HomeMy WebLinkAbout3.C. Storm Water Maintenance Policy and Presentation
3.C.
CITY OF SHAKOPEE
Memorandum
TO: Mayor & City Council
Mark McNeill, City Administrator
FROM: Bruce Loney, Public Works Director
SUBJECT: Stormwater Maintenance Policy and Presentation
DATE: April 27, 2010
INTRODUCTION:
Attached is a draft Stormwater Maintenance Policy for Council review and input. Also included
is an outline of stormwater items that are intended to update and inform the Council.
BACKGROUND:
The City has recently approved a new Chapter 16, Water Resources Management Ordinance and
has an approved Comprehensive Stormwater Management Plan.
Staff has now prepared a Stormwater Maintenance Policy designed to meet the requirements of
our plan and the City's National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System (NPDES) Phase II
Permit. The policy has three major headings being Purpose, Operations and Procedures. Under
these headings are several operation categories and procedures in maintenance of the stormwater
facilities. The main items of the policy is to establish inspection frequencies of facilities and to
identify needed repairs and maintenance from these inspections.
A presentation of the policy and an update of the stormwater requirements affecting the City will
be done at the meeting.
AL TERNA TIVES:
1. Provide staff input and feedback on the draft Stormwater Maintenance Policy.
2. Provide staff any input on the stormwater presentation of future potential
requirements.
3. Table for additional information.
,. ... J
RECOMMENDATION:
Staff recommends Alternative No.1 and No.2.
~n~
Public Works Director
ENGR/2010-PROlECTS/2010-COUNCILIDRAFT-STORMW ATER-POLICY
~ A, 1
STORM DRAINAGE SYSTEM MAINTENANCE POLICY
FOR THE CITY OF SHAKOPEE
DRAFT - Revised 4/12/10
1. Purpose
The purpose of this policy is to provide the City of Shakopee's procedures for storm drainage
system inspection and maintenance. The City believes it is in the best interest of the residents
for the City to assume the basic responsibility of inspecting and maintaining its public storm
drainage system. Reasonable inspection and maintenance is necessary for the protection of
property, vehicle and pedestrian safety, water quality issues, environmental concerns and to
comply with requirements set forth by the City's Comprehensive Surface Water Resource
Management Plan and its storm water permit with the Minnesota Pollution Control Agency
(MPCA). The City will provide these services in a cost-effective manner, keeping in mind
safety, budget, personnel and environmental concerns. The City will use its own employees,
equipment and/or private contractors to provide this service. Completion dates are dependent
upon weather conditions, personnel and equipment availability. The Public Works Director,
the Public Works Superintendent or their assigns will be responsible for scheduling of
personnel and equipment.
II. Operations
1. Storm Water Basins and Wetlands Inspection. It should be noted this section is intended to
encompass wetlands since they perform in a comparable manner to storm water basins.
Storm water basin inspection and maintenance will begin in earnest when weather
conditionsall()w,usua1ly~id~Mlifch, butsome activities call be undertaken in thewinte~
~~~~~illW~~7~Y~f;\~~tk~~~b~i~~~~~~~~!~~~y~);{~~~~~~)W~~~~~~s'.s~~:
storm water basins may be inspected on a more frequent basi~~_ .~rigrity will ~e: giyell t9
those as they appear on the most recent version of the City's stoilri.;'ariiUiage"hQtspofin,ap
and as determined by the Public Works Director, the Public Works Superintendent or their
assigns. Storm water basin maintenance will be scheduled based on priority rankings as
determined by the Public Works Director, the Public Works Superintendent or their assigns.
See the Procedures section for details concerning inspection activities and inspection
frequencies.
2. Infiltration Basins and Trenches Inspection. Infiltration areas include storm water basins
with an infiltration component, vegetated filterlbuffer strips, raingardens and rock filter
trenches. Infiltration area inspection an~~illt~n_anc~ will begillin~artl~st~hen weather
~~11&~t!~~~~~~.~~~~.i;~~~~4~thil1%:~iltl:f~~t~l~~ill~~~~t~~t~~f~t~~~
P~l:iQ'Q} However, some infiltration areas may be inspected on a more frequent basis.
P~o~i~rwill~~:WY~n.to those as they appear on the most recent version of the City's ~iQmi
&r~gg~~l!1Qt~p'Qt~man: and as determined by the Public Works Director, the Public Works
Superintendent or their assigns. Infiltration area maintenance will be scheduled based on
priority rankings as determined by the Public Works Director, the Public Works
. .
Superintendent or their assigns. See the Procedures section for details concerning
inspection activities and inspection frequencies.
3. Maintained Ditches Inspection. Maintained ditch inspection atld ll1ait:1tenatlce,~llbeg;illip;
mi~~'li~f~~~~;I~~~~Jti~r;::~~~' ;::eu~~:i~~~c~r~:g~~l:c~8:~~_~i~t;~~~~
on a more frequent basis. Prio~it)' will begiveIlto those as they appear on the most recent
version of the City's~t,Qrm?~~mageIil,d~pqt';m:a:p and as determined by the Public Works
Director, the Public Works Superintendent or their assigns. Maintained ditch maintenance
will be scheduled based on priority rankings as determined by the Public Works Director,
the Public Works Superintendent or their assigns. See the Procedures section for details
concerning inspection activities and inspection frequencies.
4. Storm Sewer Inspection. It should be noted this section is intended to cover manholes,
catch basins, outfalls, inlets/outlets, lids, grates, pipe, swales and spillways. Storm sewer
inspection an4_ll1~!l!~g~(;~ yvill. ~~gill~~af!l:~s!_.~~~1l~~~!~~!.(;o1l4i~()g~_a!I()~~ . tlstla!l)'
p~ii()g. An outfall is defined as the point source where a municipal separate storm sewer
system discharges from a pipe, ditch or other discrete conveyance to receiving waters, or to
other municipal separate storm sewer systems. It does not include diffuse runoff or
conveyances which connect segments of the same stream or water systems. The remainder
of the storm sewer components will be inspected on an as needed basis. However, some
areas may be inspected on a more frequent basis. Priority will be given to areas draining
directly into higher priority water bodies such as the downtown business district, old urban
Sh&<:o,~? in~ustri~lzo~es, those as they appear on the most recent version of the City's
$t&rni;;(iiiriii~gehotsppr;map. and as determined by the Public Works Director, the Public
Works Superintendent or their assigns. Storm sewer maintenance will be scheduled based
on priority rankings as determined by the Public Works Director, the Public Works
Superintendent or their assigns. See the Procedures section for details concerning
inspection activities and inspection frequencies.
5. High Priority Inspection (Hotspots)... In orgerto address areas requiring additionalattention,
tg~9tyh~~_~~~~10p~4a ~#jrrlldrainage' hotspot map to supplement its comprehensIve
sioriii;Hiimage;~systeriimap. Please refer to this map, which is available at the Public
Works Department and Engineering Department offices, for high priority inspection
locations and their associated inspection frequencies.
6. Subdivision Storm Drainage System Inspection. Prior to the City inspecting, approving and
accepting a storm drainage system associated with the subdivision of land, the inspection
and maintenance activities are the responsibility of the developer, contractor and/or
property owner. Except in case of emergencies, deficiencies need to be corrected within
twenty-four (24) hours of receiving instructions and notice from the Public Works Director,
the Public Works Superintendent, the Building Official or their assigns. If the developer,
contractor and/or property owner fail to perform this work within the time specified or in
. .
the case of an emergency, the City reserves the right to perform the work and charge the
associated cost to the appropriate party.
7. Storm drainage system inspection and maintenance within County road right-of-way is the
responsibility of the Scott County Highway Department. Storm drainage system inspection
and maintenance within State right-of-way is the responsibility of the Minnesota
Department of Transportation (MNDoT). The City may assist in their inspection and
maintenance under emergency conditions or cooperative maintenance agreements.
8. Storm drainage systems considered to be privately owned will not be inspected or
maintained by the City unless there is the potential of damage to property or if there is a
safety concern.
9. Yard swales will not be maintained, re-graded or re-established by the City unless there is
the potential of damage to property or if there is a safety concern. The City reserves the
right to perform the work and charge the associated cost to the appropriate party.
10. The City may be responsible for the general maintenance of roadside ditches that are in
public rights-of-way. If a ditch is not draining properly due to City operations, the City
may excavate the area to re-establish positive drainage. If a ditch is not draining properly
due to property owner activities, the City reserves the right to excavate the area to re-
establish positive drainage and charge the associated cost to the appropriate party.
11. The City will not replace driveway culverts that are deteriorated, nor will the City replace
those associated with a property owner's driveway maintenance or replacement. The City
may replace driveway culverts if there is the potential of damage to property or if there is a
safety concern. The City reserves the right to replace the culvert and charge the associated
cost to the appropriate party.
12. For the restoration associated with large scale maintenance projects in areas where the City
and adjacent property owners desire to minimize the amount of mowing, the City will
investigate the feasibility of buffer/filter strips, wetland vegetation plantings and native
prairie grass plantings. Meetings should be held with affected property owners to
determine the feasibility of such an activity.
13. Citizen requests for storm drainage system inspection and maintenance will be evaluated by
the Public Works Director and the Public Works Superintendent and they will determine
the priority.
III. Procedure
1. Storm drainage system inspection and maintenance will primarily take place from mid-
March to mid-October. However, as weather conditions allow additional inspection and
maintenance may take place. Inspections such as measuring sediment depth in storm water
basins during the winter months may be easier through the ice than in open water during the
. A
summer months. The City will use its own employees, equipment and/or private
contractors to complete the inspections and maintenance.
2. Priorities/Frequencies. The City has developed a comprehensive storm drainage system
map. This map shows the City's storm water basins, wetlands, infiltration areas, manholes,
catch basins, outf~lls, ~ets/outlets,ov~!flow structures and pipe. Additionally, the City
has developed a ,~lQrm1W'~n{ig~;S:Qt~R9i"m~p which shows areas that may require additional
attention during significant rainfalVrunoff events. These maps, the City's GIS System and
a comprehensive list of inspection activities provide the user tools to adequately perform
and record inspections, schedule and perform maintenance activities and generate valuable
reports. See the inspection activities and inspection frequencies in attachment A.
3. Storm Water/Inf1ltration Basin Cleaning:. By nature, storm water/infiltration basins can
develop wetland type vegetation (e.g. Cattails) or they can collect enough sediment that can
result in the reduction of the sediment removal capacities. Should a storm water/infiltration
basin inspection result in an unusually high number of "unsatisfactory" for these reasons,
the person that performed the inspection shall contact the Public Works Director and the
Public Works Superintendent to discuss the next course of action prior to scheduling any
maintenance activities.
4. Weather Conditions. Inspection and maintenance will be conducted when weather
conditions permit. Factors that may delay these activities may include temperatures below
thirty-two (32) degrees Fahrenheit, wind, rain, snow and frozen storm drainage systems.
5. Work Schedule. Inspection and maintenance is performed in conjunction with and can be
impacted by other maintenance operations. Inspection and maintenance will typically be
conducted during a regular eight (8) hour workday. Extended workdays and shift changes
may be necessary for spring runoff events and emergency conditions to provide maximum
efficiency. For safety reasons, no operator will work more than a twelve (12) hour shift in
any twenty-four (24) hour period.
6. Safety Concerns. Unexpected ponding water can create a dangerous condition for vehicles,
motorcyclists, bicyclists, pedestrians and property. It is not practical to sign all areas for
potentially dangerous conditions. During such events, warning signs indicating a hazard
may be placed in the vicinity and other areas as deemed necessary by the Public Works
Director and the Public Works Superintendent. These signs will remain in place until the
situation has subsided.
7. Training. The City will provide training and information on a regular basis to employees
involved in the inspection and maintenance of the City's storm drainage system. At a
minimum, training and information will cover:
. Inspection/maintenance procedures
. Reasons for inspection/maintenance
. Erosion and sediment control inspection/maintenance practices
. Daily, intermediate and long-term preventative inspection/maintenance
. .
. Major/minor repairs
. Vegetation inspection
. Storm water basins versus wetlands
. Public storm water basins versus private storm water basins.
. Storm water basins with vegetation requiring additional inspection/maintenance
8. Complaints. Complaints concerning the storm drainage system will be taken during normal
working hours and after normal working hours by those designated as emergency contacts.
Problems requiring immediate attention will be handled on a priority basis as determined by
the Public Works Director and the Public Works Superintendent. The City will document
all complaints and upgrade this policy as necessary while giving consideration to the
constraints of available resources.
9. Documentation. The City will document all of its inspection, maintenance, complaint and
emergency responses. The inspection activities and inspection frequencies in attachment A
clearly outlines all inspection activities associated with each component of the storm
drainage system. All findings, determinations and courses of action will be properly
entered into the City's GIS system. The City will also document circumstances that limit
its ability to comply with this policy. The City will also develop a list of storm drainage
system components that appear to be functioning well and prove to be beneficial and those
that do not appear to be doing so. These records will be kept in accordance with the City's
record retention schedule.
10. This policy is a guide for City staff and residents of the community. The City
Administrator, the Public Works Director, the Police Chief and the Fire Chief may deviate
from this policy if they feel it is in the best interest of the City while considering unusual
circumstances and emergency conditions.
I
~ .
Attachment A
Inspection and Maintenance
Activities
. .
,," ''''. ...
,.,
...
.,.
1 Vegetation and ground cover
2 Embankment erosion
3 Animal burrows
4 Unauthorized planting
5 Cracking, bulging or sliding of
embankment
a. Upstream face
b. Downstream face
c. At or beyond toe of slope
i. Downstream
ii. Upstream
d. Emergency spillway
6 Basin, toe and drains clear and
functionin
7 Seepage or leaks on slopes
8 Slope protection or riprap failure
9 Vertical and horizontal alignment of
erner enc overflow
10 Emergency overflow clear of
obstructions and debris
11 Other (specify)
. .
., ^ . ',"
1 Outlet orifice obstructed
, .- .
2 Trash rack
a. Debris removal necessary
b. Corrosion is evident
3 Weir trash rack maintenance
a. Debris removal necessary
b. Corrosion is evident
4 Excessive sediment accumulation
5 Concrete condition or manhole and
outlet
a. Cracks or displacement
b. Minor spalling (< I")
c. Major spalling (re-bar exposed)
d. Joint failures
e. Water tightness
6 Outlet control valve
a. OperationaVexercised
b. Chained/locked
7 Outfall pipe/channels functioning
8 Other (specify)
1 Undesirable vegetative growth
2 Floating debris removal required
3 Visible pollution
4 Shoreline problem
5 Sediment cleanout (depth> 50% of
desi de th
6 Other (specify)
I Vegetation adequate
2 Undesirable vegetative growth
,
3 Undesirable woody vegetation
4 Outlet channels clear of obstructions
5 Standing water or wet spots
6 Trash accumulation
7 Sediment cleanout (depth> 25% of
desi de th
8 Other (specify)
1 Sedimentation noted
2 Sediment cleanout (depth> 50% of
desi de th
1 Riprap failure
2 Slope erosion
3 Storm sewer pipes
4 Endwallslheadwalls
5 Other (specify)
1 Encroachment into basin
2 Complaints from residents
3 Aesthetics
a. Grass growing
b. Graffiti removal needed
c. Other (specify)
4 Visible pollution
5 Condition of maintenance access points
6 Public hazards present
1 Vegetation healthy and growing
2 Basin dominated by wetland vegetation
, .
3 Evidence of invasive species
4 Maintenance of adequate water depths
for desired wetland ve etation
5 Harvesting of emergent plantings
needed
6 Excessive sediment accumulation
7 Other (specify)
Q~p#i~i,~~~~.~~~..(i)#~s;.~ail;~~~d~A~~#tiri~9r:'~~~~~ifui#~di~t~..l\~~~.ti~rij;.;...,:;}'..":.i....'.'... .,......:...."..'...'.'...,'...';....'.,...' ;..:)....'..:.,......:',.,'..'.."..,....
General Notes:
. Storm water basins considered to be privately owned will not be maintained by the City unless there is the potential of
damage to property or if there is a safety concern.
. Prior to any work within a wetland or if there is a question as to whether or not the basin is a wetland, contact your
immediate supervisor as permits may be required.
. Properly enter all findings, determinations and courses of action into the GIS system.
.. .
.~ ", '" '"
.-' .;'
," ,', .. , .
.,
.. .
. . H, ".
., "
,:. ,
..
.. .
1 Tributary drainage area cLear of litter
and ve etative debris
2 Trench surface clean
3 Inflow pipes are clear
4 Emergency overflow is clear
5 Inlet area is clean
~~<<!bnent TrapslF~r~bays (ADn~ally) .. . .... ..
1 Functioning properly
2 Sediment cleanout (depth> 50% of
desi de th
I Basin/trench adequately dewaters
between storms
.. .. , .. ..
V~geta~ion (Monthl~)
1 Mowing performed per plan
2 Minimum mowing depth not exceeded
3 Undesirable vegetation is removed
4 No evidence of erosion
5 Fertilized per plan
.,
...
1 No evidence of sediment in gravel filter
2 Sediment accumulation does not require
cleanin
~ .
1 Sediment cleanout (depth> 25% of
desi de th
2 Winter accumulation of sand removed
durin the S r'
3 Tributary drainage area stabilized and
free of erosion
4 Visible pollution
1 Infiltration area is clean
2 Inlets and outlets are clear
3
5 Undesirable vegetation is removed
6 Visible pollution
1 Good condition
2 Cleanout and area around it is clean
3
4
Visible pollution
2 I
1 Surface of trench is clean
2 Top layer of stone does not need
re lacement
3 Trench does not need rehabilitation
.. .
General Notes:
. For infiltration basins, the items above are meant to supplement the storm water basins and wetlands inspection activities.
. Properly enter all findings, determinations and courses of action into the GIS system.
~ .,
1 Vegetation and ground cover
2 Embankment erosion
3 Animal burrows
4 Unauthorized planting
5 Cracking, bulging or sliding of
embankment
6 Seepage or leaks on slopes
7 Slope protection or riprap failure
8 Other (specify)
1 Overflow structure obstructed
2 Weir trash rack maintenance
a. Debris removal necessary
b. Corrosion is evident
3 Excessive sediment accumulation
4 Concrete condition or manhole and
outlet
a. Cracks or displacement
b. Minor spalling (< I")
c. Major spalling (re-bar exposed)
d. Joint failures
>
e. Water tightness
5 Outfall pipe/channels functioning
6 Other (specifY)
I Riprap failure
2 Slope erosion/scouring
3 Storm sewer pipes
4 Endwalls/headwalls
5 Other (specifY)
1 Encroachment into ditch
2 Excessive sediments accumulation
im edin water flow
3 Complaints from residents
4 Aesthetics
a. Grass growing
b. Graffiti removal needed
c. Other (specifY)
5 Condition of maintenance access points
6 Public hazards present
7 Visible pollution
:> }
Q~~~f~.;~;4~~~~~c(;~~~;j~'ti1',~~~a~~~i~~ii~~:~~'.~~~~'~.i~ffi~~t~'f~X~iiti~g);i,: l':':"'..;!;'~':;i;:,,;,,;'iL;:i;.:.'.". .,............,...,.;i;;,.,,;..,,''c',.i,.
.... .; .,:,'~:O..::.,.....:..:. :." :'..........;.\.:':,...::':,:'.i.::.:;.:.:.:....: :....;.,,:: ,C":,.:".:,; :i,'.",',".: !:.;:::,~, :.!.
General Notes:
. Ditches and associated appurtenances considered to be privately owned will not be maintained by the City unless there is
the potential of damage to property or if there is a safety concern.
. The Prior Lake Outlet Channel (with the exception of the bypass channel) will be inspected and maintained by a separate
entity. Should any issues arise. discuss with your supervisor to determine a course of action.
. Properly enter all fmdings. determinations and courses of action into the GIS system.
,.. .)
1 Vegetation and ground cover
2 Embankment erosion
3 Unauthorized planting
4 Cracking, bulging or sliding of
embankment
a. Upstream face
b. Downstream face
c. At or beyond toe of slope
i. Downstream
ii. Upstream
d. Emergency spillway
5 Slope protection or riprap failure
6 Vertical and horizontal alignment of
erner enc overflow
7 Emergency overflow clear of
obstructions and debris
8 Other (specify)
1 Outlet orifice obstructed
2 Trash rack
a. Debris removal necessary
b. Corrosion is evident
. j
3 Excessive sediment accumulation in
bottom of sum manhole/catch basin
4 Concrete condition or manhole and
outlet
a. Cracks or displacement
b. Minor spalling (< 1 ")
c. Major spalling (re-bar exposed)
d. Joint failures
e. Water tightness
5 Outlet control valve
a. Operationallexercised
b. Chained/locked
6 Outfall pipe/channels functioning
7 Other (specify)
1 Riprap failure
2 Slope erosion
3 Storm sewer pipes
4 Endwallslheadwalls
5 Other (specifY)
1 Encroachments
2 Complaints from residents
3 Aesthetics
a. Grass growing
b. Graffiti removal needed
c. Other (specifY)
4 Visible pollution
5 Condition of maintenance access points
6 Public hazards present
,. .J
.~~~~r~~~~~4~~~~.'m~~~~:'~~~~r~;~~:~!f~;~i~~'*~~~~~!~~~~i~~~"~~~e~~.~),~.~i?N;....i.',..".~~ .i.':::::j'.::i:,,:..'.:t;:...i'::..,i:,,;:~~....,)i".,:.,.;.,.
General Notes:
. Storm sewer considered to be privately owned will not be maintained by the City unless there is the potential for damage .
to property or if there is a safety concern.
. Properly enter all fmdings, detenninations and courses of action into the GIS system.
)0. J '.) ;.
Storm Water Overview
1. Water Resources Management Ordinance Overview
. Changes to our plan were required by the Scott WMO, the LMRWD and the PLSL WD in
order for the City to maintain permitting authority.
. Purpose
~ To protect natural resources and improve water quality by implementing a set of
detailed submittal and review standards as well as construction practices.
~ By appearing in the City Code, it has more "teeth" to adequately enforce the
requirements.
. Applicability
~ Plat applications, conditional use permits, building permits and grading permits.
~ Activities associated with impacts to wetlands.
,. Construction projects impacting large watercourses.
. Requirements
~ Essentially it takes our Water Resources Management Plan and places it into the City
Code.
~ Clearly defines requirements placed on subdivision design as it relates to storm sewer
design, erosion control and wetlands.
~ Increases our buffer standards adjacent to watercourses and wetlands.
~ Addresses illegal disposal and discharges to the City's storm sewer system (leaves,
grass clippings, dirt, gravel, contaminants, etc).
~ Places restrictions on lawn fertilizer usage (phosphorous ban).
~ Requires a detailed erosion control plan and implementation in the field with
penalties for violations clearly defined.
~ All of the above requirements are in line with requirements set forth by the MPCA
and our NPDES Phase II (MS4) permit.
. Impacts on the City
~ Our maintenance practices will need to keep in mind the strict erosion control and
fertilizer application standards.
~ Inspection frequencies have increased.
~ Education has increased as citizens may not be aware of some of these requirements
(once again, this is in line with our MS4 permit requirements).
. Future Updates to the Ordinance
~ The storm water community is constantly evolving and setting more strict
requirements.
~ The Scott WMO will be modifying their plan in the near future and we will need to
comply.
~ The PLSLWD and the LMRWD are currently revising their plans.
~ The City will need to amend its plan shortly afterwards.
.. 4( Jl J
2. NPDES Phase II (MS4) Permit Overview
. Unfunded mandate
. Storm sewer trunk fund used to pay for additional requirements
. Purpose
~ Similar to that of the Water Resources Management Ordinance.
~ Targets developing communities and organizations.
. Requirements
~ Development of a SWPPP to address ways to reduce pollution.
~ Must keep a record of our activities.
~ Legally bound by this document.
. Impacts on the City
~ Required to sweep our streets, thus the development of a Street Sweeping Policy.
~ Required to annually inspect components of our storm drainage system, thus the
development of a Storm Drainage System Maintenance Policy
~ Requires we constantly update our Storm Drainage System Maps, which can be
worked nicely into our GIS progr~.
. Updates on the Revised Permit (2011)
~ Looking at storm water volume reduction requirements.
~ Infiltration system testing.
~ Detailed requirements for monitoring and record keeping of pond inspection data,
thus the development of our Storm Drainage System Maintenance Policy.
~ City (rather than the MPCA) responsible for monitoring of all industrial discharge
permit holders.
3. Non-Degradation Plan Overview
. Unfunded mandate
. 33 Cities required to prepare this plan
. Purpose
~ Model the City's storm water runoff on a City wide basis.
~ Determine if there is an increase or decrease in storm water runoff volume,
phosphorous loadings and sediment loadings to water bodies.
. Findings
~ On a City wide basis, we are actually decreasing the volume and loadings.
~ At a watershed level, we are increasing loadings in Old Urban Shakopee and
industrial properties along CR 101.
~ The watershed level results are of some concern and may need to be addressed with
future requirements.
. Impacts on City
~ No real impacts resulting from this process, but the TMDL process may have some
impacts.
)ow, :J.
4. TMDL Process
. Unfunded mandate
. Purpose
> Address specific loadings on specific water bodies.
> Minnesota River, Lake O'Dowd and Dean Lake.
. Summary of Process to Date
> Primarily looking to reduce sediment and phosphorous loadings.
> Considering 50% reduction of sediment loadings to water bodies (areas such as Old
Urban Shakopee may only be required to achieve 25%).
> Considering a 25-40% reduction of phosphorous loadings.
> Unsure on the approach - City wide versus watershed.
> Either approach will allow for credits for various activities to achieve the prescribed
percentages.
. Potential Impacts on City
> City wide approach would be better for the City as proven by the Non-Degradation
Plan.
> Watershed approach would impact Old Urban Shakopee the most.
.:. Increased street sweeping
.:. Increased storm sewer system inspection
.:. Rain Gardens
.:. Rain Barrels
.:. In-Line Treatment Structures
.:. Redevelopment requirements
.:. Citizen education
It's easy to see all of these ordinances, plans and processes are intertwined. It's also easy to see
the need to clearly define the way we operate as a City by developing specific policies to address
several of the major requirements.
The storm water community is constantly evolving and passing down new requirements that
impact the way we perform our daily maintenance activities, the way we educate our staff and
citizens and the way we develop and re-develop properties in rural areas and in our downtown.
These requirements may even go so far as to impact developed portions of our City that were
around before these rules were in place.
\
.
,
I
,
"~
/:i---..'..~. "-
[I '<:::::->
'< ___c--....
I
i-I --
// ,~ --: -
o~, /, 0J
//"';-"" . ~~'- '/,0;:
'J ,:\ ~ ,---ce_'", ,
I" \ , "". '.~~ \ \ _
",'''T''',''." \\ //. _~ \~ ,
f BRIDGE , \. \ .. '/ '~_ /
~ ., . ',.,> " /,;.
~.. --:.-=:::._-. 'CULVERT ,.--=~... . '-.....___... ~. / _,
/>-< , , ",.
' //' cm.'" , '.. .
~ . ~
- "'I ~
- BRIDGE-2 _ 0__ I
. '"'~",.m n. '. "
/ 7-..... ~. t:~ ;" BI~{IN~I~~~{~ I h
/,.' "'--- , . ~BO.'.
U I ,
.." " r .
'0.,,",,,,, . ., ,. , F\ _"_ /
\ .~; ;-- . . ClL '.ERT. f ;; ''''"'',' i fm.,,,, . .., .
'" , . / (// -1 I~"'"\I V[K \ PEDtS f f~IA.
~ "","G"',", ff ""',>Coo
. ",' ".,"',,"' ,Y / "\__
/ \ .1-
,'/, . "
,/ '<. .:
'c '00" ",.om,,,,,,,,,, "
,.' BRill"", - """'00' ,
. , n(T-? T< '''/,HI.. ~ /. (f l' (
,,/: ~:'~~ICI\'\iKIC ~:(~~Ig\(,:,~,;~ :~,I,~,~:\\;~ " .. . . BRIDGE-IO I\~=
. ., / ,,, ."", .,,,, ,
,,,,,,,cm.'" , ""'""'~ / '
~ llRWCE-S 00'.0'\'\1
. ~ h".''',--\un
I, , ,~ .
.. '-, ,
" ., -
' .
.:. ",;-
n:UESlRlt..'(
BRID\", ,
", "
.::1J..
,
,
I
r "''''.W'''''"
VIREO ANNV
: " ""M "" . ,,,",CO '0')
- ""'" m.,,,",, . , ceo",
r "'"""" "'0 " ",""'CO," """""
J ' 00"","''"' 'A""m'~
fi /. ,"ffi~",^. '"
,,,,;., -
r1 ~ /
/' /,
C..r, c: .
Water Resources Management
1.
NPDES Phase II Permit
2.
Non-Degradation Report
3.
TMDL Process
4.
Updated our storm water plan.
•
Added a new water resources management ordinance.
•
Required by the Scott County WMO to maintain permitting
•
authority.
To protect our natural resources and improve water quality.
•
It reflects changes in requirements since our last revision.
•
By appearing in City Code, it has more “teeth” to enforce the
•
requirements.
Allows the City to maintain permitting authority.
•
Plat applications, CUP’s, building permits and grading permits.
•
Activities associated with wetland impacts.
•
Projects involving impacts to large water courses.
•
Residents (general landscaping).
•
Defines subdivision design standards as it relates to storm
•
sewer design, erosion control and wetlands.
Increases buffer standards adjacent to water courses.
•
Addresses illegal disposal/discharges to our storm system
•
(leaves, grass clippings, dirt, gravel).
Places restrictions on fertilizer usage.
•
Detailed erosion control plan and implementation in the field.
•
All requirements are in compliance with the City’s NPDES
•
Phase II permit.
Development standards have slightly changed.
•
Our maintenance practices need to comply with strict erosion
•
control and fertilizer application standards.
Inspection frequencies have increased.
•
Education program has increased (website, utility bill insert,
•
handouts) to make more people aware.
Storm water community is constantly evolving.
•
More strict requirements are on the way.
•
The Scott County WMO, the LMRWD and the PLSLWD will be
•
updating their plans shortly.
The City will need to amend its plan soon after.
•
Unfunded mandate.
•
Required by the MPCA.
•
Similar to that of the water resources management updates.
•
Reduce sediment and pollution flowing to water bodies.
•
Targets developing communities and organizations operating
•
their own storm sewer system.
Develop a SWPPP to address ways to reduce pollution.
•
Education is a key component.
•
Street sweeping and inspection also important.
•
Must keep a detailed record of our activities.
•
Annual reporting.
•
Legally bound by our SWPPP
•
Sweep our streets a minimum of 2-times per year.
•
Annually inspect various components of our storm system.
•
Distribution of educational materials (website, utility bill
•
insert, handouts).
Update our storm system maps.
•
New permit cycle begins in 2011.
•
Looking at water volume reduction requirements.
•
Infiltration system testing/monitoring.
•
More detailed inspection/record keeping requirements for
•
pond inspection data.
City may be responsible for the monitoring of industrial
•
discharge permit holders.
Potential ban on coal tar sealants.
•
Unfunded mandate.
•
Required by the MPCA.
•
33 cities required to prepare this report.
•
Model our storm water runoff on a City-wide basis.
•
Determine if there is an increase/decrease in storm water
•
runoff volume, phosphorous loadings and sediment loadings as
a result of development.
If an increase is shown, required to prepare a mitigation plan.
•
On a City-wide basis, we are decreasing the volume and
•
loadings.
At a watershed level, we show an increase in the loadings in
•
Old Urban Shakopee and industrial properties along CR 101.
The watershed level results may need to be addressed with
•
future requirements.
DEVELOPED PRIOR TO TREATMENT REQUIREMENTS
None at this time…the TMDL process may change this.
•
Address specific loadings on specific water bodies.
•
Minnesota River, Lake O’Dowd and Dean Lake.
•
Primarily looking to reduce sediment and phosphorous
•
loadings.
Considering a 50% sediment loading reduction (may only
•
require 25% for areas like Old Urban Shakopee).
Considering a 25-40% phosphorous loading reduction.
•
Unsure of how to approach –City-wide vs. watershed level.
•
Either approach will allow for credits for activities to achieve
•
the percentages.
City-wide approach would be best for Shakopee
•
Non-Degradation Report results could be used.
•
Watershed-level approach would impact Old Urban Shakopee
•
the most.
Increased street sweeping.
?
Increased storm sewer inspection.
?
Rain gardens.
?
Rain barrels.
?
In-line treatment structures.
?
More strict redevelopment requirements.
?
Increased education program.
?
Storm water community is constantly evolving.
•
New and more strict requirements are on their way.
•
Each of these plans, reports, permits and processes are inter-
•
twined.
Results in a need to define the way we operate to address these
•
requirements (policies and GIS).
-
a ..... a .....
ggs�
— —
a _
r-
•
t Storm Drainage System
M a*intena , nce
rr
•` Y
Purpose
Outlines Storm Drainage system inspection and maintenance
requirements
Meets MPCA requirements
Provides residents information on maintenance practices.
�.,.
:;._.,..
�88.8.�,.: ,..... .. ..e- ., --
�����e .
Op erat * ions
Storm water basins and wetland inspection.
Infiltration basin and trenches inspection.
Maintained ditches inspection
Storm sewer inspection
High priority inspection (hotspots).
Ar
Append
•Inspection activities and frequencies.
Schedule of maintenance activities from inspection.
Tracking of inspection and maintenance activities in GIS.
Reports can be generated to MPCA to meet MS4 requirements.
! � t
_ r
a '
1.
' • s
ell
�r y
A x
M
Awl
e
e
� e
_- �J '� - rte �:. � r � ar}�`:� -N � - ' �1 �• �
f _
w J
y y,
a
w _
Y
s
r
i
e _ _
-:z -In
OW
F
f
,
-
- d
w.
�.
,r
r�
f
•,,
.t
' a
� � *�x " ,
,, , r,
4 r � � i
1 � �. ' ^ '
w r F , I
," r v I
'i � i. '
I
� v
' ., 3
-. � r .i
' � _!
� -f Y � '
gg
.T 5,
a :
� x
�..
`r � y • - - -
' e - ,� `
i 3 d�
i :. d
�p
i '. T R i y
�' � � � � ,
,.
�� i,
y w
. �
� y .+ �, ,
� S � � r �
.ra
7 � 4
_ ,'j ' p -
'' F .,
�. i
e
i
Y w �
i e e
9 � P° � �
K J � � � N I� �,Y
�...
� � �� ,
�.
._.
r' ''
t r y( +
� ,,.e 4. � .. q � �. i �,� � a Y ,� y � � .� � ` � d y � _ - � + ry � +� r � , � i �.—.. x d
. _ � '; � ,f� ua !! ��la,�' * �i°e �� � M �, III �� � � �, � ' � � a r
.. �+
„ to
,_
;�, �� 6 fi � � � � � � � 7: � i ,� -,„ �
� �� �n { { 7 � � Y 1 �
' I ` ,ro ice-: � r ' i �f � __ r -
. , � ..�
F, � s �, "��, +, 5�� t�
v if M r u
f t •
�SfF,,. ,. � '� ,r S yr 4 • � 3: % {- s j I
f 1 •a
I'
GG
1 ,
�f 01 . e l
y
4
r�[
{I
A .
t �
_ � n
6j / a
Y; s
r
1 1-
_ I '
N
i
6
11�
A
I {
Li
- � I. GBH dkE
p _ I
I 3 Ho p — TM AE IM, VE
F
C, ay
,
�r
- - r at - 'I
1� a
E
LE
Hotspat #2
FtY Id
�" �Y I'7' -1: AVE E
c 1
Y ie '�`
F t}IM4.O
- S
j
H ~r ' E
A �r I
H
cc
p Flu.
Y. .ceromuc+oc J`� r - ".. r— r+ r
Ho put #5
n�nux;l s
a I
I Sd3Y r { Q o w fdJ
NSHIF
Lrh
ran, — 557 - 11
?rnL� v u ®r T"71
�Hvtspot #3
DOTES: rT
1' ot"s #1 Mtatspat #3 Hotsir pot #6
84' FES - PART OF UPPER VALLEY DRAINAGE DITCH, 40' FES - OUTLET CONTROL FOR WE5CHESTFR ? ?I FES - PAIN OF PHEA IT RU." PRAIINAGF sv; TE M, ,
ESTATES 8 SURROL HILLS, BLOpIUIUGE OF FES IS OF MAJOR CONCERN DUE TO THE
9I3' $ KIMMFR FROS143N CONTROIL PROXIMITY OF HOUSES.
Hotspat #2 Hatspat #4 Hatspot #4
36" FES - PART OF UPPER VALLEY DRAINAeE DITCH. ??" FES - PART OF PHEASANT RUN I]RAINAGe SYSTEM. ??' FES • OUTLET CONTROL_ FOR DOMINION HILLS.
RLOCKAj3E OF FE$ IS OF LJI qrl CO NCI PIINI DUE TO BLOCKAGE 011 FES 15 OF MAJOR GONICERN DUE TO THE
THE PROXIMITY OF HOUSES. PROXIMITY OF HOUSES_
...... R
Qst
ue oi