HomeMy WebLinkAboutCity Council Packet 07-20-1999 SpecialY
SPECIAL COUNCIL MEETING
July 20, 1999
5:30 PM
Public Safety Training Room
Light Dinner Available)
1. Water Rate Study 5:30 p.m.
2. Water Resource Management Plan -- funding issues 6:00 p.m.
requested by Councilmember Harstad)
3. Schedule next Study Session and Topics 6:45 p.m.
4. Adjourn 6:50 p.m.
DATE: July 20, 1999
TO: Dwight Johnson, City Manager
FROM: Mike Kohnnancial Analyst through Dale Hahn, Finance Director
SUBJECT: Water Rate Study
Background
In 1998 Springsted Public Finance Advisors was hired to perform a water rate study for the City
of Plymouth. The study had two main purposes. The first purpose was to determine the
financial impact of projected capital expenditures. The second was to evaluate various public
policy issues that may have a financial impact. The first purpose results from a need for
significant capital expenditures over the next 20 years for items such as water tower painting,
public works building expansion, increased well replacements, water meter replacement and
upgrades to the City's water treatment facilities. The second purpose results from the need to
resolve such issues as water conservation, senior discounts, maintenance of private hydrants and
demand charges.
Springsted did deliver a report to the City on April 19, 1999, which laid out a number of water
rate scenarios and provided information regarding the issues which need to be resolved. This
report borrows heavily from the work done by Springsted. However, several scenarios have
been added and policy issues have been incorporated to provide more accurate and fine tuned
information for decision-making purposes.
Methodology
1996 and 1997 water statistics and planning information for Northwest Plymouth were utilized to
create account and consumption projections through the year 2015. From these projections
expense and revenue estimates were derived. Operating expense estimates are based on a
historical cost per connection which is inflated 3% per year and multiplied by the projected
number of connections. Revenues are calculated based on current average annual usage by
customer class multiplied by projected customers by class.
Assumptions
The following assumptions have been made.
potentially affect the projected outcomes.
The interest rate for investments is 5%.
Any deviations from these assumptions could
Average annual usage per customer will not change. Does not assume possible reduction in
consumption for tiered rates.
Average expenses per connection will not increase at more than 3% annually.
The number of future connections will meet or exceed the level projected.
The financial goal of the analysis is to select an option which provides a ratio of ending cash
balance to operating revenues of at least 1 in all years.
Options
Option 1 represents the status quo. Water rates remain at present levels and $4,000,000 in cash
and $4,000,000 in debt are used to pay for water treatment facility upgrades.
Option 2 would result in the elimination of residential demand charges and residential hydrant
inspection fees. The water treatment facility would be paid for with $4,000,000 in cash and
4,000,000 in debt.
Option 3 would result in the elimination of residential demand charges and residential hydrant
inspection fees. The water treatment facility would be paid for with $8,000,000 in cash.
Option 4 would result in the elimination of residential demand charges and residential hydrant
inspection fees. The water treatment facility would be paid for with $8,000,000 in debt.
2
Analysis
The quantitative results of each option are displayed in the below table:
2010 2015
5,916,630 2,726,612
1.61 .74
9,646,555 12,860,009
2.19 2.64
8,363,707 13,469,858
1.9 2.77
11,231,700 12,790,533
2.55 2.63
Note: Details for the above calculations are contained in Appendices 1-4 The ratios above are
ratio of ending balance to annual operating revenues..
Option 1
If water rates are not increased, and the projected capital expenditures (Appendix 5) are
undertaken, the Water Fund would eventually have financial difficulties. This is a result of
expenditures per customer rising while revenues per customer remain constant. This option
would leave senior discounts, demand charges and hydrant inspection charges in place. The
biggest single capital expenditure (water treatment plant upgrades) would be financed in part
through cash and partly through debt. This would seem reasonable since cash is available
without depleting the Water Fund to a dangerous level in the near term. Current rates could be
left in place for a number of years without causing much harm to the Water Fund. However,
future rate increases would have to be more aggressive to catch-up with expenditures.
Option 2
Option 2 contemplates the elimination of residential demand charges and residential private
hydrant inspection fees. Once again; the water treatment plant upgrades are expected to be
financed in part through cash and in part through debt. The logic behind the elimination of the
residential fees are as follows:
Residential Demand Charges
If the townhouse, condo and apartment complexes that currently have demand charges on large
meters were so inclined, they could put in a separate % inch meter for each unit to circumvent
demand charges. An 8 unit complex could be served by either a 1 V2 inch meter or eight % inch
meters. The peak flow from the 1 %2 inch meter is 120 gpm while the peak flow for eight % inch
meters would be 280 gpm. A 64 unit complex could use one 2 inch meter or sixty-four % inch
meters. The peak flow of the 2 inch meter is 170 gpm versus 2,240 gpm for the sixty-four %
3
1999 2000 2005
Option 1 Balance 8,077,443 4,468,641 5,966,433
Option 1 Ratio 2.53 1.35 1.66
Option 2 Balance 8,077,443 4,373,222 6,547,495
Option 2 Ratio 2.53 1.36 1.67
Option 3 Balance 8,077,443 527,317 3,797,006
Option 3 Ratio 2.53 16 97
Option 4 Balance 8,077,443 8,233,448 9,424,691
Option 4 Ratio 2.53 2.55 2.41
2010 2015
5,916,630 2,726,612
1.61 .74
9,646,555 12,860,009
2.19 2.64
8,363,707 13,469,858
1.9 2.77
11,231,700 12,790,533
2.55 2.63
Note: Details for the above calculations are contained in Appendices 1-4 The ratios above are
ratio of ending balance to annual operating revenues..
Option 1
If water rates are not increased, and the projected capital expenditures (Appendix 5) are
undertaken, the Water Fund would eventually have financial difficulties. This is a result of
expenditures per customer rising while revenues per customer remain constant. This option
would leave senior discounts, demand charges and hydrant inspection charges in place. The
biggest single capital expenditure (water treatment plant upgrades) would be financed in part
through cash and partly through debt. This would seem reasonable since cash is available
without depleting the Water Fund to a dangerous level in the near term. Current rates could be
left in place for a number of years without causing much harm to the Water Fund. However,
future rate increases would have to be more aggressive to catch-up with expenditures.
Option 2
Option 2 contemplates the elimination of residential demand charges and residential private
hydrant inspection fees. Once again; the water treatment plant upgrades are expected to be
financed in part through cash and in part through debt. The logic behind the elimination of the
residential fees are as follows:
Residential Demand Charges
If the townhouse, condo and apartment complexes that currently have demand charges on large
meters were so inclined, they could put in a separate % inch meter for each unit to circumvent
demand charges. An 8 unit complex could be served by either a 1 V2 inch meter or eight % inch
meters. The peak flow from the 1 %2 inch meter is 120 gpm while the peak flow for eight % inch
meters would be 280 gpm. A 64 unit complex could use one 2 inch meter or sixty-four % inch
meters. The peak flow of the 2 inch meter is 170 gpm versus 2,240 gpm for the sixty-four %
3
inch meters. As a result of this evaluation it would seem that a strong case could be made to
eliminate demand charges on residential meters.
Residential Hydrant Inspection Fees
Residential townhouse, condo and apartment developments that have private streets also have
private water systems and hydrants served by City water. Annually the City inspects all hydrants
and a fee of $35 is charged to cover the cost of inspection. Since private residential hydrants are
no different than the other residential hydrants which are inspected annually at no charge, it is
difficult to understand why persons with private hydrants should be charged an additional fee.
This is especially difficult in light of the fact that persons with residential private hydrants are
being double charged for hydrant inspection. First, they are being charged for a portion of the
hydrant inspection that is being done for other water customers, then they are charged for
inspection of their own hydrants. Consequently, it seems reasonable to eliminate residential
hydrant inspection fees.
If residential demand charges and hydrant inspection fees are eliminated the Water Fund would
be able to afford to take care of its capital needs with a 2% rate increase.
Option 3
In Option 3, residential demand and hydrant inspection fees would be eliminated and the water
treatment facility upgrades would be paid for entirely in cash. If rates are increased by 2% per
year the Fund would end up in good position, however, it would fall well below its fund
balance/operating revenue rate target for the years 2000 — 2005.
Option 4
Option 4 would be the same as options 2 and 3 except the water treatment plant upgrades would
be paid for entirely through debt. This would enable the City to maintain a large cash balance
initially and end with a cash balance similar to Option 2. The water treatment plant upgrades are
mainly to add capacity. Current residents have paid through their rates for current capacity. It
would make sense for future customers to pay for additional capacity. By borrowing to pay the
cost of additional capacity, expenditures can be shifted in part to future residents.
Base Vs User Fee
All of the options listed above have been calculated with an equal increase to base and user fees.
The City also would have the option of increasing fees in a non -parallel manner. Base fees could
be raised while user fees remain the same or bases fee could remain constant while user fees
increase.
In general I would support an increase to the base rate for water consumption since about 85% of
Water Fund costs are fixed. What this means is that these costs are the same whether 1 gallon of
water is pumped or 1,000,000,000 gallons are pumped. However, raising the proportion of base
rates versus user rates has some disadvantages. First of all it would likely be difficult for the
public to understand. People who use little water would be paying more per gallon than those
who use larger quantities of water. Also, if a large portion of a bill is fixed it reduces the
economic incentive to conserve or at least avoid wasting water.
Discussion Points
Should residential demand charges and hydrant inspection fees be eliminated? Residential
demand charges are currently worth $157,346 per year and residential hydrant inspection
fees are worth $11,865 per year.
How should water treatment plant upgrades be paid for?
All cash
All Debt
lh Cash — 1/x Debt
Plymouths water rates are amongst the lowest in the area (Appendix 6).
5
7
y Mr
p
O
A
N O CT N
v co g
0 o V O
C11 C 11
T O O C
W ro W
N t00O Ntto
CI
pppp (
T
W V O
Oco
W O N
II" I_
O N
W N N
W W O CT O
CST
fA
N O W to9NO1+.
N L" CA)
o to
i-
14 W W N
O A CA
V O O en
4
N
W
J 0
P rn orn
W A
0) O O O v
Oo 100(AO(C71
N Iv O O CCD
CD
7
O z n
j'
5 O
Of
m
49y8_
7 tG
Oi N7 9N
ca
G
Q1 A W N -+ 3
123
OO(C
1
O((TO N o CD
yCD m C m N S}?sy m
O N H
N ZC
CD
CD
CD
7
8
N
N W
J J N O VW O t00 A N NO 0 NCC71NWO O O tD W N (D CO Cn N O CnOnCVCTWV0011NXC1T1AOinAOOWO OW CA N W A ACA CA t00AU
N W
COIF N V A 1011 O W -()) OW -4 _000CTCTW -+ V O Lb
V
O W 0) CT tbNV0)V W NOO (0 N coA
40 49 N W
ON0 W A N CAOO
CCA
Oi1 A
ON) -
tVO O +)
t0 W O A A Oo tD
CO Cn N -+ WCAO (
Da
OO N A Ov W 0 (0
O W N A A tN0 OD W C1fV W N V OCnWWO .+ 4p CA V W 0 O N CO W
co A W V .h W A GAO CW71 +
N (.J O
t0 O Cn N N c W V O V O OAf W W W
N W
O -
W
pVAA0O
000 O V WONC00CVW1 A
UO0W W
0D
V
a
Iwo OWO CND OWo tO Ttn 0,
44
IQ
N W
O- OADN +OCO CC1f
C") CT tooA4000
V V W JJAaa A O (71
N CO -+ p0p t0 tD G WQNpNOVt0CWtDOtbVCT ? A A
W W
C+
C40
T CD 0
CCA1
W N T
O VCD 80i
4V0Cf y
CT
INCOT
t0+?
0
1
CT
EOCTH
opW
W
VNW
WOCT
OCn (
090-0) WV O OCV O-+
VCn a V0) ONW to
NW
O 0 NAcO W t0
co
Ge
JW
w
A
AACA
N PD
pW1
W W V1 W O00 W 0011 A V
CAT 00N CWC1n1 A W O CDD V NW N O W N A V N co 0) A V CT " (7D
W W
tNp N
pW
A O) W W W W
W CCA ONo COCW V ton t o V
A -+ V W O) V CT C A (O In oVOWD) W N Cn V O pp CO 00 VCTOVWLntoAOANAVO" V
EA W W W
VO O
wWv(D0 c>W wwcn 0, to aOCA) CO (D w O)W W V V
p co O N N 0OOWWOcoJ. pip
O O N V v0 OD co V W CO A V (n Na 0
qEW W
4A C.0 W9 V 0) W W W
V WW pp to tn 0j
A _
OO 00 01V O
CV Cn CO O OVOCATOWCANVV
N O O V C) OD to N A C CA co N Cn A
W W
Cin W OD 0) A W W jAOONWCAWCTNO0O CA
D A 6n O) N O) V t0 O1 CO 1 1 Oo
CA X011 V C00
coco
D cn -4 N A 0011 -W+ N
O O A A C v O W 00 -+ 0 O W
W W
N N W N (0 O) A W W cn
CT N c V 00 co C V Cn O W OCA
V O N W O O O -1 (D O <D V Cb O
T co Cn O 0) p1 (D t0 N v 0 jWWWOAC) t0 WCn t0 W -
C. 0-4 N .W. W O V V A Cn 0 (n N V
A WNNNVW
V .W.. O co 00 O 000 v C 00088 CAO
p)
W,
1
W CT O O Oo Oo
G1 yty t00 tc0 4N. .p W O 0) A IM(D(DD03 N
O .P.0) O W -4 W C A NO-+Oo0
pA WtaWCinK) O7 A W W CT
A 0) co W V 0) O CA O N CT
Cn N _ CO CT Ja W CO O N O OD O OD
Q? V (n A O 0)(.n O) -4 A
tD O ww Oc0 0) W v 0071 - 0) O Cott W
E9 _ CA
Z,W
n KtT3N W W O A9ONO)
OCD A W W W V W' O N-+OtO
ftt OD 0) O O ACA - V IV
CO
CO C71
A W CC,nn W OD CA O CA OD W OD V N
W O O) A W tD ... N co CA O N O) W V
b9 _ W A W
C c O W t0 C" OOD CA OP. W O L" to CA
O V O N A O CT V O W tD Cb
W (11 V O N W 4N W V CA V M
N V V V C W V CO -I CT O) W
O 0 M CO W .A. OD V O t0 C OD -+
O O
FA
4A
cn
I
N
O -O0D p
CA) N
N
69
O NWO
O
O O N
N (C0
H
rA
9
EA
V co ONW
N wco
f9
OJ)
O
OO O N
V W
vi
fA
V IN
mNCD
A A N
CC71 0
O
V
M
M
Z
9
m
T C 3
a = (D
CL0
n
x
0
A
A
W
A
NN
0coO
6A
4A
A_
CD
N
469
W
W
V
4A
VN
W
W
00
4A
49
D
4
O
N
W
69NO) V
0V00
o
7 tl)
7 OOOOC71O (D
Oi
k
S S S S? 01
7 N
7 DCy
O1 (p
O
1O7
T
CO $ 49 iA 4E$) 44 (f) EA 6A
p (.
ppa (.?ppA ...
1 J
tJpp
T
a
O P? .A?A
AAS
V 1
W (OO 69 6A Ni 6A 6 (A b9 EA p •..
D 000000 Oo3 O
O V V V V V -I O) V y$
N 0 0 0 0 0 0 -40
00
p N40ifl69 fA 0) CD
OW0 $ OOP" tTO00(a N
000000 O$(D a
000000 0
N
LT O
9
8
4A N
rn$
O 0
A
N
V 00O00
Con
b9l
N
00
OJ
N
00
O
O
A
N
O O
i0
W
N NNWO
1+
VW
Alu
CMI)
111 V 0
o
0) A. W N -+ 9 J h
0
it=•
OOOCCTO(i i
61 A A A A A
S S S SNS
N
Cn 9.
N
O
J
iCIDA .1 co
00 ONNVpOp 000
W A W W W V W W
4 J
A t0
W O W (O V .P. (NDA OOD
O
W 00 ? -40 N W
O0N -+ V O
00 (T 0 OD ? O 0 W 0 W
O
4
N
CT N r V 8W (T CID C) A W N -N+ A
r O
J
J
OD OOOODD V V V W
ON
000 A A (O CO O N T N W
O O 0 0 0 0 V W 0 O
N
N •+•0)W IV A?
r^ J0) co LTI
1 N
O NO
00 (W(A) W_
11 OWD (OD 0 N W V w is O
CD r OO) N
0 C4J
0 W O N W V O (WTI N -
O
4AT J
OOD (T W
00
A V0WONCA
V
0) wJ J 0
O W O N W OODD N W 00 CA)
r r O
CO p
V W-+ O W W .a (O
p JN0000N? 00CID W 00 O
N
O ND
pp (T -+ ((
O
A 0 NA 000 A V O 000
O
N
N+ O 0 N A COO CCA V N
NO?
V 0p00 W W (W(
TN
W OODD 0 N A (OO W OODD A A
N
N CO O?
J 1 wVCID ? p CO W W N W
V 0 N? CO V 00 0 V
N
C) N -+ tD O
V 0) s N 0 W W A
A V 0 W A$ OWO ( OWDND
N
O N co
1 V ANO 4) W AO
0 to 41 W W
0 (O 0 W 4 O to W O ?
Ell
CD
CL
x
00
f3D
3Al
7
a
n
CD
90
M
CDN
Q
D) n
C,
CDCD
Or
r
N
fD , r
C <D0 -n 7
CL
D ir
KCD
M
X
N
D
m 5 f D 0 CD
am
z
5
RD f1 C CJ CD 0) A W N to C
0000iAo355555—
oir 6?
m oyv da
CD Nf3D (D (6.(('' L Uo 3.
N v cn(j V)
N CD = O
SDS
Q
CD H ClV
CD m
CD N
m
7
8
3
m
W
co
WAOco N0) CA N O
coV
O COO A N coCNA N U
CA
mANONWUC0OCOONDWUNUCAWc0
U OO CAC I CA 0) OD c0 bo C U A c Of .a 0o
c0 O c0 O O O O W O W CA N W A t7 .cppAO So A OUU O
co V N W r
OVI W A co N WOodDNWVCOVVNAcpUAWAU
OOO
A 6A V N
ACOno
O o
ON)
U
O U V W AO (3) O
L, w
p N V
4W
0) OO t0 W NODWvODAWW
A A OBD 6A df N W
G1 W A O A W 4 Oo CA U N W W N W pD NVWACOc0VC1ct0c7 OW NA A ANc0 UGi NN U S O Of t0 OfNOOWfDW c7c WNt0 p
ccyVp p{p
4 UO W W W W W V W pO
N
co
m c0 coWW
coW
O A N O WWD W W U A OD W W W OD 89
try
CD W Wf0 W N EA N O W W W N V NOCOUVV
N U W VOD NN O WV A c0V VU VV UW cc A U -+ V O)
A A N W CA O
pO O
Dco 0) -) C) N
W N N
0) Of 8N
co 0)
Cr OD CY) co V c0 Al V W W
VU
N -
p
OD V N V O V CO V ACDv c0O AV WV O U cD c0 O N O O0
A A 1
CO W co
O O
D
N
WUVAppWUOW_
V
N Wco Of c{
0aVVCOCACOWcoAVCoCOAVN co UU
NNO
O O— W CO O U V 0 V 040jjVVvW.. CO V U N V N N V .n.
U W CO
O U 0) co N W W
C
W
CD
O ON W W N
U CO W cD VOaODUNpUO
W
V t0 U V-4
N(W0 4V vW W co co WU Ch W
U v0 O U O U N VCYS
Wa Av
V O CD W U W CA
Hf EA
m W V U V N W W
00))
O V WAC W A O
ON N 0) O NV A VNODVO ODT COW VA Oco O t0 G O U O C
A j4O O O N A_ 0) C4 N
N COOO
cc
ON)
0..UD O OUD CNA OODD O 0 OUo O
coU
W A O 00 U cUD V
ccn
o
j fA H
W
y1
co I
V H h 1R A O A co O t0 NWW00ODOV
A CA cn A CA
CD CA V
Co
C)
N tCJCb
4 54V OD
0) - 4 (A pUCl)
COU Co N
W O W CA 0oiJ N N
O Cn -+
WWUpOc0 W
A +M
O) c0 V CO CA C(,,,1 W
W V A co N CA A U A W
01)
W O T fA 69 V) W A N
W A V C7)
O V A VV WN N07 WOD OV 4) O A W W A N
1 coO N V N W V OD A A WU O Of W V N COODAVOWO coO N p
V IV A 4 A U W CA 0) CC K) W
U N V c0 V CD V CA 1O ppW c0 V O O
U W O W r%3 i+. 9
O v O V U V O W U cD N N O U N N CO O W
40 44
NC)) VCO V WA N
0)
W
co
A A W W C)) 8-+ NpWCACAOOOAVWOW0) C) Co O O U O p
V O CD V co 4 U cco W W U N V WU (0 0) Co V
W O O co O co O N Co Cb CAW VW UO N U U t CO V OA N C1)
W O-+Aw V U
H E9 to d)
0 4 H N H W A N
N V U V W N W W CA NN 4W co U NnCOWVvVtAWCAvWOWcoO) A
Opp
O V V W Co co c0 ch N co W -+ oD
OV cp pp
O O W Of O N V N OD W v 4W W 0aOcoU0 V
N H to W A N
c0A D NU 00 CO jCOW j U W W W N K)
N OD QWpA W
pV
A OD pA1ODO) AN cD CJ) W tD O
O co i. CA U 0) K) co O CD - OD V a O
W O U mN WcoN OWCAcocoO) O co w
c0 CA 4A EA d) W A N
0fA Co m
N N A CoN A W V coW v O W N N pQ) W A 6A A COO V coV 0) W W
pA
C V O
O Cr O CD V ONDc0 0
U A c0 O c0 W N W CA co w 0o IN W (r O O
U V W CO W N U U V U N U V N N c0 c0 W W
U 0 0 V U V O V U U U O CO A U N G1 W V V
fn
O CSO ty HU AOU NW
SAA,
1
Co 0 s
UWO
A W
UV W
V :4
jU
W CO W co
CU
COVCADOOUODCOc
0N
1
ONUW
N
OCA 0c A co V JWUODWWNNAWOCDW
M H
J 41
J
O Co W OBD U O CA U
V W U U U O WO
OW)
V CAO CO ONWV4OVWNCA0) CO U
VV
Uco 0) 0W coU coCO O VUODVNUU
DW— pA C
co
WW
U c0 CA O 0) co W W V OoA O c0 N U
dl Hf
4A to A A N
co Oo O 0o U 44 U A W U
AV pNOVWUOAWUVOWCA90WNCODOWCCAI4C"1
N
CO V 00
N CO U Ic0 W c0Nco A
V
A
0) COA CAN U0) CO A V 10
W U .PNOW
NN
W U
U U O V O V O OD W V OD A W V W N W 0) U U Co
lR ffl
N fy W A A N
CA
N Co coO co N U fn W
Co
U A
OV - W V CCOA
N NOAWco
TWc0
V W
UW
U CNU
OUN WWU CA C4 OO O
CDAVV
c I
CO D CA co 0) co OD co -4
fA fA
N N
61co
A A N
M ppp
NV OOOWN
N A CD
Oy)
P A 0) N 01 U A Vc0 UU UU V CA CO OD V c0WUCO -
c+11
CD V U O0o
O O N A N co la O U A CA ImA
01)
U
Oco W W O
0 V co WV 0 COb.W0) CO+ O0 COU
co W co O 4 CA CoCo O
f3D
3Al
7
a
n
CD
90
M
CDN
Q
D) n
C,
CDCD
Or
r
N
fD , r
C <D0 -n 7
CL
D ir
KCD
M
X
N
D
M %
WN+
000009000000+a!
Mail 99119V'r
O 0 x 7
m $
w
O
N FN
mmaDmmm mNm
co co 0. co w co co CD
N N N N
NSN(T C9 V S OV1 W W OVi 0 OD
pOl
ppNp (
pW py'
ON N Np r
jN
AIS G O W N S A A A A A A A A N
r
13. NypN
tppD ppppN
O
O D
pNN
M
A
W N 10 O
app
my
p FAAAN L A A N
818 V S :4 + S N N N N N N N N 8
F
ACCNpp Wya NN
pNp yN+
Np y
f4O
fWWJ
mW
to NNN(Y. I-4 W L, Nf{0{ N
ODS W S+NS OOOOSO CS O
N
vOpNpp
NW
Ap
4yN
W
pNp +
j
NpNN
QO '
O W A (O(T (J O fgq71 (
pl
1
pN pv pW ,
tpNi 1 ,tpNn ,
pON
i N
01 5 0 V N O/ 5 m 5 5 5 5 5 S S A
O N 41Wj p1 app NNp l0p q
Nm ODp
0N1v 111O
W W ODA W ON/0N1 N
ASODpppW:0189 0)CDm O0)O) 0)0) au
Nt 1
i1
4 N
A0ND1" O
pmNpOpp.Wtt lyT
pqs
UNNg jN HN qN t« S O fJ U + V O 01 N ,O) OD A O1 Of W N
88a;9888 T T 9 9 2 TT {3
N
pppp Fpp
p
C0Np1 0N
1pp
0y
tp1 {rj1
CVpD O C44D1 OI Ol VOG V V V t0 fT v V v N
SSOi+OIA S NNNNNN NN ONi
F
NN N NNt 1 pNp
1zi;
3U5114AIS ER
fNp p+)Np NpM
Wf, ((T pp11 Of O V V V t0 N V V v N
T 5+ O O W S N N N N N N N N +
N NtN(N(
N1 pN01PPWfT .
4N1iN pNp pp+
N N
pOp O OS {T{O1 CND O CD CD ,CND W m ,CND ,CND
4N1015aVOmSNNNNNNNN8?
N
t 1N? N N N N+
pmp
A1
0p app pal Np
ppN
N
0, CD
88 82 a+5 ;pNNN NN N ,
NN N
N +
F N
fqq NN
pNp
pmNp
A fT N f0tT19y9V (,A()1O fD 5010+ V m f0 f0
yNyNSOVNWSNNNNN292W:
N
N4NI
NNN
qppNpp ppAp
0V11N ppS
N+
fN
r
jN
41 f (q O0
p0tO0
p1N yW
t0O 000 N OD O 00 N
OSA.1+. W S NNNNNN NN +
N
4 N pqp
p40
l1
pmNp
A
N (
ppTpp (mNpOf/ N2HHNppOF¢
FCD0 N
W S AOm O S N N ;j ;j NN T
N
m
ppNp1Nm
0A1 (pNT
N O1 N+
SCD fO 9Np S NNNNNN NN
F N NNN M
NN NA.fWT Na N+
f0 m 2+N m j s +r r r N
NOiT q+gyp p NpASmfTNSSNNN N N N N Si
I7
tp^
W NAl.a
jddOOCOfTc
N
N
O O
C W N
N
OrW
O
mOm
N
W
W v
ON)
G
N S
w41
m
N q
A
S
0 0 0 0 0 0 -9811
N fV11 N OVi (V71 N N V N
w
d
OD a O,(V71 W AO 00
SSSSSS 88w
NNfpp rtp d
N+ W W
W NN
NN
N
m
41 +
N N W
N m NW S OND m S CND
pp+ O0011 (
pW4l
y
t2l
V A1 W NgIA OD mO C
0 25
RI"
N Wj4411
oSoO)
N
O
1o
S
S
S
V V
O
W
a
N
r
t0
N
N
m O
A
rr
W
N
r O+
O NV
N
N
N +O
O WW
N
N
N O+
5
A
W
N
N
O+
U
s
wCL
0000 G
A
R2 AST OTg+V
p
N
mq C pp
N W
W OD A V ON .A+ OD
N
fT (NQ p po N6
V
CVD
U (7 S A O W O S
fT
pNpp (p mm
pN
INS
V
W N W O A W N+
N O O V V V W O
fppTpp
pN
aa p p ppb 4 j"j
Nm
O O NOOO V 4N1 UI O
Ol m tr+O W CLADS 5
ch
CD til fTN W V ONDNO W
14.44
Is yQN
O m W W+
CD W 01 N W V (T N
tD Ol OIN W CD UA V
OpOp
N (
p
441
10
O W NN W COD N OI Of W
O)
fNpp p441 CA
tp0
N W U N AS W OI CD O
O
pyp
p p
t0
1 4a
pN1
O
A A fTN AO A V O OD
r
O1
pyNp p (p p41 N+
t0 +
O 01 to fD 01vN o
r
N
r
V (
TNAO
V ODS V
O
A (
ONTO p p41 tW0AV (T W A 5 CD CND
O
I
N
N
4 p Np
pD
44
fy
fT t0 fT W OOmf50 S A
EAV
N A 0) to
A N O
W W U O
m o O o OO
fA N
co _ V
O
pW
AA W fJlVOAco
CA
AV
ppp OD 41WON
N lis:tA VV - t0V
WVt0WW
fAJ
c"
CNA A N O V
V O V W W
O W N (A
V 0 W co V
fA <fl
O Of Of OOD N
CT N O CA
W V W 0 V
N O OCOvV
N
Mr8
N
P 1 JN O
V 00 (O V
V W O W
W N
v O> N O
pC
C7at OD O
O W O N -VJ
I fA
W N
ON
t0 N W t0
co O 04
OOo J O O W
fAN _+
N W O t0
W O A
pN
O O W S
f f
r A
t0 OD W
W O t00 N
N
O (A W
CWT A W
co O CT 0
CAfA
0 co
J
coOODONw
At0
A
VOD
CVT
cco
o00 pNppp
OD O V A
fA
coODOD
W O V W
fA
ppJ
N ? -CAIC
pp N 0t, N O COO A
T N -co
A O co O
fAJ
JcoW J
co
O V A
V O OOD
r W
W O N O—
JJ t0 M
m t0 M
v v W
O .0-
4A
O
fA
N W
W fO0 W
00 (O(1Tf co
O O PCT
N
co O Coo
co W OD
t0 O V CT
t00 W O
yJy, coCD
W O A O
fA
W N A
W O co
fA
o m < O
m i 1m4
m com
Nf'p. (D 7
3. c
cato z
H
r7
m
G
m
CD
CD
V! fA N
O V W
O W N
W COT N W
O
CO
coo co I W
fA d! N
W N M 0
W v W v
T
O W co V
69fA N
OODD O OOD co
W p A
0o O t0 V
fA df N
t0 CO W
O O V
OD 1 O 00 1 O
4A 4A W
W W O
T —
OD O OD O
GA L
W
O 11r W N
cil I1r L
WO O m V
fA sA W
O CT CWC.SDAA0)
J
W
Cil
41
T (A
J J
v v CA
co O co O
4A 44 W
N N V
CO 10 V
J J 00
W O W V
W
O O
W W
W W N
CO O CO N
fA
W W OWf
V v N
OO O -+
W
coNNOOD
figfA A
W v CO
O CO CT
A A L7
CD CD W
00 O CO
o(D
D P° P' 99=or 1=d
WW
t00 A N W N N W
CO W CA N CA VI
co wGCA A WACAmACT
MW ,
spa
OD SOON V d
coN O W CO (, N v v
O V N OD A w N
W
N
pN
O O W (O W
O W W W W
O AAA W W W W co
d1W
w 10 14 4
W A A N W W W
CO V W N V COpco
CO O A coVcoVO N
fAW
co w
CO W .CVO A Ja COO
V W W A
N V N N v A
W
N 0 (W0 W CNO V
V co CA V N -4
ppN
J W V O(D W CA
fAW (
D00) O -A+ A WW
STA
V
J VI P 0
WNW„8
co W A O co W CO
fAW
A
C
W W CA
W CA OO Oo
0ll
0+0
W
tn I O O A coWA JJ
Of F -COit W O W
W A W N- N
co
O t0 co t0 CA O O
OpOD coo W W N CO co
W W A W C+ coOO VT
N N O O W CO
fA
P
0t0 O (VA (AO CONO N
CO -+ OD N co CT Of
N+ ((AO A CNA N W co
AI
cn
O
IV OcoN W OD
CT OD CA CO CO
0 A Of W V CO O
T W N OONDAWODD
fAA
tg to N ((OA O N (" O co
pA
1-4 A (O(AA N -
4 (O OVD .A A O COO
A
D V O N T ((AOOA co
N A CT A OD OD W
W I N O CVcoC.,,)) N A
V W N W A O O
69A
W CV11 N N CT 0) N
W (O V A CO 0
t0 tD O A V
ca
A
CD V N W CC v CO
A to (O O V
0 VOCOVo>A
O O CO 0) O V V
0 CO co Oo CO A 0
fA
j N co
W
co
0 -+ W
CMCo
Im
N CWO O
V W 8
8 COT
J
VV
pNp
COO 0
A Of
O A
fA
0 VW
ON
NVv
H
a O(
AAo
N
A o0
Wtp ((AA
W
A
MN
G )
QO
CO ” +
O W
fAN
0 .A
A p
N (p V
O (
AA
fAN
N
W co
4O
J 00 W
O coo
HN
N
v O
O W N
N co
fAN
W N NO
J J
IV IV W
W co
0
O
CO3 n
O
1 :R
fD
Cf a .
N CD
fD .n
O
C
O
i
v
M
a
x
CA)
fl
X
Q
TI
0
a
Q
CD
v, CD
ACD
7
N CD0)
CO)
f+
O O 01
V
V 0 W
41
O O N
Cn
V CVT O
d1
N
OO 00
O V O
00 V (O
to
CA
49 4A, O O 01
W CVD 0
40
40
99 t0
O " N
fA
OO 00
W V
CA
U
O O .gyp. N0001 V
O o
44
0 a)
40
V
O O N
A
A co0W
4A
0
O O
CJI
CO O
V W N
W
O O
CO
CVO L"O
A O O
tCo
V A
N
v9 EA O
O O
00 CD W
W CD V
40
CN(
S1
0
W W W
49N
d1 v1 v
O W
O O V
4 0
0oW----1-- ---
C(pp C(pp tCpp C(pp
a
O A A A A A A A A S
tod
A O 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0O = O
0) V V V V V V 0 V U) WN0CT0 (n CT Cr V CT
n
W p A N 4 -69 69 EA S' 3
OD p OOCn AO 00(3 0)
W 000000000000 O O y O'
tsi d)
d X = N O W W W COJ W W W CD CD C
00 N N N N K) K) N N O
N 00 0 0 00 0 00 OD 0
D
di N v(7) (.0 A O)111) d 0
p OOCTVW 0) ny
4 N O N W C0( W 000
CN(
Sn CA
O,7 3 O=
O O 0) W A. O A CT m
b9l
N
O
W
T
N
0 p
A
001I
42IN
g 61
CA (11
A
0rn-
001
4±1N
V p
fr 0
COIF
1±1N
0 p
O Cp
O
N
v
O
N
t00
NNWO
W
N
N
WIN
O
A
J
pA
01 o
V (00 A CW7 C07 W N v C O to 0
0 t00
W O
W CO V A CNO A 000 OJ
W 0 A -40 N 0
N
0 N-+ V 0O
O
9
IV N8
V W -148coConC" OD 0 0 W
N
CA N V p
pppp CT W IV (T
WW W
CT 0 0 A COD,
j N
CT N V O
O N
A (D 0 C00 " A N N
0 0 O 0 V V V W O
N
V1 N 0 00
coO O0 O
Cco
O O OV W 0 O
W
0
N a
N O+D FW CIV
Cj
p 0 W IV A =
W (0D 0 A 0 ONO O00 W W n
W
r IRN Cl O m
0 N « 88 _ 0
Ty Cp O
S c
000 c00 (Yo N W V (ND A
O1
e a
in D W 3
Z c mNO
0) N OD Op Z 'C a C
A W 0 c'
J0 WCr N W V 0
DW)
N D y
Da
N
J J
coOOD 0 N W OODD W ( W7, A V
V
r r O01N tD
O W --0)
WW0p
OW WONW_CWTNOD0)
4 CA
N
J J JCJD
N co Ch N A OOD W
0W)
0 O
J J
A U N A W A v 0 OD
N
OD .0, -+ 0 W W W
N+ O 0 N A
t0W
0 C1) V ON
r r O
O N
p 440t
to
W9
cn N A COO 01 WA A
N
a
N
0 N cD
p — 4D WV+ 4 USN A coOV OD
0N)
V
W
JJ Q0) N -+ CD
ppNp 0)W C4 144
A V CT W A O CWD (WD ONO I O
N
N t0
V V_ -+ N O W W A CT
P. O O W W W W
0 t0 a, W A O (D co O A
CA)
W
M CD o
W
o CD
4III37CAli T
to N
m D CD
in
D
jo091
000000 GCTOOO O(D
U)
77'7'SS? q
C7
0 0?0?d
7 D CD
C O
N
G)
a
0oW----1-- ---
C(pp C(pp tCpp C(pp
a
O A A A A A A A A S
tod
A O 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0O = O
0) V V V V V V 0 V U) WN0CT0 (n CT Cr V CT
n
W p A N 4 -69 69 EA S' 3
OD p OOCn AO 00(3 0)
W 000000000000 O O y O'
tsi d)
d X = N O W W W COJ W W W CD CD C
00 N N N N K) K) N N O
N 00 0 0 00 0 00 OD 0
D
di N v(7) (.0 A O)111) d 0
p OOCTVW 0) ny
4 N O N W C 0( W 000
CN(
Sn CA
O,7 3 O=
O O 0) W A. O A CT m
b9l
N
O
W
T
N
0 p
A
001I
42IN
g 61
CA (11
A
0rn-
001
4±1N
V p
fr 0
COIF
1±1N
0 p
O Cp
O
N
v
O
N
t00
NNWO
W
N
N
WIN
O
A
J
pA
01 o
V (00 A CW7 C07 W N v C O to 0
0 t00
W O
W CO V A CNO A 000 OJ
W 0 A -40 N 0
N
0 N-+ V 0O
O
9
IV N8
V W -148coConC" OD 0 0 W
N
CA N V p
pppp CT W IV (T
WW W
CT 0 0 A COD,
j N
CT N V O
O N
A (D 0 C00 " A N N
0 0 O 0 V V V W O
N
V1 N 0 00
coO O0 O
Cco
O O OV W 0 O
W
0
N a
N O+D FWCIV
Cj
p 0 W IV A =
W (0D 0 A 0 ONO O00 W W n
W
r IRN Cl O m
0 N « 88 _ 0
Ty Cp O
S c
000 c00 (Yo N W V (ND A
O1
e a
in D W 3
Z c mNO
0) N OD Op Z 'C a C
A W 0 c'
J0 W Cr N W V 0
DW)
N D y
Da
N
J J
coOOD 0 N W OODD W ( W7, A V
V
r r O01N tD
O W --0)
WW0p
OW WONW_CWTNOD0)
4 CA
N
J J JCJD
N co Ch N A OOD W
0W)
0 O
J J
A U N A W A v 0 OD
N
OD .0, -+ 0 W W W
N+ O 0 N A
t0W
0 C1) V ON
r r O
O N
p 440t
to
W9
cn N A COO 01 WA A
N
a
N
0 N cD
p — 4D WV+ 4 USN A coOV OD
0N)
V
W
JJ Q0) N -+ CD
ppNp 0)W C4 144
A V CT W A O CWD (WD ONO I O
N
N t0
V V_ -+ N O W W A CT
P. O O W W W W
0 t0 a, W A O (D co O A
CA)
W
F
2
G.
3
r0
e C `G
N 0 0
C ID 0
r
a sCDm
A 3
it 7
aQ-o
w +
tDN
CD
a
D
005 O m D O c
o0iam
m
f I $ m
8 coo W
0
Nic
mo>>n 3 3 m m 00
0CA03
ocoob,o m
W
m8N N 7 7C 8 s3 7 0 0 7(> > 7
d
0
CC
0 ID O C 77
Q
p
C
N 7 pj NWmNfDtD3S. fD
0 0 W
N d c• cn
tV p t4i W N
N
Cp
ZM (D
CT
OID
ym
Ch
3
g
8
a
4 C/f
y, K)C4 W W+ co
tODA N C N
Cry
W t0 NO O O CD co 0Nth w0 co
W W T0 Ch
W
O V h T
CO
Ch
0 N
co to Oe
co 00 0 N fh _Ch
O Ch A
W
t — 00
OCO Om0 O OWO co
M
NWAh
Ch to 41 O O
Go
00 V Cfl E9 H N W
O W A W W00 N) WN 01 -.
O
h
N V h VNV A 00Ch J N
O T
T 0
T O Ch V OD
A V m
O t0
yv
O.A CA W CA W A V Co O W W Nvv
W
O- 0
AW cooi
OTNih N coOO O
pW
v O T co T V NODA W N V W
Cb
fN
OBD
W to A N Oo
N
th
W
W
O
A as Ot VV OtO O ACA Do A OCA Ch NN W W N. W
Ch Ch O CA t0 CA
0) NChW
0)W
p
W
Op W N W W OOWD O
00
CV4
0) OAN N A OOoW Ch 0 pOp tW0 ccoo0) A 00 W W W OD O 01
v
v0
0
OBD OBD d! fl C!! N W
i0 N W N T N O Of W W N
NV
V-
tDChChNWNcoCOVWNW0VO C0TVChAcn0) M OD 0) OD CA — OD V CO N V W W N -p+ N co N coODONNW. V 0A OV vOAVwCO O N 91 A
41W00OBDW
O co W co N A V
Npp00VNco
OA
Oo
V NWT
O-NAcD
O CO
CO 1 CO CO V A T
O
OD NVtNcm
c0O O OV N 0W ChN co
0 V CO V T
N V N N
Vj
V V
W 44
t!! M N W
coV A A
0o OD
A A fA V T co
CODD
T W W N A OChD
W V A N N O V rl) V D
COCV Ch -4 N ChO
W W A T N) - p 4pND
OWO OO N V WOWt0
OW Vp
V Om WCh TA
wOWMcoVAAAto
V
V
p
T 0
tD V VT A ,D W A
A O pD V
tD N
4 CD pPAAWANWOAWWtDCDWAcnOp
pT V T
00 CO T Tt0 O TN t0t00 NA N A T W Nw wS— W N A
Ch OD O N O N
Cn
O Ch c0 0 0 -+ OD O TOo W N WWAO O OD t0 ChVm
CSD t0 yt W W N
D
A Ch O Ch ACh sA
V
V T IV
0 N
to A W W A
T N T Co V
O NVO0OoWODtDOWNf71WVWVOD0
O I' Ch - T A A <h tD Ch
m 4. Of A N A V W 0tcn pp m V
t7 O (h O O T Ww O y 0 V T cnAON0 A T JW
m 0
C 0 A Ch A 0 A FA V T W O A W W
CnA O W N
O co A WOD Ch V
W coCO TW V W
A T O pD W V N m coA -t O W O
W W pON
T N IV a)
pp
IV Ch IV 0) V V ppp CO — V CO 0 0
f:2WNOA ppA O W U A N N 0 - W O W NT8W00 AO Wv
CPO pd! C9 M W A N
NCOChtCCAncnpO A
A
T A
C+ W O
W co Cph
OTODO OOD
OD
W V A
O - +T
V V
A
0
O
T
W
0
W — CT
O+o
N V CO -0m
0T
0) (D V
W W ca000
4,
O N A O W O W O 0— A W A NnTOV. V
EA
M H
O p 41
4 j H W0 A Nr Nchs01TNAWWCh
O ODT V 00N0N-NW V A 9) vOONW NV0AWWOcoOWpp0)co O WA W co WVO
C40
co
co O N 0t coco W V O 0 co CD O O
49 fJOO yD Cp 44 W 4A N
Ch V T V W A W
OcDA
tD O CA CO Cnco T O pp O T m A OD t0 W
O
T 00 Ch O Ch 0 N IV OD W OD t0 OD -4 CO CO
000 N000 O
pNpD
OA C0h CCAppA CO N NNT0 co t0D OOOD
O G9 VI H W A N
K) Ch co 0co A A A v 0 NNcoO
WA
C+OOO OD TO V W O V VO AN O
Ot OO
N
D
O4
O
ACh o
V N 0
U
N W ChNco Wt0 COT Ch W
V Ch toN to NW Ch Of
Cn V N N CD tD
pp CO
T W
O Oo O O O O O V W O O O -+ CD A 0 N W W V V
p CC N CChn t N V tCn (con Ch A A tJ Ch CJ NO
0 V CO -+ O N N OD OO 14 OD O Ch W c00Oo0mCO C, th
co ooW
CA
O CA a% AOOCtvvAWOAWOWoO
TA
N fA 4A A A N
O Ch T cn N cn N V 0t O Ch A A W Cn N C4 NO0tWWAWVOcocoNCnATNOco
V W c(D V c0 -+ T A t0
N Ch T N CO -+ N VChV
Nt0CONV
Oo W A
N
W
co N
W co
00
W
0t
O 0w) m CAh V A 0Tt Na - Cn
O
OD OD
N
OCA
O O A W t CoVA A t00 00
N N 4H H A A N
0 O 0 N T N V A j 0) Cn A W Ch N A N
Ch N N O t0 T T CID V O N T 0 0
6Tt A O W W W j O
T
N co Ch 0 0 W cn W t,
pp0,,
T 41 P t0 (?n IJ W
co
C
CO OND O W W O coW coW
pOW
A A W J
DI
W N W A
00)
CJS CNnW00
i WiJ
W V h A W N A N
NW A
O W W OD N A O T V W
w V T 0
0 N N Cn OD CM AV A
A
OOo OVi O Con 0co 0
Cpl
O A to CvND co 00 N tD rDD W A N" V O
EA to
N N yt y^i Ey A A
co
N
V Ch A co A W A cnA W CA N C71 N
0 W CO N t0 A co T V W T V N W 00 V 0 0 O O
Ch to 0 T W tD -+ Ch CD A Ch O V O co V to A 0
WW W T O
V O N CID N
0o
O - O
N49 02ODT W OO T CD T T V Vc0W00mA0 WOD O
F
2
G.
3
r0
e C `G
N 0 0
C ID 0
r
a sCDm
A 3
it 7
aQ-o
w +
tDN
CD
a
D
OlA W.D++ OIA W N
G C GOAO G G OO Lnb ,
N
s
S
W
N NN N N N
ammamm mm
A N A
N m U
I44'll' --
77uu
A W Q OOOO to 0
aa4ilk 4
00
V fVll
00
c V
00
W V
O O
m N
O +
O
N p
00000 00_
V V V V:
04
V U
U U U U U U -40
d
N N
gNN
ppp
foAS N
y
V Q! N{J CD CD OD CD
G
N UODm mao OD W W
mow
8N
p p y
W
N
jNj W
N U
r
A
N+
N fT
N
o01
U O1
r 8A +
W A
IN
pOp
W
N p
N OVV
j O
N fOlit
yr
N
qNq
N p
A
OD
N p
N ... O
N W
V A
j
N
f
WOa
D7 '
A W
N
o N O
O t0 N
V
b
pN '
W W
N
NN
N
O A
W
NNO
N + U
m
N
CL 4
a
O }
q05 SOS
0 ch
q01
V fU0 A41NU j V t7 O1
A N + U
ppp O
p V
N OD
U N + V
CD (A
U
ONp p p p pqp
V
W Ub<O OD OIN
N
fppT N
y p q A
V
co + U A tO V V V A O
Opp pp pp pp ppb N
W
O O UOtOO V O
U N + w
OI OD (A l 1. OI f D U+ fO OD C
N
Oy i Npp p ONCS +
Oo
OD fD UN W V N O
I
pi
U ca UN W v0(!IN A
8
SOI
N + co V
O SWI U N W O D N U W
8N
OI
N OIOD UNOIO W fJU O
O
L A UNA ODA V O Ol
r
N O U N S I O f J V fl O
r
U
W U N O IO W A
r
V N ppi pp UW
m W
A V U W A 8 tW0 OND
r
U 10 0 W A O tO tO O A
m
a
Y
wY
A
N'N
N
ODN
co w OD 000 ODcoA
N N N N N
UpmN
OpN
p
NpN (
Vp
q
NN
O W W Ap Nppp p
NONUODVO 0) 0) W W OVI W OJ
N
imp p®Np
NyN {pW pa
pOy
pNp~
N
AA NA AL NppSOOWNOLAAAAAAAN
O fD A A O/Nd a s N
pO
pOp ,(
OA(,
fI qW
vNvOOACDV +I S N N N N N N N N
H_
pp NN (,N, NNN ONOp
GD O C/
fOOp
N + N
U V W OI
N N NNVpWm
pO
pOD O+ N O
11111111 ffJJ l
0 0 N0 0 0 0
W W
O O O
VppNppppp W Ap (
pN vW
0lN8
i1
AONiD,
SO
N
p0W 8 9p9999999
gONi
coA
NO.NIR
pO.
N
N
fO ,[IgOiI V W OI OI A O!
p
pCpD pv p0
pp'pp
i
NN NN'
W
pgN
U 1q N+
UON
OD p W t+pp
p
OpQl pNp OppD AC 0qq1
pVp pOpiDO+I CVD000 pOpH!
A A A A pOp
f
NNN
AA N
N N
WN NN
NOOW Nllllil
ONWp Up pgNp
O Ol Ol V O
pNp pa+ (NNp
V V V m U V V V N
imp ( ppg + VVUO A O N N N N N N N N 0
H
O N W
ANp
4NA/ NVppmNpWWOtWWOVVV tC (T V V V N
pOp ((
f
T01 p+p Q p J
N
NO W (
pT (
J, NEpDD1WOUO pyoOD W N
pOp p1p00 fO V m S
0800 O.D ,OND
N N N
OND ,OND
N N
N N (,H1 NNN pHAV+
OmNyOpp
A (
p1
1N0
V +l m
NNp
pp+
N N
OD WN,OND
N
m N
p+
OO NW pO NOI
N,
OND
N,
OND
N +
N N N N
mN
N A 0 N N+ N N N
8 pp VT " ppCD
Nt0 N
ppV NWp N N N N N N N N OAi
N N(NN NNWN NNAUW
U1WCpD V 0D O
N N+ tNO I N NwO
p
Ot01
mA
000N C.
N(
00 N
pO
pUp
pN
yWy
p0
N N (N1
NN
CNp
tppmi lN H NfOAfNOE. W NONOED
C0p1NA
mNO mO
N(
ONI CD010J 00 N
m
pmNmp
GWS A O m O O V0V VOVNNNNNN N N NU
M
N N A 0 N N
ApO ODNONpO W j W W N
p p000DDm mf0710 O+ODNNNN NN
N N N N N
N N A_OWi N0
1O EoOpp1
NN+ N N
t0 D. f0 N N NNp p
A S m OI N V 0 N N N N N N N N
A N A
N m U
I44'll' --
77uu
A W Q OOOO to 0
aa4ilk 4
00
V fVll
00
c V
00
W V
O O
m N
O +
O
N p
00000 00_
V V V V:
04
V U
U U U U U U -40
d
N N
gNN
ppp
foAS N
y
V Q! N{J CD CD OD CD
G
N UODm mao OD W W
mow
8N
p p y
W
N
jNj W
N U
r
A
N+
N fT
N
o01
U O1
r 8A +
W A
IN
pOp
W
N p
N OVV
j O
N fOlit
yr
N
qNq
N p
A
OD
N p
N ... O
N W
V A
j
N
f
WOa
D7 '
A W
N
o N O
O t0 N
V
b
pN '
W W
N
NN
N
O A
W
NNO
N + U
m
N
CL 4
a
O }
q05 SOS
0 ch
q01
V fU0 A41NU j V t7 O1
A N + U
ppp O
p V
N OD
U N + V
CD (A
U
ONp p p p pqp
V
W Ub<O OD OIN
N
fppT N
y p q A
V
co + U A tO V V V A O
Opp pp pp pp ppb N
W
O O UOtOO V O
U N + w
OI OD (A l 1. OI f D U+ fO OD C
N
Oyi Npp p ONCS +
Oo
OD fD UN W V N O
I
pi
U ca UN W v0(!IN A
8
SOI
N + co V
O SWI U N W O D N U W
8N
OI
N OIOD UNOIO W fJU O
O
L A UNA ODA V O Ol
r
N O U N S I O f J V fl O
r
U
W U N O IO W A
r
V N ppi pp UW
m W
A V U W A 8 tW0 OND
r
U 10 0 W A O tO tO O A
m
a
Y
wY
A
Appendix 5
r
Projected Capital Expenditures
Water Fund
Inflation 3.00%
Capital Expenses
7/16/99
Tower PW Building Increased Water Meter Treatment
Painting Expansion Well Replacments Replacement Plant Upgrades Total
1999 300,000 300,000
2000 250,000 21,000 70,879 8,000,000 8,341,879
2001 21,630 73,005 94,635
2002 265,225 22,279 75,196 362,699
2003 22,947 77,451 100,399
2004 281,377 23,636 79,775 384,788
2005 24,345 82,168 106,513
2006 298,513 25,075 84,633 408,221
2007 25,827 87,172 113,000
2008 26,602 89,787 116,390
2009 27,400 92,481 119,881
2010 28,222 95,255 123,478
2011 29,069 98,113 127,182
2012 29,941 101,057 130,997
2013 30,839 104,088 134,927
2014 31,764 107,211 138,975
2015 389,492 32,717 110,427 532,636
2016 33,699 113,740 147,439
2017 413,212 34,710 117,152 565,074
2018 35,751 120,667 156,418
2019 438,377 36,824 124,287 599,487
2020 37,928 128,015 165,944
Capital Expenses
7/16/99
k
2
Spring Loke Pork
Richfield
Plymouth
O
Oakdale
New Hope
New Brighton
Moundsview
Minnetonka
Mople Grove
Golden Valley
W Fridley
L OExcelsior
Edina
Eden Prairie
Eagan
OCrystal
Cottage Grove
O Coon Rapids
O Columbia Heights
Champlin
Burnsville
Brooklyn Pork
Brooklyn Center
Bloomington
Blaine
Q Anoka
0 C) 0 C) C) C)
LO O LO O LD
NN V-- V-
DATE: July 20, 1999
TO: Dwight Johnson, City Manager
r-
FROM: Mike Kohn, Financial Analyst through Dale Hahn, Finance Director
SUBJECT: Tiered Water Rates
Background
The City of Plymouth is considering implementation of a tiered water rate structure as a
water conservation tool. This is a result of concern that the aquifer currently being
utilized by the City is being drawn down (see Tables I and II, attached). Should user
demand result in depletion of the aquifer, the City would be forced to send wells deeper
or attempt to gain access to another source of water. Both of these alternatives could
result in significant additional costs. By implementing a tiered rate system which charges
higher costs for higher usage it is hoped that customers will make an economic decision
to conserve water.
Alternatives
Alternative 1: Retain current flat fee schedule and rely on current water conservation
policies.
The current structure of water rates is as follows:
Regular Residential Base Charge
Usage Fee
Seniors Base Charge
Usage Fee
Commercial Base Charge <=1" Meter
Base Charge 1.5" Meter
Base Charge 2" Meter
Base Charge 3" Meter
Base Charge 4" Meter
Base Charge 6" Meter
Usage Fee
1.94 Per Month
75 Per 1000 Gallons
1.94 Per Month
67 Per 1000 Gallons
1.94 Per Month
25.94 Per Month
37.94 Per Month
76.94 Per Month
121.94 Per Month
241.94 Per Month
75 Per 1000 Gallons
None of these rates provide any incentive to conserve water because the rate for usage is
not dependent on the volume of water utilized.
The water conservation measures currently in place consist of an alternate day ban on
outdoor sprinkling from May 1 to September 30 each year. Under this system properties
with even numbered addresses can sprinkle on even numbered days and odd numbered
addresses on odd numbered days.
Alternate 2: Increase the scope of current water conservation practices.
Under Alternate 2 the City could maintain its current rate structure and implement other
water conservation measures. Other options could include the following:
1. Limit outdoor sprinkling to before 9:00 AM and after 5:OOPM to prevent water loss to
evaporation.
2. Establish rebate program for water conserving appliances such as toilets,
showerheads, etc.
3. Establish a reward fund for businesses that implement a permanent water
conservation program that results in an identifiable reduction in water consumption.
Alternate 3: Implement tiered water rates.
Under Alternate 3 the City would implement a tiered rate structure wherein persons
would pay more per gallon for high consumption than for low consumption. For example
a tiered rate structure could work as follows:
Residential Account 20,000 gallons bi-monthly
First 10,000 Gallons
Next 10,000 Gallons
Fixed Charge
10,000/1,000)*
10,000/1,000)*
1.94*2)
Total
Rate
75 =7.50
1.13 =11.30
3.88
22.68
The tiered rate structure could be as simple as two steps or as many as four or more. Also
different tiers could be established for different classes of users (seniors, apartments,
commercial, etc.).
Discussion
Alternate 1
Alternate 1 is the status quo. It has several positives and negatives associated with it. A
few of them are as follows:
2
Positives
Provides a known stream of revenues.
Billing formula is known by residents and easily understood.
Negatives
Current system provides very little incentive to conserve water.
Alternate 2
Alternate 2 would not result in a change in rate structure but would result in an increase
in rates. This is because a reduction in water sold will result in a reduction in revenues.
However, expenditures will not be reduced at the same pace as revenues. This is in
response to the fact that approximately 85% of all water department operating costs are
fixed, meaning they will be present if 1 gallon of water is produced or 1,000,000,000
gallons are produced. Conservation may result in the delay or avoidance of future capital
costs but these cost savings are not immediate.
In addition, rates would have to increase under Alternate 2 because additional water
conservation measures all have costs associated with them.
Positives
Alternative 2 would most directly address the issue of water conservation without
creating any economic distortions or redistribution's.
Negatives
Alternative 2 would require an increase in rates to make up for lost revenues and
increased expenditures. This would create a perception that the City is making people
pay more to get less.
Alternate 3
Alternate 3 would provide an economic incentive to conserve water. The more water a
person utilized the more water would cost. Alternate 3 is also a very difficult option to
examine because is can take various shapes and forms and can have many uncertain
economic impacts. There are 3 primary issues to be evaluated in Alternative 3. They are
as follows:
1. Stable Predictable Revenue Stream — Any rate structure should provide a stable and
predictable revenue stream. The more complex and significant the change from the
status quo the less likely that a stable and predictable revenue stream can be obtained.
A tiered rate structure should be designed to error on the side of increased revenue.
Not only is it easier to use revenue surplus to hold off future rate increases than to ask
for immediate rate increases, but a revenue shortfall would not be good at a time
when significant capital expenditures are to take place. In addition, a revenue surplus
can also be economically justified. At present, rates are sufficient to cover the cost of
production and distribution but do not take into account the future costs to be incurred
3
by depletion of the aquifer. It does make sense to charge current customers for future
costs if their actions lead to the future costs.
2. Effectiveness — A rate structure meant to modify behavior will be most effective if it
is targeted at behavior that is most easily influenced.
3. Incidence — All rate structures should be examined in terms of incidence, or more
simply, who would be effected and how. If either residential or commercial
customers are excluded from the impacts of the rate structure there will be a
redistribution of revenue burden. Also within a customer class there will be a
redistribution of revenue burden from low to high consumption customers.
To address issue 1, it is difficult to determine how much water a tiered rate program
could conserve. Since water must be utilized for certain things, like toilets, showers,
washing, etc. its use cannot be expected to vary dramatically. This is borne out by
contact with other communities with tiered rate structures. Not one has been able to give
us even an estimate of the short or long-term effect of tiered rates on consumption.
Apple Valley and Shoreview both stated that consumption did decline in the first year but
then returned to approximately normal. Eden Praire and Brooklyn Park both though that
consumption may have been reduced but cannot attribute declines in consumption to
tiered water rates. I have attempted to obtain figures from the American Water Works
Association (AWWA) and other economic literature regarding price elasticities of
demand for water but have not been able to come up with anything.
The closest commodity for which published data is available is for residential electricity
usage. The elasticity for residential electric usage is (-.13) which means that for each 10%
increase in cost there will be a 1.3% decrease in consumption (see Table III, attached).
Since certain types of water usage are more discretionary than electricity usage (lawn
sprinkling for example) it is likely that water usage is somewhat more variable than
electricity usage, and would warrant a somewhat higher elasticity. However, even if the
elasticity were to double or triple it would still be relatively low. This means that for
significant amounts of water to be conserved rates would have to be increased
dramatically.
In order to keep a stable revenue stream it would be best to keep most consumption
unchanged by the new rate structure. However, to have an impact, any change in fees
must be significant and must target a significant quantity of consumption.
To address issue 2, it would seem that in the case of water consumption the most
discretionary and easily influenced type of consumption is likely to be seasonal activities
such as lawn sprinkling and irrigation. These areas can be most easily targeted by raising
rates on the high end of residential consumption and on irrigation meters. In the case of
commercial accounts, it may be necessary to have them meter irrigation activities
separately.
To answer issue 3, if high end residential consumption and irrigation consumption are
targeted this would likely result in a redistribution of the revenue burden from residential
to commercial unless greater than 18% of residential consumption is targeted. Tiered
1
rates would also result in a redistribution of the revenue burden from lower consumption
residential to higher consumption residential. In the case of the internal shift within the
residential group this would probably be a progressive shift since discretionary water
consumption likely increases with income. In the case of the commercial - residential
shift the outcome in terms of ability to pay is less certain.
Other Metro area communities have adopted tiered rate systems (see Table IV, attached).
They vary in size from 2 to 4 tiers, and affect both residential and commercial customers.
Some rate structures are fairly flat and others are fairly steep. There does not appear to
be any consensus to what is the best structure. The one item on which there does appear
to be some consensus is that the first tier is typically in the 12,000 to 16,000 gallon per
month range.
Discussion Points
Should the City implement a tiered rate system? Anecdotal evidence provides little
assurance that much water will be saved. Assuming an elasticity identical to that
identified for electricity, water consumption would be reduced by 1.3% for every
10% increase in the water rate for the level of consumption targeted. If 50% of
consumption were targeted with a 50% increase, consumption could be expected to
decrease by approximately 3.25%. If 25% of consumption were targeted with a 25%
rate increase, consumption could be expected to decrease by .81 %. If the elasticity
for water is assumed to be higher than that of electricity, the amount of reduction in
consumption would increase proportionally. The amount of consumption to be
targeted also raises the question of what types of consumption should be targeted.
Should a tiered rate structure include two rates or three? Under a two tiered rate
structure current rates would likely remain in place for base consumption. A higher
rate would be utilized for targeted higher consumption. If a three tiered rate structure
were utilized the first rate would likely be lower than our current rates and cover a
minimal amount of base usage. The second rate could be our current rates and cover
normal usage. The third rate would target higher consumption.
A two tiered rate would provide a more predictable revenue stream. A three tiered
rate structure could provide a "carrot and stick" approach to water conservation.
Those who use little water could pay less, while those who use a lot of water would
pay more. A three tiered system would also allow the City to eliminate the special
senior rate.
5
W
J
m
H
a w
c
E
E
0
U
m
t LO
0ti
N
m
w
NL
a
8
00 N M
Y
Sam
aI M a,
M D
011
00
O
M O
I.-.
N n 00
N 00 I -T b
00 wll N NO
00 n 00 c 00
n et N o
nl n n
N b
M N IC
tnio
00 n n00
M
CDI -
1 00
Ol
Te. ble-
294 l Chapter 14 Demand for State and Local Goods and Services
price constant). The typical ranges for estimated income and price elasticities for sensitive to price, a
various categories of state -local government services are listed in Table 14.3. For by reducing prices
comparison, the demand elasticities for selected privately provided goods and ser- moderately successf
vices are also listed.
of increases in the (
consumption much.
consumption. Thes(
l Price elasticity
When all services are aggregated, the price elasticity tends to fall in the range from Income elasticity
25 to - .50, indicating very price inelastic demand. It further appears that among
demand for education is relatively more price inelastic State -local governr
local government services
than demand for other traditional local government services. The demand for state- holding prices con
local services has similar price elasticities to that for such goods as coffee, tobacco, these services, dem
and (at least in the short run) electricity and alcohol. ally to the income
These services traditionally provided by state and local governments are viewed recreation services -
by consumers therefore as basic commodities, similar in character to basic food crease in income.
stuffs and maintenance services. Public safety and quality education are, after all, reasonable, given ti
two of the most sought after characteristics of local communities. One should. is also income elasi
emphasize that it is the characteristics of these services that make demand price higher -income cons
inelastic, not the fact that they tend to be provided by government. If these estimates Although the in
are correct, demand for education would be very price inelastic even if education in government exp(
were entirely provided by private schools, just as the demand for coffee would still more useful to trap:
be price inelastic if suddenly all coffee sales were monopolized by governments. to a $1 change in in,
the range of elasticThefactthatdemandforstate -local government services tends to be price
25
inelastic has many 'important policy implications. Because consumption is not very to $.10 increase in
Icctricity (residential)
consumers' income
64
As with the pr
TABLE 14.3 implications for th(
Representative Estimated Price and Income Elasticities government expend
growth of the state -
limits (see ChapterGoodorServicePriceElasticityIncomeElasticity
For Government Expenditures
Total local 25 to -.50
15 to -.50
60 .80
40-.65 l Two classic studiesEducation
Police and fire 20 to -.70 50-.70
Parks and recreation 20 to -.90 90-1.30 Although it is inte
Public works 40 to -.90 40-80 .80 economists go aboL
better understandin:
For Selected Private Goods have proceeded. M
Coffee 25 0
expenditure behavic
Icctricity (residential) 13 (- 1.91-11),.20
64 model of choice a:
Alcohol 92 (-3.6LRP 1.54 officials.
Gambling (horse races) 1.59 86
Restaurant meals 1.63 1.40
Automobiles 1.35 2.46
1OThe income clasti• Bewares: Fcx gavemmem eapeadderes: Imnan (19791. Tabk 9.1. 296-88). roe private g«ds: Kohler (1982.
Tables 4.2-4.4. 101-02ass1; St 1979. Tabk 11. 160). income. and means
can N computed.
Long run
Table IV
Multi -Tiered Water Rate Structures
Metro Area
AnpleValley Rates
Mobile Homes & Apartments
Base Rate 5.06
10,999 Gallons 0.85
11,000 to 15,999 Gallons 1.05
16,000 to 35,999 Gallons 1.15
36,000 Gallons 1.30
Sinele Familv & Others Users
Base Rate 5.06
10,999 Gallons 0.85
11,000 to 15,999 Gallons 1.05
16,000 to 35,999 Gallons 1.15
36,000 Gallons 1.30
Consumption charges apply to all customer classes equally.
According to the Finance Director consumption did decline in the first year and then returned to about normal.
Blaine
Residential
Base Rate
16,667 Gallons
16,668 to 33,333 Gallons
33,334 to 66,667 Gallons
66,667 Gallons
Commercial
Base Rate
16,667 Gallons
16,668 to 33,333 Gallons
33,334 to 66,667 Gallons
66,667 Gallons
Consumption charges apply to all customer classes equally.
Uncertain as to effect on consumption.
Oakdale
Residential
Base Rate
12,000 Gallons
12,001 to 17,000 Gallons
Rates
1.83
0.75
1.00
1.30
1.85
5.50
0.75
1.00
1.30
1.85
Rates
2.50
0.96
1.02
Tiered Rates Other Communities.xls
7/15/99
Table IV
17,000 Gallons 1.08
Commercial
Rates
Base Rate 2.50 for every 10,000 gallons used
12,000 Gallons 0.96
12,001 to 17,000 Gallons 1.02
17,001 to 22,000 Gallons 1.13
22,000 Gallons 1.20
Commercial customer class has one additional rate tier.
Tiered rates in place for one year. City has not yet attempted to determine impact on consumption.
Shoreview Rates
Residential
5.47
Base Rate 2.440
5,000 Gallons 0.621
5,001 to 10,000 Gallons 1.094
10,000 Gallons 1.589
Commercial
Rates
Minimum Charge 5/8 Inch Meter 5.47
3/4 Inch Meter 7.29
1 Inch Meter 9.12
1 1/2 Inch Meter 14.59
2 Inch Meter 21.33
3 Inch Meter 36.46
4 Inch Meter 54.70
6 Inch Meter 91.17
8 Inch Meter 182.33
12 Inch Meter 364.67
Volume Rate 1.094
Commercial accounts not included in tiered rate structure.
Consumption did decline in first year and has since returned to about normal.
Brooklyn Park Rates
Residential
Base Rate 0.88
16,667 Gallons 1.10
16,667 Gallons 1.50
All metered irrigation consumption 1.50
Does not apply to commercial customers.
Average water consumption has been somewhat reduced. Cannot be directly attributed to rate structure.
Eden Prairie Rates
Residential
Tiered Rates Other Communities.xls
7/15/99
Table IV
Base Rate 4.17 Water & Sewer
12,000 Gallons 1.25
12,000 2.25
Tiered Rates only apply to residential accounts.
Results in between $200,000 and $150,000 of additional revenue per year. No estimate of water conserved.
Perception that people are more conscious of water usage.
Tiered Rates Other Communities.xls
7/15/99
Agenda Number: ,,12 ,
DATE: July 16, 1999 for the City Council Meeting of July 20, 1999
TO: Dwight D. Johnson, City Manager
FROM: Fred G. Moore, Director of Public Works
SUBJECT: WATER RESOURCES MANAGEMENT PLAN
FUNDING ISSUES/SURFACE WATER UTILITY FEE
On December 16, 1998, the City Council approved the Water Resources Management Plan for
the City. This plan had been under preparation for over two years with considerable
involvement by the Environment Quality Committee and input by the City Council in
reviewing and approving the policies on which the plan is based. After the City Council
approval, the plan was submitted to the Metropolitan Council for their comments. As required
by law, it was also submitted to the four Water Management Organizations for review and
approval. Before final adoption of the plan by the City, it must be approved by all four Water
Management Organizations. By the end of March we had received comments from the four
watersheds. After meeting with the consultants for the watersheds, responses and preliminary
revisions to the plans were prepared to address their concerns. We have now submitted
responses to the watersheds which we believe will address all their comments. We are
expecting to have their final review and hopefully approval by mid August in order that the
City Council can give final adoption of the plans. This meets the schedule as anticipated last
December.
Since three of the current Councilmembers were not directly involved in adopting the plan,
attached is the entire staff report for the December 16, 1998 Council meeting. This report
includes Planning Commission minutes, Environmental Quality Committee discussion, and
staff memos with attachments as part of the plan preparation. For the City Council study
meeting, I have also reinserted attachments to this memo items which will be specifically
discussed or mentioned in this report.
The City Council study meeting is to discuss financing of the plan. This was specifically
requested by Councilmember Scott Harstad to be on a study meeting. Attached is the portion
of the plan entitled "Goal Number 10 - Finance." This section discusses various financing
alternatives. One of the alternatives is a user fee which is commonly referred to as a surface
water utility fee. Typically, a fee is established that is in proportion to the amount of surface
N:\pw\Engineering\WMMRC\MEMOS\1999\MangmtPlan_CC 7 20.doc
WATER RESOURCES MANAGEMENT PLAN
Page 2
water runoff from parcels of land. This charge is them implemented as part of the City utility
billing system.
The plan estimates a $7,799,000 cost for implementation of the plan over a ten year period.
Of this amount, we have identified that $3,654,000 are new expenditures that were not within
the current City budgets. This is divided as follows:
Operating/maintenance $1,384,000
Capital projects $2,270,000
Total $3,654,000
The 1999 - 2003 Capital Improvements Program has included water quality projects for
Parkers Lake, Medicine Lake, and Schmidt Lake. These projects were all part of the Ten
Year Implementation Plan. The cost of these projects is $1,630,000, this leaves a balance of
640,000 of capital projects which are in the implementation plan to fund in the last five years.
For the operating portion of the cost included within the plan, an additional $138,000 per year
is necessary. In summary, the following additional funding is required to implement the plan
as proposed:
Operating $138,000 per year
Capital $ 64,000 per year
Total $202,000 per year
For reference, attached is a copy of the Implementation Plan Summary and the detailed plan as
included within the Water Plan. Many project types are identified within the implementation
plan, but this does not commit the City to implement any of the programs. Before new
programs are implemented, there will be specific recommendation and approvals by the City
Council. There may be elements of the plan which the Council will decide not to implement.
As indicated in the material with the financing goal for the plan, there are several methods that
the City is currently using to finance expenditures for programs that are being implemented
and additional funding or increase in current revenues to provide the additional funding
necessary for plan implementation. One of the methods, Surface Water Utility Fee, is the
main item the City Council wanted to discuss. There is a detailed summary of this method in
the attachment. It is my opinion that at some time in the future, in order to finance programs
associated with surface water, it will be necessary for the City to have this fee. The question
is whether we can provide adequate funding at this time without this fee from other sources.
Future unknowns which could have a major impact on necessary programs are regulations
being developed by the Environmental Protection Agency which will affect the City of
Plymouth. These regulations were applied to all cities over 100,000 population four or five
N:\pw\Engineering\WTRRESRC\MEMOS\1999\MangmtPlan_CC 7 20.dac
WATER RESOURCES MANAGEMENT PLAN
Page 3
years ago. It should be noted that the cost for the City of Minneapolis was approximately
200,000 to prepare their proposed plan/application in conformance with the requirement.
This does not include any implementation programs or costs. Minneapolis has yet to receive
approval of their plan, and therefore, they do not know the entire impact on the City.,
New regulations are being developed which will affect cities less than 100,000 population
which will include the City of Plymouth. The latest time line for the development of these
regulations is this fall. This time line has moved several times within the last four years.
These regulations are part of the Clean Water Program adopted by Congress in 1984. After
the regulations are adopted, we will have two or three years to prepare our plan to comply with
the regulations and then when the plan is approved to implement the plan. What these
regulations will be, the cost to prepare the plan, and the cost to implement the program is
something that cannot even be estimated. A Surface Water Utility Fee could be a source for
the necessary funding.
The following are some of the pros and cons of establishing a Surface Water Utility Fee at this
time:
Pros:
Cons:
A stable fee for water quality would be in place that is not subject to
frequent legislative changes.
A new source of revenue could be realized that might relieve some of the
burden on other funds that are currently funding water quality related items.
It is likely that the recycling fee will come down 50 cents, making this a
good time to add a fee to the utility bill.
Other cities are using this fee.
Some water quality projects and programs could probably be done sooner
with a fee.
A fee is probably a more equitable means of funding projects/programs in
relation to surface water runoff from various parcels of land. Also, parcels
of land which are not subject to property taxes (City, county, school, state,
church) would be subject to the fee.
It is estimated to cost $80,000 to $100,000 to implement the fee. Although
we have the base computer system to use to develop the fee, information on
area, property use, runoff, deductions (i.e., wetlands) all has to be
developed and then coordinated into the utility billing system.
N:\pw\Engineering\WTRRESRCIMEMOS\1999\MangmtPian_CC 7 20.doc
WATER RESOURCES MANAGEMENT PLAN
Page 4
There will be ongoing maintenance costs to keep the system current and
updated as land is developed or use change.
It will likely take six to twelve month's effort to implement the fee.
The City should not use all of its revenue raising potential ideas until the
real "rainy" day arrives (i.e., perhaps a tax freeze by the legislature or EPA
mandated programs).
Our lobbyists recently stated that cities should levy as much to the levy
limits as possible and justifiable since he foresees further efforts to extend
and tighten levy limits in the next year's session as well as a renewal of the
reverse referendum" idea. Relying on a new utility fee may hurt us with
our future levying ability.
The fee would likely apply to tax exempt property and as with the tax
exemption system, maybe these properties should not pay.
The fee is in the form of a new "tax" and should be avoided until or unless
other conventional funding sources prove inadequate.
Attached is a copy of a survey done for 1999 by the Association of Metropolitan Municipalities
AMM) of status of "Storm Sewer Utility Charge" of cities in the Metro area. This survey
was part of their overall license fee survey.
After discussion by the City Council, direction should be given to staff on any specific action
related to a Surface Water Management Fee. Of course, staff will continue to consider this fee
along with all possibilities when programs/projects are proposed as part of the City budgets
and Capital Improvements Program.
Fred G. Moore, P.E.
Director of Public Works
attachments: Staff Reports from December 16, 1998 plan approval
Goal Number 10 - Finance
Copy of the Implementation Plan summary and the detailed plan as included
within the Water Plan
Copy of 1999 survey done by AMM
N:\pw\Engincering\WrRRESRC\MEMOS\1999\MangmtPlaiLCC7 20.doc
06/30/98
Goals and Policies
Page 114
Goal No. 10 - Finance
AJ
1
No reference to finance is made in Minnesota Rules 8410 (BWSR,1992) 1
1I
Establish funding sources to finance water resources
management activities.
Paying for water management projects has become more complex in recent ears. In
k
Ymg g P 1 P Y
the past, special assessments against benefited properties financed most of the
necessary improvements. However, the financial options have broadened
considerably. The question is, which method(s) best suit the needs of the City.
The major categories of funding sources are (1) Ad Valorem Taxes; (2) Special
Assessments; (3) Impact Charges (Building Permits, Land Development Fees and
Land Exaction); (4) User charges; (5) Tax Increment Financing; and (6) Grants.
Following is a description and financing principles used with each of these financing
mechanisms.
Table 35 illustrates the advantages and disadvantages of the different financing
methods. I
s
Plymouth Water Resources Management Plan
r
I
J
Ll
71
t
a
06/30/98
Goals and Policies
Table 35
Advantages and Disadvantages of Different Funding Alternatives
Funding Method Advantages Disadvantages
Ad Valorem Tax 1. Administrative structure for collection in 1. No incentive to reduce runoff or pollution.
place.
2. No relationship to level of benefits received.
2. Simple and accepted source of revenue. 3. Discontinuous source of revenue.
3. Allows for a larger revenue base. 4. Limitations on amount of expenditures due
4. Through tax districts contributors pay. to budget constraints.
5. Competition with other City services (i.e.,
police, fire).
Special Assessments 1. Only benefited properties pay. 1. Rigid procedural requirements.
2. Revenues from assessment are applied to 2. Runoff contributions cannot be assessed.
a specific project cost. No competition
with general services.
3. Difficult to determine and prove benefit.
3. Benefits directly related to cost for service. 4. May place an unfair burden on some
segments of the population.
4. Assessment can be deferred in hardship
cases.
System Development 1. New development generating runoff pays 1. Only address problems within the vicinity ofChargesforrunoffmanagement. the new development, not usually existing
2. Administrative structure for reviewing developments.
plans and collecting fees is in place. 2. Only address prevention not correction of
3. Systems can be tailored to the specific major problems.
needs through regulatory changes. 3. Limited usefulness as a financing
4. Revenues are applied to water mechanism.
management. No competition with
general services.
User Charges 1. Properties causing or contributing to the 1. Some initial costs in development of rate
need for runoff management pay relative formula and philosophy.
to their contribution to the problem. 2. May require an expanded administrative
2. Self-financing system not in competition structure.
with general services funds.
3. Existing and new developments both pay.
4. Flexibility in the system.
5. Continuous source of revenues.
6. Specific dedicated fund.
7. Administrative structure for collection
already in place.
Grants 1. Reduce cost burden to residents in the 1. Undependable source of revenue.
community. 2. Increase administrative costs for securing
and managing the funds.
3. Most often grants require cost sharing and
thus additional funding source. This results
in double administrative costs due to several
funding sources.
4. Limited availability on an irregular schedule.
5. Requires considerable lead time from
application to receiving funds.
Plymouth Water Resources Management Plan Page 115
Is
06/30/98
Goals and Policies
Ad Valorem Tax ,
General taxation is the most common revenue source used to finance
government services including minor maintenance measures for drainage and
water quality facilities. Using property tax has the effect of spreading the cost
over the entire tax base of a community.
Special Tax District
The tax district is similar to the administrative structure under general taxation
except that all or part of the community may be placed in the tax district. The
principle is to better correlate improvement costs to benefited or contributing
properties.
Special Assessments
Municipalities are familiar with the use of special assessments to finance special
services from maintenance to construction of capital improvements. The
assessments are levied against properties benefiting from the special services.
The philosophy of this method is that the benefited properties pay in relation to
benefits received. The benefit is the increase in the market value of the
properties.
Storm Drainage System Development Charge
As land is developed or built upon, surface water runoff and pollution loading
increases. Administrative and capital costs can be recovered at the time of
building permit issuance or land development approval. A City can require -
dedication of land for ponding or drainage purposes. The land, however, must
be from the parcel being developed.
Trunk charges or System Development Charges (SDCs) are one time charges
paid by new development to finance the construction of public facilities. SDCs
are generally used for four basic reasons.
1. To shift the burdens from existing development to new development;
2. To synchronize the construction of new or expanded facility capacity with
the arrival of new development;
3. To subject new development decisions to pricing discipline; and
4. To respond to anti -tax sentiments.
There are seven factors to determine the proportionate share of costs to be borne
by new development:
1. The cost of existing facilities.
2. The means by which existing facilities have been financed.
3. The extent to which new development has already contributed to the
cost of providing excess capacity.
Page 116 Plymouth Water Resources Management Plan
7
06/30/98
Goals and Policies
4. The extent to which existing development will, in the future, contribute
ito the cost of providing existing f i—lities used community -wide or by
non -occupants of new development.
5. The extent to which new development should receive credit for
providing at its cost facilities the community has provided in the past
without charge to other development in the service area.
6. Extraordinary cost incurred in serving new development.
7. The time -price differential inherent in fair comparisons of amounts of
money paid at different times.
Planning is extremely important, both from a land use and a surface water
management perspective. Of particular importance within the water resources
management plan is the capital improvements program (CII'). For
improvements to be funded in part through SDCs, the CII' should offer an
adequate policy foundation. In essence, the CII' serves to strengthen the
relationship between SDCs and public policy by clearly stating those policies
and the role of impact SDCs in effecting them.
CIP's normally include a three step planning process.
Preparation of an Inventory and assessment;
Determination of policies and needs; and
Development of an implementation strategy.
To adequately address the issue of Storm Drainage Trunk Charge for New
Development or SDCs, a comprehensive review of the existing water resources
management plan would be conducted to consider the elements discussed
above. Next, a CIP would be refined from the existing document. Work with
legal counsel would be undertaken to establish the legal basis for SDCs. Finally,
the SDC determination will be developed based on development needs, land use
and total systems cost. Lastly, a public information element will be used to
introduce the system to the community. The public information element will
illustrate the approach as equitable and will dispel any myths our criticisms
that may exist.
User Charges
User charges, which support surface water utilities, are a mechanism by which
a City can generate funds through billings similar to water and sewer billings.
The principle is to charge for services rendered to properties generating runoff,
as well as the service to properties being protected from the effects of runoff,
without consideration to an increase in market value of the property.
Implementation of a storm water utility is broken into three phases: (1) Concept
Development, (2) Implementation and (3) Billing. Concept Development
involves research and analysis of funding options and funding needs. A storm
water funding feasibility report includes ' a summary of all findings and
recommendations including a preliminary implementation Plan.
Plymouth Water Resources Management Plan Page 117
06/30/98
Goals and Policies
During implementation, action plans for each component of the utility
implementation are developed. The action plans identify tasks, resources,
responsibilities, schedules and measurements. A link between the recommended
rate structure and the data base is developed during Implementation. The public
involvement plan is implemented prior to presenting a draft ordinance to the
City Council. With public support in place, the ordinance is finalized in the
Billing phase.
Billing applies adopted rates to individual accounts, resulting in an interface
between real estate records and the billing system. Standard operating
procedures are developed to document the process for updating the data base
interface and billing system. On-call support is developed to ensure a smooth
transition to new billing procedures and investigation of credits and appeals.
Table 36 illustrates typical monthly utility rates for a $1,000,000 per year storm
water utility. Figure 14 shows relative contributions for major land use types.
Figures 15 and 16 illustrate the potential utility revenues based on varying
residential and commercial rates. The comparison is based on commercial rates
being 4.23 times the residential rate based Table 36.
Table 36
Typical Stromwater Utility Rates (Example Only)
Property
Class
Land Use Area
acres)
Computations (assuming 2"rainfall) Monthly Cost Summary
Runoff
Curve
No.
Runoff
inches)
REF Runoff
acre-
feet)
Total
House-
holds
Total
Cost
Cost
per
Acre
Cost
per
Hous
e -hold
1 Single Family Residential 6583.6 72 0.29 1 1924.2 13653 23,793 3.61 1.74 J
2 Multi -Family 308.5 85 0.80 2.72 245.3 1632 3,033 9.83 1.86
3 Apartments 346.5 88 0.97 3.3 334.5 4,136 11.94
4 Manufactored Housing 2.1 85 0.80 2.72 1.7 21 9.83
5 Commercial/Office/Parking 1767.3 92 1.24 4.23 2186.2 27,033 15.30
6 Industrial 1001.2 88 0.97 3.3 966.4 11,950 11.94
7 Institutional 580.4 90 1.09 3.74 635.0 7,851 13.53
8 Raildroad Right of Way 57 88 0.97 3.3 55.0 680 11.94
9 Vacant 2733.5 54 0.01 0.03 27.2 337 0.12
10 Agriculture 1490.2 70 0.24 0.82 358.5 4,433 2.98
11 Rural - Farmstead 542.9 54 0.01 0.03 5.4 67 0.12
Exempt Streets, Lakes, Government
Owned Property, Wetlands
7417.2
Page 118
C
Plymouth Water Resources Management Plan
I
I
I
r
c
0
E sm
0
CLSWm
to 15
m
CL
o
0
0
C3 $5
m
06/30/98
Goals and Policies
Figure 14 - Contriburtions Towards a Storm Water Utility
Figure 15 - Commercial Utility Rates _
250000 5500000 $750000 $1000000 $+250000 $1500000 $1750000 $2000000
Annual Utlity Revenue
Plymouth Water Resources Management Plan Page 119
10
06/30/98
Goals and Policies
as
o
c0
E $2s
0a
0
v
a511
0a
M $1
1
so
D
so
Grants
Figure 16 - Residential Utility Rates
220000 5mm t7$o$o0 $tao= 51250000 $/600000 $1760000 $2000000
A155n1 Utlay A$V51N15
State grants are available for surface water management and nonpoint source
pollution. However, it is generally not a good financial practice to rely on grants
for a service program. This source of revenue is not dependable and requires
constant speculation as to its availability. Grants are useful but should only be
used to supplement a planned local revenue source. Examples of some available
grants include
Environmental Protection Ag=cy (EPA): 604b - Urban Water Q11alityQuality,rant
The EPA's 604b Grant Program is targeted at water quality improvements in
urban areas. The grant is not a cost share program, but does require local
participation. The grant is generally administered through the state.
Environmental Protection Aged (EPA): Under Uou_nd Wection Control
EI4g=
The U. S. Environmental Protection Agency's Underground Injection Control
UIC) program involves inventories of ground water protection areas in the City
to address abandoned drainage or domestic disposal wells which are potentially
harmful to underground sources of drinking water. The results of the
questionnaire can provide a great deal of information on the degree of risk to the
City's underground sources of drinking water. The EPA has provided funding
and training for volunteers to implement the UIC program at the local level.
EIIY1L4umental Protection Agency (EPA): Environmental Education Grant
The EPA's Environmental Education Grant, enacted in 1991, is targeted at cities
or organizations in the amount of $25,000 or less. The Environmental Education
Grant is intended to finance local education initiatives related to the nature
environment. Grants are awarded on a 50/50 cost share basis.
Page 120 Plymouth Water Resources Management Plan
r
J
i
r
w
L
0
r
IF
06/30/98
Goals and Policies
The Federal Clean Lakes Grant is the next step in lake restoration following the
State Clean Water Partnership Program. The program can include significantly
more funding than the state program and can be used for development and
implementation of lake restoration plans. Clean Lakes funding is administered
through the MPCA.
Environmental Protection Agency (EPA):,Section 319 - Clear Water Act
Funding through EPA's Section 319 program supports state programs but is
potentially available for urban BMP and project implementation coordination.
The grants program includes a spring application period (May to June) for the
state. The program is significant in that it can funds implementation (i.e.,
construction) rather than funding planning efforts or studies. Available funds
may involve either full or matching funds.
U.S. Amy Corns of Engineers: Section 22 Planning Assistance to States
Programs
Funds are a 50/50 cost share. The program is administered through state
planning. Eligible projects are given to COE to prepare a cost estimate for
preliminary design. The estimate is negotiated with the "customer'. The
customer" provides 50 percent cost share in the form of cash. The COE then
completes the preliminary design or study. These funds are applicable on an
as -available" basis. The COE is not always customer focused; timeliness and
reliability must be balanced against technical expertise and financial
participation. These funds are applicable on an "as -available" basis. The COE
is not always customer focused; timeliness and reliability must be balanced
against technical expertise and financial participation.
Wallop -Breaux Funds
The program is called Wallop -Breaux, referring to the 1984 amendments to the
Dingell -Johnson program and named for its primary sponsors, Senator Malcolm
Wallop (R -WY) and Senator john Breaux (D -LA). Its formal name is the Aquatic
Resources Trust Fund, of which part is used for sportfishing enhancement
215.3 million, in 1992) and part is used for boating safety in each state ($70
million, in 1992). Wallop -Breaux is an example of a user-pays/user-benefits
program, where taxes on an activity are strictly reinvested back into the
activity's maintenance.
The Internal Revenue Service collects the money and gives it to the U. S. Fish
and Wildlife Service. After taking a percentage off the top for administration,
the service gives money to each state based on its relative size and the number
of resident fishermen. No state receives more than 5 percent of the total, or less
than 1 percent.
To obtain Wallop -Breaux funds, the state sends a proposal to the U. S. Fish and
Wildlife Service office in its region. The project must be "substantial in character
and design;' but there is no requirement that the project directly benefits sport
fishermen. In 1991, 32.4 percent went to surveys and research. About half of the
6 percent the service takes pays for the staff that administers the funds. The rest
Plymouth Water Resources Management Plan Page 121
11—
06/30/98
Goals and Policies
of the $12 million a year in administrative money is used for various special
projects. Wallop -Breaux is supposed to be new money for new fishery
improvements. But some of the money is being used to replace state funding
from licenses and the general treasury. The U. S. Fish and Wildlife Service views
itself as simply a conduit of dollars to the states.
Pittman -Robertson - Federal Aid in Wildlife Restoration Act
Funded by an excise tax on angling and hunting equipment, this program helps
raise the revenue necessary to fund specific restoration projects by state fish and
wildlife agencies.
Bort Fish Restoration Act
States receive federal aid monies for fisheries management, administered by the
U. S. Fish and Wildlife Service on a 75 percent (federal) and 25 percent (state)
basis. The federal share is from excise taxes and the state share is mainly from
sportfishing licenses.
DNR's Flood Hazard Mitigation Program
Up to 50 percent cost sharing is available through the bonding program. As
with PFA funds, this alternative best applies to a phased construction scenario,
since the state funding is on the biennium. Additionally, at Joe's suggestion you
should enlist the assistance of your state representative to lobby on behalf of the
City for'funds which are pursued by a number of entities.
Metropolitan Council Water Quality Initiative Grant
Annually, Metropolitan Council sponsors the Water Quality initiative grant
program. Initially focused on improving the quality to the Minnesota River, the
program expanded in 1996 to consider larger, regional based applications. The
program includes both technical and educational grant categories. A maximum
of $100,000 is available, with up to three grant periods. A 25 percent match is
required. Applications have been due in March.
Metropolitan Livable Communities Fund
The Metropolitan Livable Communities Fund is focused on projects that
demonstrate alternative forms of urban design and development that promotes
more efficient use of land and regional services. This funding source could be
geared towards water quality restoration and/or retrofitting treatment into a
redeveloping setting. An example is the Phalen Village in St. Paul, where the
Restoration of Ames Lake near a mostly vacant shopping center, was funded in
1996.
MPCA Low Interest Loans
Typically used for wastewater treatment and collection systems, MPCA's State
Revolving Loan Fund dollars can be used in watershed or non -point source
control. PFA administers the State Revolving Loan Program for MPCA. MPCA
recently adopted rules to facilitate application of this program. (Skwira,1996).
According to PFA (Dennis Fiest personal comm.), a City the size of Plymouth
would qualify for a low-interest loan with a rate of about 4.7 percent, which
Page 122 rlymouth Water Resources Management Plan
13
06/30/98
Goals and Policies
according to Fiest would be about 1-1.5 percent less than your bonding rate.
In addition, by using the loan program, the City can save the administrative
costs related to the bonding process. Furthermore, PFA typically waives the
interest payment in the first two years of the 20 -year loan period. There is no
dollar limit or competition for these funds.
MPCA Clean Water Partnership
MPCA receives federal matching funds for preserving and protecting lakes and
for enhancing their public use and enjoyment, under the Federal Clean Lakes
Program. The MPCA's Clean Water Partnership Program (CWP) provides
matching funds for lake improvement projects and nonpoint source pollution
abatement. The grant program is very competitive and the grant administration
can be time consuming and expensive.
Miscellaneous Funding Sources
DNR Outdoor Recreation Grant Program
DNR Natural and Scenic Area Grant Program
LCMR Legislative Commission Minnesota Resources
IPlymouth Water Resources Management Plan Page 12-
I qIy
06/30/98
Goals and Policies
Table 37 - Finance Policies
Subject:
V Paying for Water Resources Management
Purpose:
V To adequately finance management activities in an equitable manner.
Goal:
V Establish funding sources to finance water resources management activities
Finance Policies
Policy 10.1: The City shall identify and implement possible funding sources for water
resources management.
Policy 10.2: The City will actively pursue grants, donations, and in-kind contributions to help
fund water resources management.
Policy 10.3 The City shall assist citizens and businesses in their efforts to improve water
quality, decrease water quantity and/or upgrade wetlands.
Page 124 Plymouth Water Resources Management Plan
S
FSI
a
06/30/98
Goals and Policies
Table 38
Finance Implementation Plan
Revised 05/13/97
Activity Steps Resources Measurement Target
Date
Budget
1 Prepare study regarding Water resources management Completed study
methods for financing plan
water resources Council A rovalPP
management activities Implementation strategy (of this
Plan)
Current City budget process and
assessment policy
2 Implement financing Finance study Completed policy
strategies of water
resource management Public Involvement Plan Ordinance
activities Bench marking with other
communities
Plymouth Water Resources Management Plan Page 125
1C
17
a4 a se sg ae eg aE
M N e+1 O O h O N ON
a
iAN N A vl
Q 0000 h
C
h en
O
N Opp
D
Opp
O
O
cr
to
O
M
O
hn M pOo M
pOH
O 00
rGe.
C4 V! 69
CV
N
i
M 6 401.64 t
6g4 69 64
00
8 O
gK
O
8
O
pO S p
8 8 6°R
Q
8
Q8 S
pK
8
N M O
CR M44 N h O h h 00 er
N
441.
iA K h
iR
QQ v v
QQ
O
QQ
V'1
QQoQ613. oQ oQ
W
v
M44% K
v
h OC4_ 00M64 MhonfA09,
K
CV
44
I
t OO v
g g613.g g
rV
1 N
I ! inC4; 41% M6A I f
h
64
O
hN
O
N j
169
00M M69I h i44! 69 I i
i O0i %0
i OA
I
6R 64 69I I i91 I
Q I
1 1
1
C.41 00 NN hN Myq 6q h O6 O 00M M44+449.
h M if; I I
a 00
I fIi iR iR 69
v?
N oo141 O h3. 00v., 6M.
h C
M64
h oo69441. h MV%% 0 en
N
O0
cc P"
C4 i V3. iR 6R 603,
O in O N h O O O V N
00 h MfI9 Mfi4 to
Is
O O
G
h
O
M
64
O
O
N6A
O
64
O
00
O HK 664 f9 moiV3. 3 44,
N g 8 64 55Z S
S5Z2
S Q5Z5
a
ay/ •
u;
N
5
O M h Mh
9 6R
N O O o0 M O M6R
5
C
I o•
a6R f
41%
6
419,OC 4013 419.64 Q%CN 00 I
413. 8 8 o
0111 419,
AV/
pm"
N. 44% Nr f
g
O O O 8n o
l8n
g
O
g
O
g
O
n604
8n gO
g
O O Ct
N FN M hN etQ% i
ir4
h C
h
O-
N 0 vi 0 64 MM 06
r iR 00 6% 6t?
is
OA QQ QQ QQ QQ QQ 64 QQ 8", QQ QQ
G
h
v
N
r-
v
hN
v
M64 0064
v
inIt
v
ON M69 M60
v
h
v
4,13%.
v
r-
Cn
69 6R Q% 69
69 h64
ca
O I I y Q
i :W
I I 1. I
I
O I a!I
ca
I •Ur. I I I I
yi L"iI WIa! 0! 41 I y 6i1
i I Ui al I U Im.I on, l vel
17
Z
E
O
Igor
moqnqmuco lel ouetky.
sm4dweAupup.
Buq
a
U043"quo,
i
ofoqlsinboy juawd!nb3 mouolulan
uoq s!nbov 3—djnb3 SupotIL-A
alaul"on 34 1§1 T
XXM UMU
Joqvj jeuuove
4uo3 juvqnw
A
E
E51
EE
g E
c U
E
E gE
E EE
Ec
LD
E F
Ir
Oma
d
E
lie iw 1
E E
w
OL!
E 1
S,fl
2 R pi Alla v Spsm&&RMSM
E
gg
R 1i 9 1 11 E 11!
a
a
left
su(mnquluoo lelaueul
solgdetE))Buquu
Buploq
W
uoq!stnboy qty
uogongsu
oglsfnboy )uewdlnb3 eoueue)ule
uoBlstnboy )uewdnb3 SuuollucvAoO
r
S
N
It
c
N
ri g
sleueteW 3B
jogel We)u
mgel leuuosw 8
sla"wJ tuetlnsuo Ti
o
c 8 y
m ffi w
E m
a=_
m e v r
v
m
E
m o
e
m
E
Si 8 m
c
E
E
cac n
E m m? o> v am m m c
3.5
EEL^L°E2m- offi= L0 OCao`
ma0
ffim
Q
0-=
Egg gcgm
H
m
o;3^a5 a mm= mm oM
y Z. 2$gs$F
mm—
E.
cABB E
C
Ema E.Y
m
QgWaNOW UpR6
Qy$<25QQ WQ$}Q5,5QaUNQQ JLLp
gqM
X00800
EN—NN
fJINT tnl NNN
B
i Y qJ
m9Y
J
m J 0 Z C
a
m
r4
5w
m
5w
3 3 W3
w
a
mLL CC W
w a. it
S
as
O tY. N f.- NONNt
NIN'
1 NNIN'IN
E s
O O N17 mf mr l•OIRNNNNN
g g g$;RNR RRRR RRRIR$NR
I9
S
EG
Cl) m
if r
E
OA
E 'o Y
C
3 N
dCL
CG
JOB S
suo9nrylluo leiaueui 8
N
o' g og
saiydelrji6uqu l qq71
Bu yaol
Qe si
uomsinboy kiedoid
uo.nonllsuo
oQ!smboy luewdmb3 eausuoluie ON
uopismboy luewdinb3 bul g O
91euai V4 3F
walu ologes
Sg 8 8
88
88 88 8
IOQe'j lBUUOSIO p 8
slo"uoo lueynsU
C
E
E m 2 am n
gvo
o 0 m mm 0 E
8 m
m
E m c
c q
o'.
c
mgc Q E
my0
E
c
Yg
WS E
me
m
E'g
w.— E'
cce
zS
aa w'$citi9r$wtia'wl$acci<cdu
g$ON.pB
E n t7N NNN NNaNN
U
O Ndt
m
OY mD
J
N
id
U
EW
m m
U m
3
in Ew 8m
0$
q
o
c c cmc m
c
gc ii uQ
29.1? Y.S2aV m3
m
wa o'3 u.iQ m_ajtl'¢i
a
m rp Ndtm m100 O!N Nm m
Fm
E Nt O
m
N!°1 m OlO NN<N1°1 0010i
MENN N NNNNNNNNNN N N N N N
ZO
8
0
Ieft
suopn"uoo iopuew Ti 7S 7S
so.4&-X6u4uu N
ftmool
p
IW.qIslnbov Auoftd
UO[IOnOSU
opismboV wouAnb3 owwowls S22FGi
uopis!nboy tumwd4nb3 EuNo1N
R
geugsN 39
ioge7 wan I'M
mq"
5Q
IsuuOwG
sp"uoo luininsuo 7f
AN
e
4i
m 8
2 E
E
c
m
a
8
m
p
8 c E:177a55gcEocm
B
Ew
q
C
g9 E E
g
u
Esm
cjiE.c m 3Sg$g g m E" aES E 8
jg
m m
Ti3 YN N^iTi
9Q$
Qti QQQd`
Q$
m
dQQQ
pfia 74
wwjjS4 QcpiadQgwp d
df ia 55a
o oo Q3b000$
Ti
gf
QdQ
di$$
Fi
E NYINN mN_t7Nh Nl1 OONN NN NI' aO l7 NP1
p8
m
W
VU0000 U e
trTi O
0m gE
m w.
22
S 22
Cx,84
3w
St m Skkt
3m
rL
m_
m
iz a.S3 w333
a
a EOp N ON
pp NNN ffOClyy (yyC1 yy {{yyNNO Nl7dyy NQNN a-N NNp
8
N N88O N84D
O8
8R
t3ASl
N N N N I
N6hmO1O
N'VN®hCD
N illl I I 8
N N N
oN 8N
N N 8 8NNNNNN8
C)Cl
N N N N 8
Cl/l7l'!f
N N
eee 1
suoynquluop !elouem_
s ydw l8uyuu N
Bu!yool,
q.-$$
uoq!smboy /yadw
uoyowlsuo
orysmboy luewdmb3 eoueualwe
0
o
0g
uopinnWy luewdlnb3 Buuolryo
sleualeW 39 q
N
loges welu
logeq lauuowa N
sl-lluoJ
o$
Si 25 g
luellnsu N N
O
Nh
A
NU m
m
Qa
g o m
me
m
my i cmc
E
E80
Z
m@„
E
E o c
mmtl1
o
E
m
n
mEm
v m
v
8 o Q N c y m m E a
Etc
o E p d"v
c mm
m
mg. qE2
m m
a8_
mu
Q
g$$
gg
c_ E m
U gE V+`v.0=0 cv Q3 9E
EoE96Z NUc
o ROM
o9 E. c
o
o$ m° E E c 8._mB
E. m a gm go
r
EE> g i IgE mmmaga
m8 e$
uc
m
S a Q E m o n Qc 8
uo o$ 9 Y oHm q Eag
a
qmUE o
J maEm E@ m c Emmc- o m.,
p m$
a Ebwm
m
S.
m o U
L m
s
A q .. m ooE 8
o
oc
m y m
O°
a
mEY
M
3 o o: o
qq'-
o@
m E Sgc.Y S
O
coo
c N
c
E-A
k C
ronwa°o'z'c4 w>'CTwcQi ti aC Euc4x AacQQoi W CUwo.macUdac
CVONT N g Q g
uZ$$°$$ M^oN
4xw pxw
O$$$ ro1W
VE
0 ro N^'Vof O?,
71 111
m
mNN t N A d NNNN d t7 NN V Nt t7
e
m
m U
Ew
m
3 E
w
o Q o
w
g F x 3
w
F
w
Ag
w
Fg
ww
F
oC7 9
Y Y
m
r s
o
t$ a
EQ
m_maE$SLSBmllm'Y3Y"333ysoc
EE..tt99J
owm._
p ER
m. E£ Y0
ao e.L
cm.Y oE.Y
ofl
o.$cm E0
Ym Bo08
a
30
V
Nl7
oS$SSS
3a¢J'n
NIOtN'
1
V NroA
ppV
m°i0
nmzo
yymt0
NN
pO
Oda
IN
f°A
o
i mo.a=2Q¢o
ppNf0
m°O.NN
0000000000
NNONN(N'1
ONMAmgp
N
m_¢Af
NlN'IN AON
Nt70
N 20
NNa
NmA m
m
F
m
12.
n
0
oo
9
BBa 8
NO
OO
suopnquiuoo leiouvu
sonjdeiE)/Bupuu N
Buiyool
Nq
o
ua4smboy Ilueda N to N
uopxwsu
4ogispbovjuawdinb3eoueuejuje w
uouismboy luewdmb3 BuuolNo
sleualeM 38
O gioge1wauN
iogel leuuosie a o —
slomµiop uegnsu 0
p
j
m
tjl mi
E
m o a E
imlm gE
w 2m@ av m a9
0. Wa mo
m8m
E
f: i8
nl ao—m,8mco SE' qa o
E E NyWe
m Ia$
Ec a$
g8
d
em w=m 4R mmo§„miSSS o aBEm
3 gQ W@ E coe'm 4j e$ c.qn@ p
aaopvo
4
c8.
3mn,b18$'$ryn
oBm
w
7 v 4 J A Cc
O
4 6 C m m C r Y.
Y O.
aaaUJU Y .
Y m m.4—' oo
m Q$
4p Wp g
cy8mJS
q-
amc
UQ$
Lu 01 E
Y Q{
Q.
m P
c
O
o
c 8 CEI-
p6
pQ6 8Q 8US
NNt'
1Nd-NNNNNN N NN V NCCC'
111
N
L
m
Y jA
qmq JY Y Y y
m E93 3 v w'^
a° rS'immCi
m
CiUUU
o
m m m c
c c E 41
N LL_ NW N W w
wv w w 3w33
3 0
o tL
C
C cm C pC
C o-goff a'
3¢__. 0. mio'wo.wo' 2"M V_ a
m
AIpN Nf'/N nnnN
NN
Nryf.NNmm t
t tnNNNmNN m0-Ip N QO - N t0 r NNNN fpmF
E
r
NNONfphm
NHf N ppd
pdpoo
mNNNNNNNNN
00
opa Ui tp
a
veaO0000N
N N N N N t1N N N N UN N N N N z3
8
e
I
L
le6e O
suognqu.1wo leleueul 08
sNgdelE)/ffilgwj N
fiul>fow
q
uoglslnbay f(Ueda
8 0
0
uononnsuo
448
Nl/lrynb*W luewdlnb3 eaueualule Q
uoglslnboy luewdlnb36uuollu
slelieleW 39
8
N
loge] welu
g QX 8 00
a 8 o 008 880808 008ogejlauuosiaNI'l M I I I
0 N 8HsloeiluooluegnsuoR
m
vm
F
UmoC
00
m
mm3
m F
O o b= m 0
oma
g m
m m
bl EE
E v
E?-.-
8 0tn
E m a 9. o' c d c.2UcUEm-
E g
v mem
0
gog
am m 9
1BaEmgEcm2roya
o_._
m.po
e
g
c
E o n= m m V. m8 g .ma cm a u o
q
m
o
m
e o o
g.S
v c-
E E_ c$ a$ og q@ E@
g mo r cwm' E
E$m
m m
v m
a Y
E o oP m e
o
o9
E ups
c-
m m
m°$BmSf
m o.
Wr
ao$ mEm m
SmSgg
mB
c'$'$ Ec
0 E fe t5
eo
y E em.8E 0 c
m m g c E g
3=
cic4_ti
gguggiinuggiggUapp++
ugQo`3o'iio a5 ci c4w--
g--Q--
do tT
N8488$FioF3g73 m oo8S 8$88N S0d888 8
E dNt d N ANN NN
To U Ym
m
V
m
U
gm.2. oo
Ex o E x x
OO
Y m YOm Y Y
12 iUU U U
3 mo c xqc b c
fmMN 2 my m 0`1 1 IM
g
m. m
w
w
g 3
g
1 a
n
O CO W
p38co'
3JAS
15
A-
cE7333030'
A
a
a mroONNN MN pNNOf7 X17dN- N yyCI 0100NNmNNN NmON NNN
Em NNONQIh0010 N17d N•D I mO1NNNNNNNNNNth INN
N NOOi..- pNpO pNp NOO N N
O p N NpOO N NpSN N NON N8 N Np Np
N
O N N
N
O pN 8N8
N N
N Np
N N
ppN
N
N N
ppN
N
N N 8N8 8N8NN
N pNp
N N
8
16-
mm
E
3aN
E
a
c
o
C
3 E
CL
G
IeBe Oo
suognquluoo le!muu!
soiydei 8upuu m
Bunpm
oqey
uoplslnb*/ RN
UOIIJnIIs
N
o@slnboy luewd!nb3 eoueuslule ii33 N
uoglsmboy luewdmb3 Buuolryo
gp
O
s epeleW 34
Qx
g
loge] uj.lui g g
iogej leuuow o qq25 4
QQ
S
8
2S
sloeAuoo luegnsu
0
m m N
E
mw
m-
m
w w
m
9a
o
S1y4 o LY a$E
c mE
Ep
U
m
W
E-
m
m
m
mNC
m
c
v
e
AH p
A Y` E
g gm m SammE a g mE
mE
m
E m
r
o
e o
s z
pc
mffi$ac$
8iO3mmmm
Q U` 5KK5 ppS ccWQ W a OW)
Em$Y
xj appCC
E.NQ NNYI N NN N Nt 1N P1 QNO
8
U
Ew u
m
o
m
U
E
Uo
ail 41 N
as v'
g gq gg
m
agbm
0 m
li aCC c o 0
cF P.... c c
Pg-?
sgE
@'
i
i¢¢¢w¢ 3
as
ma
n'o'
a
E NCf ONrohaf OHO NMQNmn NNONi. tNV
Z S
P
eBe E
sUOyng!lluoo 1-8 88ONN
s ydei 8upuu g oN
Bu ool
8qNNqe
N
uoyisinboy Ayedol 0 0g
uogamsuo
ialjsmbW luewdmb3 eaueueluie Q
Fi
uoglsmboy luewdmb3 6uuolruo g o
s1aue1eyy 34 g
o
1OQ81 Flu
x4}4g
qqXX
54
qy
Xgg yQ
Q
loge, leuuoeie
s1oequ03 3 S 111111luellnsuug
m 4
E4
8Z E
E 7 a V E w IT
E
E m
mB8
c
m
m E
m U j O1C7d c Y" lj a
c ggEll
E gENmg m a m
ma a gE g' o
c gEa A E$n. oEEAug
b
TZ
O` m
a m E9EE o os
p
C
m
J m A g c zc E$
mm QQ
y9 EcE
m. i_ m a7F- g wEgN
m cmccEwmmmE€ OL' m, t; 33m
muc`ciaa`tiw>.ni8wrw'chi<cx°a8ii3a`"nwgw`dcio' o
O mml f°w0 N N O Q
NNO
NM
Em 7 C)NPl rn NNH) NNt'f C!N f N V N
8
m Y m
U
12
qN
poY
E
q mJNJmm"Om
m b2Yc3mJ Jy m`m
02
m mEmEY Y Y
rE"EE":me°eeEe e E
vmosoo=o,00000
mt>rmesmm.mm„>rm3
L-E-LNLAm'-
cc c
v
bac
m
S E
m M LNf DNmUl m fd
II 8 F g F o ga
o
mg.s.$._s`sCCmE s U m
m
u m
iu7a'
a>
a3m
9ma. I! 30'¢ c,c
a
L d
O m m EEppl'l N NNS yyNNOODN NO N Nt yy
m
nNO NnON tnN70nN
unNt mnNi
nnN mN NnN OrN NnN NnN dNrnmnn
W
NnppN
N-
NON88O0ppNn
l8n8N7
n pp 0 OppSppnN nWN
pNEiNr
N
NNr pnRN
8n8NNrNIOpp'
I
SSN
n
rNtOpgi
nNlNpp'
l
26
k
8
9umnquluoo 1eloueul N N b
salgd-E)AUpuu
oul>lool
q
g ggg
dlMuoplsmboy
N
W.RM lsu
ioglslnboy luewdmb3 eoueueluie N
uoq!smboy lu0wdmb3 6uuol!uo O0
9181101601 34
N
9i x
5Q y4 5Q
wge,l weiu o S 7i 7S
jogai
5qZ 4X 5t25 5 T q25 g Q 2 4
Ieuumo S 3
91oeiluoo
Q
luellnsuo
mo
N
U C
9 'q
m4 8g2
m
E R
4
Y ca et
g
w n
q—E
c E m
0 E
y
EEo
E
Pmm
w•
aam.E
a—•
E
mmCO
E E
c$ c
o a
g 3
8
c S
V
c4 rs a Im
E a EE
A o.32
m
3
a
SE age
e
E
3 a gE
sEc L°$wna>g c m=_s t Y:•:
mw
m catm8EE—Q WE
Iq
o•
oammg
q m6
wT 3w
m
gE g. m8
EE
ma
m'
s
ZZ1Xgmi
05GE+
Z N4X}p}Op{_
5Vg 5QI 5gW
O
mixpp'Euup
pB
w.Yo
Qx
gqqm goo
I/
S
C$765U UQ
C
Cga$
WZtLUpcp
5g
9N N
Ti TioTi e'+i3 e'S 11 Xg3bin
yQ{QxQ SWggg
Q
3N
Q
yWg
f/1
821u i
R2SS ES2SQvS
5oQo
jo Em f t7Y NteNN YNNN t'1 NNYNNNY Mm
8
pe
NYyygt2
m
201
UUqq
m C N YgE 9 P @ P E
G Lia
U!)
C Cmm YE
U';
Ca
U
L YmE
fU
Ca
U
La
UU
L Lar
me3c$g
fillE
1!'
cE
W
c
I I I I I 1
c
22 Rs
4
y w
g F FF g
Q
STORM SEWER UTILITY CHARGE
CITIES 0 - 2,500
Spring Park of
CITIES 2,500 -10,000
Afton na
Arden Hills Q 4.08/residential lot
Belle Plaine 1/mo
Circle Pines of
Dayton of
Deephaven 60/monthly
Falcon Heights 3.25/sf household/quarter
Farmington 6.75/unit/quarter
Forest Lake 50/proc & appr esc set at 125% of
Oak Grove
est eng costs
Grant na
Hugo na
Jordan MO 1.05
Lauderdale 6.50/01.1 for res. And equiv. REF for
Brooklyn Center
other types
Little Canada na
Mahtomedi na
Mound na
Newport na
North Oaks na
Oak Grove na
Oak Park Heights na
Orono na
Osseo na
Rockford qu
Shorewood 3.75/QU
Spring Lake Park none at this time
St. Anthony na
St. Paul Park na
Victoria na
Waconia city has detail
Watertown na
Wayzata MO res/1 third acre/2.62
Shoreview
comm/acre/39.26
CITIES 10,000 - 20,000
Andover of
Anoka na
Chanhassen 5/residential commercial based on
Brooklyn Center
acreage gtry
Chaska na
Columbia Heights na
Hastings na
Lino Lakes na
Mendota Heights 3.50/1ot resid 42/acre of commercial
Edina
or industrial
Prior Lake 3.75
Ramsey 0/proposed for midyear'99
Robbinsdale 1.15/mo
Rosemount QU 8.15
Savage 4/mo/house commercial varies per
Maplewood
acre
Minneapolis
x
Shakopee 21.84/per REF acrelquarter
Stillwater 4.50/01.1
Vadnais Heights na
West St. Paul na
CITIES OVER 20,000
Apple Valley 3.98/mo resid equivalent
Blaine of
Bloomington 6.60/residence/bi
Brooklyn Center 9.50/lot/res 190/acre/comm
144/multl 47.50/schgov
Brooklyn Park na
Burnsville 9.60/REU
Coon Rapids na
Crystal 4.59 OU
Edina 5/qtr sgl & dbl tam 15/gtr multi dwell
Fridley 2.80/residential OU
Golden Valley 4/quarter
Inver Grove Hgts. of
Lakeville 4.75/qtr surface water management
Maple Grove na
Maplewood of
Minneapolis of
Minnetonka 035/square foot OU
New Hope 6.48/QU res 9.72NVU comm. Per
REF resid equiv fact
Oakdale 20k/acre if add'I discharge
Roseville qu 4.38 residential lot
Shoreview 6.89 qu
Woodbury 9/QU
Agenda Number: 17. q
DATE: December 11, 1998 for the City Council Meeting of December 16, 1998
TO: Dwight D. Johnson, City Manager
FROM: Fred G. Moore, Director of Public Works
SUBJECT: APPROVAL OF WATER RESOURCES MANAGEMENT PLAN
ACTION REQUESTED: Make a motion to adopt the attached resolution approving the
Water Resources Management Plan and authorizing its submission to the Metropolitan Council
and the water management organizations for their review.
BACKGROUND: Beginning in August 1995, the City undertook the preparation of a
Comprehensive Water Resources Management Plan for the entire City. The main two
purposes of the plan are to update the 1980 Storm Drainage Plan and to address water quality
issues. This plan has received final review and approval with recommended changes by the
City's Environmental Quality Committee. Also, after holding a public hearing, it was
recommended for approval by the Planning Commission with one additional change.
The City Council held a study session to review and discuss the Water Resources Management
Plan on November 30. Attached to this memorandum is a copy of the material received with
the report for this study session. The following is the only new material provided that was not
included with that report:
Minutes of September 22, 1998 Planning Commission meeting (this is the
meeting that the Planning Commission adopted the motion recommending
approval of the plan.)
Proposed minutes of special Council meeting of November 30, 1998 (this was
the City Council study session on the Water Resources Plan).
The attached memorandum dated November 25, 1998, for the November 30 study
meeting provided an overall summary of the plan.
As the Council is aware, the City has not waited to implement environmental initiatives until
the plan was completed. The following are major environmental initiatives that have been
implemented.
N:\pw\Engineering\GENERA!.\MISC\FRED\App WtrRan Plan12_1 Ldoc
SUBJECT: APPROVAL OF WATER RESOURCES MANAGEMENT PLAN
Page 2
Ten Environmental Initiatives of the last five years
1. Wetland buffer ordinance
2. Phosphorous free fertilizer ordinance for commercial applicators
3. Enhanced Erosion Control Ordinance and additional inspection
4. Revised Shoreland Protection Ordinance
5. Approval of Open Space Bond Referendum
6. New zoning ordinance -reduced setbacks
7. Study of tiered water rates under review
8. NURP pond treatment requirements
9. Narrower standard for low traffic streets
10. Tree Preservation Ordinance
The plan is only a beginning to the continuation of our environmental initiatives associated
with water resources. The following are the major benefits that will be formally adopted as
part of the Water Resources Plan:
Ten Benefits of the Water Resources Plan
1. Establishes written goals for both quantity and quality for water resource for
the City.
2. Sets priorities for expenditure of funds by watershed, using a priority rating
method.
3. Declares for the first time that total volume of runoff will be considered, not
just the rate of runoff.
4. Provides a unique, colorful one page graphic on the status of each lake and out
goals.
5. Establishes a detailed financial budget for activities over the next ten years.
6. The plan calls for greenway corridors.
7. Tighter controls on use of phosphorous in fertilizers are recommended.
8. Provided the basis for increasing funding by $100,000 for water monitoring,
pond maintenance, and public education activities in the proposed 1999
budget.
9. Provides a "road map" for what activities should be done next, such as
Hydrology and Hydraulics study for northwest Plymouth.
10. Gives us a factual basis upon which to proceed with major projects on two of
our largest lakes in the next several years: Medicine Lake and Parkers Lake.
N:\pw\Engineering\GENERAL\MISC\FREDWpp WtrResp Planl2 ILdoc
SUBJECT: APPROVAL OF WATER RESOURCES MANAGEMENT PLAN
Page 3
DISCUSSION: As was discussed at the study session, before the City Council can finally
adopt the plan, it must have review by the Metropolitan Council. The four water management
organizations that govern the drainage areas within Plymouth must also review and approve
our plan for conformance to their adopted plans. We estimate that it will be July or August
before the plan will be returned to the City Council for its final approval and adoption.
The Environmental Quality Committee (EQC) made five recommended changes for additional
policies to the plan. Staff is in agreement with these additional policies. Also, one
clarification was made on the goal for Bass Lake.
The Planning Commission made one additional recommended change to the policy as
recommended by EQC. The policy recommended by EQC states as follows:
The City shall develop and adopt a city-wide ban on phosphorous base
fertilizer."
The Planning Commission recommended that this be changed to read as follows:
The City shall develop and adopt a city-wide ban on the sale or use of
phosphorous base fertilizers."
As was discussed at the study session, it is our recommendation that the policy, as proposed by
the EQC, be adopted as part of the plan. This is more generic and depending upon what
legally can be implemented could apply to either/or the sale or use of phosphorous based
fertilizers.
RECOMMENDATIONS AND CONCLUSIONS: It is recommended that the City Council
adopt the attached resolution approving the Water Resources Management Plan and directing
its submittal to the Metropolitan Council and water management organizations for their review.
This will begin the last major step in the process for the final adoption of our Comprehensive
Plan to address our valuable water resources within the City.
Fred G. Moore, P.E.
Director of Public Works
attachments: Resolution
September 22, 1998 Planning Commission Minutes
Proposed Council Minutes, November 30, 1998 Special Meeting
Copy of memorandum dated November 25, 1998
N:\pw\Enginxring%GENERAUMISCIFREDWpp_WtrResrsPlanl2 1Ldoe
Recommended Additions/Changes by EQC
EQC
1. Addition to Policy 1.1 (Page 57) - The policy would be revised as follows
with the addition shown in bold type: Constructed detention ponds should
be relied upon to limit runoff to pre -development rates and to control
downstream flooding where feasible; natural basins and green corridors
may also be utilized.
2. Policy 1.1.15 (Page 57) - Add a new policy as follows: In NW Plymouth,
the Elm Creek stream flows will be limited to pre -development
instream rates.
3. Policy 2.11 (Page 65) - Add a new policy as follows: The City shall
develop and adopt a City-wide ban on phosphorous base fertilizers.
4. Policy 4.6 (Page 75) — Add a new policy as follows: The City will identify
all restorable wetlands.
5. Policy 7.4 (Page 92) — Add a new policy as follows: The City will develop
a street sweeping plan.
6. Revise goal for Bass Lake (Page 207) — The goal for Bass Lake will change
from: Reduce total phosphorous and chlorophyll a levels in Bass Lake to
fall within Ecoregion range to: Reduce total phosphorous level below 50
ppb), and chlorophyll a below 22 (ppb).
N:\pw\Engineering\DEVLMNTS\98\98114\Resol\App Wn•_Resource—Pi.doc
Proposed Minutes
Special Council Meeting
November 30, 1998
A special meeting of the Plymouth City Council was called to order by Mayor Tierney at 7:05
p.m. in the Public Safety Training Room, 3400 Plymouth Blvd., on November 30, 1998. This
special meeting was called by the City Council to discuss the proposed Water Resources
Management Plan.
COUNCIL PRESENT: Mayor Tierney; Councilmembers Johnson, Black, Spigner, and Preus.
Councilmembers elect Slavik and Harstad.
ABSENT: Councilmembers Wold and Bildsoe.
STAFF PRESENT: City Manager Johnson, Assistant Manager Lueckert, Public Works Director
Moore, Park Director Blank, Finance Director Hahn, Community Development Director
Hurlburt, Water Resources Engineer Missaghi, and City Clerk Ahrens
Public Works Director Moore presented the proposed Water Resources Management Plan. The
two main purposes of the plan are to update the 1980 Storm Drainage Plan and to address water
quality issues. The City's plan must conform to the requirements of the four water management
organizations and must be in conformance with regional plans of the Metropolitan Council. The
plan was prepared by the City's consultant, Short, Elliott, Hendrickson, Inc. (SEH).
Director Moore said the City Council held a study session in February 1998 on the goals and
policies for the plan. The completed plan was presented to the Environmental Quality
Committee for review. They made a recommendation on the plan to the Planning Commission
with minor modifications. The Planning Commission, after holding a public hearing on
September 22, recommends approval of the plan. Their recommendation includes the items
added by the Environmental Quality Committee and two additional modifications.
Mark Lobermeier, Short, Elliott, Hendrickson, Inc., presented an overview of the plan. He said
the plan has five elements: 1) Individual treatment capacity and analysis for 31 subwatersheds;
2) Preservation of exceptional wetland resources; 3) Prioritization of subwatersheds based on
land use, land use change, and ranking of the receiving lake; 4) Specific water -body action plans;
and 5) Ten City-wide goal -driven action plans. Lake ranking was the fust step in the process,
followed by assessment of the 38 subwatersheds, 310 drainage areas, and 918 ponds/wetlands in
the City. The subwatershed analysis determines the future ponding needs based on ranking of
the receiving lake, anticipated land use changes, and extent of water quality treatment. Each goal
of the plan addresses obstacles, possible solutions, and cost. City-wide goals are in the areas of
water quantity, water quality, erosion control, wetlands, public participation and education,
monitoring, inspection, recreation/fish/wildlife, ground water, and finance.
Proposed Minutes
November 30, 1998
Page 2
Public Works Director Moore stated it is estimated that the cost to implement the plan over a ten
year period is about $7.8 million, which is generally in the following areas: 28% construction,
24% personnel/labor, 16% property acquisition, 14% planning studies, 6.5% equipment, 5%
laboratory analysis/monitoring, and 6.5% miscellaneous. Of the total $7.8 million, $3,654,000 is
identified as new expenditures that are not currently within the City's budget. He said the next
step is City Council approval of the plan. The plan will then be submitted to the water
management organizations and Metropolitan Council. Following the agencies' review, the plan
would be forwarded to the City Council for final adoption.
In response to a question by Councilmember Preus, Director Moore said that the estimated $1.4
million and $1.1 million in 2000 and 2001 includes large capital expenditures which could be
funded through bonding, the Capital Improvement Program, or internal borrowing.
City Manager Johnson suggested that the Council not make a decision on sources for funding
until later in 1999.
Councilmember Black expressed concern about not identifying specific funding. She would like
the Council to consider a dedicated utility fee. This would ensure a commitment to a funding
level and would help users associate the fee with receiving a specific benefit. She has concerns
that unless funds are dedicated for this purpose, they are easily spent elsewhere.
Manager Johnson said that it is generally his budget priority to cut new services before
eliminating existing programs if a choice must be made. However, the surface water utility fee
would be a future option that could be implemented when needed.
Mayor Tierney asked why staff projects that it would cost $180,000 to implement the surface
water management fee. Since it appears that the water management plan can almost be funded
without an additional utility fee, she would prefer to wait to consider the additional fee.
Director Moore explained that there would be significant costs involved in establishing the fee
because the fee could significantly vary by land use. The drainage area for every property in the
City would have to be defined and exceptions to the fee would also need to be addressed. The
estimated cost for managing the fee in subsequent years is $10,000 per year. The initial cost to
implement the fee in future years could be much less than the estimated $180,000 because the
City's GIS system base data will be fully established.
Councilmember Johnson asked if the City could issue bonds now for future projects.
Finance Director Hahn responded that the City would legally have a maximum time of between
18 and 24 months to begin construction from the time the bonds are sold.
Proposed Minutes
November 30, 1998
Page 3
Councilmember-elect Harstad questioned the scope of the water resources management plan. As
examples, he questioned whether fish stocking, control of noxious weeds in the lakes, and winter
lake aeration are within the scope of the plan and whether including the items in the plan makes
them optional or expected. He also expressed concern that a lot of the costs will recur, such as
eradication of milfoil.
Mr. Lobermeier said that the fish stocking meets one of the initial goals of the plan and may
address concerns of the lake associations. The DNR would likely be involved with fish stocking.
Public Works Director Moore said the DNR currently will not do fish stocking in Bass Lake
because there is no public access to the lake. He explained that the plan does not dictate the
outcome; the plan raises issues that are yet to be resolved. The Council will need to make
decisions on many future issues relating to the plan. The plan has an implementation schedule
and financing plan but it does not allocate funds.
Councilmember Preus said the plan does not differentiate between mandated and optional items.
He also believes that the plan should focus attention on the biggest problems, such as large areas
of impervious surface where water runs down the streets and directly into the lakes.
Manager Johnson said the proposed capital expenditures for Parkers Lake and Medicine Lake
will address that issue. He said that virtually nothing in the plan is mandated.
Councilmember Black suggested that a detailed study should consider a 50 -year period when
considering improvements to determine the lowest cost on a long-term basis. For example, the
costs of installing a regional pond, land acquisition, and loss of tax base should be weighed
against the higher maintenance costs of a mechanical fix. She noted that there will be some areas
where the only choice will be mechanical treatment.
Director Moore explained the review and approval process. He said that Plymouth's proposed
plan uses the most restrictive requirement from the four watershed plans throughout the City.
This plan will meet the minimum requirements of all four watersheds and, in most cases, go
beyond the minimum requirements.
Councilmember-elect Harstad said he had anticipated that the plan would include trend
information over several years in order to address the at -risk lakes first. He also asked how
successes would be measured.
Mr. Lobermeier said that Medicine Lake is in the at -risk category. He noted that ground water is
pumped into Medicine Lake in order to maintain a swimming beach. He believes that a realistic
goal for Medicine Lake would be to get it to fall within the normal measures for similar lakes in
this area of the state.
Proposed Minutes
November 30, 1998
Page 4
Public Works Director Moore explained that just as Plymouth was involved in paying for flood
control improvements which largely impacted Minneapolis and Golden Valley, the water
management organizations will likely be involved in funding issues related to Medicine Lake.
He explained that the water management organizations have been very good at viewing issues on
a regional/multi-city basis.
Councilmember Johnson asked staff to respond to the Planning Commission recommendation
that the City adopt a City-wide ban on the sale or use of phosphorus base fertilizers.
City Manager Johnson said the City Attorney has advised that there may be problems banning
the sale of phosphorus base fertilizer in Plymouth. The staff and Environmental Quality
Committee are recommending a ban on the use of phosphorus base fertilizer in the City.
In response to a question by Councilmember-elect Harstad, Mr. Lobermeier explained that
phosphorus causes big problems through algae growth.
Director Moore said that if there is a City-wide ban on the use of phosphorus based fertilizer, a
provision could be included to allow phosphorus where there is a proven need.
Councilmember Johnson said the Planning Commission also recommended that the City offer
incentives to homeowners to provide buffers adjacent to lakes and wetlands. She asked if buffers
could be retroactively required.
Director Hurlburt explained that buffers could be required when there is resubdivision or
redevelopment, and there may be incentives to encourage people to install or maintain buffers.
As discovered when the wetlands ordinance was adopted, it is extremely difficult to retroactively
require regulations that did not exist when the home was built or when the property was
purchased.
Councilmember Preus left the meeting at 9:00 p.m.
Public Works Director Moore did not expect major changes to the plan from the water
management agencies or the Metropolitan Council.
The Council directed staff to place the Water Resources Management Plan on the December 16
agenda for approval.
Councilmember Black said she would like the plan to include a study on the long-range options
for water quality in developed areas of the City, as well as cost issues.
Director Moore responded that review of each subwatershed will identify what can be done, e.g.
retention ponds, modification of existing wetlands. The studies will identify possible means to
Proposed Minutes
November 30, 1998
Page 5
achieve the improvements and the associated maintenance costs. The study would provide
information to decide whether to pursue the long-term or short-term solution to improve water
quality.
Councilmember Johnson asked whether the ban on the use of phosphorus should be implemented
before the 1999 growing season.
Councilmember Spigner spoke against an immediate ban on phosphorus based fertilizer. She
would like to educate citizens before implementing a complete ban. She said that one year
would give residents advance notice of the proposed ban, as well as time for the vendors to have
the product available.
Water Resources Engineer Missaghi said that phosphorus -free fertilizer is not currently available
at Dundee's or Home Depot. Director Moore stated the decision of which product to sell is made
nationally by major retailers. He added that Dundee doesn't offer phosphorus free fertilizer
because there is no market.
Mayor Tierney said the City has done education with residents and vendors for several years and
she believes a City-wide ban is reasonable.
Mayor Tierney asked staff to respond to the recommendation from the Environmental Quality
Committee that the City develop a street sweeping plan.
Manager Johnson said the City has a street sweeping plan and budgets funds for this purpose.
The recommended statement that "the City will develop a street sweeping plan" would direct the
staff to consider its current policy in light of the water resources management plan.
Motion was made by Councilmember Spigner, seconded by Councilmember Black, to adjourn
the meeting at 9:40 p.m. Motion carried, five ayes.
City berk
St Pt. zZ,199a
P146n n; n, C o m w+.
6. PUBLIC HEARINGS:
A. CITY OF PLYMOUTH (98114)
Chairman Stulberg introduced the request by the City of Plymouth for a Comprehensive
Plan Amendment to add the Water Resources Management Plan.
Planning Supervisor Senness gave an overview of the September 18, 1998 staff report.
Chairman Stulberg introduced Mark Lobermeier, consultant from Short, Elliott,
Hendrickson. Mr. Lobermeier gave an overview of the Water Resources Management
Plan. Mr. Lobermeier stated that the three main purposes of the plan are to (1) update the
1980 Storm Drainage Plan; (2) address water quality management concerns; (3) meet the
minimum standards of all agencies (4 watershed districts and the Metropolitan Council).
The Water Resources Management Plan results in seven major elements: (1) Ranking of
eight major water bodies; (2) Land and water resources inventory; (3) Ten city-wide goal -
driven implementation plans; (4) Nine specific water -body driven action plans; (5)
Individual treatment capacity analysis for 39 subwatersheds; (6) Preservation of
exceptional wetland resources; (7) Prioritization of recommended improvements.
Lake Ranking is the first step in watershed assessment. The lake ranking system
developed establishes logical methodology to assist in the decision-making process for
plan implementation tasks and schedules. A lake atlas was put together based on
available data from different agencies. The lake ranking uses high, medium, and low
quality to develop implementation for prioritization.
The plan philosophy establishes the general approach to the Water Resources
Management Plan. The section include includes the overall strategies that ultimately
create the foundation for the watershed assessment. There are four watersheds (Elm
Creek, Bassett Creek, Minnehaha Creek and Shingle Creek); 39 subwatersheds; 310
drainage areas; and 918 ponds/wetlands. The Subwatershed analysis determines future
ponding needs based on: (1) Ranking of receiving lake; (2) Anticipated land use changes;
and, (3) Extent of water quality treatment (function of wetland classification, buffer
ordinance).
Preservation of exceptional wetlands is based on limiting their use for storm water quality
treatment. Today most of Plymouth's wetlands receive storm water. High quality
wetlands can be adversely impacted by the quantity and quality of storm water runoff. To
preserve the highest quality wetlands as they are today, the plan assumes that exceptional
wetlands would not be used for treatment. Lesser quality wetlands would be used for
treatment to varying degrees, based on the quality of the wetland. Based on the plan, we
need about one acre of treatment acreage for every 16 acres of tributary impervious area.
The implementation plan is based on goal -driven action plans. The process of developing
the action plans is based on four steps: (1) Development of goal statements consistent
with 8410 rules and the four WMOs. (2) Identification of issues or problems related to
achieving the goal. (3) Identification of corresponding solutions corresponding to each of
the issues. (4) Development of specific action steps, including identification of resources,
measurement, schedule and cost.
There are 19 major goals established for the Water Resources Management Plan. For
each of the first 10 goals which apply uniformly across the City, corresponding policies
have been developed. The waterbody goals are specific activities in the plan.
Based on an average expenditure of approximately $780,000 per year, the activities have
been distributed throughout a 10 -year implementation plan extending through 2008.
Mr. Lobermeier stated that the next steps involve additional review, including: (1) City
Council approval to submit to agencies; (2) Agencies review; and, (3) City Council
adoption.
Chairman Stulberg asked if the plan would come back to the Planning Commission for
further review if one of the agencies comes up with something. Director Hurlburt stated
that if the change was major then it would need to come back to the Planning
Commission.
Commissioner Koehnen asked if any revisions would need to be done to the plan based
on the Planning Commission's recent recommendation for northwest Plymouth. Mr.
Lobermeier answered that the plan is generic in that regard. He stated that additional
studies will need to be done and have work done in advance. Director Hurlburt
commented that the next step after City Council approval would be to undertake the
additional studies.
Commissioner Stein commented that it appears that lake status remains the same as it is
currently. Mr. Lobermeier stated that some improvements are suggested for Medicine
Lake. Mr. Lobermeier explained the lake atlas and stated that the lakes are on a " status"
quo. If they fall outside the averages, something will need to be done.
Director Hurlburt asked where the lake atlas section is found. Mr. Lobermeier responded
that the lake atlas for each lake is located under the watershed district tabs.
Commissioner Stein said that Medicine Lake and Parkers Lake are ranked a Class 2
which means that they are not suitable for swimming. Mr. Lobermeier stated that the
reason they ranked that high, from a water quality standpoint, is that they are not as good
for swimming. He said that the plan recommendation is to look at the level twos, and see
what can be more realistic in what we can accomplish.
Water Resource Engineer Missaghi said that the Environmental Quality Committee
EQC) is composed of seven citizens from Plymouth - one from each ward and three at
large. The EQC addresses water quality and environmental issues.
Chairman Stulberg opened the public hearing.
Chairman Stulberg introduced Terrie Christian of 9910 South Shore Drive. Ms. Christian
stated that she is representing the Association of Medicine Lake Citizens (AMLAC). Her
lake association has been very involved with the EQC. She stated that AMLAC has
taken photographs of Medicine Lake and they are excited that there is hope for
improvement. Ms. Christian commented that one of the things that has had a negative
impact on Medicine Lake is the new trail on the east side of the lake. She said that they
are concerned with the lack of buffer to stop water runoff from the impervious surface.
She said that one-fifth of a mile of mature trees were removed for the trail, and what is
happening is water is collecting and goes directly into the lake with nothing being done to
reduce the sedimentation and pollutants. Ms. Christian stated that development is taking
place on the east side of the lake which will create more impervious surface and there
isn't any silt fence for protection. The development along 10d' Avenue has a drainage
pipe that is discharging directly into the storm sewer. Ms. Christian stated that the City
can do something different and they have the opportunity for a different outcome for
development in northwest Plymouth.
Chairman Stulberg introduced Kathy Marshall, of 14905 38`h Place North, Ward 1
representative serving on the EQC. Ms. Marshall said that the EQC approved the plan
and some of their comments have been included in the staff report. She said that the EQC
worked on the plan for over a year. The EQC would like the plan approved and
implemented. Ms. Marshall said that one of the main concerns is the development of
northwest Plymouth. She stated that impervious surfaces, sediment, and fertilizers from
developments can affect the lakes and the wildlife. Ms. Marshall said that northwest
Plymouth is an area that we can try some different processes and practices so problems
can be prevented. Ms. Marshall gave an overview of the EQC's recommended changes
as outlined in the September 10, 1998 letter from David Shea, Ward 2 representative.
Chairman Stulberg asked if the EQC is comfortable with staff s consideration of the
recommended changes. Ms. Marshall replied affirmatively. She said that all comments
will be worked into the final version after all agencies have looked at the plan.
Commissioner Thompson stated that the staff report does not include the issue of the
transparency, phosphorous and chlorophyll a levels between the 25"' to 75th percentile for
Ecoregion lakes. Ms. Marshall said she would have to ask for a clarification of that since
it is not in the staff report.
Commissioner Thompson asked what the EQC envisions the ban on phosphorus to be.
Ms. Marshall said that the EQC recognizes that the ban would be difficult to police. The
EQC envisions looking at the businesses within Plymouth and asking them to provide
phosphorus free fertilizer. She said that an important element of the ban would be to
educate and inform people. She said she doesn't know how the City will actually enforce
the ban.
Commissioner Stoebner asked if the EQC looked at other cities' experiences with
banning and how their ordinances were structured and how they enforced it. Ms.
Marshall said they received some information that had to do with construction and
sediment transport, but not an exact way to enforce the policy. Commissioner Stoebner
asked if that information is available somewhere. Water Resource Engineer Missaghi
replied affirmatively. Commissioner Stoebner said that information would be helpful to
pass along to the City Council.
Commissioner Koehnen asked if the instream rates language in the staff report is the
same language as recommended by the EQC. Ms. Marshall replied affirmatively.
Director Hurlburt added the clarification that the limitation would be to stream flows
across the watershed, not a specific development. She said that what will go in the plan
will be the sentence in bold as indicated in the staff report. Commissioner Thompson
suggested that an explanation also go into the plan. Director Hurlburt replied that it
could, if necessary. Commissioner Thompson said he would be more comfortable having
the explanation in the plan.
Commissioner Thompson asked what the definition is of restorable wetlands and what is
and is not restorable wetland.
Chairman Stulberg introduced Erika Urban of 1541 West Medicine Lake Drive. Ms.
Urban stated that she is a member of AMLAC. Ms. Urban said that assault of the land
causes the assault of the lakes. Ms. Urban said that the Little Peninsula deal did not go
through and was acquired by a developer.
Chairman Stulberg introduced James Willis of 16511 200 Avenue North. Mr. Willis
stated that he reviewed the plan's executive summary and attended some EQC meetings.
Mr. Willis urged the Commission to address the issue of aquatic plants transmitted into
ponds behind private residences. He said that their particular pond is infected with duck
weed. They have tried to treat it but it comes through with a new supply every time it
rains from Dunkirk Lane. Mr. Willis pointed out that the staff report doesn't really say
how these improvements will be paid. He commented that the issue of financing should
be addressed before adopting the plan.
Chairman Stulberg introduced Jim Howard of 1535 Juneau Lane. Mr. Howard stated that
he lives on Parkers Lake and is a board member of the Friends of Parkers Lake. He stated
that he supports the plan and wants funding in place to clean up the lake.
Ms. Marshall stated that pertaining to the policy comment regarding the stream flows that
some watersheds go across Plymouth and into other cities which we don't have control
over. In order to get the predevelopment rates, we also have to coordinate with other
cities. She stated that with regards to a city-wide ban on phosphorous, the City of
Medina has a ban currently in place. Ms. Marshall said that the City has an inventory of
existing wetlands. She said that the EQC wants to identify land that used to be a wetland
and restore that wetland. She stated that land is still available to restore an existing
drained wetland area.
Chairman Stulberg closed the public hearing.
Pertaining to the construction of homes on the east side of Medicine Lake, City Engineer
Faulkner stated that there are three home sites and they are not filling wetlands to build
those homes. He said that he wasn't sure if there was a silt fence in place, but would
check out the drainage pattern to see if a silt fence would be required.
City Engineer Faulkner stated that the trail project was a joint effort with Hennepin
County. A large water treatment pond was provided along 30' Avenue. He said that
there is some direct runoff into the lake, as there was before the trail was in place. He
commented that it was very difficult to get the trail wedged in between all the existing
homes.
City Engineer Faulkner said that Water Resource Engineer Missaghi has been involved
the issue pertaining to aquatic plants in ponds behind private residences. Chairman
Stulberg asked if it is acceptable to convey weeds into a private pond without a drainage
easement. City Engineer Faulkner said that it is probably a legal question; although he
agrees that it was a good comment that we will need to look at in the plan. Water
Resource Engineer Missaghi said to solve that problem we would need to take care of up
stream and down stream together.
Mr. Lobermeier stated that financing of the plan is addressed in the Goals and Policies as
Goal No. 10. He said that the City is likely to use a combination of user funds, general
taxes, and grants, which would be discussed on an annual basis through the budget. Mr.
Lobermeier said that the financing decision will either come with plan approval or later
by the City Council through the budget process.
Commissioner Thompson commented that one aspect of financing could be to assess
people who live on the lake. Mr. Lobermeier replied that with that type of assessment it
is difficult to show "benefit."
Chairman Stulberg noted that some of the comments received from citizens state that the
plan should not be approved until a funding plan is discussed and approved. Mr.
Lobermeier stated that you do need a strong idea where the funding will come from and
things have already been planned for in the budget as to where funding will come from.
He said that if you have no idea where the funds will come from, it is not a good idea to
approve the plan.
Commissioner Ribbe asked if the figures on the Implementation Plan are adequate, as
he's worried that the eight million dollar figure could turn into 16 million dollars. Mr.
Lobermeier stated that spending of the funds will be dependent on how rapidly certain
elements of the plan are implemented. He said that a number of things that have to be
defined in greater detail and a control will be set annually in the city budget.
Commissioner Ribbe commented that some numbers don't seem to be realistic such as
land acquisition. Mr. Lobermeier stated that funding could come from development fees
or conservation easements.
Chairman Stulberg asked how staff envisions that the phosphorous ban will be policed.
He stated that while he agrees with Ms. Marshall that you need to have a goal, it still
needs to be measurable or attainable. Planning Supervisor Senness responded that some
goals would be attained over time. She said that it would probably be difficult to achieve
the goal until the region gets into looking at that type of ban. Director Hurlburt
commented that not all laws are perfectly enforceable but most citizens are law abiding.
She said that it will be important to educate residents and to work with distributors.
Chairman Stulberg asked if the City is going to go back and change the wetland inventory
maps. Commissioner Thompson stated that there needs to be more clear guidelines
created for restorable wetlands that were artificially drained. Water Resource Engineer
Missaghi stated that you have to define clearly any area that has the potential to go back
to their original condition. He said that through aerial photography you can see
depression areas that could have been a wetland. He said that the city would not be
making the jump that since it is a potential site it will go back to a wetland.
Commissioner Thompson asked how you define an occasional wetlands. Water Resource
Engineer Missaghi said that if it is inundated long enough for aquatic plants to grow then
it is wetland.
Commissioner Stein asked if they looked at a cost benefit analysis. Mr. Lobermeier
replied they had not, just a sum total of all action items developed by staff. The plan
identifies key improvements that would need to be done.
Commissioner Thompson asked if there was any discussion on issuing permits for people
from other areas to bring their boats and use Plymouth's lakes. Mr. Lobermeier replied
that it is certainly an option that could be pursued.
Commissioner Koehnen asked if the clarification suggested by the EQC pertaining to the
transparency, phosphorous and chlorophyll levels being between the 25`' and 75h
percentile for the Ecoregion lakes had been decided on. Chairman Stulberg commented
that it is not in staff's recommendation. Mr. Lobermeier stated that the necessary clarity
to properly explain it will be made and along with any adjustments to the plans goals.
Director Hurlburt stated that the issue where the lake falls is a matter of the data being
presented, rather than representing a goal. It wouldn't make sense to change it; if you
did, the data wouldn't be accurate. Mr. Lobermeier stated that it is easier to change a
goal for Bass Lake and he will take out that reference.
Commissioner Thompson stated he was confused by the bold face statement pertaining to
the percentile. Mr. Lobermeier said that it seems that the goal should be that the lakes in
Plymouth fall within the Ecoregional range.
Commissioner Stoebner noted that there was a letter stating that the lake associations
were not contacted about the plan until late in the process. Mr. Lobermeier stated that
they met with the Bass Lake Association nine months ago and citizens were invited early
on in the process at the environmental fair. He said that there were at least three specific
situations that they could have been involved.
Commissioner Koehnen asked if Mr. Shea's comments would be included in the plan.
Water Resouce Engineer Missaghi stated that reporting is being mixed with goal setting.
The Ecoregion is not part of goal setting, but rather a frame of reference.
Commissioner Thompson commented that defecation from geese causes problems to
lakes also, and asked how that can be balanced. Water Resource Engineer Missaghi
commented that geese and nuisance weeds are the biggest problems. He said that buffers
around a wetland are the best way to handle geese.
Commissioner Thompson asked what legal barriers would the city face if they now try to
require a buffer around an existing wetland. Mr. Lobermeier said that it would be an
issue for the city attorney. Director Hurlburt commented that the City found that out
through the wetland ordinance process that you can go back and require something to be
done. Commissioner Thompson commented that people that live on the lakes should put
in buffers. Commissioner Stein asked if the city has looked at a property tax incentive to
put in buffers. Director Hurlburt replied negatively. Mr. Lobermeier said that they have
looked at conservation easements, but not to create lake buffers. Commissioner Stein
asked if they looked at the City of Minneapolis and what they are doing. He asked what
alternative landscaping would include. Mr. Lobermeier commented that the
improvements made by the City of Minneapolis are having a positive affect already.
Water Resource Engineer Missaghi stated that alternative landscaping can include tall
grasses, native grasses, wildflowers, and the like to allow water to go into ground instead
of running off
Commissioner Thompson said that he would like more time to look at the plan, as he
doesn't feel prepared to vote on it yet.
Chairman Stulberg asked if the Commissioners need any additional information.
Commissioner Thompson replied negatively. Commissioner Stoebner stated that he
would like more time to review the plan. Commissioner Ribbe concurred.
Commissioner Berkowitz stated that he would like more information on the financing
scenarios for the 10 -year plan and what can be done with a certain amount of money
budgeted each year. Director Hurlburt asked if the Commission is suggesting a cost
benefit analysis to achieve the different levels of compliance. Commissioner Berkowitz
said that it would be helpful to know this as we pass the plan along to the City Council.
Commissioner Ribbe asked if staff and the consultant can put recommendations in print
for the way that it should be financed to carry out the plan. He asked how the education
program will be funded. Mr. Lobermeier stated that a number of alternatives for funding
are outlined in Goal #10 under Goals and Policies and Implementation in the plan.
Chairman Stulberg asked what specifically is being earmarked to restore the water quality
in Plymouth for the 86% of the land area that is already developed. Mr. Lobermeier
replied that not much has been earmarked toward northwest Plymouth. He said that it is
lot less expensive to do improvements before development occurs. Chairman Stulberg
said that it should be called out more in the report.
Commissioner Thompson commented that you have to look at costs being a burden on
northwest Plymouth to benefit people living on Medicine Lake. He said that the option
of assessing people living on the lakes should be pursued, as the problems are being
caused by them and they would benefit from the clean up.
Commissioner Koehnen said it would be beneficial to have more time to understand the
plan more thoroughly. Chairman Stulberg agreed that more time wouldn't hurt, but noted
that the he would never be up to the technical level of the EQC. He said that he would
like to receive the additional information at least one week in advance of the Planning
Commission Meeting.
MOTION by Commissioner Ribbe, seconded by Commissioner Stoebner to table the
Comprehensive Plan Amendment to adopt the Water Resources Management Plan to a
future Planning Commission Meeting and to have the revisions at least one week in
advance. Vote. 7 Ayes. MOTION carried unanimously.
Chairman Stulberg called a recess at 9:00 p.m. and reconvened the meeting at 9:13 p.m.
Agenda Number:
DATE: November 25, 1998 for the City Council Meeting of November 30, 1998
TO: Dwight D. Johnson, City Manager
FROM: Fred G. Moore, Director of Public Works
SUBJECT: REVIEW OF PLYMOUTH WATER RESOURCES MANAGEMENT
PLAN
ACTION REQUESTED: After a review of the Water Resources Management Plan
gives staff direction on any changes or additional information requested by the City
Council.
BACKGROUND: In August 1995, the City began developing the Water Resources
Management Plan. The two main purposes of the plan are to update the 1980 Storm
Drainage Plan and to address water quality issues. As the plan evolved, the focus shifted
more towards City-wide water quality management. The City's plan must conform to
the requirements of the four water management organizations (WMO) and be in
conformance with regional plans of the Metropolitan Council.
The plan was prepared by the City's consultant, Short, Elliott, Hendrickson, Inca (SEH)
with direction and input from City staff and the Water Quality Committee. Also, at the
very beginning of the plan, public meetings were held to which lake associations and
citizens were invited to provide input into the plan.
In February 1998, the City Council held a study meeting on the goals and policies for the
plan. The goals and policies provide the background for the development of the entire
plan. After review, the City Council approved the goals and policies with direction on
some modification.
The completed plan was presented to the Environmental Quality Committee (EQC) for
their review and recommendation. They made a recommendation on the plan to the
Planning Commission for approval with a few minor modifications. These modifications
have been incorporated in the Planning Commission recommendation. The Planning
Commission, after holding a public hearing on September 22, 1998, is recommending the
plan to the City Council for approval. Their recommendation includes the items added
SUBJECT: REVIEW OF PLYMOUTH WATER RESOURCES MANAGEMENT
PLAN
Page 2
by the EQC and two additional modifications. Attached are the minutes from the
November 10, 1998 Planning Commission meeting on their discussion and motions in
recommending approval of the plan by the City Council. Also attached are the seven
changes recommended to the plan. Staff concurs with these changes.
I am also attaching a copy of a memorandum dated November 5, which I prepared to the
Planning Commission addressing their questions from the September 22 public hearing.
Attached to that memorandum is the staff report which the Planning Commission
received for the September 22, 1998 public hearing.
The Planning Commission, City Councilmembers and Councilmembers elect (then
Council candidates) received a copy of the plan in mid-September. For that reason an
additional copy is not attached to this report.
One of the questions answered for the Planning Commission was on the cost for the
estimated implementation of the plan. It is estimated that the cost to implement this plan
over a ten year period is $7,799,000. Of this amount, we have identified that
3,654,000 are new expenditures that are not currently within the City's budget.
Attached is a summary by general category showing the new or additional expenditures
for the plan implementation. The report to the Planning Commission (November 5,
1998) gives a summary review of possible financing methods for the plan. Also attached
is the summary page from the plan indicating advantages and disadvantages of different
funding alternatives. More details on these funding alternatives are indicated on Pages
116 through 123 of the plan.
The City's consultant will make a brief presentation to the City Council on the plan at the
study meeting. Shane Missaghi, the City's Water Resources Engineer and I will also be
in attendance to address additional questions which the City Council may have.
The review and approval of our Water Resources Plan cannot move forward until the
City Council gives preliminary approval to the plan and authorizes its submittal to the
organizations. We estimate that it will require four to six months before we receive their
review comments, propose necessary changes or answer questions and present the final
plan to the City Council for adoption.
Although this is a proposed plan for a ten year period, both the Planning Commission
and City Council will need to review it within the next year as part of our
Comprehensive Plan Update. Also, beginning in 2002, the watersheds will begin to
update their plans which may mean additional review and updates to our local plan.
N:\pw\Engineering\GENERAL\MEMOS\FRED\98\Raview_Waruplan.doc
SUBJECT: REVIEW OF PLYMOUTH WATER RESOURCES MANAGEMENT
PLAN
Page 3
Staff believes that this is a very comprehensive water resources plan which will improve
water quality within the existing urbanized area of Plymouth and provide standards which
will reduce the likelihood of reduction in existing water quality in the non -urbanized
portions of the City.
4
Fred G. Moore, P.E.
Director of Public Works
attachments: Recommended Changes/Additions by EQC and Planning Commission
New/Additional Expenditures
Funding Alternatives - Advantages and Disadvantages
Planning Commission Minutes for November 10, 1998
November 5, 1998 Staff Report
September 18, 1998 Staff Report
N:\pw\Engineering\GENERALXMEMOS\FRED\98\Review WatuPlan.doc
Recommended Additions/Changes by
EQC and Planning Commission
EQC
1. Addition to Policy 1.1 (Page 57) - The policy would be revised as follows
with the addition shown in bold type: Constructed detention ponds
should be relied upon to limit runoff to pre -development rates and to
control downstream flooding where feasible; natural basins and green
corridors may also be utilized.
2. Policy 1.1.15 (Page 57) - Add a new policy as follows: In NW
Plymouth, the Elm Creek stream flows will be limited to pre -
development instream rates.
3. Policy 2.11 (Page 65) - Add a new policy as follows: The City shall
develop and adopt a City-wide ban on phosphorous base fertilizers.
4. Policy 4.6 (Page 75) — Add a new policy as follows: The City will
identify all restorable wetlands.
5. Policy 7.4 (Page 92) — Add a new policy as follows: The City will
develop a street sweeping plan.
6. Revise goal for Bass Lake (Page 207) — The goal for Bass Lake will
change from: Reduce total phosphorous and chlorophyll a levels in Bass
Lake to fall within Ecoregion range to: Reduce total phosphorous level
below 50 (ppb), and chlorophyll a below 22 (ppb).
Changes by Planning Commission
1. Revise new policy recommended by EQC above (No. 3) to read as
follows (addition is in bold type): The City shall develop and adopt a
City-wide ban on the sale or use of phosphorus base fertilizers.
2. The Planning Commission recommends that the City offer incentives to
homeowners to provide buffers adjacent to lakes and wetlands.
N:\pw\Engineefing\GENERAL\NUSC\FRED\ChangeAdd—WaterPlan.doc
10 Year Implementation Plan
New/Additional Expenditures
Studies 578,000
DNR/Plant Management 1509000
Drainage/Pond Inspection Program 196,000
Alternative Landscape Monitoring 60,000
Document Existing Treatment Capacity 2009000
Pond Maintenance Access 2009000
Sub -total 193849000
Construction 252705000
Total 396549000
N:\pw\EnginceringNGENERAL\MISCIFRED\Expendimres.doc
Method
Ad Valorem Tax
Special Assessments
SystmeDevelopment
C ges
User Charges
Grants
06/30/98
Goals and PoliciPc
Table 35
Advantages and Disadvantages of Different Funding Alternatives
I. Administrative structure for collection in
place.
2. Simple and accepted source of revenue.
3. Allows for a larger revenue base.
4. Through tax districts contributors pay.
1.
2.
3.
4.
1.
2.
3.
4.
1.
2.
3.
4.
S.
6.
7.
Only benefited properties pay.
Revenues from assessment are applied to
a specific project cost. No competition
with general services.
Benefits directly related to cost for service.
Assessment can be deferred in hardship
cases.
New development generating runoff pays
for runoff management.
Administrative structure for reviewing
plans and collecting fees is in place.
Systems can be tailored to the specific
needs through regulatory changes.
Revenues are applied to water
management. No competition with
general services.
Properties causing or contributing to the
need for runoff management pay relative
to their contribution to the problem.
Self-financing system not in competition
with general services funds.
Existing and new developments both pay.
Flexibility in the system.
Continuous source of revenues.
Specific dedicated fund.
Administrative structure for collection
already in place.
1. Reduce cost burden to residents in the
community.
rtymouth Water Resources Management Plan
1. No incentive to reduce runoff or pollution.
2. No relationship to level of benefits received.
3. Discontinuous source of revenue.
4. Limitations on amount of expenditures due
to budget constraints.
5. Competition with other City services (i.e.,
police, fire).
1. Rigid procedural requirements.
2. Runoff contributions cannot be assessed.
3. Difficult to determine and prove benefit.
4. May place an unfair burden on some
segments of the population.
I. Only address problems within the vicinity of
the new development, not usually existingdevelopments.
2. Only address prevention not correction of
major problems.
3. Limited usefulness as a financing
mechanism.
1. Some initial costs in development of rate
formula and philosophy.
2. May require an expanded administrative
structure.
1. Undependable source of revenue.
2. Increase administrative costs for securing
and managing the funds.
3. Most often grants require cost sharing and
thus additional funding source. This results
in double administrative costs due to several
funding sources.
4. Limited availability on an irregular schedule.
5. Requires considerable lead time from
application to receiving funds.
Page 115
DRAFT
Planning Commission Minutes
November 10, 1998
Page #240
A. CITY OF PLYMOUTH (98114)
Director Fred Moore gave an overview of the November 5, 1998 staff report. Director
Moore stated that $750,000 is spent on street related issues on an annual basis. He
presented new/additional expenditures to the implementation plan: Studies -$578,000;
DNR/Plant Management $150,000; Drainage/Pond Inspection Program - $196,000;
Alternative Landscape Monitoring - $60,000; Document Existing Treatment Capacity -
200,000; Pond Maintenance Access $200,000. Subtotal - $1,384,000 Construction -
2,270,000.
Commissioner Thompson asked if it is legally possible to retroactively require buffers
along shorelands. Director Hurlburt responded that she didn't think there is anything in
the plan that will address that. She said that staff determined through the process of
developing the wetland ordinance that you can't apply buffers retroactively. She stated
that she didn't know of any community that has tried to require retro buffering. Director
Moore said that it may be possible to establish some financial incentives for people to do
this.
Commissioner Berkowitz asked if the City has thought about providing buffer
monuments and technical assistance for voluntary buffering. Director Hurlburt replied
that staff is already providing technical assistance. Planning Supervisor Senness stated
that the materials for buffering should be professionally applied in order to work which
would raise the cost to homeowners. Director Hurlburt noted that one thing the staff uses
to encourage buffers is the problem with geese complaints. Water Resource Engineer
Missaghi commented that he also works with various homeowners associations.
Commissioner Stein asked if any have actually implemented restoration of a buffer.
Water Resource Engineer Missaghi replied affirmatively.
Commissioner Ribbe stated his concern for implementing the plan until funding sources
have been determined. He said that there may be a need for a commitment from the
taxpayers in order to make this realistic to achieve the goals 'of the plan. Director Moore
commented that there is a section in the plan that gives several financing sources, which
will have to be addressed after the plan is adopted. He said that when the plan is adopted,
staff will then know how aggressive it should be handled and can address the finance
issues over 10 years. Commissioner Ribbe noted that 40 percent of the projected cost is
for expert labor. Director Moore commented that a lot of it is studies and staff labor, but
until a detailed study is done on a watershed by watershed district basis, you don't know
how much needs to be done. He said that this is an on-going plan that will continue even
after 10 years. He added that the City is required by state law to address water quality
and water quantity.
DRAFT
Planning Commission Minutes
November 10, 1998
Page #241
Commissioner Stein asked if the plan would come back to the Commission periodically
for review. Director Moore replied that the plan would come back formally as part of the
Comprehensive Plan. He said that the plan will need to be updated as watershed plans
are updated.
MOTION by Commissioner Thompson, seconded by Commissioner Stoebner
recommending approval of a Comprehensive Plan Amendment for the City of Plymouth
for the Water Resources Management Plan.
MOTION to Amend by Commissioner Berkowitz, seconded by Commission Thompson
to remove the recommendation for the ban on city-wide phosphorus fertilizers.
Commissioner Berkowitz stated that the didn't think an overall ban is the way to go. He
said that banning the sale of phosphorus fertilizers in Plymouth would have a better
affect.
Commissioner Ribbe stated people can still drive to other cities for sources of fertilizer.
He said that the symbolism of a ban sends a forceful message that people should quit
using something that isn't necessary.
Commissioner Stein commented that the ban on the sale would at least start the learning
process.
Commissioner Stoebner suggested that the language is broad enough that it could mean
the use or sale, and that the City Council should grapple with that issue. He said as
worded it would be appropriate.
Commissioner Thompson suggested that the wording state ban sale or use of fertilizer.
Commissioner Berkowitz commented that with the items underway through the
legislature or the Metropolitan Council, maybe the City should just focus on educational
issues and see what happens.
Roll Call Vote on MOTION to Amend. 1 Aye. MOTION failed on a 1-5 Vote.
Commissioners Ribbe, Stein, Thompson, Stoebner and Chairman Stulberg voted Nay.)
MOTION to Amend by Commissioner Thompson, seconded by Commissioner
Berkowitz to change the wording to the "ban on the sale or use of phosphorous base
fertilizers."
Commissioner Stoebner commented that the City Attorney said there would be a problem
with a ban on the sale. Commissioner Thompson said it would be the same problem as
DRAFT
Planning Commission Minutes
November 10, 1998
Page #242
banning the use, but it would have more of an affect on retailers. Commissioner Stoebner
said that anything that would have a chilling affect on the sale would be good.
Commissioner Berkowitz stated he would support the amendment. Roll Call Vote. 5,
Ayes. MOTION approved on a 5-1 Vote. (Chairman Stulberg voted Nay.)
MOTION to Amend by Commissioner Thompson to add further consideration of the
feasibility of the retroactive requirement of buffers on lake shore properties. MOTION
to Amend died for a lack of a second.
MOTION to Amend by Commissioner Stein, seconded by Commissioner Berkowitz to
offer incentive to homeowners to provide buffers.
Chairman Stulberg said that the plan already basically intends the incentive.
Commissioner Stein said that the cost of the incentive would reduce the overall cost in
the long run. Commissioner Thompson said that it is redundant to what is in the plan.
He said that he is afraid that if it is strictly voluntary homeowners would be just buffering
areas around swamps. Commissioner Berkowitz said that maybe assistance from the City
would've helped the dilemma that the Fosters' and Berglands' faced. Commissioner
Stoebner said that he would support the motion. Roll Call Vote. 6 Ayes. MOTION
approved unanimously.
MOTION to Amend by Commissioner Ribbe, seconded by Commissioner Thompson to
propose that additional wording be added "due to the scope of the plan and the
commitments that would be necessary to achieve the goals the Planning Commission
further recommends the determination of a reasonable estimate of the implementation
costs. Such costs should include the costs of land acquisition, controlling volume control
of natural waterways, and maintaining existing waterways."
Commissioner Ribbe said that before the City Council determines the final plan they
should have a handle on how to finance the plan and obtain the resources to meet those
costs.
Chairman Stulberg said he would vote against the motion as he believed the plan has to
happen anyhow and he didn't want to hold it up waiting to determine the financing
portion of the plan. He said that the plan will be a moving target that will continue to
change and will have to be monitored by staff. Chairman Stulberg stated that he would
support the recommendation, but not attached to the resolution. Commissioner
Thompson said that it is a good idea for a separate recommendation to the City Council.
Commissioner Stein asked if the financing portion could be decided before the plan is
adopted in August, 1999 and reported back to the Planning Commission. Director Moore
stated $8 million is a reasonable implementation of the plan. Commissioner Ribbe said
DRAFT
Planning Commission Minutes
November 10, 1998
Page #243
that there are portions of the $8 million that are too low that will disappear any time a
project comes along. He stated that the $120,000 for project acquisition seems low and
that it wouldn't go very far. Director Moore explained that most of the intended
acquisition is in the undeveloped part of the City and will be done in conjunction with
development. Commissioner Ribbe stated that the only significant dollar figures for
construction is related to Parkers Lake. There seem to be big gaps in the intent and how
it is going to get done. The City Council has to be willing to get their arms around the
entire project and be able to come up with the finances. Chairman Stulberg commented
that staff is saying that their estimates are realistic. Commissioner Ribbe said that there
are some items that could be big ticket items, but they don't seem to be dealt with in the
implementation.
Roll Call Vote on MOTION to Amend. 2 Ayes. MOTION failed on a 2-4 Vote.
Commissioners Stein, Stoebner, Thompson and Chairman Stulberg voted Nay.)
Roll Call Vote on Main MOTION. 6 Ayes. MOTION approved unanimously.
Chairman Stulberg commended the Environmental Quality Committee and staff for their
work on the project. He said that he encourages the current City Council to deal with the
issue and not wait for the new Council as they have not been involved with the process to
date.
Commissioner Ribbe concurred, adding that the current City Council has the knowledge
to deal with the plan.
8. NEW BUSINESS: t
A. CITY OF PL%
anDirectorHurlburt
Commission will set the 19S
meeting in January.
MOTION by Commissioner
the December 22, 1998 P
approved unanimously.
MOTION by mmissione
adjourn. V e. 6 Ayes.
adjour at 10:40 p.m.
of the vember 5, 1998 memo. She said that the
ininVi ommission Meeting Schedule at their first
A by Commissioner Stoebner to cancel
Meeting. Vote. 6 Ayes. MOTION
Stoebner, seconded Commissioner Thompson to
MOTION approved unanihvusly. The meeting was
yA.
DATE: November 5, 1998 for the Planning Commission Meeting of November 10, 1998
TO: Planning Commission
SUBJECT: Comprehensive Plan Amendment
Water Resources Management Plan (WRMP); (98114)
FROM: Fred G. Moore, Director of Public Works
On September 22, 1998, the Planning Commission held a public hearing on the Water Resources
Management Plan (WRMP). At the conclusion of the public hearing the Planning Commission had
several questions which they requested staff to provide answers before giving consideration on a
recommendation to the City Council on the adoption of the plan. Attached is a copy of the staff
report presented to the Planning Commission for the public hearing.
The proposed Management Plan is the first Comprehensive Water Resources Management Plan for
the City of Plymouth. The City has had a Storm Drainage Plan since 1972, which addressed the
flows and quantity of storm water runoff. This has been a very effective plan for the City. I am
unaware of any buildings which have been flooded from large rainfall events and the resulting
storm water runoff because of inadequate drainage systems.
The new plan not only continues the management of the quantity of storm water, but adds the very
essential element to deal with the quality of storm water. Although there has not been a
comprehensive plan, the City has implemented water quality requirements since 1995. Also in
accordance with state regulation, wetland protection has been implemented by the City since 1991.
The proposed Water Resources Management Plan combines all of the various elements into one
comprehensive plan. The Minnesota statutes require that each local government within the
metropolitan area develop a management plan which conforms to the plans adopted by the
watershed organizations. As a result of our natural drainage systems, Plymouth is part of four
watershed organizations (Bassett Creek, Shingle Creek, Minnehaha Creek, and Elm Creek). The
City's plan must implement the minimum requirements of each of the watershed organizations and
also conform and implement other mandates within state statutes, rules of the State Board of Water
and Soil Resources, Department of Natural Resources, Minnesota Pollution Control Agency, and
Metropolitan Council.
N:\pw\Engineering\DEVLMNTS\98198114\Memos\CompPlan_PlnngRpt.doc
Comprehensive Plan Amenc nt (98114)
Page 2
Since this is our first comprehensive plan, I am sure that it will continue to require revisions over
the next several years as the plan is implemented. Although this will be the official plan of the
City, I believe it should be considered a work in progress as studies are completed and new
techniques evolve to preserve, protect, and improve water quality.
The plan does require the implementation of several goals and requirements as part of
development. Because of criteria in the Water Plan, I believe we can expect to see that continued
development, within northwest Plymouth, will be different than the development which has taken
place in Plymouth over the past 30 years.
Following are answers to the questions specifically requested by the Planning Commission:
1. Are there other cities that have a total ban on phosphorus fertilizer as recommended by
the EQC?
Plymouth, along with many other cities especially in the metropolitan area has an
ordinance that requires the use of phosphorus -free fertilizer for commercial businesses
or applicators. This ordinance does not cover individual property owners doing their
own work. A search through the Internet, by our consultant, by the City Attorney's
office and through the League of Minnesota Cities did not identify any cities which have
an ordinance for a citywide ban on fertilizer containing phosphorus. In discussing this
with the City Attorney's office, it is their opinion on a preliminary basis that it would be
legal for the City to adopt such an ordinance. There are currently proposals underway
either through the legislature or Metropolitan Council to have regulations which would
set an upper limit for phosphorus of one-half to one percent. Anything which Plymouth
does might need to be amended in the future to conform with action taken by the State.
The City Staff believes that the ordinance banning phosphorus fertilizer would be most
beneficial from an education standpoint. Most people when knowing the facts do not
intentionally violate a rule or law. We have also discussed with the City Attorney
whether we could make this apply to businesses which sell fertilizer within Plymouth.
His preliminary opinion after brief research is that this is probably unlikely. If it could
be accomplished it would probably be through some type of licensing requirements for
the sale of fertilizer within Plymouth. These licensing provisions would then contain
notification and education on the City of Plymouth's requirements. Just because
fertilizer is purchased within Plymouth does not mean that is where it's going to be used
and it may be acceptable in the community where the purchaser lives.
Staff still recommends the inclusion of this requirement in the plan as recommended by
the EQC because of its educational benefit.
N:\pw\Enginecring\DEVLMNTSk9g\98114kMemoskConipPlan—PinngRPLdoc
Comprehensive Plan Amen nt (98114)
Page 3
2. What is the percentage of the cost included in the plan associated with Northwest
Plymouth?
The plan includes an implementation/expenditure proposal for a ten-year period. This
expenditure includes the cost of many studies, water monitoring and investigation of
existing ponds, wetlands and drainage systems to determine their effectiveness for water
quality treatment. As a result of these studies we expect many additional capital
improvements to be identified which will continue beyond the ten-year implementation
period identified in the plan. As the plan is updated, the implementation expenditures
would also be updated and extended into future years.
Included within the plan is a projected expenditure for the ten-year period of
7,799,000. The portion of this cost which is associated with Northwest Plymouth is
1,128,000. As can be seen, this is approximately one-eighth of the expenditures. The
area of northwest Plymouth is approximately one-eighth the area of the City even though
the implementation plan was not proposed to be proportional within the different
portions of the City or watersheds. The majority of the cost indicated in the plan for
Northwest Plymouth, $900,000, is to purchase land for regional ponding facilities.
With current developments, each development is generally providing their own water
quality treatment facility. This can be done on a more effective basis if it is done
regionally within a watershed or subwatershed and not for an individual development.
The cost which the City would incur to develop the regional facilities would be
recovered from the developing areas either on a connection charge or by assessments.
We would not anticipate that the cost to develop regional treatment facilities for new
urbanization would be a cost paid for by the City at large but ,would be a development
cost.
3. Clarify the comment by the EQC of the water quality measurements in lakes between the
25' and 75" ` percentile for Ecoregion Lakes?
The WRMP includes lake atlases for eight major lakes in the City. For each of the
lakes, a qualitative comparison of the lakes current water quality is made to ranges of
representative minimally impacted lakes in the same ecoregion of the state. The
ecoregion ranges are based on the report entitled Minnesota Lake water Quality
Assessment Report, Second Edition, A Practical Guide for Lake Managers (Minnesota
Pollution Control Agency, 1990). The report presents statistical figures related to total
phosphorus, secchi disk and chlorophyll a. The report presents the complete data set
and expresses the typical data range as the lakes' concentration between the 25th and
75th percentile of the complete data set for representative - minimally impacted lakes.
In other words, the range is for higher quality lakes and does not include every single
lake in the ecoregion. This typical range is:
N:\pw\Engineering\DEVLMNTS\98\98114\Memos\CompPlatt—P1nngRpt.doc
Comprehensive Plan Amen, nt (98114)
Page 4
Criteria 25th and 75th percentile for minimally impacted lakes
Total phosphorus 23 - 50 µg/1
Chlorophyl a (mean) 5 - 22 µg/1
Plymouth lakes may lie outside of the typical range listed above. The
Goal for Bass Lake is to reduce the phosphorus range to fall within
the typical range (above). The goal will be modified to reduce the
phosphorus value to at or below 50 µg/1
The goal for Bass Lake (Page 207) will change from: "Reduce total phosphorous and
chlorophyll a levels in Bass Lake to fall within Ecoregion range" to: "Reduce total
phosphorous level below 50 (ppb), and chlorophyll a below 22 (ppb)."
4. The EQC is recommending that the City identify all restorable wetlands. What are
restorable wetlands?
To be consistent with other publications, the water plan will define "restorable
wetlands" or "wetland restoration" the same as defined in the Minnesota Wetland
Conservation Act, which is as follows:
restoration" means reestablishment of an area that was historically wetlands but
currently provides no or minimal wetland functions due to manmade alteration such
as filling or drainage.
Once these areas, the restorable wetlands, are identified, they would be the most
logical/practical sites to establish new mitigated wetlands. A property owner would not
be required to restore the wetland.
5. What is the review/approval process and expected timeline and how will financing be
finalized? Does the plan commit the expenditure offunds?
This plan is the City's response to the Statute requiring surface water management
planning and requirements as part of our comprehensive plan for the Metropolitan
Council and watershed organizations. The various watersheds have review and approval
authority over our plan for its conformance with their water management plan which has
previously been adopted. The Metropolitan Council, DNR and the Pollution Control
Agency have review and comment authority. Their comments are made to the
watershed organizations and are considered by the watersheds as part of the watershed
approval process.
The following is a tentative timeline for this process which would bring the final plan
back to the City Council for adoption in August, 1999.
N:\pw\Engin=ing\DEVLMDrM98\98114\Memos\CompPlan_PlnngRptdoc
Comprehensive Plan Amenc .nt (98114)
Page 5
Reviewers Time Line
Planning Commission Approval November 10, 1998
Presentation to the Council/Study Session December 1998
City Council Approval December/January
Submittal to Agencies January 1999
Metropolitan Council RevieW 30 days
WMO Review' 60 days
Receive WMO Comments May 1999
Respond to WMO Comments June 1999
WMO Approval July 1999
Council Adoption August 1999
1. Concurrent submittal to Metropolitan Council, Bassett Creek WMO, Elm Creek WMO, Shingle
Creek WMO and Minnehaha Creek Watershed District
2. Review Continents submitted directly to the watersheds
The plan has an implementation schedule and financing plan but this does not allocate
funds. The City Council on an annual basis approves the City's operating budget and
the Capital Improvement Program which is the authorization for the expenditures of
funds. Once the expenditures are authorized by the Council, there are other City
Council approvals necessary for some of the expenditures such as approval of
construction contracts.
6. Provide more detail on the possible means of financing the $7,799, 000 included in the
ten-year implementation program for the plan.
As previously stated the plan does not specifically commit the dollars for the programs
upon adoption of the plan by the City Council. The spending will be committed during
the annual operating budget and Capital Improvements Program budget adoptions.
The City has always made expenditures for surface water drainage. Based upon a
conservative approach, we would estimate that there is an expenditure of $749,000 for
surface water drainage included within the proposed 1999 operating budget. Some of
these expenditures are for items that are proposed within the ten-year implementation
plan. The proposed 1999 budget under consideration by the City Council proposes an
additional expenditure of $100,400 in 1999 over and above expenditures being made in
1998 and previous years. These expenditures were proposed by the City Manager in
order to have funds as the first step in the implementation process of the water plan. Of
the $7,799,000 ten-year implementation plan, only $3,654,000 is identified as new or
additional expenditures beyond our current operating budgets and Capital Improvements
Program. If this is prorated over a ten-year period it is approximately $365,000 on an
annual basis.
N:\pw\Engineering\DEVLMNTS\98\98114\Memos\CompPlan_PlnngRpcdoc
Comprehensive Plan Amenc ,nt (98114)
Page 6
The City Manager also identified as part of the 1999 budgeting process earmarking
portions of the Capital Improvement Levy for major water quality improvement projects
for the coming years. At the present time, this capital levy is $300,000 per year. As
was previously mentioned, $100,000 of additional funding was also included in the
operating budget for 1999. It may also be possible to include an additional like amount
within the 2000 and 2001 budgets to make a total of a $300,000 annual expenditure
above the 1998 budget devoted to implementation of the water plan.
The water plan includes discussion of several financing methods which are available.
These include:
Utility Fee
Growth and Tax Base
Bond Issue
Capital Levy
Special Assessments
The financing of the water plan will very likely involve a combination of the various
funding options. These options would be considered by the City Council as part of the
annual budget approval process. The additional funding necessary to implement the
plan as proposed would not require a substantial annual increase in existing
expenditures.
Mark Lobermeier, the consultant for the plan, Shane Missaghi, the City's Water Resources
Engineer and I will be in attendance at the Planning Commission meeting to discuss the water plan
and additional questions which the Planning Commission may have in their consideration of making
a recommendation to the City Council on the plan.
Attached is a resolution recommended for adoption by the Planning Commission. It is the same
resolution that was with the September 18' staff report except an Item 3 has been added. New
Item 3 is the recommendation that is included in Item Number 3 of this memo. The resolution now
addresses all items of the EQC.
Fred G. Moore, P.E.
Director of Public Works
attachment : September 18, 1998 Staff Report
N:\pw\Engimering\DEV LMN"\98\98114\Memos\CompPlan_PlnngRpe.doe
Agenda Number
DATE: Sept. 18, 1998 for Planning Commission Meeting on Sept. 22, 1998
APPLICANT: City of Plymouth
b,A,e
REQUEST: Comprehensive Plan Amendment to add Water Resources Management
Plan
FILE NO.: 98114
1. PROPOSED MOTION:
Move to recommend approval of the Water Resources Management Plan.
2. DESCRIPTION OF REQUEST:
State law requires that the City prepare and adopt a surface water management plan as part of its
comprehensive plan. The plan that has been developed over the past three years would provide
the City with a comprehensive, pro -active approach for protecting water quality throughout
Plymouth.
Notice of this Public Hearing was published in the Official City Newspaper.
3. BACKGROUND:
In August of 1995, the City of Plymouth began developing the Water Resources Management
Plan. The main goals of the plan were to review the 1980 Storm Drainage Plan, to develop water
quality management provisions, and to meet the minimum standards of all agencies and
Watershed Management Organizations of the City with one city-wide uniform plan providing a
seamless coverage. Early on, the Plymouth Environmental Quality Committee (EQC) developed
and the City Council adopted the following Mission Statement as their guide in developing the
plan:
The Plymouth City Council envisions the community in which the quality of life is
enhanced by a natural and healthy environment and by infrastructure, designed and
maintained to protect property investment. Toward that end, the Plymouth Water
Resources Management Plan provides a single comprehensive strategy which addresses
the City's existing and future water resource needs in a proactive manner. The plan
Page 1 of 3
development promotes citizen and industry participation and education and provides clear
direction for properly managing quantity and quality of storm water runoff and surface
and groundwater resources. "
The plan has been regularly reviewed by the EQC members as well as presented at four public
information meetings to various neighborhood groups and lake associations. In February of this
year, the goals and policies of the plan was presented to the City Council. The Council reviewed
and approved the completion of the plan based on those goals and policies.
The main strategy of the plan has been to evaluate and rank the lakes and wetlands into high,
medium, and low priority. Eight lakes were evaluated and ranked based on various criteria in
three main categories of contributing watersheds, in -lake characteristics, and public use. The 38
sub -watersheds were rated based on the lakes' ranking, potential of land use changes, and the
extent of existing and potential storm water treatment in their existing ponds and wetlands.
These rankings were conducted as a general guide for future management decisions.
Ten city-wide goals such as finance, education, and erosion control and their corresponding
policies have been established which apply uniformly across the city. These goals are discussed
in depth in the Goals & Policies Chapter of the plan. In addition nine goals have been
established for each of the eight major lakes and Elm Creek, including an overall ranking and
intended use analysis which are discussed in the Watershed Assessment Chapter of the plan.
These goals are more site specific and respond closely to the needs and condition of each
watershed.
A unique feature of this plan has been the development of individual lake atlases for each of the
eight identified major lakes. Each atlas includes current and historical lake data, lake Trophic
State Index, water quality information, fish population, and an area map for quick references.
These lake atlases are located in the plan under each lake's corresponding watershed, such as
Parkers Lake in Basset Creek Watershed Chapter.
Environmental Quality Committee Comments
Attached to this report are comments on the draft plan that have been made by the Environmental
Quality Committee (EQC.) Many of these comments are technical corrections (such as
correction of spelling errors) and clarifications that are not considered substantive changes.
These changes will be made when the final draft of the plan is printed following Planning
Commission and City Council review.
The EQC has also recommended five substantive changes to the plan. Below staff has provided
listed each of these recommendations, along with a staff comment. New language is highlighted
in bold type.
Policy 1.1 (page 57)
The EQC is recommending an addition to Policy 1.1. The revised policy would state:
Constructed detention ponds should be relied upon to limit runoff to pre -development rates and
to control downstream flooding where feasible; natural basins and green corridors may also be
utilized." Staff concurs with this addition to the policy.
Page 2 of 3
Policy 1.1.15 (page 57)
The EQC is recommending a new policy for northwest Plymouth which states: "In NW
Plymouth, the Elm Creek stream flows will be limited to pre -development instream rates."
Staff understands that this means that the overall rate of flow within the stream will be
coordinated across the entire watershed. (The suggested numbering of the policy statement will
be verified in the final draft to make sure it is properly placed within the document.)
Policy 2.11 (page 65)
The EQC is recommending a new policy water quality policy which states: "The City shall
develop and adopt a City-wide ban on phosphorous base fertilizers."
The City has an existing ordinance that prevents commercial applicators from using phosphorous
base fertilizers. It will be very difficult for Plymouth to implement and police individual resident
applications until such time as there is a region -wide ban. However, staff does support the
addition of this language as a policy.
Policy 4.6 (page 75)
The EQC is recommending a new wetland policy which states: "The City will identify all
restorable wetlands." Staff concurs with adding this new policy to the plan.
Policy 7.4 (page 92)
The EQC is recommending a new maintenance and inspection policy which states: "The City
will develop a street sweeping plan." Staff concurs with adding this new policy to the plan.
4. RECOMMENDATION:
Staff recommends approval of the Water Resources Management Plan with the addition or
modification of the five policy statements as recommended by the EQC.
ATTACHMENTS:
1. Water Resources Management Plan
2. Memo from the Environmental Quality Committee
3. List of EQC's Review Comments
4. Consultant's response to the comments
5. List of Area Lake Association's Review Comments
6. Consultant's response to the comments
7. Letters from Area Lake Associations
Page 3 of 3
September 10, 1998
To: Members of the Planning Commission
From: David Shea, Environmental Quality Committee Member -Ward 2
On behalf of the Plymouth Environmental Quality Committee, I wish to recommend
your endorsement of the Water Resources Management Plan (Draft No. 5) with
the accompanying comments/corrections. Many years of effort have been invested
in this Plan and our Committee is anxious to see it adopted and implemented.
The Environmental Quality Committee Comments include corrections, clarifications
and five policy recommendations. We feel these policy recommendations are critical
to the Plan's success, establishing a comprehensive and progressive basis for decisions
on water quality and quality of life issues facing Plymouth residents. The five policy
reccomendations are:
1. Page 57, Policy 1.1
natural basins and green corridors may also be utilized.
2. Page 57, Policy 1.1.15
In NW Plymouth, the Elm Creek stream flows will be limited
to pre -development instream rates.
3. Page 65, Policy 2.11
The City shall develop and adopt a City-wide ban on phosphorous
base fertilizers.
4. Page 75, Policy 4.6
The City will identify all restorable wetlands.
5. Page 92, Policy 7.4
The City will develop a street sweeping plan.
The Environmental Quality Committee Comments did not reflect an important clarification
of water quality measurement in lakes we requested, namely that:
Transparency, phosphorous and chlorophyll a levels will be between
the 25th and 75th percentile for Ecoregion lakes.
We strongly urge your adoption of the amended/corrected Plan. A strong partnership
between the City, other governmental units, stakeholder organizations and all citizens
is needed to successfully address the issues, challenges and opportunities it presents.
Thank you for your consideration.
s
9
O
PM14
C
0
o io°
A JS
cn
W O
al
oC9o ,
40.
H 0 aa,
a o aC',
04 o
a U3 a
0 U 3
3 3
z a a o
t o
4O
aS
A
O 0 en
G
m
r"
O
b N
tr,
0
0
c
b
C14
aWi
o
0
0 0od
n
o
A
o z 0
U
t°.
W C40
0
o CA 0
c
o
on s i v Q
cd W3 o
00
a.V 0 o
00 z U U
o cd
U cj bn an m 4)
o v" o ani c a
cd Cd° 3 0
a
W"
muuA.Ua wad d v fxd U?A uAAC d
w
z
w
w I
tn
0
Z
W) O, O
N N
M d d
kn
t` ""
kn
t` ""
tn
O
NO
v1 `
110
O
NO 110
t`
0bq
N
taq
to to kn
0 0
N N
Caa;b°b
0 o 0 0 0 0 nbA
t`
bA
0
t`
bA
t
bAbbALo bA too
oNV
b= b
0
A
0 O 0 O
b
0 V°
04"
awA4C ava. A4 0-40-1 asa a aaaaaaaa,
D t` 00C--
O 1eq
ri ti
toO00
rl rl
00 O
rl OtoN
o
C
d N
z 1-4
U
9j W .D
O
0rn
N 'C 0y0
1-4
s ani c
0 0 o a
0
vOi 4 cd mstos"
ads 3 oo as 3o
0 -c! 0
Cd
O
s.;
72 -0 0 0 N NND
O O O >' o A
ani -C"3
b y 0 0 ,a? o a °' o
o U
0 o
A
c a
C) E El b
n-
0.4
O'sO 0
r N
a
O 1-4 N
O
3 aO's
d1p z o o
C14 en
LO l— O N M 10 O N O O
00 00 00 00 00 01 01
0 N U 0 U U 0 U 0 0 0 U U
9) 91 91 91 9C
qllo
c 9 9 9 99 9
a.wa a. as 0.4aa0.4a0.4a
o N M qv tn 1.0 t— 00 01 O I N M
N N N N N N N N N M M M M
SEN
3535 Vadnals Center Drive, Saint Paul, Minnesota 55110
TO: Shane Missaghi, City of Plymouth
FROM: Mark Lobermeier
DATE: September 16, 1998
RE: Response to EQC Comments
MEMORANDUM
651490-2000 800 325-2055 651-490-2150 FAX
The following are my responses to the written questions provided by the Environmental Quality
Committee (EQC) at the August 11, 1998, meeting. The questions are numbered and bold. The
responses follow each question. These and other responses will be addressed in the next plan revision.
It should be noted that in the case of the policies, many hours of staff review have resulted in the
current language, culminating in a Council presentation on February 11, 1998. Each policy change
should be discussed further.
1. Page 15. Do not miss the opportunity to do the right thing in Plymouth.
The plan represents means and methods to do the right thing in Plymouth. No plan changes required.
2. Page 19. Can we organize Lake Data Summary by name or ranking?
The Lake Ranking Summary table will be re -ordered in order of appearance in the plan. Currently the
table is ordered by Watershed.
3. Page 20. Correct spelling of the word "exceptional' in the Wetland Types and Acreage
table.
Spelling correction noted.
4. Page 21. Please add: This Me was used in determining hydric soils and other analysis which
has helped in developing this plan.
This file was not used in the manner suggested. The analysis sections of the plan provide a more
complete description as to how the wetland designations were used. See Watershed Assessment. No
changes required.
5. Figure 3. Soils. Can we have definitions for the soils data legend.
A better legend for the soils mapping will be provided.
6. Figure 6. Existing Land Use. Please define legends.
A better legend for the existing land use mapping will be provided.
An Affirmative Action,
Equal Opportunity Employer
Shane Missaghi, City of Plymouth
September 16, 1998
Page 2
7. Pages 44 and 45. Expand on items 7,11,14,15 and 24.
This listing was developed during discussions with the EQC, brainstorming on general water
resources issues. The list is a direct replication of the issues identified. For clarification, the following
amendments are suggested.
7. Balance [between development and environmental protection.]
11. Benefits [of water resources management strategies]
14. Enhance and protect [the environment]
15. Distribute information [about water quality and environmental protection issues]
24. Identify and establish natural environmental corridors through integrated resource management
see page 48]
8. Page 54. Please reword paragraph under Documentation Still needed.
The reworded paragraph:
The typical urban drainage system rarely has a complete physical inventory. Our 1980 Storm Drainage
Plan included the existing basic trunk drainage system information and suggested a planned
configuration for the future drainage system. Today, a storm sewer base map provides a detailed
index to construction as -built drawings. However, the Engineering Data tables in Appendix F are
missinLy considerabie amounts of pond data for many of the City's 900 water bodies. Before accurate
budgeting and meaningful decision-making can occur, the basic drainage system information must
be obtained. The GIS is a perfect tool for managing the data.
9. Page 57. Policy 1.1. Add green corridors to this text.
Green corridors do not necessarily fall under the Water Quantity Goal or Policy 1.1. Clarification with
the EQC, as well as with the staff and Council who have both given preliminary approval to the goals
and policies, will be needed to amend the plan as suggested.
10. Page 57. Policy 1.1.15. Add this Policy: In northwest Plymouth, the Elm Creek stream flows
will be limited to pre -development rates.
Clarification with the EQC, as well as with the staff and Council who have both given preliminary
approval to the goals and policies, will be needed to amend the plan as suggested. Also see page 159 —
Table 49 — Elm Creek Action Plan; the goal is to maintain the existing (1997) quality and rate of
runoff in Elm Creek.
11. Page 60. Simply. Remove this sentence: It is so tightly bound to soil particles that it is
unavailable to leaching. Under Regulatory Controls: change word "against" to "for."
The sentence will be deleted. "Against" will be changed to "for."
12. Page 65. Policy 2.11. Add this policy. The City shall develop and adapt a City-wide ban on
phosphorus based fertilizers.
Clarification with the EQC, as well as with the staff and Council who have both given preliminary
approval to the goals and policies, will be needed to amend the plan as suggested.
Shane Missaghi, City of Plymouth
September 16, 1998
Page 4
The changes will be made as noted. The measurement in each task is discussed in Table 21.
Measurement may be nothing more than reporting on the status of the task.
24. Page 81. Sixth bullet should read: Emphasize public health and safety. Use the word
monitor" rather than "manage" in bullet nine and ten. Add another bullet reading
Promote land use designation that preserves wildlife.
Public health and safety and wildlife are not issues related to the monitoring goal of the plan. Bullet 9
will be amended.
25. Page 82. ??
Comment not clear
26. Page 83. Remove last sentence under macrophytes. Remove "sample twice in June and
twice in August" under algae. Remove "sample mid to late May and late August" under
phosphorus. Remove remaining text after the word hydrology.
It is not clear as to why these changes are being made. However, since the discussion is "indicators
of wetland dynamics," the deletions will be made as suggested.
27. Page 86. Change "no" to "yes" under more than 5 years of data for Medicine Lake.
The table will be so amended.
Zo. rage yv. Aell1V C DVlu lI Olil tlllru uutiet. t;uu as a itwi rraurt to cullet iuur.
Bold was added for emphasis, but will be deleted as requested. The "last resort" comment is
inconsistent with the recommendation. No change is recommended.
29. Page 92. Add Policy 7.4: Develop a street sweeping plan.
Clarification with the EQC, as well as with the staff and Council who have both given preliminary
approval to the goals and policies, will be needed to amend the plan as suggested. This change fits
well with Table 28.
30. Page 103. Change word "from" to "form" in first sentence.
The changes will be made as suggested.
31. Page 109. Add No. 4 — Work with Park and Rec. to identify wildlife?
Clarification with the EQC, as well as with the staff and Council who have both given preliminary
approval to the goals and policies, will be needed to amend the plan as suggested.
32. Page 112. Reword Policy 9.6.
Clarification with the EQC, as well as with the staff and Council who have both given preliminary
approval to the goals and policies, will be needed to amend the plan as suggested.
33. Page 113. Remove the words "and monitoring" from No. 6 under Activity Steps. Add No. 8
Work with park and rec. To use alternative landscapes on all City projects.
No. 6. has no recommended change.
AAEQCCOMME.WPD
Shane Missaghi, City of Plymouth
September 16, 1998
Page 3
13. Page 66. Under Resources. Add Master Composters to No. 1. Under Measurement: Add
education and distribution of composting bins to residents to No. 1. Add No. 6 — Adoption
of phosphorus free fertilizers and No. 7 — Coordinate the various Lake Management Action
Plans.
Clarification with the EQC, as well as with the staff and Council who have both given preliminary
approval to the goals and policies, will be needed to amend the plan as suggested.
14. Page 67. Delete this sentence under Soil Erosion's Connection to Water Quality: It is so
tightly bound to soil particles that it is unavailable to leaching.
This sentence will be deleted.
15. Page 67. Change the word "against" to "for" under Regulatory Approach to Erosion
Control.
Against" will be changed to "for."
16. Page 71. Bad language. Spell out BWSR under Current Wetland Plan.
Acronyms are used throughout the plan. An index is provided in the plan. The bad language comment
is too indirect to respond to. BWSR can be spelled out to make the plan more readable,
17. Page 72. Bad language. Correct punctuation in the first sentence under: Wetlands Selected
for Management.
The bad language comment is too indirect to respond to. The period at the end of the first sentence
will be deleted.
18. Page 75. Reword the sentence under "Purpose."
Clarification with the EQC, as well as with the staff and Council who have both given preliminary
approval to the goals and policies, will be needed to amend the plan as suggested. The concern may
be over the word utilize. The word simply recognized how wetlands are currently integrated into the
City's storm water system.
19. Page 75. Policy 4.4. Where do we say the different bounces on different types.
The plan assumes that this will be one of several issues developed in the City's comprehensive
wetland plan.
20. Page 75. Policy 4.6. Add this policy: The City will identify all reasonable wetlands.
Clarification with the EQC, as well as with the staff and Council who have both given preliminary
approval to the goals and policies, will be needed to amend the plan as suggested.
21. Page 76. Policy 4.6. Reword Item F under Activity Steps.
It is unclear as to how the phrase should be reworded. No change recommended.
22. Page 77. List first table in order. Add Lake Associations to second table.
It is not clear what order is preferred in the first comment. Lake Associations will be added to the
second list.
23. Page 80. Add Cable and website to No. 3 under Resources and Management. Add Civic
Organizations to No. 4 under Resources. * How do we measure what we have done?
rA
O
V
rA
O
PO4
V
rA
M
O
p
O O O
o
4-4 O
W
0 7oo Ts o
0
u to
i
a
o'
er'
a #
0nU , IV N c c
r
v
o w c'
iA o U d - d
20 -0ON
O En
cq cd
w 00p c ' o ai moi 4.
co" Uro'-'ao°?0q ox
o
Cd 0 to
U
0 cd 05
3
o
0 0
N o iw
o t. a ° 0 a3 oI
0°10
0 C°i "
n y y Cf '0 .- cd
y G C'•
0
o
0 cd
4.. rA o
i o cdO
t°
in
0.4 0.4 in a U ON s. w3 1-4 U
w
z
O 4t
b
d
a w C p
M
N
00 00 00
a O en Q N
o
N N
ba o
N
00
N
o
a a C7 HN a a a a a a a
y
ID l- 00 0% ON
C C w
O O O
N e'Yd
b
eXd
O
0 3 3
I«f
a
I U cd
c o, I
E a a, i o
to C4 9 -S
a
rn
0 04) 0 Cd
wN
t4 y. C14 r. oar
cd CECISCT0
0. Cd
CT N N as U .O N y O QOT
op_
o N
BoU o
4-4 Cd rn
o " o°
A
C4a
a
Al,mo
p ami ami o a o
W 0 o
o O
00
w ,
x
U s=
ion°
Z 3 ab"--Rbn U)UCd
IZ a
o b
ate," c,,
0
a°
ica
3 oa,o
v,
o
m 00
00 Cd ry)
a oto0
rn
rn
a - o a a ai
Cd 9
m 0 U o O 0• n-S t v aim 3 Q,o icid
to 0 En 0
0r.O
ov,
8 2 a'; O o o°°
cti
o 4
o
U
o 0
yotos, o r
Wo
c
00
o s 4-rP.
ocd
NN
c • ani a
o
WtQ
s .cd G N ,N y G c7N 4? !" I O N cd
4..,
O U
I y o ^o y (U U
0
O O y O
2 A 10
o0
Uw
C
4)0-6
as
7
y N to
OO o
N
js-Scn
p> O 9U72NCUU
0. e o E 3U;ecX En P-4 0
00
N N M
a
R
a a w Ia
r
a a
b0
a
OA
at7c c7
virnCO
H y H H N H hy H
LAQ 0 1Q
o
a
Cd
C ' ate o ai W °' I 10 o
o~ 3 U
n N i.. c' ch to U rn cd OU
xi°
o °°d o
AN ,
Cd
aro
0 ¢o '" c' o`
p
ffUV°
Uto3
c
Cd 0 t
0-4
0
4'' cn
vl v v1 A
4' CN U Cd a)
1-4 ch w N
w o'p A o 0 V c o oma• o°'i > o c '
0
C4
t8
0 a 3 8 o o a o
a,,
oo
u c 3 4 V) " t, s o
to o Ili to 1, 00aiO
ye
W w N a U cd () o O 4 O Q 2 0
cd
d a' °o
a) : a o
o'la
c 4eo'
ate,
cy -. oP W
0°`3-
on o N 4 ' o c
odto
cn CF,4& a O P4 A
H oc°
O O
c°,ov..a
o
v.r 3
o
0 O
2°o
cdi oy3
o
ao
0
r.
a'
U ¢
N
p'
aqU
ol.aa' oF"3? c i4-
40-
4
o
C's 03 OUate;o o' U a -o
ozcn
d o c, ., o
M
0
dI
o ox'-' as , >;••ri. a; °
o
a O' cd a
oU
4-. aj o
0 cd. cj
WOa) ch o
c o .0 cd z d ° H
I-'°
a E" w C,
00
4°
c aniN
3 W O .b c z 3 2 --
a' o -o p, • E o v, a' o a a
cu ° A aoi 4° o °o ti chi a
oyc ocpcn
w 3 o o
G4
c c 3000
0 ; obo U mo w ; .tea^• dd z
moi V] V1 a)
coto
V.:; O t-+ a cd y as
cd
a.o 11:1 U as ozwGQU... oddA33 ooH oa a
a% N N N
M
N
bA bA bA ac7aaaC7 a a a. a
vi O
c 'A
vi O
eN0 rA
vl O
c` W
vi O
co y
fn O
A
m O
e` y
to O
H
vl O
y
v7 O
Mn
fn O
CO Y
AC1¢ CG1¢ cr <
I=<
m< AC1¢ t¢ at¢ 0.1¢ m<
wNCdx
w
Otocc$ N O U
3 aCOA
d a a k o
O t
N
0 Cd
y
CA9
C
N O 0
pq O
a o3 mooo l o
on on t 3 t d on
a
oma,
N U iz w0
O O U to y
bA O O U t1. R
c l
ami
3
o
ao 3c•5-su
alHOD 0
cb>Wzz Uoc cn a ,o o
0 cd
04 wo °
000
Z aoi
N N N N N N N
00
N
bq bq 994 bA Cpe bq C° bA
a a a a a aa a
o t- 00
N
end cd cc
H y U
c
NN
ld e
N
aa¢ aa¢ m¢
Wh--r Resource Management Plan )mments
SEH No. A-PLYMO9504.02
Based on my review of comments forwarded to me in your letter dated August 4, 1998,
the following are my general responses. Specific responses will be documented as part
of the plan revision process which would include a legislative style edit as previously
discussed.
Mark Lobermeier, SHE Inc.
Association of Medicine Lake Area Citizens
If available, the notation of the Bassett Creek Watershed Management Commission?s
1998 goal for phosphorus will be included in the goal statement, both on page 6
and in the Lake Management Plan section under Bassett Creek.
2. Additional clarification as to the in -lake ranking of Medicine Lake can be provided
with more direct reference to Appendix A.
3. In general, the schedule for and the scope of the Water Resource Management Plan
were to result in a comprehensive plan to be carried out over the next 10 years. The
plan was not intended to provide a specific detailed research and study and/or
feasibility level analysis of specific improvements.
Friends of Parkers Lake
1. Discussion of planned improvements to be constructed in 1999 may require
amendment based on the approval process for this plan and prioritization of other
improvements. The dates in Table 104 on page 276 must be considered preliminary
at this stage.
2. No feasibility studies were completed in 1998 as referred to on page 276. The dates
in Table 104 were originally generated over a year ago. The likely completion date
for the feasibility study will be 1999. It is possible that both feasibility and
construction could occur in calendar year 1999 depending on City budget.
3. The power boating policy is a familiar theme throughout all the lake action plans.
The issue is a controversial one but is not a "do nothing" task. It is anticipated that
lake homeowner associations and the public would participate in policy
development.
4. The activity steps support Eurasian water milfoil. The program is intended to
illustrate continued financial support of DNR efforts to control Eurasian water
milfoil on the lake.
5. During the preparation of the plan, no specific problems related to curly leaf pond
weed were identified. However, additional discussion could be added at the
direction of staff.
Page 1 of 5
PLY NTlntdiskl\pw\Engineering\WTRRESRCWPLAMl998\Water Resource Management Plan Comments.doe
6. In -lake dredging is typically not a permitted activity by the Department of
Natural Resources. While dredging would remove sediments and the associated
pollutants, the improvement would do nothing to reduce the amount of pollutants
entering the lake. The intent of the BMP study listed as Activity Step 3 in Table 104
would be to study the issue further and come up with the most feasible
recommendation(s).
7. Page 266 under Completed Studies and Problem Assessment - the last sentence will
be changed to read "Additionally, Eurasian water milfoil continues to be present in
the lake, but has been controlled through past efforts of MNDNR."
8. Page 268, Table 100 - the table has been corrected in the column under the
heading "Current" with reference to the Lake Atlas the total phosphorus
concentration should be 48 ppb rather than 44 ppb, chlorophyl a should be 37 ppb
instead of 16 ppb and the Secchi disc transparency should be 2.1 meters rather
than 3.28 meters. This change was based on a change made to the Lake Atlases
during plan development. The current numbers on the Lake Atlas, which appears
on page 273 are based on 1993 to 1995 data.
9. Page 268 - sections of the paragraph will be modified to indicate "While each of the
options resulted in improvement in water quality, the analysis concluded that the
lake goals cannot be met." This change deletes reference to combinations of
options in the current text. The analysis completed by Barr in 1993 did not
indicate in -lake concentrations of phosphorus for the combinations of BMP
options. Therefore, no judgement can be made related to the effectiveness on
lake water quality by combining any of the options. The results of the options are
not additive. Page 269, last sentence, should read "therefore the 2, 3, 5
combination is recommended for further study" This is a typographical error.
Mooney Lake Association
1. Information included in the July 28, 1998 letter received from the Mooney Lake
Association could be incorporated into page 370 under the subheading of
Completed Studies." 2. The Lake Management Plan recommended an Activity
Step 1, Table 153, page 376 would address the water quality and cost problems in
the July 28, 1998 letter.
2. Septic systems are intended to be addressed by Activity Step 4, Table 153, page
376.
1. 4. The water level study and the need to construct an outlet for the lake are
recommended on the basis of a study completed by the Minnehaha Creek
Watershed District in 1995. To develop a proper solution, up-to-date information
will need to be used.
Bass Lake Improvement Association
1. The solution of further study is in keeping with the original intent and scope of the
Comprehensive Water Resources Management Plan.
Page 2 of 5
PLY NT\ntdisklVw\Engirmm ing\W7RMROWPLAN\1999\Water Resource Management Plan Commrnts.doc
1
2. The efforts of the Bass Lake Improvement Association will be added to the text.
3. Addressing the comment on page 2 regarding purpose and the need to add
repair/reconstruction of old marginal storm sewers is properly addressed via Goal
10 - Establish Funding Sources to Finance Water Resources Activities. Staff
continues to depend on the 1980 Comprehensive Storm Drainage Plan and the
existing storm drainage system with updates periodically to handle the quantity of
storm water. No specific problems regarding old or under capacity storm sewer
systems were defined during the planning process.
4. Table 1 on page 3 "Lake Ranking Summary" could be reordered as suggested.
The original intent in ordering in the table was to write the ranking in the order of
discussion in the plan. While the lakes are ranked in the order of the watersheds as
they appear in the plan, the lakes in the Shingle Creek Watershed appear in the
plan in the following order; Pomerleau, Schmidt, Bass, and last Pike.
5. The lake ranking process included three main categories - watershed, in -lake, and
public use elements. Across these three categories, a total of 12 different factors
were utilized for determining lake rankings. Based on the lake ranking process
described in Appendix A, Bass Lake ranks high in terms of watershed category,
medium in terms of in -lake ranking, medium in terms of public use rank, and
medium in the overall composite rank. In reviewing the public use ranking in
specific, Bass Lake was given credit for carry -in access, full service City Park
facilities, and full body contact as a current use, the composite public use rank is
third behind Medicine Lake and Parker's Lake. The lake ranking was done by
SEH and reviewed by City staff. The DNR did not participate. The ranking builds
on similar lake ranking projects in other communities, including Maple Grove.
6. Page 6, Goal 14 for Bass Lake - the goal statement evolved over several months
and meetings among City staff. The current goal, to reduce total phosphorus and
chlorophyl a levels in Bass Lake to fall within ecoregion range, encompasses the
comment to address retrofit of storm sewers with more efficient detention ponds
and reducing phosphorus loadings at storm water inlet points. No change is
anticipated. However, specific studies recommended in the plan would address
the specific issues as noted in the letter from the Bass Lake Association
7. City staff reports that the 1980 plan continues to serve the City well in terms of
overall conveyance of storm water. The Bass Lake Association comments relative to
the 1980 plan seem to be more water quality oriented. Staff does not feel that the
1980 plan needs to be revised. However, Staff does believe that the water quality
improvements identified in this plan need to be implemented. The 1980 plan
addresses only one element of water resource management, that is water quantity.
The current plan is intended to fill in the gap related to water quality and address
issues such as grit chambers, storm sewer outfalls and so forth. New
development standards suggested by the Bass Lake Association fall under planning
and zoning within the City. Many similar requirements already exist for
developments.
Page 3 of 5
UPLY NMtdiskl*w%ngineaing\WMWSRC\WPLAN\1998\Water Resource Management Plan Comments.doc
8. Bass Lake Ma... It is unclear as to which Bass Lake in Is being referred to in
the comments. Figure 42 depicts the depicts the contributing subwatershed to
Bass Lake and includes a map of the lake itself as well as adjacent wetlands. The
Lake Atlas on page 205 illustrates Bass Lake proper and may or may not show the
lagoon area as indicated in the Bass Lake Association letter. The vegetative
data shown in the Lake Atlas was based on the best available data at the time the
plan was completed. The information in the Lake Atlas is not based on a separate
vegetative survey of the lake. If additional documentation is available, the Lake
Atlases can be updated as suggested.
9. If a DNR Fish Management Plan was competed in 1996, it can be included in
the plan. The analysis and research for the Lake Atlases was completed in late
1995 and early 1996.
10. The status of winter kills on Bass Lake will be noted in the plan. The Lake Atlas
already indicates that winter kill status is occasional, prevented through aeration.
11. The back page of the Lake Atlas explains the thought behind a fishery being an
indicator of water quality. The Lake Atlas may appear to have a contradictory
element with the fish populations of 1991 showing very good levels of Northern
Pike as opposed to the statewide fish abundance versus trophic state index chart on
the second page showing Group 1, which includes Northern Pike, to be low in terms
of relative fish abundance. This discrepancy will be reviewed prior to completing
the plan.
12. No specific data has been previously provided from the Bass Lake Improvement
Association related to trophic state and water quality monitoring. Acknowledgment
of the Association's existing efforts will be made based on information provided.
13. Page 202 will be revised to give credit to the Bass Lake Improvement Association
for stocking of fish, based on information provided by the Association relative to the
stocking programs.
14. 14. The in -lake ranking of Bass Lake is based on five factors; fisheries profile, water
clarity, lake depth, lake area, and total phosphorus concentration. In terms of
fishery profile, Bass Lake ranks third behind Parker's and Medicine Lakes,
from a water clarity prospective, Bass Lake ranks second behind Parker's Lake
and tied with Schmidt and Pomerlau Lake, the lake depth category shows Bass lake
tied for first with Schmidt Lake, Pomerlau Lake, Parker's Lake and Medicine Lake.
The lake area factor shows Bass Lake tied for second behind Medicine and tied
with Gleason Lake and Mooney Lake, and from a total phosphorus concentration
standpoint Bass Lake is tied for second behind Schmidt, Pomerlau, Harpers and
Medicine all tied for first with Bass being tied with Pike Lake.
15. The overall in -lake composite rank shows Bass Lake to be fifth in the ranking
behind, in order, Parker's Lake, Medicine Lake, and Schmidt and Pomerlau
Lakes (tied). Bass Lake's overall in -lake composite rank places it ahead of Pike
Lake and Gleason and Mooney Lake.
Page 4 of 5
PLY N\ntdiskl\pw\Engincering\W7RRESRC\WPLAM199g\Wua Resource Management Plan Commrna.doc
16. The statement . . the bottom of page 202 may be dece ,e in that Schmidt and
Pomerlau Lakes though ranked ahead in terms of in-lake conditions, are ahead by
only 2 percent in the overall scoring. In fairness, this statement could be removed
from the plan. What is more important than the in-lake composite rank is the
overall ranking of Bass Lake as medium. It is the City ranking that is used to
prioritize future City activities. In this case, the actual numbers will not be
used, but the overall City ranking classification (high, medium, low will be used).
17. A statement regarding the applicability of treatment within SC 27 will be added to
page 203.
18. Page 207 regarding City ranking. See response Nos. 5 and 14 above. 17. Activity
Step 1, Complete Study of Internal Lake Loading" and Activity Step 2, "Prepare
Feasibility Study Regarding Storm Water Treatment Options" would address the
point site monitoring study referred to in the Bass Lake Association letter.
There is information regarding aquatic plant management (harvesting being one
method) beginning on page 101 of the plan. A specific harvesting plan could be
developed for Bass Lake. Harvesting is much like lawn care. Harvesting activity
merely controls the degree of vegetation on a temporary basis. Approximately 5
to 15 percent of total cuttings cannot be cleaned up because of wind and wave
action that wash vegetation away. Another approach as opposed to using a weed
harvester is to use a cutter which does not stack the plants on the back of the
mechanical unit like they are with a harvesting unit. 18. Page 207 additional
fishery information beyond the 1991 data utilized in the plan will be utilized to
make plan revisions if available. The statement appears to be accurate based on the
1991 data. Any additional information will be utilized in the plan. It is
recommended that the Association meet specifically regarding new information
related to fisheries or water quality that they may have on record.
19. Table 28 "Maintenance and Inspection Implementation Plan" on page 93 of the
Water Resource Management Plan addresses street sweeping. Activity Step 4
developed a prioritized plan for street sweeping areas directly contributing to
sensitive water bodies would appear to address the Bass Lake Association"s
concerns related to street sweeping.
20. Table 21, Public Participation, Information and Education Implementation Plan
on page 80 addresses the Bass Lake Association?s concern over an education
campaign. 21. Related to Activity Step 2 in Table 72 on page 208, prepare
Feasibility Study......, the Bass Lake Association will be shown as a resource to be
utilized during plan preparation.
Page 5 of 5
PLY N\nWiskl\pw\EiWneerineWTRRESROWPLAM1998\Water Resource Management Plan Comments.doc
Association of
40 on
Medic Lake Areitiz '
s
Q, '"a C C
ftiz e4t1,a-ce u/o-?.
a,t)-
kzu oi, o-
r
lqq
0
0".131/1998 12:56 6129358956 CARTER&SHIELDS PAGE 02
MEMORANDUM
30, 1998
Tok ,Shane Missaghi
Marsha Videen
President, Friends of Parkers Lake
Plymouth Water Resources Management Plan
We are pleased that the Water Resources Management Plan (the Plan) is in the final
s es. Vor those of us awaiting help for Parkers Lake, it has seemed like a very drawn out
process: We are particularly amazed at the lack of original research over the several years
it I as taken. to complete the Plan.
In he same vein, many of the recommendations are for further studies. After all this time,
it i eems like everything is studied ad infinitum, with little recommendation for action. That
sat J, we: are pleased to see that some improvements are to be constructed in 1999. We
wc uld like to know more specifics about what those improvements are. Are they on track
an will °-the funding be in place? To be consistent, in Table 104 on page 276, under #2,
vity.Steps, it should say "construct improvements" since constructed improvements
is ne of the measurements.
Wi need access to the conclusions of the feasibility studies that are to be completed in
19037 Here I refer to the studies shown under #2 and #4.
6 as a kind of a "nothing" statement. I sincerely believe that the DNR. will not
e from their "one -size fits all' mentality regarding lake usage. I hope someone
me wrong! Some states designate a couple weekends a month for no motorboat
Something like that would be a start.
a number 5 is probably not a very actionable statement. Due to the circular shape of
kers .Lake, the milfoil has again invaded virtually the whole circumference of the lake.
y the two bays and the swimming area can really be isolated enough to treat. Due to
limited percentage of littoral area (— 159/9) that can be treated at a time, any
wingful control would be unlikely. Harvesting may make some sense, just to reduce the
07/31/1998 12:56 6129358956 CARTER&SHIELDS
leaf pond weed should probably have been mentioned as a problem on page 275. I
recently read some ar0cles about harvesting the curly-Ieaf, again to reduce the
ass at the time of the die -back and to thereby improve water quality.
At #xis point, as part of the solution to problem number 3, the 96" storm sewer, dredging
Of a already accumulated settlement should be considered. Due to the run-off directly
fro County Road. 6, the city should sock partial funding from the county to correct this
degradation of the lake.
PAGE 03
On age 266, in the first paragraph under Completed Studies and Erob- em Assessment,, the
last I sentence should be modified to more clearly reflect that the mMod was controlled by
the Ponar treatment, but is presently again widespread in the lake.
On Oage 268 in Table 100, wiry is the Secchi goal lower (2.2 meters) than the current
s hi (3.28) meters? Dial these numbers get transposed?
on page 268,1 was surprised that 33% of the watershed drains through wet detention.
study quotes Barr, but I didn't think there was brat much filtration.
I fo and the last complete paragraph on page 268 confusing. In the second sentence it says
W vile each of the options and combinations ofoptions (my italics) resulted in
owment in water quality, the atmolysis concluded that lake goals cannot be met." Then
in t it 1&0 sentence it states "Therefore, a combination of options appears necessary to
ar,eW the Parkers Lake water quality goal." Somehow these statements seem
to me. Why would a combination of options be necessary when above it says2tatruwithacombinationofoptionsthelakegoalscannotbemet?
Ani Aber confvsing statement, bq*uii rg with the last sentence on pago 268: "However, the
2,34 combination has a significant atmual cost in comparison to 2,3,5. Therefore, the
2,3 ,4 combination is recommended for further study." Why would the City do further
star on the more expensive combination?
In jonclusion, we do hope the City will fund the needed improvements for Parken Lake.
ThBoard was encouraged by the plan for some constructed improvements in 1999-
2
28 July 1998
Shane Missaghi
Water Reources Engineer
City of Plymouth
3400 Plymouth Blvd.
Plymouth, MN 55447-1482
Dear Mr. Missaghi;
We in the Mooney Lake Association (50 out of 53 lakeshore owners)
appreciate receiving your tentative plans for Mooney Lake. In general they
are in keeping with our desires; however some of the assessments of
conditions on Mooney Lake need updating. In 1960 Mooney Lake was over
6 feet shallower than it is today (about 982 feet above sea level). With
the development of the Mooney Lake Watershed area, run-off has greatly
increased. The DNR established a high water mark in 1976 of 988 feet
above sea level. This has been used in establishing building codes etc..
Since that time the Lake has risen at times exceeding 990 feet above sea
level and shows no signs of stabilizing out. With the increased depth the
character of the Lake has changed. Mature hardwood trees have been
drowned out; aquatic growth has been curtailed by the very abrupt
shoreline resulting in fish kill; and during the past three years the water
clarity has varied from 13 feet to 2 feet. At times the clarity exceeded
that of Lake Minnetonka.
In regard to the five problems and solutions listed for Mooney Lake, we
present the following comments:
Problem 1) - water quality - It appears that the water fed into the Lake
through the storm sewer on the North side of the Lake is loaded with
phosphorus causing extensive weed growth in it's vicinity. Mooney Lake
was definitely swimable in the 1960's and sustained a rather large bass
population.
Problem 2) - cost- The problem for the most part is generated by those in
the Mooney Lake Watershed, and as a result all should partake in any
solution.
Problem 3) - septic systems The septic systems in the south and west
sides of the Lake have been checked from time to time. All property
owners have relatively large land tracks and septic systems have been
well maintained. However, there is concern about the pumping system in
Imperial Hills when electric power is lost. Effluents have been seen
running into the Lake due to overflow.
Problem 4) high water - hopefully updated information will be used in
the study - AND - if the study supports our concerns, action to alleviate
the situation should be taken before loosing several homes.
Problem 5) - power boating - This has been resolved with all three
communities: Plymouth, Orono, and Medina agreeing to limit all use of
motors to Shp or less.
Again we want to thank you for solicitating our thoughts on the
Plymouth Water Resources Management Plan. We look forward to working
with you to resolve the various Mooney Lake problems.
David Mellen, Board Member MLA Terry An eny Chairman ML
1635 Troy Lane 1640 Xanthus Lane No.
Plymouth MN 55447 Plymouth MN 55447
4625 Hemlock Lane N
Plymouth, MN 55442
August 11, 1998
Shane Missaghi
Water Resources Engineer
City of Plymouth
3400 Plymouth Blvd.
Plymouth, MN 55447-1482
Dear Shane:
Thanks very much for your letter of July 10 and the Water Resources Management Plan
draft material. The points regarding Schmidt Lake are similar to earlier draft pages you
provided us that were discussed at the annual meeting of the Schmidt Lake Improvement
Association in March of this year. As the current volunteer President of the Association,
I am submitting this letter to comment on the Plan draft based on discussion at the March
meeting and ongoing dialogue within the Association since we learned of the Plan via
public meetings in summer of 1996.
The comments in this letter focus on five potential action items related to points
mentioned in the Plan draft. The Association encourages the EQC to consider these
action items. Subsequent paragraphs of the letter provide background on the current
situation of Schmidt Lake and discuss the five potential action items. The five items are:
1. "Install a modular Storm water treatment system at discharge points to the lake
Schmidt Lake]...." (p. 189)
2. As one "treatment option" (p.189) provide alum treatment to reduce phosphorous
content in Schmidt Lake.
3. Regarding "treatment ... costs and impacts on homeowners," (p. 189) provide support
for ongoing Association activities such as the current treatment program, lake
monitoring, and distributing water quality information.
4. Continue and expand support for phosphorous -free fertilizer. (p. 189)
5. Fish stocking. (p. 185)
Background on Schmidt Lake and the Association
The Schmidt Lake Improvement Association's purpose is to take long-term and short-
term action to preserve and enhance the quality of Schmidt Lake as a resource for
recreation, wild life, and esthetic enjoyment, and to maintain neighborhood property
values.
Regular Association activities include monitoring lake water clarity and temperature.
Samples are taken to test for levels of chemicals such as phosphorous. Association
volunteers annually distribute information to all Schmidt Lake watershed residents on
water quality issues such as lawn care and runoff. The Association also undertakes some
all watershed residents on water quality issues and the City's efforts to reduce or
eliminate use of fertilizer with phosphorous.
The draft Plan states "Numerous (eight) inlets feed Storm water directly into Schmidt
Lake without the benefit of pretreatment. Few areas exist ... where NURP ponds could
be developed without costly property acquisition." (p. 189) Only one settling pond was
established in the course of developing the area around Schmidt Lake. The Plan draft
states existing settling pond area is 0.37 acres (p. 183) with a deficiency in settling pond
area of 2.3 acres. (p. 186)
1. Storm Water Treatment System
Based on conversations with you, it is our understanding that a "great room" can be
added to an existing storm sewer in many situations where a settling pond is impractical
due to development having occurred without appropriate pond space. Based on our talks
with you, we understand the approximate cost per great room is $15,000, including the
cost to acquire a small right of way to install the great room. At this cost per module,
total cost to retrofit Schmidt Lake would be roughly $100,000.
The deficiency of settling ponds occurred in the course of the development of Plymouth
over the last three decades. The current work of the EQC offers an excellent opportunity
to focus appropriate City resources to remedy the situation. Either great rooms or some
other modular treatment solution would appear to be much more feasible than attempting
to acquire real estate for settling ponds.
2. Alum Treatments
Estimated cost of a lake -wide alum treatment for Schmidt Lake is $15,000. Per our
contacts with various water resource and treatment professionals, alum treatments
remove phosphorous to a degree that could improve Schmidt Lake quality in the near
term and possibly reduce the need for other treatment for a three to ten year period after a
given alum treatment. Improvements such as a modular storm water treatment system
and ongoing reduction or elimination of undesired nutrients in fertilizer could then work
to decrease major sources of undesired nutrients in lake water. In turn, these measures
could reduce the future need for lake treatment or result in improved quality without
increased treatment.
Of course, alum is not the only treatment alternative. The Association has also obtained
estimates on mowing aquatic weeds. This option was dismissed as both costly and a very
short-term measure. However, treatment or improvement options which act to eliminate
underlying problems such as phosphorous levels rather than merely dealing with
symptoms or effects on a short-term basis would be of interest to consider.
5. Fish Stocking
The summer of 1997 saw a conspicuous absence of bass and sunfish in Schmidt Lake and
a glut of bullhead minnows. DNR contacts informed us that 1996-97 was the worst
winterkill in 20 years. This spring, the Association restocked the lake with over 200
sunfish and 200 bass of varying sizes at a total cost of $600. The bullheads have
practically disappeared this year, which is probably related to restocking the bass
population.
Other species such as northern pike seemed relatively unaffected by the winter of 1996-
97. However, City activity to investigate and implement appropriate further stocking of
desirable species would be welcome.
In summary, while we are confident that the Association has and will continue to have a
positive effect on the lake, we believe that City involvement in issues beyond the scope
of the Association can make a crucial difference in maintaining Schmidt Lake as a
valuable resource for Plymouth going forward. Thanks for your help over the last two
years in providing maps and documents, coordinating water sample testing, and taking
time to talk with us both on the phone and in person. We look forward to working further
with you and the EQC to help realize the goals of the Water Resources Management
Plan.
Sincerely,
Stu Froelich
President, Schmidt Lake Improvement Association
1193154" Avenue No.
Plymouth, MN 55442
July 29, 1998
Shane Massaghi, Water Resources Engineer
City of Plymouth
3400 Plymouth Boulevard
Plymouth, MN 55447
SUBJECT: PLYMOUTH WATER RESOURCES MANAGEMENT PLAN
Dear Shane Massaghi
The officers of the Bass Lake Improvement Association (BLIA) were pleased that you solicited our
comments on the City Plan. As secretary, I duplicated everything that you sent to me and sent out copies to
each of our officers and to the H2O Quality Committee, as well. The report that accompanies this letter is a
composite of the comments made by each of the concerned Bass Lake homeowners.
Collectively, we felt that the Plan does a good technical job of characterizing Bass Lake, its role in the
watershed and the outline (organization) of the plan is very well done. We agree with most of the priorities
set forth in the action plan, but the solutions noted are only to study the problems -no real (reduction to
practice) actions are noted. Our lake is unique in its problems and solutions because the DNR has no
access and maintains controls over problems and solutions but offers little or nothing in monetary help. As
homeowners, we wish to be able to consult the state, the county and the city but we like the grass-roots
level ability to control. Sometimes this causes us monetary problems such as having to re -stock the Bass
fish population in 1996 due to excessive outside winter ice fishing with no policing from the DNR We
also maintain a winter aeration system to avoid winter fish kill. We realize this is the price we must pay
and we applaud the City of Plymouth in trying to help us maintain the quality of Bass Lake.
We feel that the report we have prepared is complete however, we would like to present questions and
statements at the August 11, 1998 meeting as well. We are looking forward to meeting with the EQC.
Together, we can save our precious water resources.
Thank you for sending us this draft.
Truly yours,
Sally J. Strand, Secy. Bass Lake Improvement
Association
Ib
3 ns
PLYMOUTH WATER RESOURCES MANAGEMENT PLAN: Comments from Bass Lake
Representatives
Executive Summary" pages 114
Page 2 — under "Purpose" add: repair/reconstruction of old, marginal storm sewer
systems to protect and improve surface water resources. May be added as follows:
Storm water treatment requirements for new/old development and reserve
funding to repair/reconstruct old, marginal storm sewer systems to protect and
improve surface water resources.
Page 3 — perhaps the lakes on the Lake Ranking Summary should be in alphabetical order
or in order from low to medium to high ranking. There seems to be little reason for its
current order of appearance.
We question the ranking of Bass Lake. Why were we ranked at Medium? Is the
large boat access the only thing that keeps us from the High rank? We DO have park
access, small boat and motor access, and canoe/small sailboat access. How heavily does
this count in the ranking?. Was this "Lake Ranking Summary" done by the City of
Plymouth or the DNR? What weights did each criteria carry? Can we see a ranking?
Page 6 — Bass Lake add the following: Retrofit storm sewers with MORE EFFICIENT
detention ponds where feasible. Reduce phosphorus loadings at storm water inlet points.
I have been informed by a city engineer that a culvert (on a holding pond owned
by DeCoursin and abutting the Darth property on the western edge of Bass Lake) was
placed facing a direction that causes pond shore erosion, the death of valuable old oak
trees, and the inability of aquascaping plants to take hold. What can be done to remedy
or reconstruct this holding pond area? A huge hill to the west of the pond empties into
the pond. During heavy rain storms the pond overflows and has actually overflowed into
the abutting road and directly into Bass Lake.
Page 7 — Regarding the statement: Developing parts of the City will still be addressed by
existing rate control and storm water treatment requirements that are in place today, and
by the 1980 storm drainage plan." The following comments are relevant to Page
13 ... "Future Needs of the City" "Developing Plymouth" "Developed Plymouth"
The 1980 plan is almost 20 years old. Perhaps it should be redone considering
we are moving into the 21" century and there are new methods based on new research
and knowledge concerning lakes, wetlands and prairie potholes. Is it time to redo the
1980 Plan? How can we facilitate this?
Our concern is that the Bass Lake watershed is approximately 50%
undeveloped at this point. By using a 1980 plan for storm water sewers we are asking for
the death of our lake. Let's use new methods as they present themselves, such as grit
chambers on lakes such as Pomerleu. We must also answer the question presented on
Page 11 — "Should development be controlled to preserve significant nature features?"
Perhaps new development could be legislated to use prairie or aquascaping in 20 to 50%
of the yard acreage just as developers demand cedar shingle roofs, no vehicles in
driveways etc.
Page 8 — Change word in paragraph "these watershed" to `watersheds"
Page 14 - Bass Lake Improvement Association wholly concurs with the strategy that the
City must first focus on pollution prevention followed by water quality treatment. As a
group we have used treatment since 1970 and the water quality only becomes worse due
to increased development, focus, by an uneducated public, on perfect lawns acquired
through the use of chemicals advertised through expensive marketing moguls. WE
MUST EDUCATE OUR NEWEST CITIZENS. THE CITY MUST USE SOME OF ITS
FUNDS FOR CITIZEN EDUCATION. We must use the State of Minnesota Dept. of
Agriculture to rework old rulings with the blessing of our legislature. WATER IS OUR
MOST PRECIOUS RESOURCE. It is taken for granted by our populace.
BASS LAKE MAP (This reproduction of an old map by the DNR/Montgomery Watson
Metropolitan Council Report is unacceptable. The Montgomery Watson Report merely
used old DNR maps/and information for its report. It does not recognize the largest and
deepest lagoon and channel on the lake. This lagoon and channel has existed since 1969.
Chip Welling says that the DNR now recognizes the lagoon as a body of water and not
just a wetland or lower elevation storm water drainage area. This large acreage lagoon
needs to be recognized. On this map it looks like a road or extended property. No water
appears to be present. If this is a CITY OF PLYMOUTH REPORT, do not just cofy old
DNR maps. Create your own with current accuracy. Our taxes indicate that we are on
water or at least wetland area.
3/6
13A5 -s
Abundant Aquatic Plants (add the following)
Wild Celery
Northern Milfoil
Coontail
Exotic Aquatic Plants
Eurasian Milfoil
DNR Fish Management Plan (Should have been done again in 1996. This is very old
information. There were five hundred 3 1/2 Bass fingerlings, paid for and added by,
Bass Lake Improvement Association in 1997. We stocked heavily at least one other
time in the last 15 years.
Winter Kill Status
Twice. (Now prevented through aeration by Bass Lake Improvement Association
volunteers and funding. Please give us the credit due to us for our support of Bass
Lake since 1970.)
Why is Bass Lake's Fishery an Indicator of Water Quality?
The statement: "The low percentage of Northern Pike (Group 1) and high proportion
of Group 3 (black Bullhead and Black Crappie) species reflect both the lake's
marginal spawning habitat and moderate water quality."
This statement is a contradiction to the "Fish Population —1991" chart on the
other side of the page, that says that Northern Pike are `very good". Indeed, in 1996,
the word, concerning the huge numbers of pike and bass, spread to NON -LAKE
residents during the winter and we had huge numbers of non-residents accessing the
lake via City owned Timber Shores Park. The fishermen set up fish houses and
fished all night. Many were observed coming in at 4:00 am and staying though -out
the day. There were never any DNR checks and controls. We believe that the lake
might have been fished out so we restocked Bass fingerlings in 1997. Bass Lake
Improvement Association would like to hire someone to do a new fish survey but the
DNR has implied that no one can do a survey except the state.
Trophic State and Water Quality
Bass Lake Improvement Association has trained volunteers taking weekly
readings. Please consult us and give us credit in any City reports.
Page 202 — Bass Lake Improvement Association (BLIA)would like the City of
Plymouth to note its increased efforts to submit monitoring data. We have many
records as trained volunteers and Montgomery Watson did not access our records.
They used only old DNR data. Also, BLIA is considering Alum treatment in the
near future. We have harvested and treated this lake chemically at our expense since
1970. We agree with the "Treatment Potential" statements wholeheartedly.
1+1(0
i3 ^ sS
Page 202 — "Lake Atlas" We no longer have the large populations of Bullhead etc.
We have stocked Pike and Bass. Give credit to Bass Lake Improvement Association
for the stocking. Bass Lake needs to be surveyed by the state or professional
surveyors. The DNR told us that what we catch is indicative of what is in the lake. If
that is the case, pike, bass, crappie, sunfish are in high quantities.
Page 202 — Please explain why the in -lake ranking, though high in comparison to all
Plymouth lakes, is considered poorer than four of the City's eight major lakes. Is it
based only on the fact that we have no DNR access? Be careful which analysis you
are using and beware the criteria. The data used is several years old. The
Montgomery Watson report used old DNR data. Now the City of Plymouth is using
old data. Some of this information is 20 years old according to the records kept by
Bass Lake Improvement Association. WHERE IS FIGURE 44 LAKE ATLAS?
Page 203 "Prioritization of Improvements"- BLIA is in agreement that SC22 needs
storm water treatment, perhaps a catch basin after the water runs down from the hill
areas and before it enters the cattail wetland labeled as high priority. We should not
ruin this wetland with direct runoff. SC35 and SC36 need catch basins at some point
to clear the water before it reaches Bass Lake. It looks like SC27 would be a good
candidate for a grit chamber at the lake's edge.
Page 207 — We question the City Ranking... Is DNR large boat access part of the
equation? What about over-all aesthetics? How are the individual categories (page 3)
ranked and weighted? Who ranked and weighted the categories? Can these Rankings
be discussed? We have a large acreage City of Plymouth Park that Bass Lake
Association was instrumental in developing. Why isn't this park/lake considered as
important as Medicine and Parkers Lake. Is it because the State and County are not
involved? Who created the Rankings?
Page 207 BLIA would like to help get in -lake component nutrient loading
information. BLIA would like to study HARVESTING to reduce internal nutrient
loading. We also want to have a point site monitoring study done.
Page 207 — Fishery is NOT out of balance. BLIA has been stocking Bass and
Northern Pike for several years. DNR data is old. A new study should have been
done in 1996 but was not done due to financial/manpower constraints in the DNR
according to one DNR officer. BLIA would like to have our activities on record as
much as the DNR, Hennepin Parks, and City of Plymouth activities are on record.
Page 207 - Add: Implement a City -Wide plan to sweep the streets before the spring
rains wash the winter sand, automobile chemicals and trash into the area wetlands and
lakes... specifically Bass Lake. Perhaps the lake areas could be swept in February or
early March rather than waiting for the very last snowstorm in March or April.
5/6
t3 ss
Page 207 — Add: Implement an EDUCATION CAMPAIGN in the watershed area to
educate Shingle Creek Watershed homeowners.
Page 208 - Point 2 Prepare feasibility study regarding storm water treatment options:
Under Resources: ADD: Lake Association. We would like to be involved in the
planning of grit chambers, changes to pond areas and the addition of lengths of pipe
which might eliminate natural means of nutrient cleansing of storm water.
Page 208 BLIA totally agrees that a new fish survey needs to be done to add to the
existing OLD data. We would invite the City to help us find someone to do the
survey. BLIA already has incorporated a fishery plan and has regularly stocked Bass
Lake with Northern Pike and Bass fingerlings. The latest Bass fingerling stock was
added in 1996. Our long time volunteer, Walter Richards has kept complete records.
b/6 13
Agenda Number: S,
TO: Dwight Johnson, City Manager
FROM: Laurie Ahrens, Assistant City Manager,
SUBJECT: Schedule Next Council Study Session
DATE: July 7, 1999, for Council Study Session of July 20, 1999
1. ACTION REQUESTED: Establish the date and select topics for the next City Council
Study Session. A possible date for the next study session is Tuesday, August 10, and the
pending list of study session topics is attached.
Pending Study Session Topics
Police Operations Overview (Tim Bildsoe)
I-494 Corridor Commission (Joy Tierney)
Drainage Ditches (Ginny Black)
Water Treatment Facility Tour (Tim Bildsoe)
Capital Improvement Program public process (Ginny Black)
City -Owned Open Space Management Practices (staff)
City Council Salaries (Judy Johnson)
Building Inspection Process and Fees (Judy Johnson)
Photo Speed Radar System (Scott Harstad)
Consider Allowing Non -Residents to Serve on Commissions (Council)
Quarterly check-in with City Manager (Tim Bildsoe) -- Last item on each
study session agenda beginning in Sept.
Pending Regular Meeting Topics
Pro -Plymouth Pledge
Pending Comp. Plan Topics
Zachary Playground Funding - PRAC policy (Joy Tierney)
Preliminary Design and
Environmental Assessment for
Reconstruction of C .S.A. H. 10 1
Hennepin County & City of Plymouth
Holy Now Lake
1.4•
MooneLakey
Lydiard
A
July 1999, Newsletter #1
Ila"
um- W Being
i i
I '
Get Involved, Stay Involved
We encourage your participation and questions! This
project is open to public involvement We invite you to attend and offer
your input at the public information meeting scheduled for Thursday,
July 29th at 5:00 p.m. at the Wayzata High School Cafeteria
in Plymouth. At this meeting, diagrams will be available showing the
proposed design along the existing corridor. Community participation is
the foundation of a successful project.This is your opportunity to get involved
and participate in a transportation project in your area.
What's Inside:
a
Why improve
C.S.A.H.101?
y Proposed Improvements
Plymouth Pomerleau
Lake project Schedule
Public Information
Meeting
rrfC For More Information
Ila"
um- W Being
i i
I '
Get Involved, Stay Involved
We encourage your participation and questions! This
project is open to public involvement We invite you to attend and offer
your input at the public information meeting scheduled for Thursday,
July 29th at 5:00 p.m. at the Wayzata High School Cafeteria
in Plymouth. At this meeting, diagrams will be available showing the
proposed design along the existing corridor. Community participation is
the foundation of a successful project.This is your opportunity to get involved
and participate in a transportation project in your area.
Public Information Meeting
A public information meeting has been scheduled to allow interested citizens an opportunity to review the latest
project information.The meeting will be 5:00 to 6:30 p.m. on July 29, 1999 at the Wayzata High School Cafeteria
in Plymouth, located just north of the railroad tracks off of Peony Lane (See map on front). Park near the athletics/
activities entrance. Hennepin County is subject to the Title Il of the Americans with Disabilities Act, which prohibits discrimi-
nation on the basis of disability by public entities.The county is committed to full implementation of the Act to their services,
programs and activities. Auxiliary aids for disabled persons are available. Please contact CraigTwinem at Hennepin County
at (612) 745-7653.
For More Information
Contact one of the following individuals:
Hennepin County SEH City of Plymouth
Mr. CraigTwinem Ms. Sue Mason Mr. Dan Faulkner
Senior Project Manager — Design
Transportation Department
1600 Prairie Drive
Medina, Mn 55340
612) 745-7653
Project Manager
3535 Vadnais Center Drive
St. Paul, MN 55110
651) 490-2018
smason@sehinc.com
craig.twinem@co.hennepin.mn.us
Hennepin County Transportation Department
1600 Prairie Drive
Medina, MN 55340-5421
City Engineer
3400 Plymouth Boulevard
Plymouth, MN 55447
612) 509-5520
dfaulkne@ci.plymouth.mn.us _
Newsletter designed by lasv
This newsletter is posted
on the World Wide Web
of www.sehinc. com.