HomeMy WebLinkAboutCWS Phase I_Summary Memorandum_062222_Final
Barr Engineering Co. 4300 MarketPointe Drive, Suite 200, Minneapolis, MN 55435 952.832.2600 www.barr.com
Memorandum
To: Ross Bintner and Jessica Vanderwerff Wilson, City of Edina
From: Barr Engineering Co.
Subject: Phase I – Edina Clean Water Strategy
Date: June 22, 2022
Project: 23271913.00
1.0 Project Purpose and Background
The City of Edina (City) engaged Barr Engineering Co. (Barr) to assist in the effort of developing a Clean
Water Strategy to guide and align the implementation of clean water services within the city. The overall
effort of developing the strategy was split into two phases, with Phase I focused on identifying the goals
and expectations of the City’s current program in comparison to what the City is currently accomplishing.
Questions asked while performing this phase of the work, include:
• What are the City’s current priorities concerning clean (surface) water?
• What is the City’s current program accomplishing, and what level of service is the City achieving?
• What are others doing to deliver clean surface water?
This memorandum summarizes findings from this phase of work, during which Barr performed a review of
existing city documents and stated priorities, interviewed City water resources staff, summarized existing
data on the current state of Edina water bodies, reviewed clean water philosophies and practices of four
comparable cities, and created a series of lake summary sheets and clean water topic fact sheets to
highlight the history and current state of water and clean water activities within the City.
2.0 Current Goals, Priorities, and Expected Level of Service
To understand the City’s current goals, policies and commitments to clean water level of service, Barr
reviewed several foundational documents that speak to the City’s overall planning, public infrastructure,
and practices related to stormwater management: the 2018 City of Edina Comprehensive Plan, the 2015
Living Streets Plan, the 2022 draft Stormwater Pollution Prevention Plan (currently under-development at
the time of this project), the 2018 Comprehensive Water Resources Management Plan, in addition to the
stormwater management rules and ordinances of the City of Edina, Nine Mile Creek Watershed District
(NMCWD), and Minnehaha Creek Watershed District (MCWD).
The City’s Comprehensive Plan and 2015 Living Streets Plan are grounded in themes of sustainability. The
Comprehensive Plan acknowledges the importance of accounting for climate change, sustainability, and
To: Ross Bintner and Jessica Vanderwerff Wilson, City of Edina From: Barr Engineering Co.
Subject: Phase I – Edina Clean Water Strategy
Date: June 22, 2022
Page: 2
\\barr.com\projects\Mpls\23 MN\27\23271913 City Edina Clean Water Strateg\WorkFiles\Task 5 - Gaps Analysis and Project Writeup\CWS Phase I_Summary
Memorandum_062222_Final.docx
aging infrastructure needs when considering growth and development. Considerations for the City’s asset
management needs are integrated throughout the document. Chapter 7 of the Plan is focused on water
resources and the approach taken to manage the city’s stormwater utility. As described within this plan,
Edina’s stormwater utility asset management approach includes working to understand and react to
service level deficits, understanding and responding to risk, and taking a life cycle view on stormwater
infrastructure needs. The Plan describes the City’s stormwater utility services as providing: “drainage of
surface waters, management of rainfall runoff and flood risk, reduction of water pollution, treatment of
stormwaters, and protection of natural water bodies and wetlands to provide outcomes supportive of local,
state and national surface water goals and policies.” The City’s Comprehensive Water Resource
Management Plan is referenced for additional details on utility service level expectations.
The 2015 Living Streets Plan describes how City goals related to sustainability will be accounted for, when
planning and redeveloping city streets. The Plan acknowledges the impact that City streets can have on
the water resources and, conversely, the role they can play in effective stormwater management by
incorporating green infrastructure and other low-impact-development stormwater practices as part of
street projects. Similar to the Comprehensive Plan, the Living Streets Plan includes a commitment to work
with community stakeholders, technical professionals and decision-makers to define expectations for
capital projects that the city implements and the services it will provide. The Living Streets Plan describes
the stormwater utility’s services as providing flood protection and clean water. The Plan references a
desire to go above-and-beyond in managing stormwater when possible, but does not include definition
of what the base service level expectation is; rather referencing the City’s Comprehensive Water Resources
Management Plan as the document for use in identifying priorities of the stormwater utility.
The City’s Comprehensive Water Resources Management Plan (CWRMP) is incorporated into its
Comprehensive Plan, by reference, and is identified in both the Comprehensive Plan and Living Streets
Plan as the primary resource for information on City goals and priorities associated with level of service
and priorities related to the City’s stormwater utility. The CWRMP describes the City’s goals and
commitments for clean water service levels, as primarily focused on meeting federal, state, regional and
local mandates on surface water protection; in some cases, moving beyond these minimum requirements.
The prioritization of capital improvements is described as first focusing on those projects that provide
long-term, measurable improvement to waterbodies that have been included on the Federal List of
Impaired Waters or those that are otherwise shown to not be meeting clean water goals. The City’s 2014
lake and pond management policy includes a system to prioritize resident requests for aquatic vegetation
management. Higher priority is given to those waterbodies that are currently listed as impaired, or
otherwise shown to not be meeting the state water quality standard. Within the CWRMP, the City makes a
commitment to manage their water resources to ensure beneficial uses of its lakes, streams, ponds and
wetlands remain available to the community. Such beneficial uses may include: aesthetic appreciation,
wildlife habitat protection, nature observation, and recreational activities. The CWRMP also describes
several programs and policies designed to encourage and facilitate partnership with local watershed
districts and residents on activities that advance a healthier lake ecosystem or other clean water benefit.
To: Ross Bintner and Jessica Vanderwerff Wilson, City of Edina From: Barr Engineering Co.
Subject: Phase I – Edina Clean Water Strategy
Date: June 22, 2022
Page: 3
\\barr.com\projects\Mpls\23 MN\27\23271913 City Edina Clean Water Strateg\WorkFiles\Task 5 - Gaps Analysis and Project Writeup\CWS Phase I_Summary
Memorandum_062222_Final.docx
Several of these programs and policies have implicit or implied narrative goals, such as promoting a
diverse aquatic plant community. Explicit metrics or level of service goals associated with these activities
are not defined.
The City’s Stormwater Pollution Prevention Plan (SWPPP) is aligned with meeting the City’s requirements
for stormwater management, resulting from their state Municipal Separate Storm Sewer Systems (MS4)
Permit. This document contains information on city activities and programs designed to satisfy the
permit’s six minimum control measures. The document does not define nor contain commitments for
utility asset level of service; however, it does contain information and city commitments on best practices
and activities that the City will undertake to protect its surface waters by addressing illicit discharges,
working to prevent or reduce the discharge of pollutants into the MS4, and performing inspections and
maintenance of city-owned structural BMPs, among other items. The state MS4 permit mandates that the
City of Edina have a regulatory mechanism in place to address and control stormwater management
activities on public infrastructure and site redevelopment projects. The City of Edina’s stormwater rules
address erosion, sediment control, and rate control requirements. The City defers regulatory authority for
the regulation of water quality and volume control of stormwater runoff to the Minnehaha Creek and
Nine Mile Creek Watershed Districts. Both watershed districts have stormwater management requirements
that meet or exceed those required by the state.
2.0 Current Accomplishments
Current City programs are primarily aligned with meeting federal, state, regional, and local regulatory
requirements, and particularly those of the City’s Phase II MS4 permit. The City actively partners with its
local watershed districts on studies and implementation activities to protect and improve surface water
quality within its waterbodies. Following its lake and pond management policy, the City also plays an
active role in supporting in-lake management activities that advance a clean water benefit. Details of the
City’s Water Resources Implementation Program are outlined in Table 15.1 of the City’s CWRMP.
As part of the Clean Water Strategy effort, Barr reviewed the current status and governing requirements
for 13 waterbodies within the City of Edina. Attachment A includes a table summarizing available
information for these waterbodies, including: public waterbody and beneficial use classification, water
quality impairment status, availability of water quality data and frequency of monitoring, known
information on aquatic plants and fish communities and lake physical characteristics.
Results of this review highlight the significant challenge of protecting and managing shallow lake systems
within a fully built-out, urban setting. Of the thirteen waterbodies reviewed, two (Lake Cornelia and Lake
Edina) are currently included on the USEPA’s Federal List of Impaired Waters. All of the waterbodies with
available surface water quality monitoring data have been shown to consistently not meet state water
quality standards. Most of the lakes also have aquatic invasive species present. The City’s creeks (North
and South Fork of Nine Mile Creek, and Minnehaha Creek) are also listed as impaired by the USEPA.
To: Ross Bintner and Jessica Vanderwerff Wilson, City of Edina From: Barr Engineering Co.
Subject: Phase I – Edina Clean Water Strategy
Date: June 22, 2022
Page: 4
\\barr.com\projects\Mpls\23 MN\27\23271913 City Edina Clean Water Strateg\WorkFiles\Task 5 - Gaps Analysis and Project Writeup\CWS Phase I_Summary
Memorandum_062222_Final.docx
The attached lake summary sheets highlight and summarize the best available water quality, aquatic
vegetation, fish community, and water level data for each of the 13 lakes reviewed. Also summarized is the
history of each waterbody, showing how the surrounding landscape and land use has changed as the city
has developed around them. Key lake management activities performed by the City or other government
partners, and results of lake studies are also highlighted on the sheets.
3.0 Review of Other Cities
In an effort to understand what other cities are doing to advance clean water, Barr reviewed readily-
available information on the clean water programs and practices of four similarly-sized suburban cities, as
identified and requested by City staff. The cities chosen have similarities to Edina, in relation to their status
as a suburb of a larger metropolitan area and/or prevalence of natural waterbodies. Barr’s review was
focused on identifying information related to each city’s clean water philosophy, noting apparent
influences on the city’s clean water programs, how the cities use partnerships to advance their clean water
goals, and any particularly notable practices the cities were undertaking to advance water resource
management. The four cities reviewed were: Evanston and Highland Park, Illinois, Everett, Washington and
Apple Valley, Minnesota.
Evanston and Highland Park, Illinois are suburbs of Chicago, situated on Lake Michigan. Evanston, IL has a
population of 78,110 and is located 12 miles north of Chicago. Highland Park has a population of 29,622
and is located 22 miles northwest of downtown. Responsibility for stormwater management in both of
these cities falls to their Public Works Department. Both cities have educational materials readily-available
on their websites, to educate citizens regarding stormwater management, ways that residents can manage
stormwater on their property, methods for residents to prevent pollution, and more.
While it is situated directly on Lake Michigan, the majority of Evanston drains to combined sewer systems
that outlet to Metropolitan Water Reclamation District (MWRD) facilities. However, a small portion of
Evanston does drain to Lake Michigan; this portion of the city is covered by an MS4 permit. As part of
their Climate Action and Resiliency Plan, Evanston has stated goals for protection, restoration and
expansion of its urban canopy and natural areas, in addition to the promotion of using green stormwater
infrastructure (GSI) toward a goal of eliminating combined sewer overflows. These goals are also reflected
in the City’s Stormwater Management Plan. The City is currently undergoing an update to their
Stormwater Management Plan, including development of a city-wide hydrology and hydraulic model for
use in setting goals associated with flood protection and prioritizing capital improvements. The City
historically had a partnership with MWRD through which residents could obtain free rain barrels; that
program ended in 2016.
The City of Highland Park, IL drains primarily to two large waterbodies: the Chicago River and Lake
Michigan. Highland Park actively partners and benefits from several county-level water management
programs, including participation as a member of the Lake County Stormwater Management Commission
which provides services under 4 of the 6 Minimum Control Measures required by Highland Park’s MS4
To: Ross Bintner and Jessica Vanderwerff Wilson, City of Edina From: Barr Engineering Co.
Subject: Phase I – Edina Clean Water Strategy
Date: June 22, 2022
Page: 5
\\barr.com\projects\Mpls\23 MN\27\23271913 City Edina Clean Water Strateg\WorkFiles\Task 5 - Gaps Analysis and Project Writeup\CWS Phase I_Summary
Memorandum_062222_Final.docx
permit. This includes implementation of their Watershed Development Ordinance, which regulates
stormwater management requirements for development projects within the County. A local watershed
group and the county health department perform water quality monitoring within the city. The City’s
website highlights work the City is doing to preserve and restore natural areas.
Everett, WA is located 27 miles northeast of Seattle. Stormwater runoff from the city flows to one of 3
large waterbodies: Lake Washington, the Snohomish River or Port Gardner Bay. A northern portion of the
city drains to a CSO. The City’s Surface and Stormwater Services Group is within their Public Works
Department. The stated goal of the surface and stormwater group is to reduce stormwater pollution,
promote private stormwater management and protect rivers, streams, and groundwater. Everett ‘s
stormwater management programs are aligned to meet requirements of its Phase II MS4 permit. The city
generally defers to the Washington State Department of Ecology Stormwater Management Manual for
Western Washington to define its stormwater policies and regulations. The city does implement a
permitting program and has several resources on-line for developers to ease in the permitting process.
The City of Everett’s website provides education and lists multiple programs to get residents involved in
stormwater management, including a program that covers up to $2,500 for installation of a raingarden
and a program that sells pre-made rain barrels for $55. The city provides several resources to educate the
public on at-home activities to promote clean water. The city website also includes specific information for
all the local lakes, including an interactive map that allows the user to select a lake and learn details
regarding water clarity, phosphorus, and algae. The city has historically partnered with other government
agencies to advance ecological restoration projects within the city. The city participates in vegetation
management within a local lake annually. City staff performed surface water and macroinvertebrate
sampling within city streams at several locations.
Apple Valley, MN is located 20 miles south of Minneapolis and southeast of Edina. The city’s Public Works
Department oversees operation and maintenance of the storm sewer system. Within Public Works is the
Natural Resources Division which oversees and coordinates the city’s programs and policies for surface
water management. Apple Valley falls under the jurisdiction of the Black Dog Watershed Management
Organization, Vermillion River Watershed Joint Powers Organization, and Dakota County Soil and Water
Conservation District. The Black Dog WMO performs surface water quality and aquatic vegetation
monitoring in select Apple Valley lakes. The city has also historically participated in the Metropolitan
Council’s Citizen-Assisted Monitoring Program (CAMP) for lake water quality monitoring and performs
vegetation and fish surveys on priority lakes. The city has successfully partnered with their watershed
organizations, and neighboring communities to secure state funds and implement several water quality
improvement projects.
Apple Valley has several webpages and other online resources targeted at public education on lake, pond
and stormwater management, the city’s activities to advance clean water, and actions that residents can
take to assist on their own property. Resources include fact sheets for several lakes within the city, in
addition to lake management and operational plans. The city also provides FAQs regarding ponds and
To: Ross Bintner and Jessica Vanderwerff Wilson, City of Edina From: Barr Engineering Co.
Subject: Phase I – Edina Clean Water Strategy
Date: June 22, 2022
Page: 6
\\barr.com\projects\Mpls\23 MN\27\23271913 City Edina Clean Water Strateg\WorkFiles\Task 5 - Gaps Analysis and Project Writeup\CWS Phase I_Summary
Memorandum_062222_Final.docx
lakes addressing questions such as: why ponds are weedy, why ponds are green, and why does the pond
smell. The City of Apple Valley offers a cost share program, of up to $500, for residents that install
raingardens, shoreline buffers, or native gardens on their property.
Based on this review of four communities, Edina’s storm and surface water management practices are
generally in-line with their peers. Each of the cities reviewed had a foundational focus of meeting their
MS4 permit requirements, with supplementary programs and practices aligned with climate resiliency and
natural resource protection and restoration. Each of the cities relies on partnerships to help advance their
goals. The cities of Everett, WA and Apple Valley, MN appear to take a more active role and to have more
substantial programs in the management of their natural resources, appearing to strategically focus city
resources particularly in those areas where partnerships are not available. They both have a robust on-line
presence with resources targeted at public engagement and education as associated with storm and
surface water management. Given the City of Edina’s long history of focusing on their natural resources
and strong partnerships with their watersheds and lake associations, Edina may want to consider similar
educational strategies for actively communicating city priorities and practices, past management activities,
and educational messages to help inform and engage the public in contributing to the management of its
surface waters. Edina may similarly want to consider the strategies being utilized by Everett and Apple
Valley in structuring the city’s programs focused on natural resource management as coordinated and
complimentary to those of its other local governmental partners.
4.0 Gaps Analysis
There are several ways in which the City of Edina can, and does, work to protect and improve water quality
within its surface waters. These include various city policies, zoning and regulations, the management of
city properties, engagement with its resident, and the building and maintenance of capital infrastructure.
Through review of City documents, discussion of current clean water commitments with City staff, and
review of the City’s clean water level of accomplishments, the following gaps and areas for potential
improvement in Edina’s clean water services were identified.
These gaps and areas for potential improvement were placed into categories related to the type of city
activity they’re associated with: “Managing the Landscape”, “Managing its Waters”, and “Resident
Education and Engagement”.
Managing the Landscape:
• The City of Edina leverages the strengths and regulatory authority of its watershed districts,
relying on them for stormwater regulation and advancement of many of the clean water activities
within the City. The NMCWD takes an active role in lake water quality monitoring, advancing
technical studies and implementing water quality improvement projects within the city. The
MCWD has historically been less active in performing this type of work in Edina. This is, in part,
due to the fact that MCWD has fewer large waterbodies than NMCWD within the City. As a result,
To: Ross Bintner and Jessica Vanderwerff Wilson, City of Edina From: Barr Engineering Co.
Subject: Phase I – Edina Clean Water Strategy
Date: June 22, 2022
Page: 7
\\barr.com\projects\Mpls\23 MN\27\23271913 City Edina Clean Water Strateg\WorkFiles\Task 5 - Gaps Analysis and Project Writeup\CWS Phase I_Summary
Memorandum_062222_Final.docx
the area of Edina within NMCWD has more lake water quality information and resources available
to inform the development and implementation of clean water management strategies.
• The City relies on its watershed districts for implementation of stormwater rules and post-
construction controls, as required by the City’s MS4 permit for water quality pollutant removal.
The City maintains rules for stormwater management on smaller sites (< 1 acre) when triggered
by flooding and drainage issues. NMCWD’s rules for stormwater management are more stringent
than MCWD’s rules, as related to the scale of project that triggers them. Both organizations’ rules
have historically been consistent with MS4 permit requirements. As part of the effort to update
their SWPPP and CWRMP, the City is working to more clearly document the delineation of roles
and responsibilities associated with stormwater permitting and inspections of stormwater controls
as required by their MS4 permit.
• The City’s Comprehensive Plan and Livings Streets Plan contain goals and strategies focused on
stormwater management, resiliency and moving above-and-beyond stormwater regulatory
requirements, but point to the CWRMP for further definition of management goals and
prioritization of areas for implementation. The City’s CWRMP does not currently contain a
comprehensive, city-wide prioritization of these items for use in informing implementation.
• Though listed as a management strategy within its Water Resources Implementation goals, the
City is not currently performing additional strategic street sweeping in targeted areas for water
quality improvement. Many of Edina’s peer cities are using targeted street sweeping as a cost-
effective strategy to reduce pollutant loading to surface waterbodies.
Managing its Waters:
• The City’s current waterbody classification, prioritization and management policy was created to
provide a framework for the City to respond to resident requests for lake management activities.
This policy was last updated in 2018. Since that time, additional lake data have been collected,
several additional lake and watershed-based management studies and implementation strategies
have been developed, clean water projects have been implemented, and guidance on best
practice in shallow lake management has evolved. In addition, new lake management challenges
such as harmful algal blooms (HABs) have emerged and questions have arisen about potential
impacts of the long-term use of dye and copper treatments for in-lake algal control. The existing
prioritization and lake management framework does not fully account for these considerations.
• The City currently defines its clean water goals as primarily focused on meeting federal, state,
regional and local mandates on surface water protection, with a commitment to manage their
water resources to ensure beneficial uses remain available to the community. Specific goals or
delineation of management priorities for individual waterbodies and their associated drainage
areas are not currently identified within the CWRMP.
To: Ross Bintner and Jessica Vanderwerff Wilson, City of Edina From: Barr Engineering Co.
Subject: Phase I – Edina Clean Water Strategy
Date: June 22, 2022
Page: 8
\\barr.com\projects\Mpls\23 MN\27\23271913 City Edina Clean Water Strateg\WorkFiles\Task 5 - Gaps Analysis and Project Writeup\CWS Phase I_Summary
Memorandum_062222_Final.docx
Resident Education and Engagement:
• The City of Edina has several water resources webpages and an online report library focused on
engaging the public, providing information on water resources within the city, regulatory
requirements, and actions the public can take to help with protecting city waters. In addition, the
City has two publicly available interactive map viewers: the Water Resources viewer and the “What
is my Flood Risk?” viewer, where the public can engage with relevant information on City
waterbodies within a map-based format. The City’s current webpages on lake management and
water quality topics, are more limited than what’s provided for flooding, and also more limited
than that provided by two of the four peer cities reviewed. The lake summary and clean water
topic sheets being created as part of the Clean Water Strategy may help with addressing part of
this gap.
• The City’s Water Resources staff currently lack a comprehensive view of how city residents feel
about the status of Edina’s waterbodies, resident priorities for their use, and how the City is
currently performing in their management.
5.0 Conclusion
The City of Edina places a high value on the management of its water resources and has numerous plans,
policies, and programs in place to support protection of water resources. The City’s currently stated clean
water goals related to their surface waterbodies are tied to federal, state, and local water quality
requirements. The following table summarizes the City’s current clean water outcomes, as associated with
these requirements, for nine waterbodies within the city. Four other waterbodies reviewed for this project
did not have sufficient data available for reporting. As highlighted within the table, despite the City’s on-
going efforts and clean water investments, outcomes within these lakes compared to state-defined clean
water goals are poor. Two of Edina’s lakes (Lake Cornelia and Lake Edina) are currently included on the
USEPA’s Federal List of Impaired Waters. All of the waterbodies with available surface water quality
monitoring data have been shown to consistently not meet state water quality standards; with some lakes
being significantly over the goal for summer average total phosphorus. Most of the lakes also have
aquatic invasive species present. The City’s creeks (North and South Fork of Nine Mile Creek, and
Minnehaha Creek) are also listed as impaired by the USEPA.
To: Ross Bintner and Jessica Vanderwerff Wilson, City of Edina From: Barr Engineering Co.
Subject: Phase I – Edina Clean Water Strategy
Date: June 22, 2022
Page: 9
\\barr.com\projects\Mpls\23 MN\27\23271913 City Edina Clean Water Strateg\WorkFiles\Task 5 - Gaps Analysis and Project Writeup\CWS Phase I_Summary Memorandum_062322_Final.docx
Lake Designated as “Impaired” by MPCA
and USEPA1
Range of Summer Average Total Phosphorus
Concentration (µg/L)2 Notes on Water Quality Data Availability Summary of Aquatic Invasive Species3
Lake Cornelia – North
X
High: 211; Low: 84; Average: 142 Data available for 9-years between 2007 to 2020. Invasive species include: goldfish and common carp;
curly-leaf pondweed, purple loosestrife, and Eurasian
watermilfoil. Lake Cornelia - South High: 174; Low: 97; Average: 131 Data available for 6-years between 2008 to 2020.
Lake Edina X High: 146; Low: 77; Average: 111 Data available for 5-years between 2008 to 2020. Invasive species include: curly-leaf pondweed and
Eurasian watermilfoil.
Hawkes High: 123; Low: 88; Average: 110 Data available for 4-years between 2016 to 2019. Data not available.
Arrowhead High: 80; Low: 52;
Average: 68 Data available for 4-years between 2011 to 2020. Invasive species include: purple loosestrife, curly-leaf
pondweed, and Eurasian watermilfoil.
Indianhead High: 146; Low: 53; Average: 94 Data available for 4-years between 2011 to 2020. Invasive species include: purple loosestrife, yellow iris,
and curly-leaf pondweed.
Pamela High: 213; Low: 51; Average: 121 Data available for 7-years between 2004 to 2015. Data not available.
Harvey Average: 152 Data available for 1-year in 2010. Data not available.
Mirror High: 119; Low: 104; Average: 112 Data available for 2-years between 2004 to 2012. Invasive species include: goldfish, purple loosestrife, and
curly-leaf pondweed.
Melody High: 164; Low: 140; Average: 152 Data available for 2-years between 2009 to 2010. Invasive species include: curly-leaf pondweed and
Eurasian watermilfoil.
1 As noted within the MN Pollution Control Agency’s 2022 List of Impaired Waters. Waters listed as ‘impaired’ by the State of MN and USEPA are not meeting state or federal water quality standards.
2 Based on data collected and reported by the Nine Mile Creek Watershed District, the Metropolitan Council, and the MN Pollution Control Agency. The state goal for average summer total phosphorus concentrations for shallow lakes in this region is less than or equal to 60 µg/L.
3 Based on data collected and reported by the Nine Mile Creek Watershed District and the MN Department of Natural Resources.
To: Ross Bintner and Jessica Vanderwerff Wilson, City of Edina From: Barr Engineering Co.
Subject: Phase I – Edina Clean Water Strategy
Date: June 22, 2022
Page: 10
\\barr.com\projects\Mpls\23 MN\27\23271913 City Edina Clean Water Strateg\WorkFiles\Task 5 - Gaps Analysis and Project Writeup\CWS Phase I_Summary
Memorandum_062322_Final.docx
The City’s current policies of protecting beneficial uses for its residents and promoting balanced lake
ecosystems are difficult to assess without further definition of goals at the city and/or waterbody-level. As
part of Phase II of the Clean Water Strategy, we recommend that the City (re-) prioritize and further define
goals for clean water services both within its surface waterbodies, as well as in those areas that drain to
them.
Developing a reprioritization and goals for its surface waterbodies will help the City to become more
proactive and less reactive in the implementation of in-lake clean water services, by further defining how
and when it will engage in lake management activities. It will also assist in identifying priority areas on the
landscape for the implementation and advancement of watershed-based clean water services such as
strategic street sweeping, pursuit of further partnerships with its watershed districts and other
organizations, and grants for above-and-beyond water quality improvements.
Phase II of City’s clean water strategy is currently intended to outline the philosophy and vision of the
City’s Clean Water Strategy and lay out options to close the gaps identified in this Phase I memo and/or
improve the level of service. Reprioritization and establishment of goals developed during Phase II will
help the City integrate those goals into their existing programs in an effort to best align city services and
available funding to protect and improve the city’s surface water.
To: Ross Bintner and Jessica Vanderwerff Wilson, City of Edina From: Barr Engineering Co.
Subject: Phase I – Edina Clean Water Strategy
Date: June 22, 2022
Page: 11
\\barr.com\projects\Mpls\23 MN\27\23271913 City Edina Clean Water Strateg\WorkFiles\Task 5 - Gaps Analysis and Project Writeup\CWS Phase I_Summary
Memorandum_062222_Final.docx
Attachment A: Edina Lake Management Summary Table
NamePublic Waterbody ID (1 unless noted)Public Waterbody Classification (1 unless noted) State Assessment Unit ID (1 unless noted)Beneficial Use Classification (2 unless noted)Is it currently listed as impaired? (3)Applicable WLAs (3)If impaired, is TMDL/WRAPS complete? If yes, include linkIs it directly upstream of an impaired water? (1)Has a UAA study done by WD? (4)Is water quality data available? If yes, include linkWater Quality Parameters (most recent years) (2)Sampling Frequency by State (2)Water Quality Sampling by WD (4)Frequency by WD (4)Vegetation Sampling / Observation (noted by who and timing)Citizen Monitoring/Other monitoring (2)Lake Association / Lake Group (1) Assigned classification for aquatic vegetation management (high, med, low, or none) (1)Lake Cornelia27002801 and 2700282PNorth ‐ 27‐0028‐01; South‐ 27‐0028‐022B Yes, nutrientsIncluded in Lower MN River WRAPS (2014); WLA for TPhttps://www.pca.state.mn.us/sites/default/files/wq‐iw7‐50e.pdfYeshttps://webapp.pca.state.mn.us/surface‐water/impairment/27‐0028‐01; https://webapp.pca.state.mn.us/surface‐water/impairment/27‐0028‐02 Chl‐a, TKN, TP, secchi, DO, NO2NO3, Turb (2020)Almost every yearSecchi, Chl‐a, turbidity, Do, Temp, Specific conductivity, TP, ortho P, TN, TKN, Nitrate and nitrite, Chlorides, pHEvery year except 2018 and 2019. Monthly sampling May to SeptPhytoplankton, plants‐ once every three years (4)Citizen Lake Monitoring (Secchi) and MCES Citizen Lake Monitoring (TP, Chl‐A, Secchi)Lake Cornelia group HighMelody Lake 27066900 W 27‐0669‐00 2B No No Nohttps://webapp.pca.state.mn.us/surface‐water/impairment/27‐0669‐00Chl‐a, TP, Secchi (2010)2009 and 2010Friends of Melody Lake HighMirror Lake 27005500 P 27‐0055‐00 2B No No Nohttps://webapp.pca.state.mn.us/surface‐water/impairment/27‐0055‐00Secchi (2020) Almost every yearSecchi, Chl‐a, turbidity, Do, Temp, Specific conductivity, TP, ortho P, TN, TKN, Nitrate and nitrite, Chlorides, pH2020 last year (typically once every 7 years). Monthly sampling May to Sept Phytoplankton, zooplankton, aquatic plants with IBI, at same time as WQ sampling (4)Citizen Lake Monitoring (Secchi)No LowHighlands Lake 27066800 P 27‐0668‐00 No No No Not on MPCA Not on MPCA website Not on MPCANo MediumLake Edina 27002900 P 27‐0029‐00 2B Yes, nutrientsIncluded in Lower MN River WRAPS (2014); WLA for TPhttps://www.pca.state.mn.us/sites/default/files/wq‐iw7‐50e.pdfYeshttps://webapp.pca.state.mn.us/surface‐water/impairment/27‐0029‐00Chl‐a, DO, TKN, NO2NO3, pH, TP, turb, Secchi (2020)Every 5 yearsSecchi, Chl‐a, turbidity, Do, Temp, Specific conductivity, TP, ortho P, TN, TKN, Nitrate and nitrite, Chlorides, pH2020 most recent (typically 2‐3 years) monthly sampling May to SeptPhytoplankton, zooplankton, aquatic plants with IBI, at same time as WQ sampling (4)MCES Citizen Lake Monitoring (TP, Chl‐A, Secchi)No HighIndianhead Lake 27004400 P 27‐0044‐00 2B No No Nohttps://webapp.pca.state.mn.us/surface‐water/impairment/27‐0044‐00Chl‐a, DO, TKN, NO2NO3, pH, TP, turb, Secchi (2020)Every 5‐10 yearsSecchi, Chl‐a, turbidity, Do, Temp, Specific conductivity, TP, ortho P, TN, TKN, Nitrate and nitrite, Chlorides, pHLast two years monthly sampling May to SeptPhytoplankton, zooplankton, aquatic plants with IBI, at same time as WQ sampling (4)Citizen Lake Monitoring (Secchi)The Indianhead Lake AssociationHighLake Nancy/Lake Otto 27067700‐ Nancy and 27067800‐OttoW27‐0677‐00 Nancy No No Yes No Not on MPCA Not on MPCA websiteNot on MPCA websiteLake Nancy Lake AssociationNancy‐High, Otto‐LowArrowhead Lake 27004400 P 27‐0045‐00 No No Nohttps://www.ninemilecreek.org/whats‐happening/lake‐creek‐monitoring/ Not on MPCA websiteNot on MPCA websiteSecchi, Ch‐a, turbidity, Do, Temp, Specific conductivity, TP, ortho P, TN, TKN, Nitrate and nitrite, Chlorides, pHLast two years (before that every 3‐5 years) monthly May to SeptPhytoplankton, zooplankton, aquatic plants with IBI, at same time as WQ sampling (4)Arrowhead Lake AssociationHighHawkes Lake 27005600 P 27‐0056‐00 2B No No Nohttps://webapp.pca.state.mn.us/surface‐water/impairment/27‐0056‐00Chl‐a, TKN, NO2NO3, Pheo, TP, Secchi (2019)Every year the past 6 yearsMCES Citizen Lake Monitoring (TP, Chl‐A, Secchi)No LowLake Harvey 27067000 W 27‐0670‐00 2B No No Nohttps://webapp.pca.state.mn.us/surface‐water/impairment/27‐0670‐00Chl‐a, TKN, NO2NO3, Pheo, TP, TSS, Secchi (2004)Only 2014MCES Citizen Lake Monitoring (TP, Chl‐A, Secchi)No LowLake Pamela 27067500 P 27‐0675‐00 2B No No Yes Nohttps://webapp.pca.state.mn.us/surface‐water/impairment/27‐0675‐00Chl‐a, TKN, NO2NO3, TP, TSS, Secchi (2015)Almost every year 2005 to 2015MCES Citizen Lake Monitoring (TP, Chl‐A, Secchi), Clean water legacy surface water monitoring, long term metropolitan lake chloride monitoringNo HighSouthwest Ponds Not in table 16.3No No NoNoCentennial Lakes27‐1120‐00 (2) 2B No No No Not on MPCANo2B = cool and warm water aquatic life and habitat and wetlands2Bg = cool and warm water aquatic life and habitat and wetlands, including biological criteriaSources:(1) City of Edina Comprehensive Water Resources Management Plan(2) MPCA Surface Water Database(3) Lower Minnesota River Watershed TMDL Part II by MPCA(4) Nine Mile Creek (fact sheets or reports)(5) Lake Finder(6) DNR infested water list(7) City of Edina staff, 2021(8) UAA Study for Edina and Cornelia(9) Edina XPSWMM Updates by Barr(10) City of Edina Bathymetry Data(11) GIS data developed for City.
Is there a fact sheet on the WD website, if yes include linkWatershed District Max Depth Average Depth Lake Surface Area Littoral Area Shore LengthOrdinary High Water LevelLake Level Management PlanDNR Water Level DataWatershed District Water Level DataBathymetry DataManaged Outlet? (9)Invasive Aquatic Plants (confirmed and managed)Invasive Fish Fish Stocked? Confirmed HAB Drainage Area (9)FEMA Regulated ZoneFEMA 100‐Yr Elevation (NGVD29)Modeled 100‐Year High Water Levelhttps://www.ninemilecreek.org/explore‐the‐watershed/explore‐our‐lakes‐and‐creeks/lake‐cornelia/Nine Mile Creek WD6.5 feet (5), 8 feet (10)4.6 feet (10)52.63 acres (5), 33.3 acres (11)58.24 acres (5)2.34 miles (5), 1.32 miles (11)https://www.dnr.state.mn.us/lakefind/showlevel.html?downum=27002800https://maps.barr.com/NMCWD/WebTool/Home/WaterLevels?selectIDs=NANCYxNoCurly‐leaf pondweed (4), purple loosestrife (4), hybrid cattail (4), Eurasian watermilfoil (6)Carp and goldfish (7)Bluegill (2020, 2016, 2015, 2014, 2012, 2011), Back Crappie (2015, Hybrid sunfish (2015), Pumpkinseed sunfish (2015) (5)Annual since 2016 (7) 982.1 acres AE 864No Minnehaha Creek WD 7 feet (10) 4.2 feet (10)8.51 acres (2), 8.3 acres (11)0.86 milesxPumped (controlled elev at 887.4)Curly leaf pondweed (7), Eurasian watermilfoil (7)176.2 acresNo Nine Mile Creek WD 14 fete (10) 5.4 feet (10)21.29 acres (2), 22.8 acres (11)1.37 mileshttps://www.dnr.state.mn.us/lakefind/showlevel.html?downum=27005500https://maps.barr.com/NMCWD/WebTool/Home/WaterLevels?selectIDs=NANCYxPumped (controlled elev at app. 908.5)Purple loosestrife (7), Curly leaf pondweed (7)Goldfish (7)282 acres No Nine Mile Creek WD 8 feet (10) 3.7 feet (10)9.0 acres (2), 11.4 acres (11)0.69 miles (11)xPumped (controlled at 888.5)Bluegill, fathead minnow, largemouth bass, yellow perch (2015) (5) 272.9 acreshttps://www.ninemilecreek.org/explore‐the‐watershed/explore‐our‐lakes‐and‐creeks/lake‐edina/Nine Mile Creek WD5 feet (4,8), 4 feet (10)3 feet (4,8), 2.9 (10)23.55 acres (2), 25 acres (4), 23.9 (11)0.99 mileshttps://www.dnr.state.mn.us/lakefind/showlevel.html?downum=27002900https://maps.barr.com/NMCWD/WebTool/Home/WaterLevels?selectIDs=NANCYxNoEurasian watermilfoil (4,5,6), Curly‐lead pondweed (4) 394.9 acres AE 824.5https://www.ninemilecreek.org/explore‐the‐watershed/explore‐our‐lakes‐and‐creeks/indianhead‐lake/Nine Mile Creek WD6.5 feet (4), 7 feet (10)4.7 feet (10)]12.46 acres (2), 14 acres (4), 14.1 acres (11)0.92 miles (11)863.7 ft NGVD 29 (5)https://www.dnr.state.mn.us/lakefind/showlevel.html?downum=27004400https://maps.barr.com/NMCWD/WebTool/Home/WaterLevels?selectIDs=NANCYxNo ‐ landlockedPurple loosestrife (4), Yellow Iris (4), Curly leaf pondweed (7)Bluegill (2016, 2013), Black Crappie (2016, 2013), Largemouth Bass (2016, 2013), Hybrid sunfish (2016) (5) 113.9 acresNo Nine Mile Creek WD 4 feet (10) 2.5 feet (10)Nancy‐ 3.75 acres (2); 4.3‐acres (11) / Otto ‐ 10.25‐acres (11)Nancy ‐ 0.45‐miles (11); Otto ‐ 0.82‐miles (11)https://www.dnr.state.mn.us/lakefind/showlevel.html?downum=27067700https://maps.barr.com/NMCWD/WebTool/Home/WaterLevels?selectIDs=NANCYxNoCarp and goldfish (7)148.7 acreshttps://www.ninemilecreek.org/explore‐the‐watershed/explore‐our‐lakes‐and‐creeks/arrowhead‐lake/Nine Mile Creek WD 7 feet (5), 9 feet (10)7 feet (4), 4.8 feet (10)22.03 acres (5), 21.1 acres (11)22.03 acres (5)1.09 miles (5), 5, 0.98 (11)875.8 ft NGVD 29 (5)Yeshttps://www.dnr.state.mn.us/lakefind/showlevel.html?downum=27004500https://maps.barr.com/NMCWD/WebTool/Home/WaterLevels?selectIDs=NANCYxNo ‐ landlockedEurasian watermilfoil (5,6), Purple loosestrife (4), curly leaf pondweed (7)Bluegill and largemouth bass (2016) (5) 178.7 acres No Nine Mile Creek WD5.38 acres (2), 6.8 acres (11)0.53 miles (11)https://www.dnr.state.mn.us/lakefind/showlevel.html?downum=27005600https://maps.barr.com/NMCWD/WebTool/Home/WaterLevels?selectIDs=NANCYPumped (controlled elevation at 885.1) 341.7 acresNo Minnehaha Creek WD6.71 acres (2), 6.6 acres (11)0.51 miles (11)No, not pumped, piped outlet42 acresNo Minnehaha Creek WD 8 feet (10) 3.4 feet (10)6.75 acres (2), 7 acres (11)0.54 miles (11)xNo 276.4 acres AENo Nine Mile Creek WDNo‐ piped (all but one, other is landlocked) 411.5 acresNo Nine Mile Creek WD 9 feet (5, 10) 4.3 feet (10)5.86 acres (2), 7.6 acres (11)3.33 acres (5) 0.87 miles (5)xNot pumped, piped outletBluegill (2020, 2017, 2016, 2015, 2014, 2012, 2011), Black Crappie (2017), Northern Pike (2017,2014), Pumpkinseed sunfish (2016), Largemouth bass (2014) (5) 214.3 acres
To: Ross Bintner and Jessica Vanderwerff Wilson, City of Edina From: Barr Engineering Co.
Subject: Phase I – Edina Clean Water Strategy
Date: June 22, 2022
Page: 12
\\barr.com\projects\Mpls\23 MN\27\23271913 City Edina Clean Water Strateg\WorkFiles\Task 5 - Gaps Analysis and Project Writeup\CWS Phase I_Summary
Memorandum_062222_Final.docx
Attachment B: Lake Summary Sheets
To: Ross Bintner and Jessica Vanderwerff Wilson, City of Edina From: Barr Engineering Co.
Subject: Phase I – Edina Clean Water Strategy
Date: June 22, 2022
Page: 13
\\barr.com\projects\Mpls\23 MN\27\23271913 City Edina Clean Water Strateg\WorkFiles\Task 5 - Gaps Analysis and Project Writeup\CWS Phase I_Summary
Memorandum_062222_Final.docx
Attachment C: Clean Water Fact Sheets