HomeMy WebLinkAboutSECTION_15 ISSUES AND IMPLEMENTATION PROGRAM
Barr Engineering Company 15-1
P:\Mpls\23 MN\27\23271072 Edina Water Resources Mgmt Plan Update\WorkFiles\Report\December 15 2011 FINAL
DRAFT\Edina_SWMP_FINAL_v1.docx
15.0 Issues and Implementation Program
This chapter describes the significant components of the City’s CWRMP implementation program,
including its NPDES Phase II MS4 permit, ,specific requirements of the NMCWD and MCWD,
financial considerations, ordinance implementation and official controls, and implementation
priorities. The implementation program is discussed in Section 15.7, which presents summary details
of the implementation program, including a project description, cost estimate, potential funding
sources, and proposed years of implementation.
15.1 Water Quality/NPDES Phase II MS4 General Permit
Under the federal 1987 Clean Water Act revision, discharges of pollutants into waters of the United
States are prohibited without a permit under the National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System
(NPDES) program. Traditionally, this program concentrated on discharges from industries and
publicly owned treatment plants. In 1990, the EPA promulgated rules establishing Phase I of the
NPDES Stormwater Program in an effort to reduce the water quality impact of stormwater drainage
systems on receiving water bodies. Phase I of the program regulates stormwater runoff from
municipal separate storm sewer systems (MS4s) generally serving populations of 100,000 or greater,
construction activities disturbing five acres of land or greater, and various industrial activities.
In 1999, the Phase II Rule of the NPDES Stormwater Program extended the coverage of the NPDES
program to operation of “small” MS4s in urbanized areas and operation of small construction sites.
Through the use of NPDES permits, these operations are required to implement programs and
practices to control polluted stormwater runoff. Because the City of Edina is located in an
“urbanized area”, as defined by the Bureau of the Census, it is covered under the Phase II NPDES
Stormwater Program. Operators of Phase II small MS4s in Minnesota were required to apply for
coverage under the Small Municipal Separate Storm Sewer Systems (MS4s) General Permit from the
Minnesota Pollution Control Agency (MPCA) by March 10, 2003. This permit, which addresses how
the City will regulate and improve stormwater discharges, requires MS4s to develop and implement a
Storm Water Pollution Prevention Program (SWPPP).
15.1.1 NPDES Phase II MS4 Storm Water Pollution Prevention Program
The SWPPP outlines the appropriate best management practices (BMPs) for the City to control or
reduce the pollutants in stormwater runoff to the maximum extent practicable (MEP). The City will
accomplish this through the implementation of the BMPs outlined within its SWPPP. These BMPs
will be a combination of education, maintenance, control techniques, system design and engineering
methods, and other such provisions that are appropriate to meet the requirements of the NDPES
Phase II permit. BMPs have been planned and implemented to address each of the six minimum
control measures as outlined in the rules:
1. Public education and outreach on stormwater impacts.
Barr Engineering Company 15-2
P:\Mpls\23 MN\27\23271072 Edina Water Resources Mgmt Plan Update\WorkFiles\Report\December 15 2011 FINAL
DRAFT\Edina_SWMP_FINAL_v1.docx
2. Public participation/involvement.
3. Illicit discharge detection and elimination.
4. Construction site stormwater runoff control.
5. Post-construction stormwater management in new development and redevelopment.
6. Pollution prevention/good housekeeping for municipal operations.
The six minimum control measures are described in further detail in subsequent sections. The
SWPPP BMP implementation program is incorporated into the City’s overall stormwater
implementation program presented in Table 15-3.
15.1.1.1 Public Education and Outreach
Public education and outreach is a key component in a successful stormwater management program.
An informed and knowledgeable community will lead to greater support and greater compliance with
the City stormwater program, as the public becomes aware of the personal responsibilities expected
of them as community members.
As required by the MPCA MS4 General Permit, the City has developed and is implementing a public
education program to distribute information and conduct outreach activities regarding the impacts of
stormwater discharges on water bodies, as discussed in Section 3.8. The public education program
must address each of the six control measures required by the General Permit. For each control
measure, the City’s education program identifies the audience involved, educational goals, activities
used to reach activity goals, activity implementation plans, and available performance measures that
can be used to determine success in reaching educational goals.
The public education program also includes working collaboratively with the local watershed
districts in distributing educational materials and promoting/supporting outreach programs.
At least one public meeting is held every year prior to submittal of the SWPPP annual report. Notice
of the meeting is distributed in a local newspaper and contains a reference to the SWPPP, the date,
time, and location of the public information meeting; a description of the manner in which the public
information meeting will be conducted; and the proper method to obtain a copy of the SWPPP.
Details regarding the measurable goals, implementation schedule, and responsible parties for the
public education program can be found in the City of Edina’s SWPPP (Appendix A).
15.1.1.2 Public Involvement and Public Participation
As required by the MPCA MS4 General Permit, the City of Edina will solicit public input on the
adequacy of the SWPPP, including input from the annual public meeting addressing the annual
report. Oral and written input from the public regarding the SWPPP will be sincerely considered and
adjustments will be made where appropriate. The City will comply with applicable public notice
Barr Engineering Company 15-3
P:\Mpls\23 MN\27\23271072 Edina Water Resources Mgmt Plan Update\WorkFiles\Report\December 15 2011 FINAL
DRAFT\Edina_SWMP_FINAL_v1.docx
requirements of the General Permit when implementing the provisions of the SWPPP. The City also
intends to incorporate public information on SWPPP issues into the City’s website.
Details regarding the measurable goals, implementation schedule, and responsible parties for the
public involvement and public participation requirements can be found in the City of Edina’s SWPPP
(Appendix A).
15.1.1.3 Illicit Discharge Detection and Elimination
Identification of stormwater pollutant sources includes identification of illicit pollutant discharges
and nonpoint sources throughout the city. An illicit pollutant discharge is defined as a nonpermitted
point source of pollutants that is discharged to the storm sewer system at a specific location. Illicit
discharges can enter a storm sewer system directly (through wastewater piping mistakenly or
deliberately connected to the storm drains) or indirectly (through infiltration from cracked/leaking
sanitary systems, spills collected by drain outlets, or other contaminants such as paint or oil dumped
directly into a storm drain).
To prevent the harmful effects of illicit discharges, a number of BMPs have been developed to
implement and enforce a program to detect and eliminate illicit discharges into the municipal
separate storm sewer system. The BMPs include:
Based on the requirements of the NPDES Phase II MS4 General Permit, the program must include
the following components:
1. An annually-updated storm sewer system map showing the location of all City-owned storm
sewer pipes (24-inch diameter or greater), outfalls, locations where discharge leaves the city,
and water bodies.
2. Review of existing City ordinances relating to illicit discharges and develop/adopt an illicit
discharge ordinance as necessary.
3. Expansion of the City’s program to detect and reduce all forms of non-stormwater discharges
and continuation of inspection for illicit discharge during the outfall and pond inspections.
4. Distribution of educational materials to residents and providing illicit discharge educational
information or training to City staff at a minimum of once a year.
Details regarding the measurable goals, implementation schedule, and responsible parties for the
public education program can be found in the City of Edina’s SWPPP (Appendix A).”
15.1.1.4 Construction Site Stormwater Runoff Control
Runoff management from construction sites is crucial in the effort to minimize the amount of
sediment and other pollutants entering the water bodies within the city. Phase II of the NPDES
Barr Engineering Company 15-4
P:\Mpls\23 MN\27\23271072 Edina Water Resources Mgmt Plan Update\WorkFiles\Report\December 15 2011 FINAL
DRAFT\Edina_SWMP_FINAL_v1.docx
stormwater program requires reduction of stormwater pollutant discharges from construction
activities that result in a land disturbance of greater than or equal to one acre.
The policies and design standards adopted by the City to control stormwater pollutant discharges
from construction sites are detailed in the Water Quality Management Standards (Section 3.2) and
the Erosion and Sediment Control (Section 3.3) sections.
In addition to the policies and BMPs previously discussed, a number of BMPs have been developed
and will be implemented and enforced to reduce pollutants and storm water runoff from construction
activities with land disturbances equal to or greater than one acre. These BMPs include:
1. Review of current permit stipulations/City codes relating to project specific erosion and
sediment control and update as necessary.
2. Every applicant for a City permit to allow land disturbing activities must submit a project
specific stormwater management plan (if applicable) and/or erosion control plan to the
City.
3. Construction site operators must provide a phone number, website, and point of contact
for the public to report storm water pollution issues. Staff procedures for stormwater non-
compliance are defined in the SWPPP (Appendix A).
4. Construction site operators must conform to NPDES Phase II, watershed district, and
City ordinances pertaining to erosion and sediment controls and waste controls.
For projects less than one acre, the Rules and Regulations of the Nine Mile Creek and Minnehaha
Creek watershed districts are applicable.
Details regarding the measurable goals, implementation schedule, and responsible parties for the
construction site stormwater runoff control requirements can be found in the City of Edina’s SWPPP
(Appendix A).
15.1.1.5 Post-Construction Stormwater Runoff Control
The Phase II NPDES Program requires small MS4s to develop, implement and enforce a program to
reduce pollutants from new development or redevelopment areas having a land disturbance of greater
than or equal to one acre.
The city of Edina has adopted the control policies and BMPs discussed in the Runoff Management
and Flood Control (Section 3.1), Water Quality (Section 3.2), and the Erosion and Sediment Control
(Section 3.3) sections to ensure pollutant reduction from new development and redevelopment areas.
The City’s policies and BMPs are enforced through issuance of permits through the City and the
Nine Mile Creek and Minnehaha Creek watershed districts.
Barr Engineering Company 15-5
P:\Mpls\23 MN\27\23271072 Edina Water Resources Mgmt Plan Update\WorkFiles\Report\December 15 2011 FINAL
DRAFT\Edina_SWMP_FINAL_v1.docx
In addition to the control measures addressed in earlier sections, a program of BMPs has been
prepared to address storm water runoff from new development and redevelopment projects that
disturb equal to or greater than one acre. This program insures that controls are in place that would
prevent or minimize water quality impacts from development activities. These BMPs include:
1. Continuing to use existing development review policies currently in place to address
water quality, erosion control, and BMPs.
2. Evaluating all structural and non-structural BMPs during the plan review process for the
potential of new and/or revised BMPs.
3. Actively looking for non-structural BMP opportunities where prudent and feasible.
4. Inspecting post-construction BMPs and evaluating inspection records for determining the
corrective maintenance actions (if necessary) for the long-term operation of all storm
water management facilities.
The City of Edina also addresses runoff problems with sound planning procedures. Land use and
zoning ordinances promote improved water quality by guiding the growth and redevelopment of the
community away from sensitive areas and by restricting certain types of growth to areas that can
support it without compromising water quality. The City is currently in the process of updating their
zoning ordinance.
Details regarding the measurable goals, implementation schedule, and responsible parties for the
post-construction stormwater runoff control requirements can be found in the City of Edina’s SWPPP
(Appendix A).
15.1.1.6 Pollution Prevention and Good Housekeeping Methods
Pollution prevention and good housekeeping methods can ensure a reduction in the amount and type
of pollution that is discharged into waterways from streets, parking lots, open spaces, and storage and
vehicle maintenance areas. To take advantage of the benefits provided by pollution prevention
practices, the Phase II Rule requires that the City develop and implement an operation and
maintenance program has the ultimate goal of preventing or reducing pollutant runoff from municipal
operations into the storm sewer system. The program must include employee training on
incorporation of pollution prevention and good housekeeping techniques into municipal operations
such as park and open space maintenance, fleet and building maintenance, new construction and land
disturbances, and storm water system maintenance.
To meet the requirements of the pollution prevention and good housekeeping for municipal
operations, a number of BMPs have been developed. These BMPs include:
1. Annual inspection of 20% of the outfalls, sediment basins, and ponds within the City’s
storm sewer system.
Barr Engineering Company 15-6
P:\Mpls\23 MN\27\23271072 Edina Water Resources Mgmt Plan Update\WorkFiles\Report\December 15 2011 FINAL
DRAFT\Edina_SWMP_FINAL_v1.docx
2. Inspection and documentation of all structural pollution control devices a minimum of
once per year.
3. Evaluating, annually inspecting, and modifying (if necessary) current BMPs in place on
all exposed stockpiles, storage, and materials located within City-owned property.
4. Annually evaluating landscaping and lawn-care practices, which may include the use of
fertilizers, pesticides, herbicides, lawn mowing, grass clipping collection, mulching and
composting, and developing BMPs to reduce storm water pollution.
5. Annually reviewing practices and policies related to road salt applications. The City will
consider alternative products, calibration of equipment, inspection of vehicles and staff
training to reduce pollutants from road deicing activities.
6. Continuation of the current street sweeping program, identification of improvements, and
implementation of changes to reduce storm water pollutants.
Details regarding the measurable goals, implementation schedule, and responsible parties for the
pollution prevention and good housekeeping requirements can be found in the City of Edina’s
SWPPP (Appendix A).
15.1.2 Nondegradation Report
The City’s nondegradation report was required by the MPCA to address modifications to the SWPPP
for measures that may be necessary to meet the new, applicable requirements of the NPDES MS4
permit. These modifications cover discharge to wetlands and other special waters as applicable, and
the nondegradation requirements for selected MS4s (30 permittees including the City of Edina),
including the development of a loading assessment and nondegradation report. The Nondegradation
Report Submittal to the Minnesota Pollution Control Agency for Selected MS4 Permit Requirements
(Barr, 2007) is presented in the CWRMP as Appendix B.
The City’s loading assessment and nondegradation report assumes that future BMP implementation
throughout the city would follow the most stringent standards of the two watershed management
organizations. The NMCWD has adopted amended stormwater management rules (March 2008), but
the MCWD is in the process of formal rule revisions. Because the MCWD is still in the process of
revising their water quality treatment standards, the City assumed that the NMCWD volume retention
standards (NMCWD, 2008) would be applied throughout the city in the future. Upon approval of the
MCWD revised standards (if more stringent), the City will update its development review policies,
standards and procedures, as cited in the SWPPP. This approach will ensure the following:
1. Receiving water quality should be improved for lakes, wetlands and creeks in Edina.
2. Channel erosion and creek morphology changes will be minimized.
Barr Engineering Company 15-7
P:\Mpls\23 MN\27\23271072 Edina Water Resources Mgmt Plan Update\WorkFiles\Report\December 15 2011 FINAL
DRAFT\Edina_SWMP_FINAL_v1.docx
3. Further protection will be provided for the physical and biological integrity of the creek and
wetland corridors
4. Controlled bounce and duration of inundation in the City’s wetlands and preservation of the
functions and values for each type of wetland classification.
For projects that impact wetlands, and where the requirements of the Wetland Conservation Act
(WCA) are not as comprehensive as the MPCA water quality standards, then the requirements of the
NPDES permit require an LGU to make a determination that will also satisfy Minn. R. 7050.0186.
The City of Edina will continue to defer LGU authority to the NMCWD and MCWD.
The City will revise its SWPPP to show where the vulnerable wellhead protection areas are within
the city and to define the measures that will reduce the threat to drinking water to the maximum
extent practicable. These measures will be developed in accordance with the guidance provided by
the Minnesota Department of Health’s Evaluating Proposed Stormwater Infiltration Projects in
Vulnerable Wellhead Protection Areas (2007), and the MPCA’s Minnesota Stormwater Manual
(2005) regarding potential stormwater hotspots.
Prior to June 30 of each year of the five-year permit cycle, the City must hold an annual public
meeting. At this meeting, the City distributes educational materials and presents an overview of the
MS4 program and the City’s SWPPP. The City also receives oral and written comments and
considers them for inclusion into the SWPPP. Also prior to June 30, the City must submit an annual
report to the MPCA. This annual report summarizes the following:
x Status of Compliance with Permit Conditions. The annual report contains an assessment of
the appropriateness of the BMPs and the City’s progress toward achieving the
identified measurable goals for each of the minimum control measures. This
assessment is based on results collected and analyzed, inspection findings, and
public input received during the reporting period.
x Work Plan. The annual report lists the stormwater activities that are planned to be
undertaken in the next reporting cycle.
x Modifications to the SWPPP. The annual report identifies any changes to BMPs or
measurable goals for any of the minimum control measures.
x Notice of Coordinated Activities. A notice is included in the annual report for any portions
of the permit for which a government entity or organization outside of the MS4 is
used to fulfill any BMP contained in the SWPPP.
15.1.3 Impaired Waters and TMDL Issues
The federal Clean Water Act (CWA) requires states to adopt water quality standards to protect the
nation’s waters. Water quality standards designate beneficial uses for each waterbody and establish
Barr Engineering Company 15-8
P:\Mpls\23 MN\27\23271072 Edina Water Resources Mgmt Plan Update\WorkFiles\Report\December 15 2011 FINAL
DRAFT\Edina_SWMP_FINAL_v1.docx
criteria that must be met within the waterbody to maintain the water quality necessary to support its
designated use(s). Section 303(d) of the CWA requires each state to identify and establish priority
rankings for waters that do not meet the water quality standards. The list of impaired waters, or
303(d) list, is updated by the state every two years.
For impaired waterbodies, the CWA requires the development of a total maximum daily load
(TMDL). A TMDL is a threshold calculation of the amount of a pollutant that a waterbody can
receive and still meet water quality standards. A TMDL establishes the pollutant loading capacity
within a waterbody and develops an allocation scheme amongst the various contributors, which
include point sources, non-point sources and natural background, as well as a margin of safety. As a
part of the allocation scheme a waste load allocation (WLA) is developed to determine allowable
pollutant loadings from individual point sources (including loads from storm sewer networks), and a
load allocation (LA) establishes allowable pollutant loadings from non-point sources and natural
background levels in a waterbody.
The city’s SWPPP also requires the City to complete a review of impaired waters, including
identification of the impaired waters that are likely to be impacted by the City’s stormwater
discharge, identification of all potential stormwater discharges to impaired waters, delineation of the
watershed areas that contribute to these discharges, and evaluation of the hydrology, land use and
other characteristics of the watershed areas that may impact the impaired water as a results of a
stormwater discharge. Based on this review, the City must determine whether changes to the City’s
SWPPP are warranted to reduce the impact from the City’s stormwater discharge to each impaired
water of concern. The City must incorporate the changes identified in the impaired waters review
into the City’s SWPPP.
Impaired waters located within the City of Edina, as identified by the MPCA’s 2008 303(d) Impaired
Waters List, include: Lake Cornelia, Lake Edina, Nine Mile Creek and Minnehaha Creek. These
waterbodies are listed in Table 15.1, along with the affected MPCA designated use, the pollutant or
stressor that is not meeting the MPCA water quality criteria, and the MPCA target for starting and
completing the TMDL process. It is likely that TMDLs will be completed to address these
impairments, and load reductions will be assigned to the City, based on the TMDL results. This
Water Resources Management Plan will likely need to be amended to incorporate future TMDL
requirements. The TMDL requirements will also be incorporated into the City’s NPDES Phase II
MS4 permit.
Barr Engineering Company 15-9
P:\Mpls\23 MN\27\23271072 Edina Water Resources Mgmt Plan Update\WorkFiles\Report\December 15 2011 FINAL
DRAFT\Edina_SWMP_FINAL_v1.docx
Table 15.1 City of Edina Waters on MPCA’s 303(d) Impaired Waters List
Reach/Waterbody Description Affected Use
Pollutant or
Stressor
Target Dates for
Starting/Complet
ing TMDL
Lake Cornelia1 Aquatic
Recreation
Nutrient/Eutrophic
ation Biological
Indicators
2012/2016
Lake Edina2 Aquatic
Recreation
Nutrient/Eutrophic
ation Biological
Indicators
2013/2017
Nine Mile Creek3 Headwaters to
Minnesota River
Aquatic Life Fish
Bioassessments
2005/2009
Nine Mile Creek3 Headwaters to
Minnesota River
Aquatic Life Chloride 2005/2009
Nine Mile Creek4 Headwaters to
Minnesota River
Aquatic Life Turbidity 2005/2009
Minnehaha Creek5 Lake Minnetonka to
Mississippi River
Aquatic Life Fish
Bioassessments
2007/2012
Minnehaha Creek5 Lake Minnetonka to
Mississippi River
Aquatic
Recreation
Fecal Coliform 2007/2012
Minnehaha Creek5 Lake Minnetonka to
Mississippi River
Aquatic Life Chloride 2007/2012
Minnehaha Creek6 Lake Minnetonka to
Mississippi River
Aquatic Life Dissolved Oxygen 2009/2012
1 Draft 2010 303(d) list indicates a target start date of 2013 and completion date of 2018
2 Draft 2010 303(d) list indicates a target completion date of 2018
3 Draft 2010 303(d) list indicates a target completion date of 2010
4 Nine Mile Creek has been delisted for a turbidity impairment on the Draft 2010 303(d) List
5 Draft 2010 303(d) list indicates a target start date of 2009
6 Draft 2010 303(d) list includes a dissolved oxygen impairment for Minnehaha Creek (was not on the 2008
303(d) list.
15.1.3.1 Nine Mile Creek
Nine Mile Creek is currently on the 303(d) Impaired Waters List for several aquatic life impairments,
including excess chloride, fish bioassessment, and turbidity. In 2007, the MPCA and NMCWD began
development of a chloride TMDL for the creek, to be completed in 2010. The City of Edina will
continue to participate in the stakeholder process for the chloride TMDL. The loading allocation and
implementation plan that results from the TMDL will focus on reducing road salt application, where
possible, and other BMPs to reduce the amount of salt that reaches the creek.
The Nine Mile Creek is also listed for a fish biota impairment. In 2009, the MPCA and NMCWD
began development of a TMDL to address the biotic impairment. Stakeholder meetings have been
held and the draft TMDL report is to be completed in early 2010.
Barr Engineering Company 15-10
P:\Mpls\23 MN\27\23271072 Edina Water Resources Mgmt Plan Update\WorkFiles\Report\December 15 2011 FINAL
DRAFT\Edina_SWMP_FINAL_v1.docx
In 2002, the Nine Mile Creek was listed for turbidity impairment. In 2008-2009, the NMCWD
disputed the impairment, based on evaluation of historical turbidity data collected from various
reaches of the creek. The MPCA has concurred that the creek is not impaired for turbidity, and the
impairment has been removed in the 2010 draft 303(d) list.
15.1.3.2 Minnehaha Creek
Minnehaha Creek is currently on the 303(d) list for several impairments, including excess chloride,
fecal coliform, and fish biota impairment. Lake Hiawatha, located on Minnehaha Creek downstream
of the City of Edina, is also on the impaired waters list for excess nutrients and eutrophication
biological indicators. The MPCA and MCWD initiated the TMDL development process in 2009 to
address bacteria, nutrients and chloride in Minnehaha Creek and downstream Lake Hiawatha. The
TMDL development process will also likely address the biological impairment for the creek. The
City of Edina will continue to participate in the stakeholder process for the Minnehaha Creek/Lake
Hiawatha TMDL.
The MPCA’s draft 2010 303(d) list also includes an aquatic life impairment for Minnehaha Creek
due to low dissolved oxygen levels.
15.1.3.3 Lake Cornelia
Lake Cornelia (North Basin) was included on the MPCA’s 303(d) list in 2008 for excess nutrients
and eutrophication biological indicators, with a targeted TMDL start date of 2012 and completion
date of 2016. The MPCA’s draft 2010 303(d) list extends the targeted TMDL start and completion
dates to 2013 and 2018, respectively.
In 2004-2005, the NMCWD completed a Draft Use Attainability Analysis for Lake Cornelia, which
is a scientific assessment of a water body’s physical, chemical, and biological condition. The study
included a water quality assessment and prescription of protective and/or remedial measures for the
lake and its tributary watershed. In 2008-2009, the NMCWD collected additional data on the lake’s
water quality to verify the conclusions of the draft Use Attainability Analysis and evaluate several
additional remedial measures to improve lake water quality. It is anticipated that the completed UAA
will be used as a starting point for the TMDL development process in the future. The City of Edina
will partner with the NMCWD in evaluating potential remedial measures for the lake and its
watershed and implementing recommended BMPs to improve the quality of Lake Cornelia. The City
of Edina will also participate in the stakeholder process for TMDL development.
15.1.3.4 Lake Edina
Lake Edina was included on the MPCA’s 303(d) list in 2008 for excess nutrients and eutrophication
biological indicators, with a targeted TMDL start date of 2013 and completion date of 2017. The
MPCA’s draft 2010 303(d) list extends the targeted TMDL completion date to 2018.
For the MPCA to list a water body (besides a river or creek) on the impaired waters list, it must meet
the MPCA’s definition of a “lake” and there must be sufficient data to determine if the lake is
Barr Engineering Company 15-11
P:\Mpls\23 MN\27\23271072 Edina Water Resources Mgmt Plan Update\WorkFiles\Report\December 15 2011 FINAL
DRAFT\Edina_SWMP_FINAL_v1.docx
impaired (see MPCA guidance manual, 2005). The City will work with the NMCWD to assess
whether Lake Edina meets the MPCA’s definition of a “lake”. If it is determined that the waterbody
does not meet the appropriate “lake” criteria, efforts will be made to remove this lake from the
303(d) list.
15.1.3.5 Other Downstream Waterbodies
There are also impaired lakes and streams outside the city that receive stormwater from Edina and
will be the subject of TMDL studies, including Lake Hiawatha (discussed in Section 15.1.3.2), the
Mississippi and Minnesota Rivers, and Lake Pepin. Lake Pepin is located downstream of the city via
the Mississippi River. It is on the impaired waters list for excess nutrients, and a large-scale TMDL
development effort is underway by the MPCA. Once the Lake Pepin TMDL is completed, it could
impact the City of Edina, since the area tributary to Lake Pepin is the entire Mississippi River and
Minnesota River basins upstream of the lake.
In addition to TMDLs for specific impaired waters, the MPCA has developed a statewide TMDL for
mercury. Mercury in Minnesota fish comes almost entirely from atmospheric deposition, with
approximately 90 percent originating outside of Minnesota (MPCA, 2004). Because the main source
of mercury comes from outside the state and the atmospheric deposition of mercury is relatively
uniform across the state, the TMDL for mercury is 11 kg/year for the entire state.
15.2 Specific MCWD Tasks/Issues
The Minnehaha Creek Watershed District (MCWD) Comprehensive Water Resources Management
Plan (MCWD Plan) requires the City of Edina to address the following specific items as part of this
CWRMP’s implementation program.
15.2.1 Phosphorus Load Reduction
The MCWD Plan has identified required annual phosphorus loading reductions for each Local
Governmental Unit (LGU) within the watershed in an effort to improve downstream water quality.
The MCWD Plan requires that the City reduce its annual phosphorus load by 67 pounds and that the
City include “strategies and specific steps for achievement of the prescribed loading reductions,
including operational, land use, and capital improvements implemented since 2000, and those
planned for the future” in its local water management plan.
The City of Edina has met its required phosphorus load reduction through implementation of capital
improvements since 2000, including the Pamela Park Water Quality Improvement Project (annual
reduction of 88 lbs), installation of underground stormwater treatment structures and sump manholes
as part of recent street reconstruction efforts (annual reduction of 8 lbs), and its biannual street
sweeping program (annual reduction of 80 lbs). Further phosphorus loading reductions are
anticipated between 2010 and 2019 as a result of the City’s impervious surface reduction efforts
(estimated annual reduction of 3 lbs). These capital improvements and practices, and the associated
phosphorus load reductions, are discussed in more detail in the following sections.
Barr Engineering Company 15-12
P:\Mpls\23 MN\27\23271072 Edina Water Resources Mgmt Plan Update\WorkFiles\Report\December 15 2011 FINAL
DRAFT\Edina_SWMP_FINAL_v1.docx
In addition to these capital improvements and practices, the City will continue to seek opportunities
to implement infiltration and other BMPs as part of their street improvement and repair work. Based
on current projections, the City expects to undertake several road improvement projects within the
portion of the City that drains to Minnehaha Creek in the next 10 years. A map of the City’s
2010-2019 anticipated local bituminous street reconstruction projects is included as Appendix C.
The City will seek to partner with the MCWD to explore opportunities for incorporating water
quality improvement BMPs as part of the street reconstruction projects.
15.2.1.1 Pamela Park Water Quality Improvement Project
In 2001- 2002, the Pamela Park Water Quality Improvement Project was constructed to improve the
water quality conditions of Pamela Lake and reduce the external phosphorus and sediment loads to
the lake and to Minnehaha Creek. The capital improvement project, which was initiated by the City
of Edina and completed in partnership with the MCWD, included construction of three stormwater
ponds in the northern part of Pamela Park, construction of two stormwater treatment wetlands on the
south side of Pamela Lake, and removal of accumulated sediment from open water areas of Pamela
Lake.
The three stormwater ponds in the northern part of Pamela Park were constructed in series and treat
stormwater runoff from a drainage area of approximately 304 acres. The drainage area is primarily
single-family residential land use, but also includes approximately 41 acres of institutional land use
(Edina Community Center/Normandale Elementary, Southview Middle School, and Concord
School). Prior to construction of these stormwater ponds, runoff from much of this drainage area was
discharged directly to Minnehaha Creek. Runoff from the remainder of the drainage area discharged
to the wetland complex located upstream of Pamela Lake, which outlets to Minnehaha Creek via a
concrete weir and culvert under 58th Street.
Two stormwater treatment wetlands were constructed on the south side of Pamela Lake at the
locations of two major storm sewer outfalls to the lake. These wetlands, which were constructed at
the edges of the pre-existing Lake Pamela wetland, provide pretreatment of stormwater prior to its
discharge into the lake. The 132-acre drainage area to these treatment wetlands is primarily single-
family residential land use.
In addition to construction of the stormwater ponds, the capital improvement project also included
removal of accumulated sediment in Pamela Lake. Over the years, nutrient and sediment loads
flowing directly into Pamela Lake from stormwater runoff had significantly reduced the water depths
within the lake. As part of the project, much of the accumulated sediment was removed from the lake
to restore the lake to its ‘original’ conditions, improving lake water quality and habitat and increasing
the water quality treatment achieved through sedimentation as stormwater passes through the lake to
Minnehaha Creek.
A P8 water quality model was developed to assess the annual phosphorus removal achieved through
construction of the stormwater ponds and treatment wetlands. The model was run for a twenty-year
time period (1981-2001). Based on the modeling results, the average annual phosphorus removal
Barr Engineering Company 15-13
P:\Mpls\23 MN\27\23271072 Edina Water Resources Mgmt Plan Update\WorkFiles\Report\December 15 2011 FINAL
DRAFT\Edina_SWMP_FINAL_v1.docx
achieved from construction of the stormwater ponds and treatment wetlands is approximately 90
pounds.
In 2005, portions of the Edina Community Center and adjacent school complex were redeveloped,
which triggered the MCWD’s stormwater treatment requirements. In lieu of constructing an onsite
stormwater treatment pond, the MCWD allowed the school district to utilize the Pamela Park
stormwater treatment ponds to meet their treatment requirements. The school redevelopment results
in an additional six pounds of annual phosphorus loading to the Pamela Park stormwater ponds, of
which approximately two pounds is removed prior to discharge to Minnehaha Creek. The MCWD has
indicated that the City’s required phosphorus load reduction cannot be attained through
implementation of the MCWD stormwater rules. Therefore, the portion of the average annual
phosphorus removal from the Pamela Park water quality improvement project attributed to the school
redevelopment (two of the 90 lbs phosphorus removed annually) is not included as part of the City’s
required phosphorus load reduction. This results in an average annual phosphorus removal of 88
pounds due to construction of the Pamela Park stormwater ponds and treatment wetlands.
15.2.1.2 Underground Stormwater Treatment Structures and Sump Manholes
Since 2000, the City of Edina has completed several significant street reconstruction projects in the
portion of the City that drains to Minnehaha Creek. As part of these projects, the City has upgraded
the stormwater management system to include sump manholes and underground stormwater
treatment structures, which reduce the amount of sediment and phosphorus that are discharged to
downstream waterbodies. In total, fifteen sump manholes and twelve underground stormwater
treatment structures have been installed since 2000 in the portion of the city that drains to Minnehaha
Creek. The locations of these structures are shown in Figure 15.1.
To estimate the amount of annual phosphorus removal achieved through installation of the sump
manholes and underground stormwater treatment structures, the Sizing Hydrodynamic Separators and
Manholes (SHSAM) model was utilized. SHSAM is a model developed by Barr Engineering in
2008-2009 to simulate the sediment removal from hydrodynamic separators and sump manholes,
based on the laboratory research conducted by the St. Anthony Falls Laboratory (SAFL), University
of Minnesota. The SHSAM model uses the manufacturer-specific performance functions developed
by the SAFL, in conjunction with site-specific watershed parameters, local precipitation records, and
sediment characteristics to estimate sediment removal performance (Mohseni, 2009). A relationship
between phosphorus and suspended solids in stormwater runoff was developed to estimate the
amount of phosphorus removal annually from the sump manholes and underground stormwater
treatment structures (Barr, 2009). Based on the modeling results, the fifteen sump manholes and
twelve underground stormwater treatment structures result in an eight pound reduction in average
annual phosphorus loading to Minnehaha Creek.
15.2.1.3 Street Sweeping
The City of Edina implements a biannual street sweeping program, sweeping all streets at least twice
a year (typically spring and fall), and more often on an as-needed basis. City records indicate that
Barr Engineering Company 15-14
P:\Mpls\23 MN\27\23271072 Edina Water Resources Mgmt Plan Update\WorkFiles\Report\December 15 2011 FINAL
DRAFT\Edina_SWMP_FINAL_v1.docx
approximately 2,500 cubic yards of debris were collected from the City's streets in the fall of 2008
and spring of 2009.
Quantifying the phosphorus load reduction from street sweeping can be difficult, as relevant, site-
specific data is often limited and the available research documents a wide range of pollutant removal
effectiveness from street sweeping. Information regarding the mass of suspended sediment or
phosphorus in the City’s street sweepings from the fall of 2008 and spring of 2009 was not available.
To quantify the mass of total suspended solids (TSS) swept, it was estimated that 5.5% of the volume
of street sweepings collected was of a particle size that falls into the P8 TSS particle size class
distribution, based on sample results from Eden Prairie sweepings (Eden Prairie Draft
Nondegradation Assessment, 2007). Assuming a phosphorus load of 569 mg TP/kg total solids from
streets in residential areas (USGS, 1999), the estimated annual city-wide phosphorus reduction from
the street sweeping program is 350 lbs. Of this, the estimated portion of the phosphorus load
reduction within the MCWD is approximately 80 lbs, based on the proportion of the city’s total
impervious area within the MCWD.
15.2.1.4 Impervious Surface Reduction
In recent years, the city has strived to reduce the impervious footprint of its roadways, where
feasible, as part of its street reconstruction program. Between 2005 and 2009, the city-wide net
decrease in impervious surfaces as a part of road reconstruction projects was 0.95 acres. The majority
of this decrease was within the portion of the city that drains to Nine Mile Creek, and therefore the
resulting phosphorus load reduction to Minnehaha Creek is negligible.
Based on the City’s street reconstruction plan for 2010 to 2019 (Appendix C), there are ten
neighborhood street reconstruction projects anticipated in the Minnehaha Creek watershed. Assuming
conditions will be conducive to achieving impervious surface reductions similar to those of recent
projects (2005-2009), a decrease of 1.7 acres of impervious surface is anticipated. This translates to
an annual phosphorus load reduction of approximately three lbs, based on the Simple Method for
estimating phosphorus export (MPCA, 2005).
15.2.2 Landlocked Basins
The MCWD Plan identified two landlocked subwatershed units: one located in the northeast portion
of the city (White Oaks area), and the other located west of T.H. 100 and north of Vernon Avenue
(Interlachen area). The MCWD Plan requires that the City discuss and incorporate strategies to
minimize new stormwater volumes and address any flooding issues in these areas. These areas are
discussed in further detail below.
15.2.2.1 White Oaks Landlocked Area
The MCWD Plan identified a landlocked area located in the northeast portion of the city, generally
south of Sunnyside Road and north of West 49th Street, east of Arden Avenue and west of France
Avenue. To assess the flood potential in this landlocked area, the 100-year, 10-day snowmelt event
was simulated in XP-SWMM, assuming impervious (frozen ground) conditions. Comparison of the
Barr Engineering Company 15-15
P:\Mpls\23 MN\27\23271072 Edina Water Resources Mgmt Plan Update\WorkFiles\Report\December 15 2011 FINAL
DRAFT\Edina_SWMP_FINAL_v1.docx
modeling results with the City’s 2-foot topographic information indicates that there is potential for
the 100-year high water levels to impact structures in the following subwatersheds: MHN_1,
MHN_49, MHN_12, MHN_65. To assess the potential for flooding, the City will complete a field
survey to determine the low entry elevations of the potentially impacted structures and a detailed
feasibility study to identify remedial measures, if necessary.
15.2.2.2 Interlachen Landlocked Area
The MCWD Plan identified a landlocked area located west of T.H. 100 and north of Vernon Avenue.
This area, which encompasses subwatersheds EI_11, EI_12, EI_24, EI_13, and EI_19, currently
drains to a wetland complex (EI_19) just south of Meadowbrook Golf Course. Two-foot topographic
information for the area indicates that the natural overflow elevation between the landlocked wetland
complex and the Meadowbrook Golf Course is approximately 885 feet M.S.L. Based on the FEMA
Flood Insurance Study for Hennepin County (FEMA, 2004), the 100-year flood level of Minnehaha
Creek as it flows through the golf course is 892 feet M.S.L.
The maximum flood elevation that the City will allow in the wetland area (EI_19) is 888 feet M.S.L,
based on review of the city’s two-foot topographic data in relation to structures adjacent to the
wetland. To prevent the backflow of water from the Meadowbrook Golf Course to the wetland
complex (EI_19), it is recommended that an embankment be constructed/raised between the wetland
and the golf course to an elevation of at least 892 feet M.S.L. Upon raising the embankment, a
pumped outlet will be required to keep the flood elevation below 888 feet M.S.L. The City should
establish a management plan to address necessary pumping scenarios. Previous analyses for the area
indicate a 1 cfs pumped outlet would be sufficient.
15.2.3 Flooding or Modeled High Water Locations
The MCWD Plan identified several locations in Edina where there are known or modeled flooding
issues. These areas were evaluated and are discussed in further detail below.
15.2.3.1 Kresse Circle
The area near Kresse Circle in Northeast Edina drains to a land-locked basin located directly east of
Maloney Avenue and north of the Interlachen Country Club parking lot (Subwatershed HO_19).
This land-locked basin has a pumped outlet; stormwater discharge is conveyed northward via a
forcemain into the Hopkins system, which appears to then flow east along Excelsior Boulevard and
eventually into Minnehaha Creek. There is a natural overflow on the east side of the pond at an
elevation of approximately 916 feet Mean Sea Level (M.S.L.);water will flow eastward into the
Interlachen Country Club golf course. The City is not aware of any flooding issues at this location.
15.2.3.2 Minnehaha Creek at West 58
th Street
Based on the most current FEMA Flood Insurance Study for Hennepin County (FEMA, 2004), the
100-year flood level of Minnehaha Creek just north of West 58th Street is approximately 861 ft
M.S.L. At this elevation, the creek will overtop its banks north of West 58th Street and flow
Barr Engineering Company 15-16
P:\Mpls\23 MN\27\23271072 Edina Water Resources Mgmt Plan Update\WorkFiles\Report\December 15 2011 FINAL
DRAFT\Edina_SWMP_FINAL_v1.docx
westward. The creek overtopping will result in inundation/ponding in subwatersheds MHS_81
(stormwater pond north of West 58th Street), LP_2 (including portions of West 58th Street), LP_25
(stormwater ponds south of West 58th Street), and portions of Pamela Park (including Lake Pamela
and the wetland complex to the north of Lake Pamela, Subwatersheds LP_14 and LP_26).
To further evaluate the flooding in this area and the potential impact to nearby properties, the City
will complete a stormwater analysis and detailed feasibility, if necessary. The City will seek to
partner with the MCWD to address this potential flooding problem through the sharing of hydrologic
and hydraulic modeling information and requesting funding assistance.
15.2.3.3 Utility Bridge in Arden Park
The MCWD Plan has identified a potential flooding issue at or near the utility bridge in Arden Park,
located in Northeast Edina. The referenced bridge is a pedestrian bridge that crosses Minnehaha
Creek just north of West 53rd Street. The City is not aware of any flooding problems in this area.
Potential inundation of this bridge in a 100-year precipitation event is not critical, as it would not
result in property damage to nearby homes nor pose a significant risk to public safety.
15.2.4 Flow Velocity and Erosion
The MCWD Plan identified three locations where the MCWD’s modeling indicated existing and
future high pipe peak flow velocities may require erosion control measures or energy dissipaters at
inlets and outlets: Minnehaha Creek downstream of 50th Street, storm sewer discharge that enters
Minnehaha Creek just north of Pamela Park, and the storm sewer outfall into the ditch that leads to
Minnehaha Creek just north of Pamela Park. Per the MCWD Plan requirement, the City assessed the
need for erosion control at these locations. A visual observation field inspection was performed in
the fall of 2009. At the time of inspection, stream flow was nonexistent, which made for ideal
inspection conditions. Observations and recommendations for each site are summarized below.
15.2.4.1 Downstream of 50
th Street
The City of Edina has recently completed a repair/improvement project of the 50th Street dam
structure, including installation of a cable-concrete blanket below the spillway. Beyond the cable
concrete, the channel bottom is well armored. South of 50th Street, the channel butts up against a
high bank on the west side of the channel. There is moderate erosion on this bank; however it is
heavily forested and very steep. The erosion appears to be occurring slowly and does not warrant the
installation of countermeasures at this time.
Two drain tile outlets were also observed approximately 500 feet downstream of 50th Street on the
west bank, near the bottom of the slope. These outlets are apparently private systems originating
from the Edina Country Club. One of the lines is perched higher than the other and has a significant
scour hole below it. This line may have been abandoned and replaced with the other observed line,
but water was observed dripping from its end. The City of Edina encourages the MCWD to work
with the Edina Country Club to verify whether this line is abandoned or not and repair the scour hole.
Barr Engineering Company 15-17
P:\Mpls\23 MN\27\23271072 Edina Water Resources Mgmt Plan Update\WorkFiles\Report\December 15 2011 FINAL
DRAFT\Edina_SWMP_FINAL_v1.docx
15.2.4.2 Storm Sewer Discharge North of Pamela Park
A 30-inch RCP discharges to a channel leading to Minnehaha Creek immediately north of West 58th
Street. There is a moderate scour hole downstream of the culvert. The scour is approaching a fairly
large cottonwood tree on the west bank, and it may be desirable to place some fieldstone riprap along
this bank to prevent further undercutting. Otherwise, the channel is relatively free of erosion and
appears to be quite stable.
15.2.4.3 Storm Sewer Outfall to Ditch North of Pamela Park
A 48-inch RCP storm sewer discharges to a ditch located approximately 300 feet north of West 58th
Street. The ditch flows east to Minnehaha Creek; a weir is present directly downstream of the storm
sewer outlet at the head of the ditch. The ditch has a mild slope and is filled with downed timber on
the downstream end. Since there was very little flow during the observation, it is not clear whether
the debris presents any problem during higher flows. Only minor, site specific erosion was observed
in the channel and no action is recommended.
15.2.5 Potential Capital Projects and Other Issues
The MCWD Plan identified a potential capital improvement project in Edina to implement a stream
restoration project on Reach 14 of Minnehaha Creek. This reach extends from France Avenue to 54th
Avenue West. This project would include streambank stabilization, in-stream habitat enhancement,
and buffer enhancement.
The MCWD has historically had jurisdiction and maintains responsibility over county ditches within
its boundaries. County ditch #17, located in the far northeast portion of Edina (Morningside area)
has been converted to local storm sewer and no longer performs its historical function and is used
mainly as a local, inter-community stormwater conveyance. The MCWD is interested in transferring
jurisdiction of Ditch #17 to the City. The City is not interested in transferring the jurisdiction of
County Ditch #17 at this time. However, the City will seek to partner with the MCWD to address
identified flooding problems related to this storm sewer system (see Section 12.3.1.1 for additional
details).
15.2.6 Housekeeping Requirements
The MCWD Plan requires that the City consider changes in housekeeping (land management)
practices in the CWRMP. The City of Edina implements many ‘housekeeping’ best management
practices as part of its SWPPP, and reviews these practices annually as part of their annual SWPPP
reporting. No specific modifications have been made to the City’s housekeeping practices as a result
of this plan update. However, modifications will be made to the City’s housekeeping practices on an
as-needed basis, in response to requirements by the MPCA or local water quality improvement
efforts. For example, the City has been adjusting winter salting practices to address future
requirements of the Nine Mile Creek Chloride TMDL, including using calibrated salt application
equipment to optimize salt usage. The City is also considering use of Global Positioning System
(GPS) units to further reduce salt usage.
Barr Engineering Company 15-18
P:\Mpls\23 MN\27\23271072 Edina Water Resources Mgmt Plan Update\WorkFiles\Report\December 15 2011 FINAL
DRAFT\Edina_SWMP_FINAL_v1.docx
15.3 Specific NMCWD Tasks/Issues
15.3.1 Use Attainability Analyses
The NMCWD has developed Use Attainability Analyses (UAAs) for Mirror, Arrowhead, Indianhead,
and Cornelia lakes. A UAA is an intensive, watershed-based lake study that diagnoses water quality
problems and their causes and evaluates feasible alternative improvement measures. The UAAs for
each of these lakes are described in further detail in the following sections.
15.3.1.1 Mirror Lake Use Attainability Analysis
In 2003-2004, the NMCWD completed the Draft Mirror Lake Use Attainability Analysis (Barr
Engineering Co., 2004) based on water quality data collected from the lake in 2001. The watershed
and in-lake modeling analyses indicated that the internal release of phosphorus accounts for the
largest portion of annual phosphorus loading to Mirror Lake (approximately 50%), with watershed
loading comprising approximately 45% and atmospheric deposition accounting for the remaining
phosphorus loading.
In the summer of 2004, the NMCWD collected additional water quality data for Mirror Lake, and the
watershed and in-lake modeling analyses where re-evaluated to verify the conclusions of the draft
Use Attainability Analysis. The preliminary management recommendations from these efforts
included implementation of BMPs in the Mirror Lake watershed, continued monitoring of aquatic
plant populations and potential aquatic plant management to control Curlyleaf pondweed, and an in-
lake application of alum (aluminum sulfate) to limit the internal phosphorus loading to the lake. The
City of Edina will work with the NMCWD to further evaluate and implement the recommendations
of the draft UAA as deemed appropriate.
15.3.1.2 Arrowhead and Indianhead Lakes Use Attainability Analysis
In 2004-2006, the NMCWD completed the Draft Arrowhead and Indianhead Lakes Use Attainability
Analysis (Barr Engineering Co., 2006). The NMCWD’s proposed management strategy for these
lakes is to “protect”, which means “to avoid significant degradation from point and nonpoint
pollution sources and from wetland alterations, in order to maintain existing beneficial uses, aquatic
and wetland habitats, and the level of water quality necessary to protect these uses in receiving
waters”.
The watershed and in-lake modeling analyses completed for Arrowhead Lake indicated that
watershed loading is the largest source of phosphorus to the lake (approximately 75%), with internal
phosphorus loading (likely due to die-back of Curlyleaf pondweed and the release of phosphorus
from lake sediment) comprising approximately 20%, and atmospheric deposition accounting for the
remaining phosphorus loading. The watershed and in-lake modeling analyses completed for
Indianhead Lake indicated that watershed loading is the primary source of phosphorus to the lake;
internal loading was not found to be a significant source of phosphorus to Indianhead Lake.
Barr Engineering Company 15-19
P:\Mpls\23 MN\27\23271072 Edina Water Resources Mgmt Plan Update\WorkFiles\Report\December 15 2011 FINAL
DRAFT\Edina_SWMP_FINAL_v1.docx
Preliminary management recommendations for these two lakes included continued periodic
monitoring of aquatic plant populations to assess the growth of undesirable non-native species such
as Eurasian watermilfoil and Curlyleaf pondweed. To reduce the internal phosphorus loading in
Arrowhead Lake, Curlyleaf pondweed management was suggested. The City of Edina will work with
the NMCWD to further evaluate and implement the recommendations of the draft UAA as deemed
appropriate.
15.3.1.3 Lake Cornelia Use Attainability Analysis
In 2004-2006, the NMCWD completed the Draft Lake Cornelia Use Attainability Analysis (Barr
Engineering Co., 2006). In 2008-2009, the NMCWD collected additional data on the lake’s water
quality to verify the conclusions of the draft Use Attainability Analysis and evaluate several
additional remedial measures to improve lake water quality. It is anticipated that the completed UAA
will be used as a starting point for the TMDL development process in the future. The City of Edina
will partner with the NMCWD in evaluating potential remedial measures for the lake and its
watershed and implementing recommended BMPs to improve the quality of Lake Cornelia. The City
of Edina will also participate in the stakeholder process for TMDL development.
15.3.2 Water Quality Improvement Projects
In 2009 the City of Edina petitioned the NMCWD for assistance in planning, implementing, and
funding various water quality improvements throughout the portion of the city in the Nine Mile
Creek Watershed District. The petition includes, but is not limited to, streambed stabilization
projects, off road multi-purpose trail accompanying the creek to the extent possible, creek corridor
management, and improvements of lake water quality. The NMCWD passed a resolution accepting
the City’s petition, upon several conditions. The NMCWD engineer will be preparing a feasibility
report in appropriate phases to reflect 1) streambank restoration, including streambank stabilization,
removal of sediment deposits, deadfalls, and other debris, maintenance of Bredesen Park, and other
measures to restore natural function, scenic values, and enhance public access, including ponds,
storm sewer devices, or other improvements appropriate to achieving the NMCWD’s water quality
goals identified in their Water Management Plan (NMCWD Plan) or in a NMCWD Use Attainability
Analysis (UAA), and 2) lake water quality improvements, through implementation of the NMCWD
Use Attainability Analyses prepared for Edina, Arrowhead, Cornelia, Indianhead, and Mirror lakes,
including ponds, storm sewer devices, or other improvements to the extent they are necessary to
achieve the water quality goals identified in the NMCWD Plan or in a NMCWD UAA. The City of
Edina will continue to work with the NMCWD in development of the above mentioned feasibility
analyses and in implementation of the resulting water quality improvement projects.
15.4 Financial Considerations
Implementation of the proposed regulatory controls, programs and improvements that are identified
in the plan will have a financial impact on the City. To establish how significant this impact will be,
a review of the means and ability of the City to fund these controls, programs, and improvements is
Barr Engineering Company 15-20
P:\Mpls\23 MN\27\23271072 Edina Water Resources Mgmt Plan Update\WorkFiles\Report\December 15 2011 FINAL
DRAFT\Edina_SWMP_FINAL_v1.docx
necessary. Table 15.2 lists potential sources of revenue for implementation of the water resources
management efforts outlined in this plan.
Table 15.2 Potential Funding Sources for Plan Implementation
Description of Funding Sources Revenue Generated
1. Revenue generated by City’s Storm Water Utility $1,800,000/yr.
2. Special assessments for local improvements made
under the authority granted by Minnesota Statutes
Chapter 429
Variable depending on activities undertaken
3. Revenue generated by the Watershed Management
Special Tax Districts provided for under
Minnesota Statutes Chapter 473.882.
Variable depending on activities undertaken
4. For projects being completed by or in cooperation
with the Nine Mile Creek and Minnehaha Creek
Watershed Districts, project funds could be
obtained from watershed district levies associated
with their administrative funds, construction
funds, preliminary funds, repair and maintenance
funds or survey and data acquisition funds, as
provided for in Minnesota Statutes Chapter
103D.905.
Variable depending on activities undertaken
5. Grant monies that may be secured from various
local, regional, County, State, or Federal agencies.
This would include MnDOT, MPCA, Metropolitan
Council, the DNR, and others
Variable depending on activities undertaken
6. Other Sources: These may be other sources of
funding for storm water activities such as tax
increment financing (TIF), state aid, etc. The City
will continue to explore additional revenue
sources as they become available.
Variable
7. Tax abatement
15.5 Plan Update and Amendment Procedure
It is the intention of the City to have this Comprehensive Water Resource Management Plan
reviewed and approved by the Nine Mile Creek and Minnehaha Creek Watershed Districts. Once
approved, no significant changes to this plan can be made without the approval of the proposed
revisions by the watershed districts within the city that are affected by the change. Significant
changes to the local plan shall be made known to the following parties:
x City Manager, Director of Public Works, and City Engineer
x Affected Watershed District within the City
Barr Engineering Company 15-21
P:\Mpls\23 MN\27\23271072 Edina Water Resources Mgmt Plan Update\WorkFiles\Report\December 15 2011 FINAL
DRAFT\Edina_SWMP_FINAL_v1.docx
x Metropolitan Council
x City Council
Following notification of the above parties, they shall have 60 days to comment on the proposed
revisions. Failure to respond within 60 days constitutes approval. Upon receipt of approvals from
the affected watershed districts within the city, any proposed amendments will be considered
approved.
Minor changes to the Plan shall be defined as changes that do not modify the goals, policies, or
commitments expressly defined in this plan by the City. Adjustment to subwatershed boundaries will
be considered minor changes provided that the change will have no significant impact on the rate or
quality in which storm water runoff is discharged from the city boundaries. Minor changes to this
plan can be made by the staff at the City without outside review.
This Comprehensive Water Resources Management Plan (CWRMP) will guide the City of Edina’s
activities through 2020, or until superseded by adoption and approval of a subsequent CWRMP.
Amendments to the CWRMP will be required within two years of the adoption of an updated
watershed plan by the watershed districts, consistent with 8410.0160.
15.6 Regulatory Framework and Agency Responsibilities
Various units of government are involved in regulating water resource related activities including:
the City of Edina, watershed management organizations, the Metropolitan Council, Hennepin
County, the Minnesota Department of Natural Resources, the Minnesota Board of Water and Soil
Resources, the Minnesota Pollution Control Agency, the Minnesota Department of Health, the
Minnesota Environmental Quality Board, the US Corps of Engineers, and the Minnesota Department
of Transportation.
15.6.1 City of Edina
The City of Edina manages stormwater to protect life, property, waterbodies within the city, and
receiving waters outside the city. However, the City relies heavily on the Nine Mile Creek and
Minnehaha Creek watershed districts for implementation of water resource protection rules and
requirements. The City defers Local Governmental Unit (LGU) authority to the NMCWD and
MCWD for floodplain management and drainage alterations, wetlands management, stormwater
management, erosion and sediment control, waterbody crossings and structures, shoreline and
streambank improvements, and sediment removal.
The City of Edina also defers Local Governmental Unit (LGU) authority for the Wetland
Conservation Act to the NMCWD and MCWD. This includes requiring and verifying that all
projects impacting wetlands meet the requirements of the Minnesota Wetland Conservation Act. For
projects in or around wetlands that do not trigger WCA regulation or NMCWD/MCWD involvement,
the City is considering incorporating wetland management requirements into their zoning code,
Barr Engineering Company 15-22
P:\Mpls\23 MN\27\23271072 Edina Water Resources Mgmt Plan Update\WorkFiles\Report\December 15 2011 FINAL
DRAFT\Edina_SWMP_FINAL_v1.docx
which is being updated in 2009-2010. The Board of Water and Soil Resources serves as both a state
administrator of the programs associated with the WCA, as well as providing technical assistance to
LGUs administering the WCA.
The City of Edina is required to meet the conditions of the NPDES Phase II MS4 General Permit and
to implement its SWPPP. The City continues to actively engage the MPCA and others to keep its
permit and implementation up-to-date with regard to technology and regulations.
The City utilizes its Development Review process to address stormwater management and ensure
water resource protection within the city. Engineering staff review development and redevelopment
proposals to ensure that the stormwater management policies and standards detailed in Section 3.0 of
this plan are met. Engineering staff also consult the City’s Wellhead Protection Plan to ensure that
development and redevelopment proposals are in line with the protective measures established for the
City’s sensitive groundwater resources.
Staff from the City’s planning department review development and redevelopment proposals with the
guidance of the City's long-range Comprehensive Plan and Zoning Ordinance. In addition to the
incorporating the policies and design standards of this CWRMP, the Edina Comprehensive Plan
(City of Edina, 2009) includes policies, principals, and guidelines that integrate water resources
protection and management with land use planning. Among these include the City’s land use policy
to “grow and develop in a sustainable manner that will protect its high quality natural environment,
promote energy efficiency and conservation of natural resources” and to “maintain the current open
space and wetlands acreage and seek to expand it whenever possible”. The Comprehensive Plan
encourages reductions in impervious surfaces and associated stormwater runoff from redevelopment
sites and parking lot design that promotes stormwater infiltration., and also encourages protection
and improvement of urban forests, which provides stormwater management benefits, among others.
The City’s zoning ordinance is used by staff in the planning department to guide development and
redevelopment within the city. The zoning ordinance establishes required setbacks from naturally
occurring lakes, ponds, and streams. In some cases, the buffer requirements of the watershed districts
may be more stringent, upon which the watershed district requirements supersede. The City’s zoning
ordinance also addresses development within the floodplain districts of the city.
The City of Edina is basically fully developed; thus land alteration activities are primarily of a
redevelopment nature. As the city redevelops, the City utilizes the policies of the Edina
Comprehensive Plan, the zoning ordinance, and this CWRMP to encourage low-impact site design.
The City also relies on implementation of the rules and regulations of the Nine Mile Creek and
Minnehaha Creek watershed districts to promote low-impact site design.
The City and its residents highly value the parks, open space, and natural resources throughout the
city. Through their Comprehensive Plan, they have identified the preservation of natural resources
and, where appropriate, restoration of natural resources to create an environment that promotes
sustainable natural resources. The City plans to continue to work closely with the Nine Mile Creek
Barr Engineering Company 15-23
P:\Mpls\23 MN\27\23271072 Edina Water Resources Mgmt Plan Update\WorkFiles\Report\December 15 2011 FINAL
DRAFT\Edina_SWMP_FINAL_v1.docx
and Minnehaha Creek watershed districts to coordinate and support future efforts to create, protect,
and preserve wetland areas and restoration projects that improve shoreline stabilization, establish and
maintain environmentally sound shoreline buffer zones and other water quality best practice projects
(City of Edina, 2009).
The City of Edina currently owns and maintains approximately 350 acres of natural resource open
space areas, which includes 148 acres along the Nine Mile Creek right-of-way and 23 acres along the
Minnehaha Creek right-of-way. The City is basically fully developed, and is therefore no longer
actively acquiring additional property to develop as park land or open space. However, the City plans
to retain all of the current publicly owned park land and consider any additional property that may be
offered in the future as potential additional park property. The City will also seek to acquire
additional park and open space land as more private land may become available for public
acquisition.
15.6.2 Watershed Management Organizations
The Metropolitan Surface Water Management Act (Chapter 509, Laws of 1982, Minnesota Statute
Section 103B.201 to 103B.255 as amended) establishes requirements for watershed management
organizations to prepare watershed management plans within the Twin Cities Metropolitan Area.
The law requires these plans to focus on preserving and using natural water storage and retention
systems to:
x Improve water quality.
x Prevent flooding and erosion from surface flows.
x Promote groundwater recharge.
x Protect and enhance fish and wildlife habitat and water recreation facilities.
x Reduce, to the greatest practical extent, the public capital expenditures necessary to control
excessive volumes and rate of runoff and to improve water quality.
x Secure other benefits associated with proper management of surface water.
Edina lies within two major drainage areas. As a result two watershed management organizations
cover Edina, each with its own governing body; the Minnehaha Creek Watershed District (MCWD)
and the Nine Mile Creek Watershed District (NMCWD).
More information is available at: www.leg.state.mn.us/lg/statutes.asp
15.6.2.1 Minnehaha Creek Watershed District
The Minnehaha Creek Watershed District (MCWD) consists of 27 cities and 3 townships on the
western edge of the Twin Cities area. The MCWD adopted their most recent watershed management
Barr Engineering Company 15-24
P:\Mpls\23 MN\27\23271072 Edina Water Resources Mgmt Plan Update\WorkFiles\Report\December 15 2011 FINAL
DRAFT\Edina_SWMP_FINAL_v1.docx
plan (Minnehaha Creek Watershed District Comprehensive Water Resources Management Plan) on
July 5, 2007.
The MCWD maintains a robust regulatory program that requires development and some
redevelopment projects to treat and control the rate of stormwater discharge, using a variety of best
management practices (BMPs). Development and water resource related projects must apply for and
receive MCWD permits before work can begin.
The MCWD permitting program includes rules and permitting requirements for sediment and erosion
control, stormwater management (including stormwater runoff volume reductions and water quality
requirements), wetlands protection, shoreline improvements, floodplain alterations, and dredging.
Where lakes do not currently meet water quality goals, the MCWD uses three key strategies to
achieve load reductions: 1) rules requiring removal of at least 50 percent of new phosphorus loads
generated by new development on new permitted development and redevelopment; 2) management of
volumes generated by that new development; and 3) a requirement for stormwater plan approval
earlier in the development process.
In 2003 the MCWD completed a Functional Assessment of Wetlands that assigned wetlands in the
watershed to a management classification based on existing conditions. The MCWD will consider
amending its wetland regulatory program to manage wetlands on the basis of that classification.
The MCWD operates a Land Conservation Program that undertakes conservation activities ranging
from assisting property owners in enrolling property in conservation programs to acquiring
easements or fee title over high value resources. The MCWD Plan has identified Key Conservation
Areas, which are priority areas in the watershed where the conservation of land will improve the
characteristics of the aquatic ecosystem and the water quality locally and downstream.
The MCWD’s designated Key Conservation Areas within Edina generally follow Minnehaha Creek,
and fall mainly on park lands and riparian wetlands adjacent to the creek. Figure 15.2 shows the
portions of the MCWD’s Key Conservation Areas within the city that intersect with City-owned
property. The City will strive to protect and conserve the hydrologic and ecologic values of these
areas and other natural areas in the city through implementation of their stormwater management
goals and policies (Section 3.0) and development/re-development review process. These resources
will also be protected through implementation of the MCWD’s rules and permitting program.
The MCWD operates a watershed-wide Strategic Education and Communications Program that
provides general watershed education and outreach as well as targeted information. The program
philosophy is that an informed and well-educated public and public base will better understand the
benefits that water quality protection and improvement offers throughout the MCWD.
More information is available at the MCWD website: www.minnehahacreek.org.
Barr Engineering Company 15-25
P:\Mpls\23 MN\27\23271072 Edina Water Resources Mgmt Plan Update\WorkFiles\Report\December 15 2011 FINAL
DRAFT\Edina_SWMP_FINAL_v1.docx
15.6.2.2 Nine Mile Creek Watershed District
The NMCWD works cooperatively with other governmental bodies at the city, county and state level
to maintain and enhance water quality, regulate stormwater runoff, and provide year-round
recreation. The NMCWD also works with developers on any project that proposes to alter
floodplains, wetlands, lakes or the creek itself. The NMCWD requires permits for these types of
projects to ensure that land use changes do not negatively impact water quality and flood protection.
The NMCWD’s review of permits provides an opportunity for citizen input on water-related issues.
The NMCWD Watershed Management Plan was adopted in March 2007. Through their plan, the
NMCWD pursues projects that improve water quality. These projects, like past flood control
projects, will be conducted in full cooperation with municipalities.
The NMCWD permitting program includes rules and permitting requirements for sediment and
erosion control, stormwater management (including stormwater runoff volume reductions), wetlands
management, floodplain management, and water quality.
The NMCWD’s permitting program is independent of permits that may be required by other
governmental agencies. If a permit is required by the Minnesota Department of Natural Resources
(DNR) for a project, the NMCWD reviews and provides comments to the DNR regarding the project.
General Permitting authority has been given to the NMCWD by the DNR for projects related to shore
protection, docks, road crossings and maintenance at storm sewer intakes and outfalls.
The formal review by the NMCWD typically is held at a regular Board of Managers meeting within
one month from the approval of the project by the city council. NMCWD meetings are open to the
public. At the meeting, Managers receive comments from the permit applicant and the general public
regarding the project. After review of the application and all comments, the Board of Managers
votes to approve, approve with modification, or deny the application on behalf of the NMCWD. If
the project is approved by the NMCWD, correspondence is prepared summarizing the conditions of
the NMCWD’s approval. This correspondence and approved permit is usually sent to the permit
applicant within two weeks of the Board of Managers' meeting date.
More information, including the NMCWD’s most current rules and design criteria, are available at
the NMCWD’s website: http://www.ninemilecreek.org/
15.6.3 The Metropolitan Council
The Metropolitan Council provides regional planning and wastewater services (collection and
treatment) for the seven county metropolitan area. The Metropolitan Council provides review and
comment on watershed management plans, local water management plans, and local comprehensive
(land use) plans; conducts lake monitoring (including the Citizen Assisted Monitoring Program); and
conducts river and stream monitoring. Questions concerning the Metropolitan Council’s role in
water resource management should be directed to the Metropolitan Council, 390 North Robert Street,
St. Paul, MN 55101 (651-602-1000).
Barr Engineering Company 15-26
P:\Mpls\23 MN\27\23271072 Edina Water Resources Mgmt Plan Update\WorkFiles\Report\December 15 2011 FINAL
DRAFT\Edina_SWMP_FINAL_v1.docx
More information is available at the Met Council website: www.metrocouncil.org
15.6.4 Hennepin County
Hennepin County plays a role in groundwater protection and management, through implementation
of its Ground Water Plan (1994). The county administers a well sealing cost share grant program and
works with the cities in the county to implement the county’s groundwater plan.
More information is available at the County website: www.co.hennepin.mn.us
15.6.5 Minnesota Department of Natural Resources
The Mn DNR Division of Waters (Waters) manages water resources through a variety of programs in
its Water Management Section, Surface Water and Hydrographics Section, and Ground Water and
Climatology Section. Mn DNR Waters administers the public waters work permit program, the water
appropriation permit program, and the dam safety permit program. Mn DNR Fisheries administers
the aquatic plant management control permit program and other fishery related permits.
In addition to permit programs, the Mn DNR oversees the floodplain management program, the
public waters inventory program, the shoreland management program, the flood damage reduction
grant program, the wild and scenic rivers program, various surface and groundwater monitoring
programs, and the climatology program. The Mn DNR is involved in enforcement of the Wetland
Conservation Act (WCA) and is responsible for identifying, protecting, and managing calcareous
fens.
The Mn DNR’s public waters work permit program (Minnesota Statutes 103G) requires a Mn DNR
public waters permit for work below the Mn DNR designated Ordinary High Water Level (OHWL)
that will alter or diminish the course, current, or cross-section of any public waters or public waters
wetlands, including lakes, wetlands and streams. For lakes and wetlands, the Mn DNR’s jurisdiction
extends to designated U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service Circular #39 Types 3, 4, and 5 wetlands which
are 10 acres or more in size in unincorporated areas, or 2.5 acres or more in size in incorporated
areas. The program prohibits most filling of public waters and public waters wetlands for the
purpose of creating upland areas. The public waters work permit program was amended in 2000 to
reclassify public waters and to make the administrative program more consistent with the WCA
administrative program. Under certain conditions, work can be performed below the OHWL without
a public waters work permit. Examples include docks, watercraft lifts, beach sand blankets, ice ridge
removal/grading, riprap, and shoreline restoration.
The Mn DNR regulates groundwater usage rate and volume as part of its charge to conserve and use
the waters of the state. For example, suppliers of domestic water to more than 25 people or
applicants proposing a use that exceeds 10,000 gallons per day or 1,000,000 gallons per year must
obtain a water appropriation permit from the DNR. Appropriation permits from the DNR are not
required for domestic uses serving less than 25 persons for general residential purposes. The DNR is
Barr Engineering Company 15-27
P:\Mpls\23 MN\27\23271072 Edina Water Resources Mgmt Plan Update\WorkFiles\Report\December 15 2011 FINAL
DRAFT\Edina_SWMP_FINAL_v1.docx
also responsible for mapping sensitive groundwater areas, conducting groundwater investigations,
addressing well interference problems, and maintaining the observation well network.
The Mn DNR’s shoreland management program provides statewide standards for shoreland
protection that local governments must adopt into their own land use controls. The City of Edina
does not have a specific ordinance for shoreland protection, but instead has included the current
Mn DNR shoreland management standards as part of its zoning ordinance.
More information is available at the Mn DNR website: www.dnr.state.mn.us
15.6.6 Minnesota Board of Water and Soil Resources
BWSR oversees the state’s watershed management organizations (joint powers, county and
watershed district organizations), oversees the state’s Soil and Water Conservation Districts, and
administers the rules for the WCA and metropolitan area watershed management.
More information is available at the BWSR website: www.bwsr.state.mn.us
15.6.7 Minnesota Pollution Control Agency (MPCA)
The MPCA administers the State Discharge System/National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System
(NPDES) Permit program (point source discharges of wastewater), the NPDES General Stormwater
Permit for Construction Activity, the NPDES General Industrial Stormwater Permit program, the
NPDES Phase I and Phase II Storm Water Permit program, and the individual sewage treatment
system regulations (7080 Rules). The MPCA also reports the state’s “impaired waters” to the U.S.
Environmental Protection Agency. Spills should be reported directly to the MPCA.
The Minnesota Pollution Control Agency (MPCA) administers and enforces laws relating to
pollution of the state’s waters, including groundwater. The MPCA monitors ambient groundwater
quality, and administers septic system design and maintenance standards. The Tanks and Spills
Section of the MPCA regulates the use, registration and site cleanup of underground and above
ground storage tanks.
The MPCA is responsible for administering the programs regulating construction and reconstruction
of individual sewage treatment systems (ISTS). The MPCA requires an inspection program for ISTS
that meets MPCA standards. Minnesota Rules 7080 govern administration and enforcement of new
and existing ISTS. Hennepin County’s Ordinance 19 also sets standards for ISTS and adopts by
reference Minnesota Rules 7080.
The MPCA no longer administers Section 401 of the Clean Water Act - Water Quality Certification
program, which is primarily administered by the COE (see Section 15.6.11 below). However, formal
applications for 401 certification must still be sent to the MPCA.
More information is available at the MPCA website: www.pca.state.mn.us
Barr Engineering Company 15-28
P:\Mpls\23 MN\27\23271072 Edina Water Resources Mgmt Plan Update\WorkFiles\Report\December 15 2011 FINAL
DRAFT\Edina_SWMP_FINAL_v1.docx
15.6.8 Minnesota Department of Health
The MDH is the official state agency responsible for addressing all environmental health matters,
including groundwater protection. The MDH administers the Well Management Program, the
Wellhead Protection Program, and the Safe Drinking Water Act rules. The MDH also issues fish
consumption advisories. The MDH is responsible for preventing pollution of water supplies to
ensure safe drinking water sources and limit public exposure to contaminants. Through
implementation of the federal Safe Drinking Water Act, the MDH conducts the Public Water Supply
Program, which allows the MDH to monitor ground water quality and train water supply system
operators. The 1996 amendments to the federal Safe Drinking Water Act require the MDH to
prepare source water assessments for all of Minnesota’s public water systems and to make these
assessments available to public.
Through its Well Management Program, the MDH administers and enforces the Minnesota Water
Well Code, which regulates activities such as well abandonment and installation of new wells. The
MDH also administers the Wellhead Protection Program, which is aimed at preventing contaminants
from entering the recharge zones of public water supply wells.
In 1997, the Wellhead Protection Program rules (Minnesota Rules 4720.5100 to 4720.5590) went
into effect. These rules require all public water suppliers that obtain their water from wells to
prepare, enact, and enforce wellhead protection plans. The MDH prepared a prioritized ranking of all
such suppliers in Minnesota. Regardless of the ranking, Rules 4720 require all public water suppliers
to initiate wellhead protection measures for the inner wellhead management zone prior to June 1,
2003. If a city drills a new well and connects it to the distribution system, the city must begin
development of a wellhead protection plan. Wellhead protection plans include: delineation of
groundwater “capture” areas (wellhead protection areas), delineation of drinking water supply
management areas (DWSMA), assessment of the water supply’s susceptibility to contamination from
activities on the land surface, and management programs, such as identification and sealing of
abandoned wells, and education/public awareness programs. As part of its role in wellhead
protection, the MDH developed the guidance document Evaluating Proposed Stormwater Infiltration
Projects in Vulnerable Wellhead Protection Areas (MDH, 2007).
See the Minnesota Department of Health website
(http://www.health.state.mn.us/divs/eh/water/index.html ) for more information about these
programs.
15.6.9 Minnesota Environmental Quality Board (EQB)
The EQB administers the state’s environmental review program, including Environmental
Assessment Worksheets (EAW) and Environmental Impact Statements (EIS).
More information is available at the EQB website: www.eqb.state.mn.us
Barr Engineering Company 15-29
P:\Mpls\23 MN\27\23271072 Edina Water Resources Mgmt Plan Update\WorkFiles\Report\December 15 2011 FINAL
DRAFT\Edina_SWMP_FINAL_v1.docx
15.6.10 Minnesota Department of Transportation (Mn/DOT)
When NPDES Phase II became effective in 2003, Mn/DOT was required to apply for a NPDES
permit to discharge stormwater from its right-of-way. As part of the NPDES Permit, Mn/DOT Metro
District was required to develop and implement a Stormwater Pollution Prevention Program
(SWPPP) to reduce the discharge of pollutants from our storm sewer system to the maximum extent
practicable.
Within the Metro District there are 114 local government MS4s that are designated for the NPDES
permit coverage under the Phase II stormwater program. It is the primary goal of Mn/DOT Metro to
develop, and implement, its Phase II program consistent with these MS4s to ensure a uniform
regulatory environment for the public. Any work done on, or affecting, Mn/DOT property must be
approved by Mn/DOT.
More information is available at the Mn/DOT website: http://www.dot.state.mn.us/
15.6.11 U.S. Army Corps of Engineers (COE)
The COE administers the Section 10 of the Rivers and Harbors Act permit program, and the
Section 404 permit program.
Section 404 Authorizations. The Federal Clean Water Act requires that anyone who wants to
discharge dredged or fill material into U.S. waters including wetlands must first obtain a Section 404
permit from the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers. Examples of activities that require a Section 404
permit include: construction of boat ramps, placement of riprap for erosion protection, placing fill in
a wetland, building a wetland, construction of dams or dikes, stream channelization, and stream
diversion.
When Section 404 permit applications are submitted to the Corps of Engineers, the applications are
typically posted for the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, the U.S. Forest Service, the U.S. EPA, and
other federal agencies to review and provide comments on the application. The Corps of Engineers
evaluates permit requests for the potential impact to various functions and values of the wetland.
Section 401 Water Quality Certifications. A Section 401 water quality certification may be granted
if an applicant demonstrates that a proposed activity “will not violate Minnesota’s water quality
standards or result in adverse long-term or short-term impacts on water quality.” Greater protection
is given to a category of waters designated as Outstanding Resource Value Waters. The waters in
this category have received this designation because of their exceptional value. These include such
groups as scientific and natural areas, wild, scenic and recreational river segments and calcareous
fens.
More information is available at the COE website: www.usace.army.mil
Barr Engineering Company 15-30
P:\Mpls\23 MN\27\23271072 Edina Water Resources Mgmt Plan Update\WorkFiles\Report\December 15 2011 FINAL
DRAFT\Edina_SWMP_FINAL_v1.docx
15.7 Implementation Priorities
This CWRMP serves as a master plan for the City’s water resources management and storm drainage
system. The City will work with residents to implement structural (capital) improvements and non-
structural programs to address existing water resource problems within the city and to prevent future
problems from occurring. The implementation program identifies and prioritizes the programs and
improvements, and provides cost estimates for budgeting purposes. Table 15.3 presents the City’s
water resource-related implementation program for 2010-2019, which includes the City’s non-
structural (administration) programs and structural (capital) improvement program.
Table 15.4 identifies numerous stormwater improvement projects that have been identified
throughout the city based on the hydrologic and hydraulic analyses completed as part of the City’s
2004 Comprehensive Water Resource Management Plan or more recent analyses. Table 15.4 also
identifies several potential pond upgrade projects to improve the effectiveness of the current
stormwater system in removing stormwater pollutants such as phosphorus. These flood protection
and water quality improvement projects have been prioritized (see Table 15.4). The City has
identified funding in their Capital Improvement Program (CIP) for such projects (see Table 15.3).
The City will review the potential projects in Table 15.4 when developing their annual capital
improvement program. However, stormwater management improvements will not be limited to what
is included in Table 15.4 and prioritization of studies and/or implementation projects will be
dependent upon additional factors such as the City’s street reconstruction schedule (see Appendix C)
and the timeline of other roadway and utility improvement projects. As the City designs and
implements stormwater improvement projects, including those identified in Table 15.4, the City will
consider ways to incorporate volume reduction or retention practices.
Barr Engineering Company 15-31
P:\Mpls\23 MN\27\23271072 Edina Water Resources Mgmt Plan Update\WorkFiles\Report\December 15 2011 FINAL DRAFT\Edina_SWMP_FINAL_v1.docx
Table 15.3 Water Resources Implementation Program
Project Name /
Location Description Proposed Improvement
Cost
Estimate1 ($)
Proposed
Year3 Funding
Source
Plan Amendments This Water Resources Management Plan
may need to be amended periodically. This plan will be amended as required. As Required As Required SW Utility
Plan Update/Revision
This Water Resources Management Plan
will expire in 2019 and need to be
updated/revised to be consistent with WMO
plans and policies and state and federal
rules.
This Plan will be updated to maintain
compliance with state and federal rules and
WMO policies.
100,000 2018-2020 SW Utility
City-wide education and
resident involvement
program
Implement the City’s Education Program
including educational and outreach tasks
called out in the City’s SWPPP
Maintain the education program to educate
residents about the Plan and about various
water related issues.
10,000/yr Ongoing SW Utility
Illicit discharge detection
and elimination
Continue implementation of the SWPPP
Illicit discharge detection and elimination
tasks
Inventory, mapping, inspection,
enforcement and education. City Staff Ongoing SW Utility
Develop Interactive GIS
water resources web
mapping tool
Development of a web-based mapping
system for sharing water resource
information with the interested public
Water resources information will be more
easily accessible to interested public via the
City’s website.
11,000 2009-2010 SW Utility
Maintenance of Interactive
GIS water resources web
mapping tool
Annual updates and maintenance activities
for interactive GIS web mapping tool, as
needed.
Web mapping tool will have continued
functionality and reflect most up-to-date
information available.
3,000 Ongoing SW Utility
Illicit discharge ordinance
review
Review existing City ordinances and
develop/adopt an illicit discharge ordinance,
as necessary.
City ordinances consistent with illicit
discharge requirements of NPDES Phase II
MS4 General Permit
City Staff Ongoing SW Utility
Construction site
stormwater runoff control
Maintain construction site stormwater runoff
control program and SWPPP tasks
Plan review, inspection, enforcement and
education City Staff Ongoing SW Utility
Post construction
stormwater management
Maintain the post construction stormwater
management and SWPPP tasks Design standards and review, education City Staff Ongoing SW Utility
BMPs–Housekeeping,
Street Sweeping, & Storm
Drainage System
Maintenance
Maintain the City’s Pollution prevention –
Good housekeeping practices and related
SWPPP tasks including Street sweeping and
system maintenance.
Street sweeping, structure clean-out, City
facility operations and maintenance and
training, inspections and recording with
concentration of efforts in target areas.
City Staff Ongoing SW Utility
Storm Drainage System
Inventory
Continue inventorying storm sewers,
manholes, catch basins, etc.
Complete inventory. Tie inventory into the
City's GIS and CityWorks system. City Staff Ongoing SW Utility
Barr Engineering Company 15-32
P:\Mpls\23 MN\27\23271072 Edina Water Resources Mgmt Plan Update\WorkFiles\Report\December 15 2011 FINAL DRAFT\Edina_SWMP_FINAL_v1.docx
Project Name /
Location Description Proposed Improvement
Cost
Estimate1 ($)
Proposed
Year3 Funding
Source
Updates to Hydrologic and
Hydraulic Modeling
Annual updates to City’s stormwater
management system modeling to reflect
infrastructure improvements
Current, up-to-date modeling results. 10,000/year
Impaired Waters Tracking
and Review
Monitor impaired waters list and respond
with review and implementation as needed
per the SWPPP.
The City will remain fully informed and
responsive to impaired waters issues. City Staff Ongoing SW Utility
Nondegradation Report
Follow-up City-wide loading assessment
Determine pollutant load reduction
necessary for nondegradation of water
bodies
5,000 TBD SW Utility
Annual SWPPP update and
meeting
Make any needed updates to the City’s
SWPPP and hold an annual public meeting
to receive public input.
Involve residents in water resource issue
development and implementation tasks. City Staff Ongoing SW Utility
BMPs - Sedimentation Pond
Maintenance
Sedimentation ponds require frequent
cleaning and maintenance.
Develop and implement a program to
inspect, clean and maintain sedimentation
and water quality ponds and lakes.
2,800,000 /
10 years Ongoing SW Utility
Miscellaneous Drainage
Improvements Miscellaneous Drainage Improvements Miscellaneous Drainage Improvements 23,000,000/
10 years Ongoing SW Utility
Infiltration and Inflow
reduction
Reduce the amount of infiltration and inflow
to the sanitary sewer system
Reduce the amount of infiltration and
inflow to the sanitary sewer system 200,000/year Ongoing SW Utility
Participation in Nine Mile
Creek Chloride TMDL
Participate in stakeholder process for Nine
Mile Creek Chloride TMDL City Staff 2009-2010 SW Utility
Implementation of Nine
Mile Creek Chloride TMDL
Implement the requirements of the Nine
Mile Creek Chloride TMDL To be determined TBD 2010-2020
SW Utility/
NMCWD/
Grant Funding
Participation in Minnehaha
Creek/Lake Hiawatha
TMDL Development
Participate in stakeholder process for
Minnehaha Creek/Lake Hiawatha TMDL
development
City Staff 2009-2012 SW Utility
Implementation of
Minnehaha Creek/Lake
Hiawatha TMDL
Implement the requirements of the
Minnehaha Creek/Lake Hiawatha TMDL
loading allocation and implementation plan.
To be determined TBD 2012-2020
SW Utility/
MCWD/
Grant Funding
Participation in the
NMCWD Lake Cornelia
Use Attainability Analysis
(UAA) development
Partner with the NMCWD to evaluate
potential remedial measures for improving
the water quality of Lake Cornelia.
City Staff 2009-2010 SW Utility
Barr Engineering Company 15-33
P:\Mpls\23 MN\27\23271072 Edina Water Resources Mgmt Plan Update\WorkFiles\Report\December 15 2011 FINAL DRAFT\Edina_SWMP_FINAL_v1.docx
Project Name /
Location Description Proposed Improvement
Cost
Estimate1 ($)
Proposed
Year3 Funding
Source
Participation in Lake
Cornelia TMDL
Development
Participate in stakeholder process for Lake
Cornelia TMDL City Staff 2013-2018 SW Utility
Implementation of
recommendations from the
NMCWD Lake Cornelia
UAA and Lake Cornelia
TMDL
Partner with the NMCWD to implement the
recommended remedial measures to improve
the water quality of Lake Cornelia
To be determined TBD 2010-2020
SW Utility/
NMCWD/
Grant Funding
Participation in Lake Edina
TMDL Development
Participate in stakeholder process for Lake
Edina TMDL City Staff 2013-2018 SW Utility
Implementation of Lake
Edina TMDL
Implement the requirements of the Lake
Edina TMDL loading allocation and
implementation plan.
To be determined TBD 2018-2020
SW Utility/
NMCWD/
Grant Funding
Implementation of
recommendations from the
Draft NMCWD Mirror Lake
UAA
Partner with the NMCWD to implement
recommended remedial measures to improve
the water quality of Mirror Lake
To be determined TBD
SW Utility/
NMCWD/
Grant Funding
Implementation of
recommendations from the
Draft NMCWD Arrowhead
and Indianhead Lakes UAA
Partner with the NMCWD to implement
recommended remedial measures to improve
the water quality of Arrowhead and
Indianhea Lakes
To be determined TBD
SW Utility/
NMCWD/
Grant Funding
Minnehaha Creek Reach 14
Stream Restoration Stream Improvement Project Streambank stabilization, in-stream habitat
enhancement, and buffer enhancement. MCWD
Zoning Ordinance
Revisions
Revise zoning ordinance to include wetland
management and shoreland restriction
aspects.
City Staff 2009-2010 SW Utility
Stormwater Management
Ordinance Development
Develop and implement stormwater
management ordinance reflecting the
policiesand design standards detailed in the
CWRMP.
City Staff 2010-2012 SW Utility
1 TBD – To be determined
Barr Engineering Company 15-34
P:\Mpls\23 MN\27\23271072 Edina Water Resources Mgmt Plan Update\WorkFiles\Report\December 15 2011 FINAL DRAFT\Edina_SWMP_FINAL_v1.docx
Table 15.4 Potential Implementation Activities (including Capital Improvements)
Project Name/Location Description Proposed Improvement Priority
1
Nine Mile Creek-North
Subwatershed ML_19 (505, 509, 513 Tyler Ct) Flooding problem Upgrade to larger pipe. C-40
Suwatershed HL_2 (Hawkes Drive) Flooding problem Construction of overflow swale between homes C-41
Subwatershed HL_18 (5711 & 5717 Grove St) Flooding problem Upgrade to larger pipes C-22
Subwatershed HL_25 (5516 & 5520 Dundee Rd) Flooding problem Perform detailed field survey. Additional pumping
capacity may be required at lift station. E-3
Subwatershed MD_22 (6009 Leslie Ln) Flooding problem Upgrade to larger pipes. C-39
Subwatershed MD_28 (5316 Schaeffer Rd) Flooding problem Maintain road overflow and positive overflow swale. C-18
Subwatersheds NMN_90, NMN_23 (Fountain Woods
Apartments) Flooding problem Privately owned drainage system. Notify owners of flood
potential. E-2
Pond MD_3 (Bredesen Park, east of parking area) Water Quality Improvement Excavate to remove accumulated sediment. C-12
Pond MD_15 (Sun Road) Water Quality Improvement Provide additional 0.3 acre-feet of dead storage volume. C-10
Pond NMN_24 (Between Waterford Ct and Habitat Ct) Water Quality Improvement Increase pond depth. C-7
Pond NMN_27 (Northeast of T.H. 62 & T.H. 169) Water Quality Improvement Provide additional 1.4 acre-feet of dead storage volume. C-8
Pond NMN_49 (West of 5521 Malibu Drive) Water Quality Improvement Provide additional 0.2 acre-feet of dead storage volume. C-11
Nine Mile Creek- Central
Manhole 457 (6005 & 6009 Crescent Dr) Flooding problem Construction of a positive overflow channel. C-38
Subwatershed IP_4 (Cherokee Trail & Gleason backyard
depression area) Flooding problem Work with homeowners to evaluate construction of a low
level outlet from landlocked depression. C-37
Subwatershed NMC_80 (5339 West 64th St) Flooding problem Upgrade to larger pipes at Ridgeview Dr and Valley Ln. C-36
Subwatersheds NMC_86, NMC_120 (Valley View Rd &
Hillside Rd) Flooding problem Upgrade to larger pipe. C-35
Subwatersheds NMC_71, NMC_103 (West 66th St & Naomi
Dr) Flooding problem
Provide additional outlet capacity from backyard
depression area through gravity outlet system (1) or
pumped outlet (2).
C-44
Subwatershed NMC_106 (6712, 6716, 6720 Ridgeview Dr) Flooding problem Installation of a gravity storm sewer system at backyard
depression. C-34
Barr Engineering Company 15-35
P:\Mpls\23 MN\27\23271072 Edina Water Resources Mgmt Plan Update\WorkFiles\Report\December 15 2011 FINAL DRAFT\Edina_SWMP_FINAL_v1.docx
Subwatershed NMC_107 (6808, 6812, 6816, 6820
Ridgeview Dr) Flooding problem Installation of a gravity storm sewer system at backyard
depression. C-33
Lake Cornelia/Lake Edina/Adam’s Hill
Subwatersheds NC_62, NC_3 (Swimming Pool Pond/ North
Lake Cornelia) Flooding problem Upgrade pipe and outlet structure. C-31
Subwatershed NC_11 (6312, 6316, 6321, 6329 Tingdale
Ave) Flooding problem No recommendation at this time. Further analysis
required. E-9
Subwatersheds NC_40, NC_26 (St. Johns/Ashcroft & West
64th St) Flooding problem Installation of additional pipe to drain T.H. 62 median
ditch and prevent upstream flooding. C-21
Subwatersheds NC_86, NC_97, NC_99 (Barrie Rd &
Heritage Dr) Flooding problem No recommendation at this time. Reevaluation of T.H. 62
system will be required. E-10
Subwatershed NC_88 (York Ave & West 64th St) Flooding problem Increase pump capacity. Adjust pump on/off elevations. E-1
Subwatershed NC_132 (T.H. 62 at France Ave) Flooding problem No recommendation at this time. Reevaluation of T.H. 62
system will be required. E-14
Subwatershed NC_135 (Parnell Ave & Valley View Rd) Flooding problem No recommendation at this time. Further analysis
required. E-13
Subwatersheds LE_53, LE_7, LE_10 (Hibiscus Ave) Flooding problem Construct positive overflow swale. C-31
Pond LE_38 (West of Lake Edina) Water Quality Improvement Provide additional 1.4 acre-feet of dead storage volume
within MnDOT right-of-way C-9
Nine Mile Creek- South
Subwatershed CL_51 (7001 & 7025 France Ave) Flooding problem No recommendation at this time. E-11
Pond SP_1 (Border Basin - West of Minnesota Dr & West
77th St) Water Quality Improvement Provide additional 21.5 acre-feet of dead storage volume. C-2
Subwatershed NMS_1 (Southwest quadrant of the T.H. 100
& West 77th St interchange) Water Quality Improvement Construct water quality basin. C-1
Ponds NMS_72, NMS_74 (Fred Richards Golf Course) Water Quality Improvement Increase pond depths. C-6
Pond NMS_76 (Fred Richards Golf Course) Water Quality Improvement Provide additional 2.5 acre-feet of dead storage volume. C-4
Pond NMS_104 (Fred Richards Golf Course) Water Quality Improvement Provide additional 0.2 acre-feet of dead storage volume. C-5
Nine Mile South Fork
Barr Engineering Company 15-36
P:\Mpls\23 MN\27\23271072 Edina Water Resources Mgmt Plan Update\WorkFiles\Report\December 15 2011 FINAL DRAFT\Edina_SWMP_FINAL_v1.docx
Subwatershed AH_31 (6309 Post Lane) Flooding problem Construction of two control structures to restrict flow
through the existing storm sewer system. C-42
Subwatershed NMSB_62 (Braemar Golf Course) Flooding problem No recommendation at this time. Further analysis
required. E-12
Subwatershed NMSB_70 (7009 & 7013 Sally Ln Backyard
Depression Area) Flooding problem Perform detailed field survey. Positive overflow swale
may be necessary. E-7
Subwatersheds NMSB_83, NMSB_84 (Paiute Pass & Sally
Ln) Flooding problem Perform detailed field survey. Positive overflow swale
from backyard depression may be necessary. E-8
Ponds NMSB_3, NMSB_2 (Braemar Golf Course) Water Quality Improvement Provide additional 1.2 acre-feet of dead storage volume. C-13
Pond NMSB_7 (Braemar Golf Course) Water Quality Improvement Increase pond depth. C-15
Pond NMSB_12 (Braemar Golf Course) Water Quality Improvement Regular maintenance. C-3
Pond NMSB_85 (Braemar Golf Course) Water Quality Improvement Provide additional 1.2 acre-feet of dead storage volume. C-16
Pond NMSB_86 (Braemar Golf Course) Water Quality Improvement Provide additional 0.15 acre-feet of dead storage volume. C-14
Southwest Ponds
Subwatershed SWP_14 (7411 Coventry Way) Flooding problem Installation of flapgate. C-17
Subwatershed SWP_46 (7317 Cahill Road) Flooding problem No recommendation at this time. Further analysis
required. E-6
Subwatershed NM494_4 (7709 Stonewood Court) Flooding problem Upgrade to larger pipes. C-43
Northeast Minnehaha Creek
White Oaks Landlocked Area Flooding Analysis and
Feasibility Study (if necessary) Flooding problem
Complete stormwater analysis to determine potential
flooding impacts of 100-year snowmelt event to structures
surrounding the landlocked areas
E-16
Subwatershed MS_3 (4300, 4214, & 4212 Branson St) Flooding problem Install catchbasin in backyard depression and upgrade to
larger pipe. C-24
Subwatershed MS_7 (4140 & 4150 West 44th St) Flooding problem Provide additional storage capacity in backyard
depression. C-25
Subwatershed MS_17 (4308 France Ave) Flooding problem Work with homeowners to evaluate installation of gravity
system to drain backyard depression area. C-23
Subwatershed MS_40 (4000 West 42nd St and 4100, 4104,
& 4108 France Ave) Flooding problem Implement recommendations of the 2006 Weber Park
Pond Feasibility Study C-45
Barr Engineering Company 15-37
P:\Mpls\23 MN\27\23271072 Edina Water Resources Mgmt Plan Update\WorkFiles\Report\December 15 2011 FINAL DRAFT\Edina_SWMP_FINAL_v1.docx
Southeast Minnehaha Creek
Complete stormwater analysis to determine potential
flooding impacts of Minnehaha Creek overtopping just north
of West 58th Street.
Flooding problem Complete stormwater analysis to determine potential
flooding impacts of Minnehaha Creek overtopping just
north of West 58th Street.
E-15
Subwatershed LP_15 (6213 Ewing Ave) Flooding problem Upgrade to larger pipes. C-26
Subwatershed LP_24 (5837, 5833, 5829, & 5825 South
Chowen Ave) Flooding problem Installation of a catchbasin in backyard depression area. C-27
Subwatershed LP_27 (Chowen Ave & West 60th St) Flooding problem Perform detailed survey/verification of storm sewer to
verify pipe sizes, inverts, and low point of entry. E-4
Subwatershed MHS_4 (3600 West Fuller St) Flooding problem Installation of a catchbasin in backyard depression and
storm sewer along Beard Ave. C-19
Subwatersheds MHS_24, MHS_66 (5609, 5605 Dalrymple
Rd & 5610, 5612 St. Andrews Ave) Flooding problem Construct surface overflow swale (1) or upgrade to larger
pipes (2). C-29
Subwatershed MHS_79 (5605, 5609, 5613, 5617, 5621,
5625, & 5629 Beard Ave) Flooding problem Upgrade to larger pipes. Install catchbasin in alley. C-20
Subwatershed MHS_89 (5840 & 5836 Ashcroft Ave) Flooding problem Work with homeowners to evaluate installation of catch
basin from backyard depression. C-28
Subwatershed ML_7 (5213 & 5217 Richwood Ave) Flooding problem Perform detailed field survey of wetland storage. Further
analysis required. E-5
Subwatershed ML_12 (5701 Dale Avenue) Flooding problem Upgrade to larger pipes. C-30
Northwest Minnehaha Creek
Interlachen Landlocked Area Flooding problem
Construct/raise embankment between landlocked wetland
and Meadowbrook Golf Course. Develop management
plan for pumped outlet.
C-46
1 C indicates a construction project, E indicates that an engineering study is required
S o u t h F o r k N i n e Mile
C
r
e
e
k
Melody
Lake
Hawkes
Lake
Highland
Lake
Lake
Pamela
Lake
Edina
N ineMile
C
r
e
e
k
M
i
n
n
e
h
a
h
a
C
r
eek
£¤169
£¤169
100
62
100
456720
456731
456717
456753
4567158
Fr
a
n
c
e
A
v
e
Yo
r
k
A
v
e
66th St
Vern
o
n
A
v
e
S
Interlachen Blvd
Bl
a
k
e
R
d
S
Valley View Rd
Lake
Cornelia
Mirror
Lake
Arrowhead
Lake
Indianhead
Lake
Lake
Harvey
Mud
Lake
Centennial
Lakes
MinneapolisMinneapolis
HopkinsHopkins
Eden PrairieEden Prairie
RichfieldRichfield
BloomingtonBloomington
MinnetonkaMinnetonka
St. Louis ParkSt. Louis Park
!;N
Ba
r
r
F
o
o
t
e
r
:
D
a
t
e
:
6
/
4
/
2
0
1
0
4
:
4
6
:
4
0
P
M
F
i
l
e
:
I
:
\
C
l
i
e
n
t
\
E
d
i
n
a
\
P
r
o
j
e
c
t
s
\
C
R
W
M
P
_
U
p
d
a
t
e
_
2
0
0
9
\
M
a
p
s
\
R
e
p
o
r
t
s
\
F
i
g
u
r
e
s
_
C
i
t
y
R
e
v
i
e
w
D
r
a
f
t
\F
i
g
_
1
5
_
1
_
T
r
e
a
t
m
e
n
t
_
S
t
r
u
c
t
u
r
e
s
_
a
n
d
_
S
u
m
p
_
M
a
n
h
o
l
e
s
.
m
x
d
U
s
e
r
:
m
b
s
2
3,000 0 3,000
Feet
Figure 15.1
UNDERGROUND STORMWATER
TREATMENT STRUCTURES AND
SUMP MANHOLES
Comprehensive Water Resource
Management Plan
City of Edina, Minnesota
1,000 0 1,000
Meters
!(Storm Sewer Sump Manhole
$+Underground Stormwater
Treatment Structure
Roads/Highways
Creek/Stream
Lake/Pond
City of Edina Boundary
15-38
So u t h F o r k N i n e MileCre
e
k
Melody
Lake
Hawkes
Lake
Highland
Lake
Pamela
Lake
Lake
Edina
NineMile
C
r
e
e
k
M
in
n
e
h
a
h
a
C
r
eek
Nine Mile Creek
Watershed District
Minnehaha Creek
Watershed District
£¤169
£¤169
100
62
100
456720
456731
456717
456753
4567158
Fr
a
n
c
e
A
v
e
Yo
r
k
A
v
e
66th St
Vern
o
n
A
v
e
S
Interlachen Blvd
Bl
a
k
e
R
d
S
Valley View Rd
Lake
Cornelia
Mirror
Lake
Arrowhead
Lake
Indianhead
Lake
Harvey
Lake
Mud
Lake
Centennial
Lakes
MinneapolisMinneapolis
HopkinsHopkins
Eden PrairieEden Prairie
RichfieldRichfield
BloomingtonBloomington
MinnetonkaMinnetonka
St. Louis ParkSt. Louis Park
!;N
Ba
r
r
F
o
o
t
e
r
:
D
a
t
e
:
6
/
4
/
2
0
1
0
4
:
3
0
:
5
3
P
M
F
i
l
e
:
I
:
\
C
l
i
e
n
t
\
E
d
i
n
a
\
P
r
o
j
e
c
t
s
\
C
R
W
M
P
_
U
p
d
a
t
e
_
2
0
0
9
\
M
a
p
s
\
R
e
p
o
r
t
s
\
F
i
g
u
r
e
s
_
C
i
t
y
R
e
v
i
e
w
D
r
a
f
t
\F
i
g
_
1
5
_
2
_
M
C
W
D
_
K
e
y
_
C
o
n
s
e
r
v
a
t
i
o
n
_
A
r
e
a
s
.
m
x
d
U
s
e
r
:
m
b
s
2
3,000 0 3,000
Feet
Figure 15.2
MINNEHAHA CREEK WATERSHED
DISTRICT KEY CONSERVATION AREAS
Comprehensive Water Resource
Management Plan
City of Edina, Minnesota
1,000 0 1,000
Meters
City of Edina Boundary
MCWD Key Conservation Area
located on City Property
Creek/Stream
Lake/Pond
Watershed District Boundary
Roads/Highways
15-39