site
Twin CIties Army Ammunition Plant Site
1lII3M Pertluorochemicais (PFC's)
IIIIIIIII MacGillis and Gribbs Plant (Wood Treatment) Site
Figure 1-1 Groundwatcl' Plume Map
(Used with permission of the Star Tribune, from the series liThe Longest Cleanup, II Sept. 16-18,2007; reported by David
Shaffer, graphics by Billy Steve Clayton, 102007 Stal" Tribune.)
3
Ramsey County Groundwater Protection Plan - 2009
DRAFT (3/4/09)
1.1 PURPOSE
The purpose of the Ramsey County Groundwater Protection Plan is to act as a centralized policy
and strategy document to require the implementation of protection programs and activities that
the County, cities, and other local units of government will utilize to protect groundwater.
1.2 GOAL
The primary goal of the County groundwater plan is to protect and maintain the quality and
quantity of groundwater resources, now and in the future, by:
. monitoring the status of groundwater quality and quantity in Ramsey County,
. identification of existing contamination, and
. prevention of further releases.
1.3 GUIDING PRINCIPLES
. Groundwater is an essential natural resource for the present and future needs of the
residents and industries of Ramsey County.
. Groundwater contamination and sustainability issues represent severe threats to public
health, enviromnental quality, and economic development.
. Groundwater contamination is a foreseeable problem and preventing contamination is the
surest and most cost effective method of protecting groundwater quality, public health,
and economic viability.
. The only way to manage a vital resource like this is to periodically check on its baseline
status.
. Proposed initiatives should be tangible and verifiable.
. No other agency provides this service and Ramsey Conservation District is the unit of
local government with the capacity to take on this responsibility.
4
Ramsey County Groundwater Protection Piau - 2009
DRAFT (3/4/09)
1.4 USES OF GROUNDWATER
Groundwater is used by approximately 15 to 20% of Ramsey County residents for their sole
source of public or private drinking water. The following table shows water sources by city:
Blaine
Gem Lake
Mounds View
New Brighton
North Oaks
North St. Paul
Saint Anthony
Shoreview
Spring Lake Park
Vadnais Heights
White Bear Lake
White Bear Township
Arden Hills
Falcon Heights
Lauderdale
Little Canada
Maplewood
RoseviIle
St. Paul
The St. Paul Regional Water Service derives its most of its' drinking water supply from the
Mississippi River, but 10% of all the water they provide, several billion gallons, is groundwater.
Also, thousands of residential homeowners, industrial users, and several mobile home
communities located throughout the County, rely upon their own private wells for water supply.
1.5 THREATS TO GROUNDWATER
In Ramsey County, the most significant threats to groundwater quality come from the following:
.
Numerous current and past land-use activities threaten the quality of our groundwater
resources, the public's health, and the economic stability of businesses, communities and
cities. A preliminary search identified more than 10,000 existing and potential sources of
contamination documented by the MPCA, within our county borders. These included
known releases as well as underground storage tanks, hazardous waste generators, etc.
Known groundwater plumes that spread downgradient.
Unused residential and commercial/industrial water wells that can be a "path of least
resistance" for spreading contaminant plumes by virtue of the open borehole.
As yet undetected contaminant releases and how they may have already impacted
groundwater.
.
.
.
5
Ramsey County Groundwater Protection Plan - 2009
DRAFT (3/4/09)
Aquifers cannot protect themselves from becoming contaminated and the cleanup of polluted
groundwater is technically challenging and expensive. Only well-conceived and coordinated
land-management efforts and monitoring can ensure the protection of our important groundwater
resource. Our Technical Advisory Committee emphasized that while surface water is monitored,
groundwater data collection and assessment is not currently performed.
,
I
g Because we currently lack groundwater resource monitoring, we know very little about the
I status of our groundwater. The greatest risk to Ramsey County's groundwater is from all that
I we do not know about this vulnerable asset that we take for granted.
l
What is the greatest threat to groundwater in Ramsey County?
1.6 GROUNDWATER CONSERVATION
Conserving groundwater is a significant issue for a densely populated county like ours. Ramsey
County is the only county in Minnesota that uses more groundwater than infiltrates back to the
groundwater within the boundaries of the county (Figure 1-2). This relationship is due to
Ramsey County's small size in comparison to its population. Less surface area means less
recharge compared to population. This means that based on population, we withdraw more
water in comparison to other counties. If surrounding counties were also in this situation, it
could cause groundwater scarcity.
That having been said, Ramsey'County is not faced with a pending water scarcity. The
Metropolitan Council has stated that our groundwater supplies are adequate.
6
Ramsey County Groundwater Protection Plan - 2009
DRAFT (3/4/09)
2005 Net Water Use as a Percent
of the Renewable Resource
Net Water Use as a Percent
of Renewable Resource-
<25
25.5{}
.50.15
.75-100
.,,00
Note, this map provides a county-scale
assessment and is not designed for
site specific decision makin9_
Figure 1-2 Net water use (Source: Metropolitan Council)
In 2008, the Minnesota State Legislature passed Minnesota Statutes, section I 03G.291, subd. 4.
This requires that by December 2010, metropolitan public water suppliers serving more than
1,000 people must employ water use demand reduction measures, including a "conservation rate
structure", before requesting approval from the commissioner of health to construct a public
water supply well or requesting an increase in the authorized volume of appropriation.
Conservation rates are water prices that increase with increased consumption volume.
7
Ramsey County Groundwater Protection Plan.- 2009'
DRAFT (3/4/09)
1.7 LOCAL RESPONSIBILITY FOR PROTECTING GROUNDWATER
Groundwater contamination is a local problem. Water supplies are provided locally either by a
homeowner, community, business or a local unit of government. Contamination sources in
Ramsey County are within a short vertical distance of the aquifers which they can potentially
impact. A program for protecting groundwater is necessary for Ramsey County. The roles of
various environmental agencies are fully defined in a document called "Water Resources
Management in Minnesota" and included in Appendix A.
Who Protects Groundwater?
.
Envoronmental Protection Agency - sets standards/reporting
Department of Natural Resources - water appropriation permits/observation wells
Minnesota Department of Health - well construction/sealing/supply well
monitoring/wellhead protection
Minnesota Pollution Control Agnecy - contamination cleanup/USTs/hazardous waste
permitting
Board of Water and Soil Resources - set planning requirements
Metropolitan Council- regional water supply policy
Watersheds - historically: surface water focus
Ramsey County - county-wide groundwater planning delegated to the Ramsey
Conservation District
Cities - supply water/wellhead protection plans
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
Isn't there another regulatory agency doing this already?
'.~iVo p.
Minnesota Pollution Control Agency - Investigates known releases & limited ambient
groundwater quality monitoring
Department of Natural Resources - Tracks groundwater use and levels
Minnesota Department of Health - Regulates well design code
Metropolitan Council- Regional water supply planning
Minnesota Geological Survey - Maintains County Well Index database
St. Paul-Ramsey Co., Dept. of Public Health - Permit/inspect hazardous waste facilities
- Protects vital local groundwater supply
,
The MPCA Ambient Groundwater Monitoring Program, reestablished in 2003, currently
monitors one Ramsey County well in the unconfmed aquifer and seven deeper Prairie du Chien
wells in North Oaks. The MPCAs program is currently unfunded. This Plan recommends that
8
Ramsey County Groundwater Protection Plan - 2009
DRAFT (3/4/09)
more be done on this issue. There is no regulatory agency which fully coordinates state, federal
and local policies relating to groundwater protection. A void exists that calls for additional local
groundwater protection.
1.8 PROTECTIVE MEASURES
Ramsey County and its' partner organizations can implement the initiatives included in this
Groundwater Protection Plan and greatly reduce the threat to the quality and quantity of
groundwater used by municipal and private well owners. Several regulatory agencies have
groundwater protection as part of their mandate, but there is currently no state or local agency
that has local groundwater protection as its mission. The initiatives proposed in this Plan can
close those gaps.
Cities that provide water to their residents are required to generate Wellhead Protection Plans
(WHP plans) and submit them to the Minnesota Department of Health (MDH). These WHP
plans fill a different role than this Groundwater Protection Plan. They require cities to delineate
a wellhead protection area around their wells and locate potential sources of contamination.
However, little in the way of active groundwater protection activities are required. These are left
up to the water provider.
Some cities in Ramsey County have completed Wellhead Protection Plans and the others must
wait to begin the process until the MDH has the necessary staff time. Cities have indicated that
any assistance RCD could render, with regard to their Wellhead Protection Plans, would be of
great help. Taking a county-wide approach would also be more effective because aquifers
transcend local boundaries.
The Minnesota Groundwater Protection Act of 1989 emphasizes the importance of protecting all
the groundwater resources of Minnesota. Metropolitan county groundwater planning was
initiated in response to concerns that more local involvement was needed to adequately protect
groundwater resources from contamination. Prevention and early detection of contamination
are the safest and most cost-effective methods of protecting groundwater.
Local governments possess several regulatory controls such as planning and zoning, licensing,
inspection, permitting, and inspection. In the publics' best interest, cities, watershed
management organizations, the Ramsey Conservation District, and Ramsey County departments
and agencies should use these tools and other measures to help protect the public, their
groundwater resources, and their economic viability.
The Groundwater Protection Plan has specified a variety of programs and activities that protect
groundwater in Ramsey County. A proactive and cooperative approach between cities, county
services, watershed management organizations, as well as regional and state agencies is
emphasized in this Plan. Roles and responsibilities are recommended in Chapter 5 of the Plan
for the implementation of the groundwater protection programs and activities.
9
Ramsey County Groundwater Protection Plan - 2009
DRAFT (3/4/09)
r is ta gnnwdwaterjust(fied? 1
I Compared to the complexity and cost of groundwater contamination incidents, groundwater I
m protection is a fairly straightforward and economical effort. Local groundwater protection is a ill
i multi-pronged process and several groundwater resource protection initiatives are outlined in theJ
lPlan.
10
Ramsey County Groundwater Protection Plan - 2009
DRAFT (3/4109)
1.9 INITIATIVES TO PROTECT GROUNDWATER
. Stormwater infiltration
ould be directed away from
ntaminated soils.
ontinuous groundwater
elevation data collection
program.
8. Support open space or land
use easements as mechanisms
I that protect groundwater.
. Fund sealing of unused
ell cost-share program.
11
Ramsey County Groundwater Protection Plan - 2009
DRAFT (3/4/09)
1.10 AUTHORITY
Minnesota Water Law Statute g103B.255 enables metropolitan counties to prepare, adopt, and
implement county groundwater plans.
Ramsey County. Resolution 90-294 delegated responsibility for preparation of a County
groundwater plan to the Ramsey Conservation District.
Ramsey County Administrative Code Section 4.60.00 Public Health
Items excerpted from 4.60.30 Duties and Responsibilities
d. Develop and revise ordinances necessary to protect the public health and environment;
e. Protect the environment through the implementation of plans, through education and
consultation, and through compliance monitoring and enforcement of ordinances;
i. Recommend the development of comprehensive public health policies and to advocate
for the application of public health principles in County policies;
I. Take a leadership role in setting standards for the provision of public health services in
the community.
Ramsey County's taxing authority for groundwater planning:
Minnesota Water Law Statute Sl03B.255 Subd. 13. Property tax levies.
A metropolitan county may levy amounts necessary to administer and implement an
approved and adopted groundwater plan. A county may levy amounts necessary to pay
the reasonable increased costs to soil and water conservation districts and watershed
management organizations of administering and implementing priority programs
identified in the county's gr.oundwater plan.
12
Ramsey County Groundwater Protection Plan - 2009
DRAFT (3/4/09)
1.11 TOP 10 REASONS TO PROTECT GROUNDWATER
Starting at the top:
10. Stormwater and surface water, like lakes and streams, are all connected to groundwater.
9. Everyone shares the same groundwater resource.
8. Between 15-20% of Ramsey County residents are completely dependent on groundwater
for their drinking water.
7. Groundwater protection is cheaper than groundwater cleanup.
6. Today's contaminated groundwater will be in tomorrow's drinking water.
5. Groundwater is a limited resource that will only become more scarce in the future.
4. Who doesn't favor clean water?
3. A valuable resource is worth maintaining.
2. Planning for groundwater protection raises public awareness of the issue.
\. Ifwe don't, who will?
I3
Ramsey County Groundwater Protection Plan - 2009
DRAFT (3/4/09)
1.12 ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS
This plan would not have been possible without the contribution of the planning committees.
The Ramsey Conservation District thanks all of them for their advice and recommendations.
The planning committees met three times between September and November of 2008. Financial
support was provided by the organizations (bold) listed below.
District Administrator: Tom Petersen, Ramsey Conservation District
Groundwater Plan Coordinator: GeoffNash, Ramsey Conservation District
Technical Advisory Committee
I. Bob Fossum Capitol Rel!;ion Watershed District
2. David Kotilinek City of North St. Paul
3. Mark Maloney City of Shoreview
4. Michael MacDonald Department of Natural Resources
5. William O. Gangl Gangl Well Drilling, Inc.
6. Karen Eckman Grass Lake WMO
7. Chris ElvrumlLanya Ross Metropolitan Council
8. Melissa Lewis/Eric Mohring Minnesota Board of Water and Soil Resources
(Natural Resource Block Grant)
9. Bruce Olsen Minnesota Department of Health
10. Steve Thompson/Sharon Kroening Minnesota Pollution Control Agency
II. Janice Reitman Ramsey County Board of Commissioners
12. Terry Noonan Ramsey County-Public Works-Environment
Department
13. Tina Carstens Ramsey-Washinl!;ton Metro Watershed District
14. Doug Thomas Rice Creek Watershed District
15. John F. Blackstone, P. E. Saint Paul Regional Water Service
16. Norm Schiferl/Larry Carlson Saint Panl - Ramsey County Department of Public
Health
17. Stephanie McNamara Vadnais Lake Area Water Management
Orl!anization
18. Lincoln Fetcher Valley Branch Watershed District
14
Ramsey County Groundwater Protection Plan - 2009
DRAFT (3/4/09)
Local Advisory committee:
I. Greg Hoag, Dir. of Public Works City of Arden Hills
2. John Lind, Uti!. Dept. Superintendent City of Blaine
3. Paul Emeott, Mayor City of Gem Lake
4. Heather Butkowski, City Administrator City of Lauerdale
5. Bill Blesener, Mayor City of Little Canada
6. Michael Thompson, Ass!. City Engr. City of Maplewood
7. Nick Fleischhacker, Surface Water City of Mounds View
Spec.
8. lCerrv Thorne, Engineer City of New Brighton
9. Jim March, City Administrator City of North Oaks
10. Deb Bloom/J(ristine Giga City of Roseville/Arden Hills/Falcon Heights
13. Terry Randall, Director of Public City of Spring Lake Park
Works
12. Jay Hartman, Director of Public Works City of St. Anthony
II. Phil Belfiori, Water Resources Spec. City of St. Paul
14. Mark Graham, City Engineer City of Vadnais Heights
15. Mark Burch, City Engineer City of White Bear Lake
16. Joe Fox, Supervisor Ramsey Conservation District
17. John Freitag, Sr. Environmental Spec. Washington County Public Health &
Environment
18. Bill Short, Clerk Treasurer White Bear Township .
15
Agenda Item 5.b.
MEMORANDUM
TO:
FROM:
SUBJECT:
DATE:
Environmental and Natural Resources Commission
Michael Thompson, Assistant City Engineer
Public Improvement Process Overview
March 30, 2009
INTRODUCTION
Staff will be presenting an overview of the public improvement process relating to road reconstruction
projects in order to solicit feedback from the Environmental and Natural Resources Commission on
future coordination and involvement on public improvement projects.
DISCUSSION
The City of Maplewood reconstructs a handful of streets yearly in order to address deteriorating
streets, poor utility infrastructure, lack of storm water treatment, and drainage problems. Each project
is different and is studied to understand needed improvements.
The following is an overview of the ideal schedule for a project slated for construction in 2010:
1. Council adopts Capital Improvement Plan (CIP)
2. August 2009 - Staff Author/zed to Prepare Feasibility Study
3. September 2009 to December 2009 - Staff Works on Feasibility Study
4. December 2009 - PubJic Hearing Conducted
5. December 2009 to March 2010 - Work on Plans and Specifications
6. March 2010 - Council Approves Plans and Authorizes Advertising for Bids
7. April 2010 - Award of Construction Contract
1. The start of the process is identifying neighborhood streets for upgrades in the city's five-year
(CIP). This allows planning for financing of projects typically that exceed $50,000. Streets are
programmed based on surface pavement condition. All streets are given a score from 1 to 100
based on pavement failures such as cracks and potholes, also taking severity into account.
For example the Carsgrove area streets (south of County Road C and west of Highway 61) had
an average score in the 30's. The CIP is updated yearly and adopted by the council.
2. Next the council has to give staff the authority to begin preparing a feasibility study. This
request would be made around August of 2009 for a 2010 construction project. This is when
staff gathers soil borings and conducts the planimetric/topographic survey to come up with the
preliminary design for the roads, drainage, and utilities. A condition assessment is performed
on existing utility infrastructure and a detailed drainage analysis is completed in order to
understand drainage and treatment needs. The feasibility study identifies the associated cost
for the improvement and identifies how the project will be financed. Typically the financing
mirrors that found within the five-year CIP, but is not exact because the CIP is a rough order of
magnitude estimate, whereas the feasibility study cost estimate is more accurate and based on
quantity and unit price information.
3. While working on the feasibility study from September 2009 to December 2009 staff sends out
questionnaires to residents to understand concerns with yard drainage, sanitary sewer service
pipes, or other conditions. This is the time that there is also an opportunity for residents to sign
up for the rain garden and the driveway programs. One or two neighborhood meetings are
then held with residents before bringing the report to council for approval.
4. After the feasibility study is complete, a licensed engineer from the staff signs the report and
presents it to the council for acceptance and calling of a public hearing. The public hearing
would typically take place in December 2009 for a 2010 construction project. Staff must
request that a public hearing be called at least two weeks before the hearing date to allow for
the notice to be published in the local newspaper twice with the last publish date at least three
days before the hearing. The notice also must be mailed to the property owner at least 10 days
in advance of the public hearing.
5. If the council orders to proceed with the project after the public hearing then staff begins
working on the design plans and specification in December 2009. Staff then brings the plans
and specs to the council for approval to allow bidding of the project in March 2010.
6. The award of a construction contract would occur in April 2010 typically at the same city council
meeting as the assessment hearing. This is the last of the two public hearings for the residents
and allows final adoption of the special assessment roll. Similar to the first public hearing, the
assessment hearing must also be published and a mailed notice sent. The notice must be
published in the local newspaper one or more times at least two weeks prior to the hearing.
Notices must be mailed to owners at least two weeks in advance also. Special assessments
currently account for about 30% of project financing.
CONCLUSION
Staff recognizes the importance of input on projects from the Environmental and Natural Resources
Commission. The goal is to produce the best product for the residents within the neighborhood and
the city as a whole. Taking direction a'nd recommendations from the Commission is important in
achieving this goal. The engineering staff looks forward to working with the Commission on future
projects by soliciting ideas and feedback early in the process. It is requested that the Commission
provide input to staff on future project coordination timelines and level of involvement.
2
Ajcn d ~ 'J:te r,\ s. ~,
MEMORANDUM
DATE:
Environmental and Natural Resources Commission
Steve Love, Civil Engineer II
Ginny Gaynor, Natural Resources Coordinator
Stormwater Management Enhancements at Spoon Lake Preserve and
Kohlman Park
March 27,2009
TO:
FROM:
SUBJECT:
INTRODUCTION
City staff is requesting input from the Environmental and Natural Resources Commission (ENRC)
regarding the proposed storm water management features on the Carsgrove Area Streets project
(Attachment 1). There are two feasible locations in the neighborhood for the constructing of
stormwater treatment basins: at Spoon Lake Preserve on the south end of Forest Street, and at the
northwest corner of Kohlman Park.
DISCUSSION
Project Timeline
Maplewood City Council ordered the improvements to the Carsgrove Area Streets on January 26,
2009, which includes reconstruction of existing streets and improving stormwater management. The
City Council has not yet approved plans for the project. On March 18, 2009, staff brought the proposal
for a filtration basin at Spoon Lake Preserve to the Parks Commission. It was clear from this meeting
that a more ex1ensive review process is needed. Staff has revised the project time table to enable this
item to be brought before the ENRC on April 7, 2009 and again before the Parks Commission on April
15,2009. It will then go to City Council for approval on April 27, 2009.
Stormwater Management Proposal
The current drainage system in the Carsgrove neighborhood provides little to no treatment of
stormwater, so any treatment created as part of this project will result in an improved quality of the
runoff waters to Kohlman, Gervais Lakes, and surrounding wetlands. The city's plan is to install two
large filtration basins on this project to provide treatment of water and meet volume reduction
requirements-one at the northern entrance to Spoon Lake Neighborhood Preserve (south end of
Forest Street) (Attachment 2), and the other at Kohlman Park (intersection of Cypress Street and
County Road C) (Attachment 3). Individual rain gardens will be offered to residents to help provide
additional treatment.
Storm water Treatment Requirements
Ramsey-Washington Metro Watershed District (BWMWD) requires reconstruction projects to infiltrate
the first 1" of rainfall over new or disturbed impervious areas. In this case we are disturbing existing
impervious street surfaces and must comply fully with the requirement. This treatment requirement is
in line with current city policies for stormwater treatment and non-degradation goals. According to the
Geotechnical Engineering Report, the soils in the project area have very low hydraulic conductivity
characteristics. These heavy soils do not drain well and infiltration basins are not suitable for the
project area. Therefore the proposed design includes the use of filtration basins. Filtration treatment
methods require approximately an additional 30% of runoff to be treated over what is required for
infiltration treatment methods.
A filtration basin is a planted basin that collects stormwater and filters it through a lose soil media. It
has a drain tile along the bottom of the basin that allows the filtered water to leave the basin after being
treated. Some of the runoff may infiltrate into the subsoils. The basin is designed for water to drain
within 48 hours. Staff met with the watershed district to discuss the proposed stormwater design and it
was decided that the filtration basins would be designed to filter an additional 30% of storm water to
meet the previously discussed stormwater requirements.
Proposed Basin at Spoon Lake Preserve
The Engineering Department is proposing to construct a filtration basin at the south end of Forest
Street in the Spoon Lake Neighborhood Preserve to treat water from Brooks Court and a portion of
Forest Street. Spoon Lake Preserve is an approximately 27.55-acre natural area (Attachment 4). The
proposed basin would require removing trees and grading approximately 0.5 acres located at the south
end of Forest Street. According to the site analysis for Spoon Lake Preserve (conducted by Barr
Engineering, 1999) (Attachment 5), the site is severely degraded ecologically and the native plant
communities have been nearly completely destroyed.
An Interim Management Plan (Attachment 6) was adopted for the Spoon Lake Preserve on November
1, 2000, and included the following items:
I) The Soil and Water section calls for addressing the erosion and storm water coming in
from Forest Street and concerns that that this flow could run into the high quality wetland
located west of Forest Street.
2) The Neighbors and Community section calls for the posting of No Dumping Yardwaste
signs at the entrance near Forest Street since dumping has been a problem at this
entrance.
3) The Pilot Restoration Projects section calls for stormwater management and erosion.
Staff has been working with RWMWD to come up with an innovative basin design to fit in with the
natural aspects of the preserve, meet goals as set forth in the Interim Management Plan, and enhance
the residential entrance to the preserve. The basin at Spoon Lake Preserve will require removal of
several trees so staff would like to discuss the proposal with the commissioners and get direction.
Precedence of Installing Basins at Parks and Preserves
Maplewood has over 50 rain gardens or filtration basins on city land. Many of these are at city parks
and have become amenities for the parks. Basins have been installed at two Neighborhood
Preserves in conjunction with street reconstruction projects. The basin at Prairie Farm was installed
as a wetland/infiltration basin. This was a very successful installation that added great diversity of
native wetland and prairie plants to the site.
Ecological Impacts of a Basin at Spoon Lake Preserve
Constructing a filtration basin at Spoon Lake preserve will require clearing nearly 1/2 acre of trees.
The city is exempt from complying with Maplewood's Tree Preservation Ordinance on public
improvement projects, but staff inventoried the significant trees in the proposed area of disturbance to
determine impacts. The city's tree preservation ordinance defines "significant" trees as hardwoods
over 6" diameter and softwoods (boxelder, elm, silver maple, cottonwood, aspen, willow) over 12".
Significant Trees:
. 19 hardwood trees over 6" diameter (range 6"-15.4")
. 6 softwood trees over 12" diameter (range 12"-18.9")
Additional Non-significant Trees:
. 25 softwood trees in the 6"-11.9" diameter range
. Numerous trees less than 6" were present but not counted
. Numerous dead trees
. Numerous buckthorn trees
2
While there are many trees in this area, this woodland is very degraded ecologically. Most of the trees
are less than 35 years old and aerial photographs from 1985 show the eastern third of the proposed
basin as grassland. Many elms in this part of the site have died from Dutch Elm disease and it is likely
many additional elms will die in the next several years. There is very little native ground cover in this
area.
Enhancements to the Preserve
Rain gardens and infiltration basins have been amenities at other sites because they add diverse
native plants to our parks and preserves. If a basin is installed at Spoon Lake Preserve, staff
recommends that we go beyond seeding the basin and:
1. Incorporate the storm basin into the preserve by planting it as a native plant community.
2. In addition to seeding the basin, plant trees, shrubs, and herbaceous plants in the basin.
3. Hire a landscape designer to develop a design for the Forest Street entry that fits in with the
natural character of the site.
4. Re-do the northern entry to the preserve.
5. Explore design concepts and innovative strategies to get the water from the street into the basin.
6. Install 230 feet of graded soft-surface trail to connect the entry to existing footpaths on the site.
7. Fix the existing stormwater erosion at the south end of Forest Street in the preserve.
Staff met with Ramsey-Washington Metro Watershed District and designers from two agencies to
discuss design concepts and supplemental funding for this project to ensure the basin fits into the
natural character of the site. We are looking at 1) innovative ways to bring water into the basin and 2)
whether this basin can be restored as a wooded wetland. Wooded wetlands are now rare in
Maplewood and the heavy soils on this site would be conductive to this type of plant community.
Evaluating Impacts
The south end of Forest Street in the preserve is the only location feasible for creating a filtration
treatment basin for runoff from Brooks Court and part of Forest Street. This project will require
removal of 25 significant trees at Spoon Lake Preserve, in an area that is very degraded ecologically.
If we construct a filtration basin at this location, staff proposes going beyond just seeding the basin and
restoring it with native trees, shrubs, and herbaceous plants. Staff requests that Environmental
Commission weighs the environmental impacts of no stormwater treatment vs. removal and replanting
of trees.
Kohlman Park
On the Carsgrove project, the Engineering Department is also proposing a filtration basin at the
intersection of Cypress Street and County Road C, at the northwest corner of Kohlman Park. The
proposed basin would lie between the roads and the existing basketball court and parking lot. A rain
garden was constructed in this area in 2001 and planted by neighbors. The soils do not allow water to
infiltrate at a rate that typical rain gardens require. This has caused water to pool in the rain garden
killing many of the original plants. Cattails have taken over the wettest parts of the garden. Rain
gardens are typically designed to capture and treat the first flush of stormwater runoff by infiltration.
The current rain garden is working more as a flow through with a permanent shallow pool of water.
The proposed basin would remove and replace the existing rain garden with a filtration basin. The
location was chosen due to grade limitations and the existing drainage patterns. The runoff flows north
along Cypress Street from the intersection with Connor Avenue to a low point at the intersection with
Knollwood Drive. Drainage from Knollwood Drive also is collected at this low point. The runoff is then
discharged to the existing rain garden and flows into the ditch along County Road C. As this entails
the use of the edge of the park land, staff would like to discuss the proposal with the commissioners.
3
RECOMMENDATION
Staff requests that commissioners discuss the proposed filtration basin for Spoon Lake Neighborhood
Preserve and make a recommendation on whether the project design should include a filtration basin
at this location at the northern entry of the preserve or whether the stormwater should go untreated.
Staff requests that commissioners discuss and provide feedback on the proposed basin for Kohlman
Park.
Attachments:
1. Map of project location
2. Spoon Basin infiltration basin design
3. Kohlman Park basin design
4. Map of Spoon Lake Neighborhood Preserve
5. Spoon Lake Preserve Site Analysis by Barr Engineering Company, Fall 1999
6. Spoon Lake Preserve Interim Management Plan (Kushlich Property), 11/01/00
4
Atlc:tc..hmCU1t2.
.,,-.;;-,~
~y".
<.
f:"' ,'~
t1~"-\;'
~ .:~'. .
~ ~.';'::,~:., :.--<,
,..,
. ,';::,. , ;.' 't~~f'..~:... ..i~~.~.~."t>.;.:.. ~'~-.',;~0r.~,..~~:.~.t~....~~.~.!\,.:~.-
:-r"';<>.:~.,..~".~~~'.~,:{ _ _ _" - "_ _ ~ . ~F '
....::::.... _ ,,_ ;~"'_.:.,'<:_ ._'-", --".:"'" '" ~n~ "" ~'"i~\'.
;, ~.- -
.-,~~.:_~:.:
~." ,:';,:.; " '.. ...... 1"
..
','
.... - "-'---'-?l~~~~'~-'-:"'--~ - "',, '1"" i'" \ J ~r~ J' :<..-;,':',';., i~
:i .~~.: ~,~~,~-'~';.:.~';l.', -, -;i2~::.;;~/:~ -/ .~;, .~>~". '.._>(~~~ -:-r:rA~~$~;?:.~ ~
I. >~1>\~~'" ,/(' "'~_ -f l!:~ l.'~ "',.' 'l ~fJtJ'''f' , ...r~l "
, ~ ..~\"",~, ':1:..: .,., : 1_' k~7~} ":~?J'~ > ';.' _n~l ""
~ ,~_. ~,~.-< -_.:::,.~_.- ~' ,\t'o....,,: v." '. - -"'...... ~_').,.... \-:~. .;
~ ......--..,.,>;-'<-<., I..~"- ~~. ~\ '''''. .st...,..:."" 'J.'~' .7f1;""A"'4~~-~ 1
,:_::~'~<:' .;'~~'~',....\";:' _~.... I-..\?'.}!~'.(...~~.: ',""~~",,,~ ~1-:' < ~J'
'-~,"'~;:"K:~-" <':.\.r",~ "_-;~\;(""",,. -.~../'~;"t""~. ,:; ;,-,.........,~;~., _or... "'-''\i'~' -
.._.~.iS";- >I.'~~:;'~ . -:.I.' "....'.....,'>:'" ,,~'I'.:~.~-
~.~ .K,........ -'''1:/ Ji>~ \' ~ ' "'i(. ~._.... ~ ,,: ~k"'-';;:
."'~,'~ ~~ '}:d ...<-;.;.. "" " ~,~ . ~"<..-1"::- ,- ... '.t ~'A ....'.
I. ~~.... ,.."..,,,~ ,.lt~/"'" ~~. ~ - -Ie..... ro' . "":'...j;
. .~" ~,r.,"~ r ';.... ~-.' -~ ~,-
~~;'J~'j;,~~' t^ ->';{.<~i, .<~~ : :o,.;..._:.L'" -;:~.~} ~~"'...' . "'\. ~ 0'
~~\~ft:<:~~~,;e~:~~~.'.~. "'. :.?~~'_,~~,:::~~~f '# 1~. ~': :t~~~ t __< '. >. :,~~~..t
,..,~..r1;,~:~..:;"'--;,':\".'A.';""",~~.,.;.,,~,;:--,- ........'.~ .\.~~::!".j-.!>,..._-...,'{'rf;;':'~-':-';;' ~ .:}~'f" '1""",~ ~ "~' ':I-
.:~~~~2::";::":.I:.~:,:)L:;::'{:{'(';f':;<?:':',__---,c'i:~;~Jt~~'f~~~;t~jt\.:~\::i~. 'O\.Jr~7.~70' ':t ,'l . '"
&~:"'''';'-'-'''' :")" ,#,j~~. ...~-:t~--:~. .',....'"...........,._;':.\~~..":~!-..!'f);;'~;.:iq.~~'''\ ". ''''':,r" ~ 0 "i" ' .... i<'
;.1r~~~" ~&&'~{?j
~:~~J1~'i{~~lk
,.
~ ,
""
"
\,'; " ,"t...".l i
"'/-~~4
J~'~~~~>';. .' '. ,::, './7'
,,'l(;\, '.. ,....., .y..
C. ~~~,,.:~.t1:~"l'i-iP<., .~<;' ':"~"'i
. ..'..'.., '" t.'J:''.i,;''-.".-}'. "-+'''''~$;'-
;~~it~'~
.......fV;f'~:.::,:\
YI..'; ~:r.1 ;,.~....'.rl
~':;, '~,~' I: -',
?' "'~"
rl .;'f ',.-f i
.L;f' :2;' ,-'
',.".-
'",':j. ',.',
,---:,,):.::'.
,~
"
~-',
". .
;==~=-~~~~,",.-.'~.;,~-~~=~~>>
,,-_..--_.__._-,--~----
FOREST STREET
""C ~,.,
~
--(f)-
FOREST STREET
INFilTRATION BASIN
)rm1
o
'''''.ffi< <<"1.... "~llM~..... "'" City of MspJewrxxi
'.0"''''''''''''""''''..''''''''
,...,""........,.....""',....., ~EPARTMENTOFPUBUC WORKS
W"~~,:,~g'
ENGINEERING DIVISION
"~Vl-" IT. UJV'- ~.l--, P.U!. ,""""""eo..->\y_a
-" _..-."'.....mo ~",.
.."'~IX_""-~ ("5') 2'9_~'ro r.... {6SI} 2'9-2'1)9
OOOO[~~~~J
CARSGROVE MEADOWS
COUNTY ROAD C
0 :$ Kohlman
a . Park
I-- a I-- .
PALM (j) :s: IJ) 0::::
~ ---l Manufactured 0
CT. ---l I-- IJ) 1 Housing
'? {\'-~ a IJ) Estates
Z 0 W 2
Y: 0:::: 3
CIR ':\':>.OR 0... CO
CONNOR CO~ \>-'-1S. >- 4
u
J CT. DEMO~I AVE. .
I--
I-- IJ)
(j) w &
w
0:::: -.J ~
0 BROOKS w
0
lL. CI. <( l..t..J
SEXTANT 0:
AVE. .$ GER
EXHIBIT 1
PROJECT LOCATiON MAP
VOIS
e
~O~
~
p Iqtjlr:
2
~
_ PROPOSED STREET IMPROVEMENT
Capital Improvement Project for 2009
Carsgrove Meadows Area Street Improvements
City Project 08-10
0~
I--
(j)
[!J
AtliU'\IU clh t 1-
1-
/'
-----
_='.~5~~_c~)"g
-~5~----- ~k
, _-'C;;''-i-'-
~~-~~-
~.- ---
,
, ---
I'-
I
~-
"
,
r
'6 --
~
_ _-=-=:::~II\i"--;---
--;:8---
"'---
"
---- '
-'~'I/8----c::--
_',"::0>-
2 - ---
-~/
~~
,~ .~~---
---~:::~~~~~----- -
-- -
~
_,/085__ ~
~.~=. ~~-.~-
.- ~ ~~-_--o _. ,,__ - '0__ ,~k
_________...... .....____, 0,...-1--- I
-... " 1II_
" " ~
-- - '--, "
" \ .. 1I
'\ \ ;0. ~
\)
_ui:i I ~
\~'"
~~S- _ ~ ~
\./ . ..,,- ..... ~~_.... .
_--}\"3d _.~- --\
\/" "'''"."'~
--~:~
\ ,~
'\' g
-to*- ~ ~.~'
.c-,~""C
!~__., kO.o<l~\!_;:.-"l;.-,t'
~ ~O(13\: ,/\
.... 0 j\\~ /'
"J,fF"{} //
~
J~
M
i3~
.~
'1.
~"
:zel
"
""
0"
~~
~5
jij2
!"g
o
,
Si
!1
I
" r-
~.~ ..'68-------
~~~~ j~~ ~@~ ~;;~ ~
~g~~ ~~m ~g.... ~"'m~ ~
gb8~ ~g~ gd~ ~~~
~ ~~~D m5~ ~~~ ~~g
~ ~~~~ z~~ ~~~ ~~~
'~g~ ~Y.l~ :"m;ll g~~
~ "'n~ ~a.... "'~ ,_~
F ~~~ g~~ ~~ ~~~
i F~~ ~~~ r~ '" ~
"g~; mzX ~~~ ~~ ~~~
L :~~ "'os lilY' pE~
!1!~"; "'0f'1~:::;I a:J ~;!;",
!iP"ili . <l ~;g -<
~ c: J';.....'" ~'"' i'il';~
",,,,m ~"'.... 8~ illill:..
;~E ~!jji ;;;:>< "'~
~~ ~ . ~o ~o ~
Glllill '" ,-, '"
~!;?UI Iii ~ ~
of':lJ ,... -
:;):15 2 ~
0"'''' -,
..,~~
~~
~~~oUOZ~~^~_~o~~onm~3
"0
~F.3
~
<i1Jil
.-
o.
1~
""
".
<"
~jJ
~~
0'
~:
6~
'.
~~~ 'j5f2<;
i":;?~ 5~;;l
g~ ~~;
~Jil ~Jil~
",g "'~;;!
E~ ~~'"
~'" r:-~~
<i1 "'01
!ilili li!~g
~':l ~~'"
i"~ ~.!';
@:: ~5!~
~g ~8~
.."
~~8
~~~
5"''''
z~d
m...."
gi:l~
~~g
g
-,
'c
~~
::!gol
QQQ
0,
'0
/,
"
o
m~~~iii$~~g*iim~&~&~~
g8888g8ggggggg~~~~~~i
~
o
s
~
o
mOOOL~J
CARSGROVE MEADOWS
'H'"....WI1lFYn"Tn.~"W<'''s
"""''''ED "'"''''' ""'"",,,. """"
"''''''''''''''.""'''''',.""A OOCY
ucrnsmp-="'......"""',,."""'"
""',..""",-"'" "''',,"'""'''''''''''
Cit;yofMaplewood
*DEPARTMENTOF PUBLIC WORKS
~ ENGINEERING DIVISION
~ ,a30Eo.1Cou'lyRoodB
""'p.._....i"".....,SSI09
(0"') 24'_2400 FAX (S~') ~49' ~<09
FOREST STREET
INFILTRATION BASIN
)~OO
llB
'"'
,',
Sl...<~ ... UN'. P.... p.L.s.
"'l"E~l':E'''<''''_J.lID
AfuchllWfl' 3
Kohlman Park c
1000 CORD C
4.81 Acres
Apr 11, 2008
i
i'l~~~
I
~
/
!
f
~.
~
SE:E:SIiE:P . ~
, Xx
CYPf?tss
STRE:t:r _
x~<c~~~o~oz~rX4_~o~~onm~~
--
~J_
~'--
~
i
i
,
!
,
",
"'\..
''''-
-'''-,
"
m
Gia
i:\x
~~
FZ
n~
o~
c^
~
~
,
,
"
'".
~~~ !~.
;~
g@
O.
<~
~~
.,
'x
~6
::!d
~"
"
"
"
/
/"
liit:l
"m
m.
""
S~
''\,
"
"
,
"
"
,
"
"\.
,
"'\.
,
'\"
~~
z"
gg
~Iil
~~
~o
>0
52
XI;;
,
."'-
''\,
"
,
-"""-
,
,
c?0
0\1 / /
!~~ ~~~~ ~
f"~~ ~~:~
g~ ~~~~
1il; 1'5gg
mg ~~~;
Qg ,..,.
5'" ~U'@~
z~ o:gg'iil
:~ ~~~f
~3 g~~ u
::!d Gl:g1 M
@'" l>
~~~
"':~
~g
~Cl
/
/
/
'8a:~:8:::::~;O;.;Qb: ~
~~~~pr~~~d~~~~::!~~~~~~>
O~,.M o,.~C~,.-ZM~_ZOZO~~
~Q~~ ~~~:~~~~:~~~8~~~o
~gMQ ~~ ~~~a~g~a~a~d~
~"'M~ ~~~~~~~~~"'~Fp~~"~
o~~~ ~~~~~~"''''~6",,,,Q'@o~~
~om ,. r",~ ~60 ~5 mom.
~ ~,. a~~'m"rM~fflFM"POCl~
~~~~ ~~~~:~~5;~m5~~~"'~
~<"'r ~o~ ~g<~c~m~Q~~~~
Ol"'!;!g 1/I11",n ~!Jl"'J;lf;l;;r"!ll f'....:I:
~~~~ ~~~~O~~~ o~~ '" m~
m6~~ Fog~~ Q- ~8- ~ ~~
8~@~ ~~8"'~ ~g ~~~ ~ ~~
~~~8 ~~o: ~ g 8~ ",Im 6 M~
~~,~ ~ ~ ~Q b~Q ~ o~
~~~~ ~ 0 ~~ ~~~ j z~
~ 0 ~ ~ ~~ ze~ ~ ~
~ ~ ~ g\!! "'\1l
~z ~z !\!
"
."
,"0
_\/ r;;
o~~/
e:.f. _-,J~/
0- / \."
~ ,- ~/.'
~lQ
"m
"I,
S~
,.
/g~
<"
gg
~~
0<
~:
52
/"'Iii
/
//
/
/
//
n
"
-<
~
~
"
~
n
~
o
rn
'.
o
/
"
<
o
/'
:10rm1~(
jJ iLiliu
lrm1
U
CARSGROVE MEADOWS
'"EIi""'<:rn1IJY'"'T""'....."'"
.'''',,"EO Ir<.' """"""'.... ~R<CT
5UP"""''''"....''"'''...AO...'
,."""...."""""""-""""""""rn'R
"""",,,,0'''''''''''/1:0'''''"='''-
City ofMapJewood
.DEPARTMENTOF PUBLIC WORKS
':'< ENGINEERING DlV1SION
~ "~~~o~IM~":,~.-1,;~9
(651) 2<9-2<00 ~N/. (651) 2'9~2<09
CYPRESS STREET
INFILTRATION BASIN
~'tvtN ". lIJYt, P.t., P.Ls,
o.m:=U<<_",^~
Alhe-hY\'1(lVlt 3
\
/
/
i
~
i
~
I
!
,
i
!
,
,
@
@
_ __ "<1 J -
\
")J
"'
r__ /1;;
.... /"
/4 ~
4 <
:$ ~
r
.,ue' /<,
/'/
:;/
/'//
('"
,
~
o
"
-<
~
~
e
~
o
~
o
m
~
o
~OOOLJ(
~
.~
~
P
P .'
-r-::---
,:?'
~~
p;<<,\5')~
P' .
354_
^
~O
."
~r
~<
Z.
OZ
r~
O.
~~
^
4
/
/,//
f'':<, '
./
J/f'./
i~ i~ ~ ! B "r"'<'_"'<>"""H'n..,.~
O. O. o~ .z o~ > ~ >
g~ g~ .. .' ^' ~g . 0
1?ieJ E; ,. ". 5 i
,. ,. Om ., >
g~ 0" '.iljll ~~ on " ~
,~ ~~ ~~
p p 0
00 00 O' ,,~ iil..:: ~ "
:m :~ ~i m .
~; cl~ .. .
o. Z .
::'i'1l 'ill!! Co m. ~~ . i
0< 0< ~~ i .. "
,0 ,0 '5
~!!i ~~ .' .. 8~ - .
~~ ~~ ~E ;;jY> 0 . .
o~ < 0
m. . 0 0
~ 0
o~ h t~ " 0
0 .
'F . '" < .
i 00
~ ': ;; .
.
E~ 0
~ 0 ~
" " 1Ja
0 &~
~ <
0 00
.'
. ..,,~
CARSGROVE MEADOWS
)~'Ii
L-
,'i
CYPRESS STREET
DRAINAGE SWALE
,
\
,
"
"
\
,
,
~
o
--.--
r HE'''.... 'EIiTlFYn~T"'" ""'"....
"I"',,"'" "'U,",""". "'''''''CT
~~"]:j;,,~l's.JJm.'~':',?.1.0<.
_"''''",TlfE''''''''"',,"''''''''
City of Maplewood
*DEPARTMENTOF PUBLIC WORKS
"" ENGINEERING DIVISION
~ ISJOEo.lCo""I1Ro.dB
l.loplo..ood....;.".""to !.Slog
(M'l249_24OO FAA (65.> 2"~2409
SIC'"" ... UN". ~-<.. P.l."
"""~UCEN'.",,..ftllll
fitlC(JH"'€V1T :5
t<.,.,\~G N<1-A
~ .~
~ ~
~ g
<.)
M/((cni'Vlrmt 4
Spoon Lake Preserve c
NE of Spoon Lake, S of Brooks & For
~ Acres
Apr 11, 2008
I~j
'TI
III
~
<0
<0
<0
~ t;;.[~s3
g.~~'8~
~ ::;J '" ......"'<l
p..e~.~ S-
@ ..........'< fI>
~8.~g,~
~ g..g ~ ~
<l'S-e..., t:i.
(\I ~ cr' 0 ft
~ 8.~ ~Ei'
~ ~ ~ e ~
g.e 0 ::;J ~
~ "'! g. & Pi
n'2.g,~
g!"ag'8"
~ ~~ g,1
,?. ~o ~. a g,
,; ~. S'''' ~
.'g.~l!.
g. '" S'$. ~
~ t;' P (ll
'"
~
o
....
(;,)
":u;;-,-"'"
'~.'~" "'.""",;k"",,wJ:;!,1;,,;,.;,,,,,..-,,,,~,"""~:.l~'-,,:,'C:,il;!:CA~~'~T" r-"
'.,,-,,'-~\~m', ,:.~ ~,'~:Sl ':',n<:I.t~,'--"'~:Ei'!-~r.'I!:\,;:,\,'g[~'';C~" ',::_,7:'l_""'.~~;:~8;:~::<'_~:::...:c.::::' ._
,"\'.:!~V;:~5~8~"";>lewnodl.,"""'n I..ai<e p6~
a~~~~g~b
fi> 0 '" tI> 0 tr't) n
~ s-::;! '" EI 0 ....
~(ll~l:Pa....,gQ)
a~f'lS&~~ g
o (/:I .... e:- C1l tr
l:j ~ g (ll p.. ~ ;;;. ::J
g-!P ~~1i~g
l:I "'1 (II '" !5: 0-, J:1.
ogQ~~~8.
~;; l-tI!1l t;i' &. S'
g R- \=;:' S'::;J @
~ ~ l3 S'!l ~
.....~ J;J ~ 0 e:..
'" 0 O"'t:j ....,
~g~ge:l~
~ljgl:j~'E..
~g.~~~~
g:~~ ~ ~ 0
(b It S el . ::
~'"O'O [. ~
s H'5- ~
(Jq Ill..... (ll
g, ~ ~ it" ~ !}'S. ~ g' " (JJ
g.p..~ "'i~a ~~~ ~::+
~ ~ ~ [s~ [go a 13 '" S CD
~:(F.lo""otl>~..oB~g ....
fl' (ll p..g."t:I ~ p..l=" ....~..... '-"
!,,$l)oB<;a~~ g,C'I)
,.~,",~~go:gL::u>
~_@::aWg.~o.,.~n
8S,~sa."i}!l'o:!.
~ (i1 rG g,iil s.o.s'::;! "'C
p.g~g..'o.:;;tO('\lO""
~ ".f' ~ 0:10 ~:;-$. o.
&q_ p~.....,~o
~g,!itgg.~~~~g-::I
0. g. f;- 8 0 0'0 El s:- i:i
8~.g~g:sall'~'E..
8 [~.~.~~ ~&'g.[
~~::t'~i:lg.l>>'dg~
oo.~a.g'~uit~.sg.
~ S e ~ 0-; tl> q:j: .... tr.l ('\I
g...., ~. l:i" p.. ~ 0 ~ l:::: <f.I
o(ioo'~D:~..:jag,
5 JiljS ~ g,v '"g jS'"g I:!:.
"0 "'_~..o r.".'
I=T' fD '" 0 J:T 0..... . l=l '"
0.. ::E (ll '"
g ~ ~ ~. J;t. ~t"
0. '" ('\I f;;'
~
)>
n
iil
u>
,@ ~ ",. c:
"d &. ~- (ti> ::J
o ~ ::!l.::;! _.
". Po" S .c
Jg'o..w I>> C
s:.>i i~ CT>
~!:l !a 0 II
.5'a;~CD
g; 1;l:;'1=t m
"d y 0 (II ,....
If~.g'g c
.... S'-(Jq ~ a
~ ff".g ~ t/I
a l5 ~ ~
~ti~
. pc '< Po
~s,!f
l! 'd 0
~ ~i
Po ~ 0
~.l:J fa
:=:Sg.
.
o
"
~.;;l 51 C/) ~IU &' li~~Qir~ ,g';;lZ O'S'(8'" 8 ~'l1'g,'g
~~p 0 o . CD ~ r .g g ~ 0. &. ~ g-
o -. o ~ ~ ti' ~ 0..\5 8"0 _0
d!iiil o Po! c ~ ~ u:l ~ g . Si' p. go g t:I g, I::l
"~Po .a:"o g ::J P~~g;ag~g. . ::r ~ ~1l,8.. g.!:r (II ~ qtl 0 g,
s.... ll' (\I C. fooq,....Ps=-o P' ~ ti 'l1 ,,'< so ~ ~ o-l" so
!:rg.~ . S 8 tr ~ '" l:i" a
so-o ',j ~~g Dl g'~o'eli'I'asg' S' 0 o ~ g. a-: G (Dv 0. If ~. Cll
. ~ ~ :S P> ~ l:l tI.I ;:: (;I ~
~ 'S. 0 g ..:i:! .... q ~ I>> E: Cll !5 S' ... '" 'g :.:;; i'i>_O ~ ~ '0", Cll
~ .. 0. "d' tr g " ::r 5'~ & ("> E? g. A i & e-
. p 0 ~~ P-S m PI t:T'! ~ ::t'f<!' 0.
"'.0 e; ~ Ii';" g ~ lZlq " 0 '"H&~['tlg."g,
~ Po S ~ S. lZl g ::I (\I tr !:f 0 0 g.o
Po~'" :S 0 S'(Jq ('> a, s ~ g-e. o I:l 0.. ~.... e. 0::....
~Q..Gl ~oS~.~ ~ so 0 . S 5'~' tI> 01';
o ~ 0> Ci.g v ~ P- Et 0 a. 0 t:f ~ '0 (Jq 0 II 0
'" W-s. '0 (\I fl' 0 &'" a .....<< ~ ....., I=l ~s-'" '" (l>' 0"0"0
g-<'(l> ~ g'El m ~~2.~~~~~ ~ 0_ 8. (l>,og~"'tc~Orr
~ S g. n I=l (l> ::t ~ = (l> x 0-
~. s..g ~. ::J .....1>>09.0 ocr(l>~
, ~ ~ ::r O"so"'o~~ a l!f~(l> I=l o..ti:'(l> j5;,.....
g ~w ff<< (l>.g a !)l ~CD
l" 3-.0.. 00 (l> 0 3 '\'i ,",,,, so~ g.~ I=l~ s.g,sgg~S'
o >< o se:,"Eisg.~,@
!>>\i a ~ I=l CD -g,~~<[ ",... g. h o' ~ ~ S'[ Po
iO!& H~~ o ~ ~ (ll cr 0
16 >1:l ~ ~llQ (l> ~ 0 g, o..~ el ;-''t:I!:t. g"' ~
o . el 0 el 1:3 ,po
"'0 (11 (l> ~. S::::~crop.~.! I ~ ~ g, ~ ~Ji'~~ ~~.
. 0 Po~"
~; ~~~S-~;:i "'.8 so '" 0 e- 0
~ ~ ~ ft. ~ ~fl5' a~
S. ~ S' ~ 0- g, ~ ~ 8.' ~ il' . 5',..... C\J P;' II> 0-
o ". "" " '";;l' it. 0 ~ a
" so " 0 S 0 "
..",,,
~~~
'S("l;,tI>
. 0 '"
~~;;.
E'~~
~~<":>
:;;.~
. .
~. E:-
, ~
,"co
;.i~
.. ~
. !
&-~
s'iS"
~&
, .
~ ~
15'~
~ ~
. .
~~
g .
,~
~
'"
"
~
~
Jj
:;.
<
..
~
Ei'
'"
U
~.
g-
o
if
~
i
~.
g-g'~ rg g;!!s g O"s~~ ~'g'-I
~.g W~a.~~ g-.~~ g'~TI ~ ::r
a !r-p.5 3 ~~ ~ ~.~is'4~' a
;'8 i;;'~~ s.~ &Jg g gl $"0'0 m
~ ~ f~ t~~,![g-i g~[ ur
m 0....... 0 0.. ~~ '0 g ~ g rt ~.~ Qo
W[~ ~'[(l>~~~.g ~'e-~g. z
o-roo..~ O'~g.qgvO"o'>gCD
;;::;<~(l> ~~~ ~:..,$.g,a[~ ~(Q
OO'd~~ .~s:crET-el"''' m
.....g!EiO-m(JQov...omC\Jg!eEt-.....
8.C! >i::I 0.. 0.. ::;: '" e- '" 1:3 0.. ~ (ll -.
a E:'~O~ Cl g,g.~ ~.ft'~ ~'S-g :::
.... 0 0 (l> Et- t:t> (l> lC!:.' '" <: (l> '" ~...
e..!S: 0 . p.. 0 s:: ::: ;::>"")- """ ("0 ll> .....
5''< W 0 0<1 0.. (l> 0' t::l 1:3 '" 3
p.@",,~~g_.~,"~oPo~.
'O~. eS~~l::l",s.;;g"o
8 vq> ~'<! :. S. a. g' s lIQ e. & i.:i i
go 0 (l> ~ ll> <: ~ S 0 8>'< po If n
g Ii 5 ~ ~?&.g::l!!5 ~ ~g 0 r.t
fl'''O::tv ~.< ~(ll -0.'0 P a.,.
I=l ..../:T <::r' f'l (11 I=!;. 0 t::::...... t:f'.....
o-ge~ET-'S- ~>-f}~~~o
_:;;l (l> (ll ~ 0' 0.. 08. (l> 6"
[g:....l=I>~5. 0
" Po P
A&.chWU?V\t b
"",-,;"."~:,,c::~.-~"-' .., .._.....'"'-"'.-'=~~,_""'.d>'~''''.,,'''-: "'~""',~-:;"-~,',,-"""''''''''aili,''',,::~.
I~i
"TI
III
~
CO
CO
CO
jii1~b'~
Wm3!:
:::!. fij:' 3 :3
~::lglll
::r-g0""2.
gffi:5(j>
..!).!::r::><'
lQ25'
a 0"3
.
gQ~k
~'~ ~ ~
iil ~ g s.
iirQj{l>~
::t.1!:@iir
iifl:i"S
~} g III
.00,
g ~;r
il
N
o
.....
w
p'123\fi2\""~\marl~nlal<<!rli5
oO"'~s,.co""'D
oco!>':sstT
~ U ~ ~'"' ~ c
~g~o.sP.",!!!.
~ p ::i. ~ g..s- (ii :::.
~~~...Qo'd'<
00.0'" is. " If 0
~ g' S:~a a r+ ""'"
S' [~ t;' g.'(6 8~ "'ll
g.o.,...._o p. _
o~ft~8 cD)
i,€';lg,&ha
~ ~.~g-~ sc-~ 0
p.~QI.>O(l1~e,o
~()I &r a g. x g. 3
g e, * e,.g ~
~s g.sc-".1f 3
cEis~15j:;1"'C:
'E- ~ g ~ e,' ~ :;J
o f<i...o... 0 _,
_'d'1j ~ t:r0"' ~
~ ~li"[o.~~ g;'
o r+ ~ .::l en
~ ~~g
o q
"~~~'"-'!'U',,;;l'."'~fU""'=~
~~~~;;o~Z~G')~b'9~~~~
o~o~~~~~i~~~~~nm~
a. lP 9. 0" 0 m'< ::l a. O"::l ~ III c:::>:r;:!.
[g::r~~3g-J:;S!!l::E=r;o;~~~
(j>;o;lQ::><' 'U:::l ::r:;;:~ g (II 5"::>
3 10 5.~ d a.~ s.!!!. 0
~~ g~ 2.. 3
w ;0; 3
c
3
OO;;o"ll'"llOOOJOJUJt:O
~[,a~m~aglf3
~@ ~ffi"5-fr~g.2.~
!;f::l g 10 g: "i' cg. a.
~~* g~ ~~~
(01j~ ~w ....~~
_g: m CD CD
<<~~~oocncn;;IJ"ll~~OUJUJ>b 0
~~~&~~::rro6ro~~lllaw~~Il103
~~~3~~J~c::~ro~i~i~~r3
m~gffilOlll~<~~~7111re3 W 0
~1ll::la.::l~Oro~~rog:lO~ Wm~
~~~~~~~~~~a.~~g a.llli
a~2mE~::lmoo ~~~ 03
a~m ~2.. ~[ ~a= ~
~ ~
o
;;?PS1~pe~~&fi1ciJ;jf'6'S-S;
~i'r:;; g:a a ~ ~.~ s.tg a;; ~~
i5~~~1;;f;;~1;;~g~~,1;;~~1ll
~.~S-Q1'C! ~a;--g 0 CI) iti.a 3 g<Zi'~
:gill ~~~~~!~J:~g.ii1g-
~ 3 o.:<Q ~ g m 0 ~ [} ::3
~. ~o~Ill~~Illi3 lp
.Q g' CI) III
:0
a-
ID'
~~~~~~~~~~
3 W- t:! e- g. i;:' if' 0 ~ 5.
1;;~'s2~33iil~g
5' III CI) {g III g a- iii, t:l. i:l:
~2!g.""CI:::r~3oc:g
~.a2'. a&.~ ~~[}
Cl)3'~. mQla-g'32
lllW iiJ~CI)II>QjJg
il ~ ;;;.~ ~ii1 ~
~~~~C~~O~03~~~~~~
~t!li~&!llii~l~ti
&i 8"Qj:::t'Ro~ a;-~-o ~m&l_a""'::..
o~-o~~gowlm~~oaQj~w
~3B3~w@~CI)i""'-2~~. W-
m2~Qllliilm~a~I%~~1 ~
i<Q~i gS&o.:Jm~& ~ ~
~oQ~ 3....,~c:::3~~m ...., II>
oo~1ll3 olll<;;'(Jjn'~'~~ W
3 g; III "" C;;'
"'ll
~
3.
:J
III
-<
"'ll
iii
:J
-
go,
g u)"
"-
z
.
3
.
'--if:;>
. ~
. 0
H
. <
[
..
B
~
!
il-
.
I
~
.
.
.
.
.'
.
~ t ~ ~ t$l ~ ~ ~ g'
l:i ffiitg-s.! g ~:: ~,.
~~~"S-~ ~f~a~'
:;; ;.~.... g ~ f;;:<;::f (i'
g ~ _It) ~ !.? ::::j:l.. i5!:l; Iii
5:", <;~<Q,::. ~~, ~ g:
~ i}~~1r~'~~'S, J>
~if~ii~!ll
s.f"'\::I~!i't~'~"5 c
F:~~~~~ ~~1 3
't:l ...{l - .., ~ .., ~-
~rr~~~~S;"1r
~.~~~~ s.~ ~~
_"" .... 'l': ~.. ~.t'i t}
~ ~ ~. if ~ ~ ~ ~~
"~~~~<;:..:'"
~~~~~F..s ~~
::! .~~ ~ ~ ~ ~ Sl ~
-<.' ".,."'::::"'::.
~i~~~~~~~
2.ti~"'~~a~
if s- 'I ~ '" 2: ~
....~ ~R~ ~
!t-!'>,.. '<:;
::tis: ;l}l,D'"
~t ~..a:
g;a
"'g
, ,
)~ ii
, ,
, '
A
,
,
,
,
Ii
I -
, '
[i ii
, ,
, ,
Ii Ii
, "
I I
.Ij'
lill
"T1
III
--"
(0
(0
(0
w
o
-0,
w
p:I?;\62"~53\mapl"1l'Oo:l\Spoon Lake llll5
ll'&'.ii ft",[ &. if:J:
~agg ~gC
8gp.~ "'"3
0- Ii ~ .:;! t:t._..... (I>
lIS l;tiP'{lI cg'lj g. S>>
2';5. g- ~ g g :: :::s
~~......g.(11 g..... c:
g 5Q;.<: f" t:l <t
l:l ;;l 0 ~!'"::l '" :=;;. en
.B g~.g [a.lS a.
Sg-p;p."'ft~
~"!!,;Ji..~
'" g',:< r::.g.Sg.
o ~. 1::" tii",< g a
..., <. ;;J 0 l:l
S< (II g. 0 ~ s: ~
g e: E. ~:=;;' c:r l5.
(\>::4(11.........(1>....
8o!;:tg-go!!
t:t.q g- if &to g g
~ g,.g 'El ~ S:~.
. g. ~ 0 ..... ~ 0
(I> <';;g vft (II~ t:l
~. 0 I=l.. 0" P-
et f!l. ~ C S'<<
8. g g. ~.. If
\l .:J
l1. g,~. 8 ~ 0
~t:l<ta~ft
to g;............
~. Q. 8: g- s
~ ~ s.. f!l, ~
~ ~ S' ft tp
(Il It 0 .........
goa~s:-
rf@.:. [~.
~ l:i'~ 8' s-
o 0 .... ~.... g
e. ..., ~ S' c
~!f~~~
- - [..... (Il.
.......... <:
!!l. ft \'II 0
1;.' IT'd ~
s;;J ~ if-.
~ (II.g it ~
S' Cf g-~ ft
(Il (Il P. 0 .
8. ~~. ~E
to g: B: C'" no
o a- t:l tJ> ...
"""ss> e:
g. (I> ("0 g
(I> a '"
:;,
1 i. f ~. i l { ~ i ~_ -0
(I> (b (II J:ll p..(II.,.......'" Dr
(lI tiJ < '" (7' p., <: 8.. iii' ~ ::J
8l>>J~ ~ (Il 0 ;;i.......l:r'm....
t:lt:r'O"g~l:Ig.o8..
~[g~~if"ifs 0
~~~a%i~~~!~
'< (1)'-:>-. o't:l "d P""'O .... 3
"'''ifli~g~"-s'
~ ~ ~ o' ~'"d 5: t:l [(II' s::
m .::t. ~ t:l p.,~ (I> .:;! lIJ'd :::s
s:o"'m.S'(II(jl~gb>_.
!'~ftll'o.s~p.s.~
~~(II!3?sp..l>>g
g:e:~g~8'~~~ ~
g.~Has'na.~
e. tT' i:I l:l" Ef' c.. I:l:I tt 0
~ 8.. g JEl'!:!l ()I (jl g.~'
0. Q.t<i(tlo~~oCl
!'[~~~lsg~.....
~ ~ CI> ~~'ag.s::Po o.
Po 8-.~. ~ S' ~ j:;l 0- g' ::J
~ 0 ? 8. o. (\I g 0
" s:
::l
....
(1)
"'U:::03"3"5"S"Ul ttl 5'''''1
~-3 a:a-:a:Di~ 3 a: 3'
[o~~~~moa
m < (fl (fl co f1l 3 s. co en
,<CO-ca.m-.m<Q='m _.
. n@<D3mg: c-.....
ffi5:~ _~ ~!!?.~5 CD
5'~g3e<<2~S:
:=.cti::lm<D;E ::T
::lUl!:t"OO'"Qg30111
"'6"Q.Ws:::: "'co ::J
<tm"Cn&::l ""'m
=' 6' i3 0 ::rco g- ~ co
2=,(C~011lnoCD
m-.ii303~~D33
o~3.:c' UlO-
::l ...., Ul 3"_ (1)
(C -g . ct: s: __ lU :t
^=' @ CD ffi::l ...
~<Q.. 3 !?l.='~
mil' m ~
~ 8" ~
~:;l
. .
S;f5
~,
. ~
H
~ ~
~[
q
"'~
s. ~
. .
c;'~
" a
~~
H
.q
O'~
e"
, .
.~
'9>"'
.~
..
~
.:,(
':~
~-J
:1
::}
~~
-::i
'.'
j
~-l
:':!
'1
iJ
.;1
it
*1
2.
"
3.
;j 4.
~ 5.
,.
*6:
*7.
8.
, Atfo.(h~4:~f{o .,'
Interim Management Plan
Spoon Lake (Kuslich Property)
11/1/00
The following goals and tasks are recommended management practices to maintain the site until
long-term restoration goals are funded and implemented.
GOALS
1. Ensure that the preserve is a sale, accessible site open to hiking.
2. Prevent spread of spotted knapweed.
3. Prevent invasion by purple loosestrifu.
4. Remove fruiting buckthorn trees.
TASKS
The starred items below are deemed essential
Safety, Access, and Amenities
Preserve signs. Neighborhood Preserve signs should be installed on Keller Parkway and on
Forest Street.
Bike and vehicle IIse. Vehicle and bike use should be monitored and addressed before it
becomes a problem.
Parking. Parking at the Spoon Lake parking lot is currently adequate and a cross-walk is
not necessary at this time. Limited street parking is also available on Forest.
Crime. There have been no reports of crime on this site.
Trails. There are foot trails on this site. It would be nice to clear fallen trees and brush to
make a full loop trail. Once trails are cleared, periodic mowing or brush cutting would help
keep them open.
Trash. Remove furniture, trash, and litter from site.
Tree Fort. The tree fort on the site should be remove<i
Fence. There is a barbwire fence on the interior which should be remove<i A fence along
Keller Parkway should also be removed but this is low priority.
-...... . . ......-....
-......................-.,.-..,..'--.....--,.-
-. ........
.._.._..._-"-,..~.,_.,-_._-'
;
Vegetation Management
;:1
;ji
,1
* 1. Spotted knapweed is minimal but it should be pulled.
*2. Prevent entry of purple loosestife. Begin by removing plant on island and making certain
someone has released beetles in the wetland north ofthe preserve.
3. The site has severe infestations of buckthorn and amur maple. Because these stands are
dense and the soils are primarily fine sandy loams, erosion could be a serious problem if all
exotic shrubs are removed and nothing is planted in their place. It is recommended that
buckthorn and amur maple not be eradicated until we have a plan for revegetation and a
neighborhood volunteer force committed to long-term buckthorn management at this
preserve. If neighbors are anxious to begin buckthorn management, it would be :fine to
remove the fruiting buckthorn without revegetating.
;:1
.~
.:1
',i
Soil and Water
8
* 1. Erosion. Address erosion and storm water corning in from Forest. This flow may be
running into the high quality wetland west of the site.
Neighbors and Community
* 1. Address encroachment by neighbors.
1) Send letter to all adjacent landowners.
2) Follow-up with phone calls, tour, or home visits if necessary.
*2. Post no dumping yardwaste signs at entrance near Forest.
Wildlife
1. Cooperate with Ramsey County Parks in controlling deer populations.
."
Pilot Restoration Projects
;.'
j::
f"
1. Storm-water management and erosion.
2. Yard waste management. Develop \ trials that include methods for neighbors to initiate on
their land as well as use of yard waste on open space sites.
::j
Interpretive Projects
1, Succession and Invasion by Exotic Species.' (Explain histonCa.luse of sife, soil removal and
disturbance, pioneer species on disturbed sites.)
,'i
..i
-r..' .
____"" .. . ..
_ ._~__._._""._._ "._.-"___'..__~--'._:"''o:'':, ,,~~:.::.':,...::..,.~,~:.,-,,;;:;_:..-..:--.-.
.j
.j
THOUGHTS ON LONG-TERM RESTORATION ANi) MANAGEMENT
,
~
;i
This section contains notes and preliminary thoughts about restoration.
Also see recommendations in the site analysis done by Fred Rozumalski, Barr Engineering.
;;j
Thoughts Regarding Long-term Restoration
'~!
[~
This site is eXtremely degraded and will be extremely difficult to restore. Restoration may
prove unfeasible and should not be undertaken until we are convinced we have a good chance of
succeeding. Neighbors love this preserve. We need to highlight what is best about it and be open
to alternative approaches to this site.
~j
Task: Force members have suggested the following target plant communities: big woods for
southeast, floodplain forest in south central, savanna on western slope (currently amur maple).
They disagree with Fred's assessment that the area of organic soils were disturbed mechanically.
A more detailed analysis and history is necessary to understand the soils and hydrology on the
site. A soil core might help us understand if there has been mixing of soil horizons. Public works
should have some maps ofrunofE
Because exotic trees are so dense, Task Force suggest girdling of large buckthorn to kill it
slowly until we can revegetate.
Highlights we may want to feature
.
Meadow (potential prairie)
Northern wetland
Topography
Mature oaks
History of site: soil disturbance, invasion of exotics
Peaty organic soil in south
.
.
;':
.
.
.
~I
Restoration Difficulties
. The disturbed soils on this site will make restoration extremely difficult.
. Buckthorn and aDlur maple will be extremely difficult to control on this site.
Notes on Site History or Past Management
1. The City has done no management on this preserve except for trash removal.
3
...... . . ." .,. ........ "','-~'."'
"_ _' __ _"~_ __.____......~ _...._...~.._. _.. ".. __. ..._..___. .__ _".' __"_.___~.__"__~~~~._"._._....""'.,. _~~_." ,,",'" ,_ .' c......~_...."._, "_. '.~ .
."
~:
.~
Management Unit Concerns Restoration and Management
Recommendations
general encroachment by neighbors
furniture etc.
meadow keep spotted knapweed out
northern weijand
oak woods
east and central woods
southern wetland
:1
,
'j
~i
i
.:;
~
~i
~
4
Agenda Item 5.d.
MEMORANDUM
DATE:
Environmental and Natural Resources Commission
Shann Finwall, AICP, Environmental Planner
Silver Lake Improvement Association Request for Herbicide Treatment Funding
for Silver Lake
April 2, 2009 for the April 7 Environmental Commission Meeting
TO:
FROM:
SUBJECT:
INTRODUCTION
Silver Lake is located on the far northeast section of the City of Maplewood and shares its
border with two other municipalities, North St. Paul and Oakdale (Attachment 1). Silver Lake is
located in the Valley Branch Watershed District. The size of the lake is approximately 72 acres
with a mean depth of 7.3 feet, and a maximum depth of approximately 23 feet. A total of 35
residents and two parks have shoreline on the lake. The parks are Silver Lake Park in North St.
Paul and Joy Park in Maplewood.
The Silver Lake Improvement Association (hereinafter the "association") was created to help
restore Silver Lake. The association, made up of residents on or near the lake, has obtained
yearly study grants from the Minnesota Department of Natural Resources (DNR) for the
treatment of the lake with herbicide for the control of curlyleaf pondweed and Eurasian
watermilfoil starting in 2006. The total cost for treatment of the lake in 2007 was $40,000,
$60,000 in 2008, and is estimated to cost $36,332 this year. The DNR is offering another Total
Lake Treatment Pilot Study Grant for 2009.
The association estimates that Joy Park encompasses 33 percent of the linear shoreline of
Silver Lake. As such, Dr. Mike Mahthei, president of the association, has submitted a letter
requesting that Maplewood contribute 33 percent of the funding ($11,990) to treat the lake this
year (Attachment 2). The association is committed to a five to ten-year plan to restore the lake,
and as such is requesting yearly participation from the city.
BACKGROUND
June 23, 2008, the city council approved funding $8,250 toward the 2008 herbicide treatment of
Silver Lake (Attachment 3). The funding was authorized for one year on the condition that
future funds are authorized based on the results of additional lake studies and on the condition
that the association implements stormwater best management practices.
DISCUSSION
Herbicide Treatment
The cost of the 2009 herbicide treatment is estimated at $36,332. The treatment will include an
early-season application of Aquathrol K for the treatment of curlyleaf pondweed only. The DNR
does not recommend treating for Eurasian watermilfoil this year due to the decrease in some of
the native aquatic plants and a decrease in water clarity. The rationale for this approach is that
early-season control of curly-leaf pondweed may benefit water quality and is unlikely to
1
extensively reduce in native vegetation. On the other hand, lake-wide control of Eurasian
watermilfoil is unlikely to benefit water quality and may reduce native vegetation.
Lake Study
The DNR has hired the University of Minnesota to collect data on the aquatic plant community in
Silver Lake following the 2008 herbicide treatments (Attachment 4). The draft study reflects a
decrease in curlyleaf pondweed and Eurasion watermilfoil, which is encouraging. It also reflects
a decrease in native aquatic plants such as coontail, Canada waterweed, and bushy pondweed
and a decrease in water clarity. The DNR was hoping to see the native plants increase as
nonnatives decrease, so they are concerned with this trend. They are however committed to
the long term benefits of the project and have agreed to continue with the Total Lake Treatment
Pilot Study this year. Brittany Hummel, Aquatic Plant Specialist with the DNR, will be present at
the Environmental and Natural Resource Commission meeting to discuss the study.
Stakeholder Meetings
Earlier this year the Minnesota Pollution Control Agency (MPCA) hosted a stakeholder meeting
to discuss issues associated with Silver Lake. Included in this discussion were representatives
from the DNR, MPCA, Board of Water and Soil Resources, Silver Lake Improvement
Association, Valley Branch Watershed, Maplewood, North St. Paul, Ramsey County, Senator
Chuck Wiger, and Representative Leon Lillie. The representative cities and the DNR indicated
that they do not have available funds to increase their share of the herbicide treatments at Silver
Lake this year. Based on these discussions it was understood that the City of Maplewood could
feasibly fund the same amount as last year, $8,250, as long as the conditions imposed by the
city council were met, which include additional lake studies and the implementation of
stormwater best management practices by the association.
Best Management Practices
Dr. Manthei submitted the following information on the association's attempts at implementing
stormwater best management practices along the Silver Lake shoreline:
.
Several people have made improvements to their properties.
Paul Anderson received a grant from the Valley Branch Watershed District to complete
native plantings along the shoreline of his property.
Tom Germscheid worked all summer on his lake shore and drainage improvements from
his property
Dave Liukonen put large rocks in front of his lake shore to stop the soil erosion and also
stop the geese from using his yard as a waste dump.
Dr. Mike Manthei worked on an elevated rain garden to catch water coming off the roof
on the west side of his house and will be working on the east side of the house this year.
Dr. Manthei also hopes to apply for a grant from Valley Branch Watershed District to do
shoreline restoration this year.
Dr. Manthei and his neighbors near him do not mow all the way to the shoreline, so this
helps to buffer what goes into the lake.
Dr. Manthei and other neighbors who use the lake for irrigation do not fertilize so this
helps the lake shore and the plant communities in the lake.
The association is working to educate more home owners on the importance of
stormwater best management practices.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
2
. Several lake shore owners went to the lakeshore and rain garden seminars hosted by
the Ramsey-Washington Metro Watershed District and the City of Maplewood last year.
. The association will be holding their annual meeting on Thursday April 2. They have
invited Angie Hong to talk to the association about the Silver Lake shoreline and the
association asked her to start the process of education for lake shore owners on
becoming better stewards of the lake.
RECOMMENDATION
Fund Silver Lake Association's request for herbicide treatment of Silver Lake at the same rate
as last year, $8,250. Future funding should be conditioned on additional lake studies and
additional stormwater best management practices being implemented by the homeowners.
P:\PWlWorks\Environmental\Silver Lake\4-7-09 ENR
Attachment:
1.
2.
3.
4.
Location Map
Silver lake Improvement Association Letter
June 23, 2009, City Council Minutes
University of Minnesota Preliminary Evaluation of Lake-Wide Herbicide Treatment in Silver Lake
3
';(0) /~l-'
( <.)
/\' ~
I \(') 190
! -; 5
1 LYDIA AVE
,.." BRENNER AVE
"''''.,.----
\'j:
."
1-<
]~
,...
,2
f-
'<.)
'>-
I"
1<(
I"
!~
!~
1<(
ST NDRIDGE AVEj~
,
!
i
,,,
,-
i.
,-"
w
i\"
i
I
>- !
" ,
~ ,
W /
~ //
<( "'.rk.,
"'..~ '"
(-
[;;
LYDIA AVE
North Sl. Paul
Attachment 1
107
Location Map
Att4C/ll11e.f1+ l.
B. M. MANTHEI, pres.
P. J. ANDERSON, vice-pres.
P. J. SWAN, sec.
C. ETTLINGER, treas.
The Silver Lake Improvement Association
NORTH ST. PAUL
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
MINNESOTA
15 March 2009
City of Maplewood
1830 Co. Rd. BEast
Maplewood, MN 55109
Year Three
Dear City Manager:
I am writing to you on behalf of Silver Lake and Silver Lake Improvement Association, Inc. in Ramsey
County. I am the President of the Silver Lake Improvement Association, Inc. We created this
Association to help restore Silver Lake. Last year, we obtained permission from the MN DNR to treat
the whole lake, because of the non-native exotic invasive plants that are in this lake (Curly Leaf Pond
Weed and Eurasin Water Milfoil). We were awarded a Grant for $10,000 last year (2008). We have
been awarded again a Total Lake Treatment Pilot Study Grant for this year (2009).
We have the estimate now for total lake treatment based on the treatment from last year. The final
costs will be determined by the spring plant survey conducted by the MN DNR. The cost of this
treatment will need to be shared by the City of Maplewood (your park on the north end), the City of
No. St. Paul (their park on the south end), the City of Oakdale (their area of the lake adjacent to
Century Ave), and lakeshore owners surrounding the lake (they will be asked to contribute $384-
1000). Last year, Ramsey County and Valley Branch Watershed District contributed as did other No.
St. Paul neighbors and businesses. We will try to include other stakeholders as they are identified to
us.
We will be treatina onlv Curlv Leaf Pondweed this year based on the results of last year's
treatment.
In the year of 2005, two people from our lake board measured very carefully the lake shore perimeter.
We have divided the linear feet into a percentage. Please see the percentage listed below.' This
amount (in dollars related to the cost of treatment) is the minimum participation requested. Please
note: the amount requested is for this year, year three (2009). We are committed to a 5 t010
year plan to restore this lake. Please use these percentages as everyone else has contributed
for two years using these numbers. We respectfully request your yearly participation.
City of Maplewood:
City of No. St. Paul
City of Oakdale
Lake-shore owners (35)
Feet
3100
1950
803
3423
Percent
33
21
9
37
Page 1
We are hopeful that the costs for treatment will not exceed $36,332 this year. This amount
uses the same application rate of Aquathrol K (0.75ppm) as last year. If the MN DNR requires
us to change the application rate to 1.00 ppm then the bid amount would be $41,416. We are
going to estimate for the .75 ppm treatment rate, therefore Maplewood's fair share of the
$36,332 will be $11,990. The check can be made out to Silver Lake Improvement, Inc.
Last year, we requested your participation in this very important public project. You did not contribute
your fair share. Your park borders on this lake and as good citizens it is in your best interest to
participate this year to the 100% level requested. We need your full participation if we are going to
arrive at the necessary funding amount needed to complete this public project.
As for the other Cities, Ramsey County and Valley Branch Watershed District, I sent letters to the City
Managers of Oakdale and No. St. Paul. I did not attend any of their meetings. These two cities paid
their fair share. For Ramsey County, an employee Terry Noonan approved our request for funds via
the internet. The Valley Branch Managers voted on our request after I attended one of their
meetings. These requests were simple and required minimal energy. We request that Maplewood
follow the same pattern as the other two cities regarding the sending of their funds.
We have seen that Maplewood is beginning to improve their park on the North End of Silver Lake. It
does not make sense to improve a park on any lake without improving the lake. A very high
percentage of Maplewood residents use this lake. The boat ramp is within Joy Park which brings
people into Silver Lake. People fish from your lake shore surrounding the lake on the North Side.
We are hopeful that you will contribute to this project that is actually improving your park.
Enclosed is the result of the treatment of aquatic plants that was done for the MN DNR last year. As
you can clearly see, the treatment helped the lake by reducing the target non-native plants. Coontail
and Elodea were reduced more than expected last year either due to Renovate and/or because of the
delayed treatment application date. This is why the MN DNR wants to do only Curly Leaf Pond Weed
this year. The lake was also turbid las~ year probably due to low water level (low rain fall) and
increased boat traffic. We need to continue working several years longer to be able to control the
exotic species (especially Curly Leaf Pond Weed). Please join the other stakeholders and help our
efforts to restore Silver Lake.
If you have any questions, please feel free to contact me. Please make your check payable to:
SILVER LAKE IMPROVEMENT ASSOCIATION. INC. by April 15th,2009.
If you have any questions, direct them to me:
~v~#r~J~
~~r{~ ~'
~~V'P
Dr. Mike Manthei
President
Silver Lake Improvement Association, Inc.
2894 No. Lake Blvd.
No. St. Paul, MN 55109
651-777-6343 Home
651-770-2381 Work
Page 2
A-tt(;\(, h iY\ et') t- 3
MINUTES
MAPLEWOOD CITY COUNCIL
6:30 p.m., Monday, June 23, 2008
Council Chambers, City Hall
Meeting No. 17-08
L. NEW BUSINESS
1. Silver Lake Herbicide Treatment Funding Request.
a. Environmental Planner, Shann Finwall gave the presentation and answered
questions of the council.
b. Dr. Mike Manthei, President, Silver Lake Improvement Association, Inc.
commented on this item and stated he had given information regarding these
concerns to Mr. Konewko.
c. Acting City Manager, Public Works Director, Chuck Ahl answered questions of the
council.
d. Chair of the Parks Commission, Peter Fischer shared comments from the Parks
Commission.
e. Lincoln Fetcher, President, Valley Branch Watershed District shared his
comments regarding this topic and answered questions of the council.
f. City Attorney, Alan Kantrud answered questions of the council.
Council member Rossbach moved to approve the Silver Lake Herbicide Treatment Fundino
Request. which represents the citv's 27.5 percent share of the shoreline ($16.500 X .50= $8,250).
One half of those funds should come from the Environmental Utilitv Fund and the other one half
should come from Parks Maintenance or Recreational Funds. Further addino that the fundino is
for one year only and that future funds will be conditioned and documented on additional
lake studies and stormwater best manaoement practices beino implemented by the Silver
Lake homeowners.
Councilmember Juenemann made a friendly amendment clarifing that the funding is for one year
only and that future funds will be conditioned and documented on additional lake studies and
storm water best management practices being implemented by the Silver Lake homeowners.
Council member Rossbach accepted the friendly amendment.
Mayor Longrie stated for the record she would have preferred to see the studies and the
chemistry that have been discussed this evening. Mayor Longrie said she has a double major in
chemistry and biology. (Someone in the audience shouted that this information is available
online.) However, Mayor Longrie stated she wanted to see this information before voting so she
could better understand things. Mayor Longrie was concerned about where the financing would
come from. She thinks the idea of having different associations such as lake associations coming
to the City of Maplewood and applying for charitable gambling funds looking for money will be
common.
June 23, 2008
City Council Meeting Minutes
1
Mayor Longrie said this is the opening of the public policy. She would like to be a voting member
so the city can be partners. Without that the city is just a money bag. These are the types of
things that she weighs and balances when voting. She felt she didn't have the appropriate
information to make a good, balanced, and informed decision. She is concerned about the
chemicals that were put in the lake last year and the impact on the lake. Now those chemicals
aren't allowed. These are the questions she hasn't heard answers for.
Seconded by Council member Juenemann.
Ayes - Council members Juenemann,
Nephew & Rossbach
Navs - Mayor Longrie,
Council member Hjelle
The motion passed.
June 23, 2008
City Council Meeting Minutes
2
A1Tctd1lY\ e (rr i
Preliminary evaluation of lake-wide herbicide treatments for controlling
curlyleaf pondweed and Eurasian watermilfoil in Silver Lake (DOW# 62-(001)
James A. Johnson and Ajay Jones (advised by Dr. Ray M. Newman)
Fisheries, Wildlife and Conservation Biology
University of Minnesota - St. Paul, MN 55108
[Draft received on 28 January 2009]
Project Overview
The Minnesota Department of Natural Resources (MNDNR) and University of Minnesota (UMN) have been
collaborating since 2006 to evaluate the use of whole-lake herbicide treatments for controlling nuisance growth of
curlyleafpondweed (Potamogeton crispus) in Minnesota lakes. The specific objectives of the project are to:
1. Determine the effectiveness of treatments for reducing curlyleaf distribution and growth density
2. Determine the effects of treatments on native plant distribution, diversity and growth density
3. Determine if successive lake-wide treatments reduce the number of curlyleaf turions (reproductive buds) in lake sediments
During each year of this project, we conducted point-intercept aquatic vegetation surveys, measured plant biomass
(estimate of growth density), collected water quality measurements, and sampled lake sediments for curlyleaf
turion in 13 study lakes, including Silver Lake (Table 1).
Table 1. Summary of aquatic vegetation (A V), bio.mass (BM), and turion density surveys completed in 2005 (MNDNR), 2006, 2007, and
2008 (UMN) as a part of the evaluation of lake-wide herbicide treatments to control P. oris pus in Silver Lake (DOW#62-000 I).
, AV Survey' Max Depth Total BM
Date AV Survey AV Survey Total AV Points Sampled Points Turion
Sl/l'Veyed 1 2 3 (ft) 1/2/3' Survey
2006- N/A June 7 July 27 149 20 N/A N/A
2007- May 14 June 11 Aug 13 150 20 39/38/38 Sept 5
2008 May 22" June 23 Aug 24 149 18 -/40/40 Oct 20
· 2006 surveys conducted by Barr Engineering, Ino., 2007 and May 2008 surveys conducted by Fortin Consulting, Ino.
All oilier surveys conducted by Ajay Jones - University of Minnesota.
1 1 = pretreatment period (Apr-May), 2 ~ peak P. erispus period (late May-June), 3 ~ peak native plant period (Aug-Sept)
2 Biomass sample point totals listed by seasonal period in chronological order (1/213)
Preliminary evaluation of laka-wide treatments for controlling curly/eaf and milfoil in Silver Lake
James A. Johnson and Ajay Jones - University of Minnesota - Jan 2009
D:\CHIP D\Z 2008\Milfoil 2008 Lakes\Silver\Summary for Silver Lake-4.doc
[Draft received on 28 January 2009]
Summary of Results
Silver Lake (Ramsey County, MN, DOW 62-0001) is a moderately fertile (mesotrophic) lake with a history of
moderate water clarity (Table 2). The lake has a history of abundant plant growth, and contains established
infestations of two non-native invasive plants, Eurasian watennilfoil (M spicatum) and curlyleafpondweed (P.
crispus). In 2006 and 2007, aquatic vegetation was found at 90-100% of the sampled littoral sites during all
surveys, but in 2008 vegetation appeared to decline in abundance from 100% vegetated in May to 30% in August
(Table 3). The dominant plant taxa generally declined in abundance in 2008. Water clarity also declined during
the monitored period, with average May-September Secchi transparency dropping from about 2.5m in 2005 and
2006, to about 1.6m in 2007 and 2008 (Table 2).
Summary of Growing Season Water Quality (May-Sept)
Silver Lake: 2006-2008
Secchi Chi-a Total P
m pglL pglL
Mean' I SO Mean I SD Mean I SD
1998 3.5 1.10 5 3.7 25 9.2
1999 2.6 1.00 6 4.6 27 10.2
2000 3.0 0.77 5 2.7 25 9.6
2001 3.2 1.28 5 3.2 34 14.8
2002 2.9 0.91 2 1.6 25 8.5
2003 2.4 1.38 8 7.8 35 19.4
2004 2.9 0.86 9 7.2 30 8.3
2005 2.5 0.92 10 5.5 28 4.7
2006 2.4 2.19 11 16.1 43 25.7
2007 1.6 1.03 24 25.9 38 14.2
2008 1.7 1.04 18 18.9 37 27.4
Table 2. Summary of growing season (May-
Sep) water quality data collected from Silver
Lake. Data provided by the Minnesota
Pollution Control Agency.
Native Aquatic Plants
Coontail (c. demersum) was consistently the most common plant during the monitored period, occurring at
80-100% of sampled littoral sites in 2006 and 2007; however, it declined in 2008 from 80% occurrence in May to
10% in August (Table 4). Elodea (E. canadensis), the next most abundant native plant, showed a similar pattern,
Preliminary evaluation of lake-wide treatments for controlling curlyleaf and milfoil in Silver Lake 2
James A. Johnson and Ajay Jones - University of Minnesota - Jan 2009
D:\CHIP D\Z 2008\Milfoil 2008 Lakes\SlIver\Summary for Silver Lake-4.doc
[Draft received on 28 January 2009J
occurring at 30-50% of the sampled littoral sites in 2006 and 2007, but declined in 2008 from 30% in May to 10%
in August. Two other common native plants, bushy pondweed (N. flexilis) and large-leaved pondweed (P.
amplifolius), also showed notable declines in occurrence from 2006 to 2008 (Table 4).
Non-Native Invasive Plants: Eurasian Watermilfoil and CurlyleafPondweed
Eurasian watennilfoil was found at 50-70% of the sampled littoral sites in 2006, but was not found during any of
the surveys in 2007, and only occurred in May of2008 at about 10% ofthe sampled sites. Curlyleafpondweed
was found at 60-70% of sampled littoral sites in May of2007 and 2008, but occurred at less than 5% of sites in
June of both years (no May survey in 2006), likely due to treatment. Curlyleafpondweed turion density dropped
considerably from 210 turionslm2 in 2007 to 10 turionslm2 in 2008 (Table 5), suggesting a decline in turion
production due to the control of curlyleaf. These results suggest that the herbicide treatments are effectively
controlling both of the target non-natives. Although curlyleaf pondweed abundance in May did not decline during
the monitored period, the absence of curlyleaf in June, normally the period of peak growth, and the large decline
in turion density suggest that the treatments are minimizing negative impacts to recreational use and are reducing
turion density to a level that should translate into reduced cw'lyleaf abundance in 2009.
Preliminary evaluation of lake-wide treatments for controlling curlyleaf and milfoil in Silver Lake 3
James A. Johnson and Ajay Jones - University of Minnesota - Jan 2009
D:\CHIP D\Z 2008\Milfoil 2008 Lakes\Silver\Summary for Silver Lake-4.doc
[Draft received on 28 January 2009]
Aquatic Vegetation Survey Results
Silver Lake: 2006-2008
May I June T August
""L1l1oral Area Vegelated 2006 - 100 99
(s'Mm) 2007 95 97 95
2008 100 72 27
MaxlmumOepth of Growth 2006 - 6.2 5.9
(a/ltaxa) 2007 5.1 3.8 6.2
2008 5.9 5.7 2.2
Specl.s Rlchne.s 2006 - 18 14
2007 17 13 13
2008 13 9 11
P. crlspus % Occurrence 2006 - 21 1
(littoral points) 2007 64 2 1
2008 66 0 0
M. spicatum % Occurrence 2006 - 69 53
(littoral points) 2007 0 0 0
2008 8 0 0
Rei Freq of Invasive Taxa 2006 - 0.26 0.20
(IUtoral points) 2007 0.38 0.17 0.05
2008 0.30 0.00 0.00
Avg # of Native Taxa/Point 2006 - 2.4 2.1
2007 - - .
2008 1.5 1.5 0.4
Avg Native Biomass/Point 2006 - - -
(dry glm'2) 2007 - - -
2008 - 1 3
Table 3. Summary statistics for aquatic plauts
iu Silver Lake. (2006 data collected by Barr
Engineering Inc., 2007 aud May 2008 data
conected by Fortin Consulting Inc., aud 2008
Jone and August data collected by the
Universily of Minnesota.)
May results provide some indication of
curlyleaf (P. crispus) abondance prior to
spring treatment, June results measure the
period oftypicaJ peak curlyleaf density for
comparison to pre-treatment data, aud August
results provide information about Eurasian
watermilfoil (M spicatum) and native aquatic
plaut growth aud distribution.
Aquatic Vegetation Survey Results
% Occurrence o( Taxa Encountered
Sliver Lake
Ramsey County (62-0001)
e . '.
. '~ .
~ e , e ] il, 8
& J1 ] '. . 11
~ a 't ~ .. s ,
~ ,. 1 ~ ~ 'Jl! ~ ~ :lI t " j!l
~ ~ 1l '0, 1: 0 .
.~ 0 ~ e " il. 0
~ e -Il ~ . " ] 0 e 't
~ t !i '8 t t '~ Ii t ,~ 0 0
f " ~ .. 0 -il ~ ~ ~ h 0 b 0 0
e ~ l .. '" 0 ~ & 0 .~ .. .. . ~ " ..
, 5 ~ ,!1 m 8' 8' ';! ~ If 8' 0 8' 8'
i l l e . j!l ~
'" . . . ~ E e 5 ~ ~ 0 j!l E . E e
1l -Il ~ Jl! ~ g ~
i!- Jl! . " " ~ j!l " ~ " . !} " "
ill ~ It. ~ ~ ~ It. It. . It. 0 ~ It. It.
0 " ~ <: " <: ~ m <l. <Xl <:
2006 Jun-7 9a 51 14 69 27 13 3 10 3 22 6 2
Jul-21 97 41 9 53 29 10 10 13 2 3
2007 Ma.y-14 74 25 13 11 5 10 2 14 3 2 2
JUR*11 79 54 26 11 5 3 2 12
Aug-13 91 31 32 7 5 3 5 2 4
2008 May-22 al 31 39 a 2 14 3 2
JUR*23 54 17 14 3 4
Aug-.24 11 12 5 2 5 3 3 3
Table4. Summary of% occurrence for aquatic plant taxa encountered during point-intercept vegetation surveys conducted on
Silver Lake. (2006 data collected by Barr Engineering Inc., 2007 and May 2008 data collected by Fortin Consulting Inc., aud
2008 June aud August data collected by the University of Minnesota.)
Preliminary evaluation of lake-wide treatments for controlling curlyleaf and milfoil in Silver Leke 4
James A. Johnson and Ajay Jones - University of Minnesota - Jan 2009
D:\CHIP D\Z 2008\Milfoil 2008 Lakes\Silver\Summary for Silver Lake-4.doc
[Draft received on 28 January 2009]
Curlyleaf Pondweed Turion Survey Results
Silver Lake: 2006-2008
Sliver Lake
Number of Samples 2007 40
2008 40
# of Sites with Turions 2007 24
2008 7
Mean Turlon Density #lmA2 2007 214
(allliUoral points) 2008 10
Standard Error 2007 13
(allliUoral points) 2008 4
Mean Turlon Density #lmA2 2007 357
(only sites with turions) 2008 57
Standard Error 2007 14
(only sites with turions) 2008 3
Turion Viability 2007 -
(% sprouted) 2008 44
Table 5. Summary of results from curlyleaf
pondweed turion surveys conducted on Silver
Lake. The mean turion density declined from
2007 to 2008. No turion survey was conducted
in 2006. 2007 data collected by Fortin
Consulting, Inc. 2008 data collected by lbe
University of Minnesota.
Summary:
. Eurasian watermilfoil (M spicatum) and curlyleafpondweed (P. crispus) appear to have been effectively
controlled by herbicide treatments in 2007 and 2008.
. Although May curlyleaf abundance did not decline over the three-year monitoring period, little curlyleaf was
found in June of2007 and 2008, and curlyleafturion density declined substantially,
· Although Silver Lake supported abundant plant growth in 2006 and 2007, plant abundance declined
substantially during the summer of2008. Most notably, coontail (c. demersum) declined from 80-100%
occurrence in 2006 and 2007 to 10% in August of2008. The decline in native plant occurreuce may be
associated with the decline in water clarity.
. Water clarity declined from 205m in 2006 to 1.6m in 2007 and 2008 and cWorophylllevels in 2007-2008 were
higher than most previous years.
· The University of Minnesota plans to continue monitoring Silver Lake in 2009 (Ajay Jones).
Preliminary evaluation of lake-wide treatments for controlling cUrlyleat and milfoil in Silver Lake 5
James A. Johnson and Ajay Jones - University of Minnesota - Jan 2009
D:\CHIP D\Z 2008\Milfoll 2008 Lakes\SlIver\Summary for Silver Lake-4.doc