DOCSLIB.ORG

Simonton Lake Diagnostic/Feasibility Study Elkhart County, Indiana

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
Simonton Lake Diagnostic/Feasibility Study Elkhart County, Indiana Simonton Lake Diagnostic/Feasibility Study Elkhart County, Indiana May 2011 Prepared for: Simonton Lake Home Owners Association c/o William Broderick 1424 Johnson St. Elkhart, IN 46514 Prepared by: 708 Roosevelt Road Walkerton, Indiana 46574 (574) 586-3400 EXECUTIVE SUMMARY Simonton Lake is a 301 acre (121.8 hectares) groundwater fed lake located in the northwest portion of Elkhart County Indiana. The Simonton Lake watershed extends north of Simonton Lake into Cass County, Michigan and encompasses approximately 5,233 acres (2,177.7 ha). The lake drains south through Lilly Creek (Osolo Township Ditch) into the St. Joseph River then to Lake Michigan. The soils surrounding the lake are primarily sands from glacial outwash or low muck areas that are wetlands. Soil erosion is not an issue as there are no permanently flowing surface streams entering Simonton Lake. Historically, the watershed was primarily upland deciduous forest pocketed with prairie, sedge meadow, swamp, and seeps. The watershed is now approximately 60 percent agricultural and 40 percent low intensity residential development, with residents in the vicinity of the lake connected to sewers since 1999-2000. A review of residential development around the lake noted 20 structures in 1939 on the south side of the west basin. By 1951, North Shore Drive had been extended to the narrows with over 30 homes along the northern lakeshore and approximately 30 homes on the south side. Development of the channels on the east end of the east basin began in 1957. By this time, as many as 100 structures existed on the south side of the west basin. Prior to 1965, the channel between the two basins was dredged; homes were being built on the east end of the east lake, and a channel adjacent to Forest Avenue was completed. The shoreline was nearly 100% developed except for the southeast corner of the east basin by 1973. A Conservancy District was formed and the majority of residents around the lake hooked to a sewer system by 2000. Simonton Lake has a volume of approximately 2,686 acre-ft (3,313,132 m3) with a maximum depth of 24 feet (7.3 m) and a mean depth of 12.1 ft (3.7 m). Approximately 84% of the lake surface area is less than 10-feet deep with less than 6 acres (2.4 ha) deeper than 20 feet. Approximately 99% of the total volume of the lake is within the photic zone and available for growing plants. The length of the shoreline is 43,170 ft (14,073 m), which results in a development ratio of 3.6:1. The Simonton Lake fishery is dominated by bluegill, largemouth bass, and redear sunfish. The sportsman’s club stocks the lake with walleye annually. IDNR surveys from 1964-2007 indicate the fishery has remained relatively consistent in regards to dominant fish species composition, relative growth rates, and condition factors (length/weight) of those species. Bluegills and largemouth bass have exhibited average to above average growth rates. Simonton Lake has been sampled five times since 1988 for water quality. The concentration of total phosphorus has decreased steadily over the years from a mean of 0.055 mg/L in 1988, to under 0.030 mg/L in 2010; keeping overall densities of algae low. The concentration of total nitrogen has also declined due to declines in ammonia and nitrate. The lake had adequate DO in the well-mixed epilimnion, but it decreased rapidly below 16 feet in the west basin. At the 20 foot (~6 m) depth, the concentration of DO was less than 1 mg/L, which is insufficient to support fish. The 1% light level extended to 21.5 ft (~7 m) meaning 99% of the lake can support aquatic submersed vegetation. Overall, there was a nice mix of phytoplankton and zooplankton in both basins and this resulting balance is important for a healthy lake ecosystem. The water quality of Simonton Lake is much better than most of Indiana’s lakes. Simonton Lake water quality parameters place the lake in the mesotrophic range with an Indiana TSI score of 22. The total nitrogen to total phosphorus ratios of 40N:1P for the west basin and 35N:1P for the east basin show a strong phosphorus limitation, which means more phosphorus will stimulate more algae growth. The water that enters Simonton Lake stays in the lake for 1.2 years on average. JFNew Project# 0812096.00 Page i Simonton Lake Diagnostic/Feasibility Study May 2011 Elkhart County, Indiana The plant community was surveyed in the two basins on May 27 and August 27, 2010. Aquatic plants were found at all 70 sites and muskgrass was the dominant submersed species of 16 different species collected. Four invasive species: Eurasian water milfoil, curly leaf pondweed, brittle naiad, and spiny naiad were all found in sparse populations. The state listed threatened species, white-stem pondweed was documented during the surveys at two locations. The most common of seven emergent species documented were cattail and arrowhead. Two floating leaf species noted were spatterdock and white water lily. Secchi disc transparency depths ranging from 8.5 feet in the spring to 6.2 feet in the summer indicated good water clarity. Concerns of lake residents included overuse of the lake by nonresidents, too many boats accessing the lake, lake level control, aquatic plants in the channels, a decline in the fisheries, pier and funneling issues, water quality, and the need for dredging the channel between the lake basins. Swimming and boating are the primary uses of the lake, followed by fishing and irrigation. The public access site is located between the two lake basins on the south side of the lake. A boat count conducted by lake volunteers documented that pontoon boats were the most popular watercraft on all days. On weekdays, fishing boats are the second most common watercraft followed by speedboats. On the weekend (excluding July 3), fishing boats, speedboats, and personal watercraft have similar densities on Simonton Lake. Excluding July 3, the average number of boats on the lake was 15.6 during any one counting period. Approximately half that many were present in the morning hours with peak use occurring between 5pm and 7pm on the weekday and around 3pm on the weekend. Research suggests lake users should tolerate 6-8 pontoon boats or 3-4 high speed boats operating at the same time safely given the size of Simonton Lake. The lake may be at, or close to its socially acceptable carrying capacity for watercraft during most of the summer. The following management recommendations are suggested: 1) Limit phosphorus inputs by education of residents about fertilizer and animal waste 2) Encourage continued sewer system hookups 3) Establish and enforce an ecozone in the southeast corner of the east basin 4) Protect existing aquatic plants from damage by boat traffic 5) Encourage natural vegetated shorelines as alternatives to seawalls 6) Educate residents on invasive aquatic plants and implement monitoring & control 7) Consider dredging the channel between the basins to reduce sediment resuspension The projects selected as being feasible to implement are the establishment of an ecozone and the dredging of the channel between the two lakes. Establishing an ecozone in Simonton Lake can improve water quality and fish habitat. JFNew recommends the Simonton Lake Area Home Owners Association begin the petition process to the IDNR to create an ecozone. Dredging of the channel between the two basins will reduce sediment resuspension from watercraft. Hydraulic dredging is proposed for a maximum extent of 60,000 square feet based on a channel length of 2000 feet and a channel width of 30 feet. The estimated cost for engineering, permitting, and implementation of this dredging project is $105,000 of which potentially 80% could be paid for through the LARE program and another 10% through local in-kind services. Simonton Lake’s water quality has improved in the last 10 years and is considered to have good water quality when compared to other Midwestern lakes. This trend should continue with attention to management of phosphorus inputs from the vicinity of the lake through continued sewerage of adjacent residents, education of residents on the use of phosphorus free fertilizers, and enforcing idle speed limits in the shallow areas of the lake. Implementing the two feasible projects of an ecozone and the dredging are not critical to preserving the water quality of the lake, but would play an important role in controlling phosphorus resuspension. JFNew Project# 0812096.00 Page ii Simonton Lake Diagnostic/Feasibility Study May 2011 Elkhart County, Indiana ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS The Simonton Lake Diagnostic/Feasibility Study was completed with funding from the Indiana Department of Natural Resources (IDNR) Division of Fish and Wildlife Lake and River Enhancement Program with matching funds provided by the Simonton Lake Area Home Owners Association. JFNew appreciates the assistance received from individual Simonton Lake property owners in organizing meetings, providing a boat and driver for the plant surveys, conducting the boat counts, and attending the project meetings. We especially would like to thank Bob Putnam, Bill Broderick, and Bob Evans for their continued support of this project. William Jones, Clinical Professor of Limnology at Indiana University, was the research scientist who supervised the lake water quality data collection and analysis, completed the water budget, and contributed substantially to the summary and recommendations in the report. Individuals from JFNew that participated in the project included John Richardson, Betsy Ewoldt, Brett Peters, Erick Elgin, Tom Estrem, and Christine Dittmar. Heather Cecrle provided administrative support, review, editing, and assembly of the document. JFNew Project# 0812096.00 Page iii Simonton Lake Diagnostic/Feasibility Study May 2011 Elkhart County, Indiana TABLE OF CONTENTS PAGE 1.0 INTRODUCTION........................................................................................................
Load more

Recommended publications
  • Lake Superior Regulation
    L AKE S UPERIOR R EGULATION LAKE SUPERIOR REGULATION: : A ADDRESSING UNCERTAINTY IN UPPER DDRESSING GREAT LAKES WATER LEVELS U NCERTAINTY IN U PPER G REAT L AKES W ATER L EVELS FINAL REPORT TO THE INTERNATIONAL JOINT COMMISSION MARCH 2012 Report Cover Changing water levels can have significant effects on the lives of the more than 25 million people who live and work in the upper Great Lakes region. The front cover shows an integrated view of the key interests served by these waters. In the centre of the image is a photograph of the control structures at the outlet of Lake Superior on the St. Marys River, the only location in the entire Great Lakes basin upstream from Niagara Falls where water levels can be affected by regulation. Under the Boundary Waters Treaty of 1909, domestic and sanitary water uses, navigation, and power and irrigation are given order of precedence. These uses must be taken into account in the development of regulation plans. Today, it is recognized that other interests have rights under the Treaty, consistent with the International Joint Commission’s balancing principle – providing benefits or relief to interests affected by water levels and flows without causing undue detriment to other interests. With this in mind, the International Upper Great Lakes Study added the interests of ecosystems, coastal zone uses and recreational boating and tourism to its analysis of Lake Superior regulation and uncertainty in future upper Great Lakes water levels. In addition, the Study recognized that First Nations in Canada, Native Americans and Métis represent an important perspective in the upper Great Lakes.
    [Show full text]
  • Béng Salang Drainage Basin Ghn'öm#Iaötii:;^Iiïmbóclia:;S:*' ;;; Sawa
    |||«|iBi-««ss«,,,,.,„ •<îouueirânià"fYon*afrtWi&WP*»**"«**»s «"••••-•-•••-!\i-olhörlanHc:ïnÏT^SAïyiilfÏftft M#**iiiii l ; 1 f s December11990 liiiilis OttWWIayts l''*t**. iMvr'fc^^sW«*i s ' '^*" "*'*'***™*** "yK'!.TiS'syW%sii!^^ii^ïl m •** ••,.. •.. "'. '""" '!IS ' h '' * *W*i*»*hWer8rrt«3(a^OeweJopmênt ' ' J|'* jj^jj^ ^f T^fOJD ê ratiïMT * * • * * * • < ; s is 111 41 II 622 KHPH90 * Mi M SM | i iitl Hi • j* UNI», S ' • !•) f J 'Itlli,. iNiiiiii 'MM! ill ( tuti s t illililiiilllllllll^^^ ••IIIINI 4 !i'» < :*iH:1::iN|M|()||:ï::|:::-:i::::..: :|!:;| lilli • < iBiitiiiiit lllllNilHIilltii: MîMM MMI ! M f ! H t II ÜÏ >**ii;ii|i!i|ï «IliliiNliiiiii •I ••••: Jill!:!*::::. Béng Salang Drainage Basin : ' i * * i hllil ghn'öm#iaötii:;^iiïmbóclia:;s:*' ;;; r, i I • Consultancy Group for Utrecht, The Netherlands sawa Watersupply, Sanitation, Agriculture and Waterrnanagement International Institute for Delft, The Netherlands Hydraulic and Environmental Engineering DELFT LIBRARY ïERMATiONAL RFFERENCE CENT -•? COMMUNITY WATER SUPPLY ••i'M-ilTATIQN (IRC1 December 1990 Municipality of Phnom-Penh NOVIB Sewerage Department Drainage Study of Beng Salang Drainage Basin Phnom-Penh, Cambodia LIBRARY, INTERNATIONAL REFERENCE CENTRE FOR COMMUNITY WATER SUPPLY •v^iD SANITATION (IRC) . ). Box 93190, 2509 AD The Hagu» u;l. 1070) 814911 ext 141(142 International Institute for Consultancy Group for Hydraulic and Environmental Watersupply, Sanitation, Agriculture Engineering and Watermanagement P.O. Box 3015 Schoolplein 7 2601 DA Delft 3581 PX Utrecht The Netherlands
    [Show full text]
  • Strategic Flood Risk Assessment 2013 Appendix B5
    ID³ Location1 Watercourse and Cause2 Dates Source Comments Staffordshire Past-Track 1 Near Uttoxeter River Dove Oct-03 Photos showing waterlogged fields http://www.staffspasttrack.org.uk/ Picknall brook Staffordshire Past-Track 3ft/1m depth 2 Hockley Road 1946 Cause i? http://www.staffspasttrack.org.uk/ Photo included Picknall brook Picknall Brook SFRM 2005-6, 3 Hockley Road 2000 81.34m AOD Cause i? Jun-06 Picknall brook Picknall Brook SFRM 2005-6, 4 Downstream of Hockley Road 2000 81.20m AOD Cause i? Jun-06 Picknall brook Picknall Brook SFRM 2005-6, 5 Bridge Street/Brookside Road 2000 77.67m AOD Cause i? Jun-06 Picknall brook Picknall Brook SFRM 2005-6, 6 Station Road Brookside Road 2000 77.72m AOD Cause i? Jun-06 Picknall Brook Picknall Brook SFRM 2005-6, 7 Hockley Road Oct/Nov 2000 5 properties flooded. Cause i? Jun-06 8 Picknall Brook Flood Warning given (8a-8b) Stafford Road to Racecourse Cause i? Dec-03 Environment Agency ‘Provision of Flood Warnings’ Report to Defra April 2005 Floodplain flooded only Staffordshire Past-Track 9 Dove Bank Snow thaw so possibly Cause iv? 1946 Photo included http://www.staffspasttrack.org.uk/ BBC Nottingham News 10 Railway line Cause iv? Nov-00 Railway line closed Stoke on Trent to Derby line http://www.bbc.co.uk/nottingham/news/2000_11/09/floods_traveldetails.shtml (Feeder brook to Picknall) Big flood problem just after the three tributaries join as the culvert is not big enough to cope 11 Foxglove Avenue Area Regular Emma Roberts (Council) Cause iii and cause i with the runoff from hills plus the new development (housing estate) (Feeder brook to Picknall Brook) 12 Kingfisher Way Winter 2006/7 and a few before Emma Roberts (Council) Problems with the capacity of the culvert Cause i and cause iii Very small section 13 Between Park Street and The Dove Way Cause iii ? Emma Roberts (Council) of culvert neglected by the EA.
    [Show full text]
  • Newsletter 8 Page.Pub
    Raymond Waterways Newsletter Published by Raymond Waterways Protective Association “To protect and improve pond and lake water quality and foster watershed stewardship” June 2004 Dear Friends of Raymond Waterways; Inside this Issue: After experiencing a “non-winter” with cerned about and this one is very close to Milfoil Update 2 hardly any snow, we anxiously await a nor- us. Little Sebago Lake has a close relative mal summer, replete with warm tempera- of variable milfoil called Myrophyllum RWPA Structure 3 tures and sunny days. pinnatum. We know that this new (to us) Lake Associations 3 plant does not have flowers like variable First, a change of date... Thomas Pond 4 You may be a bit surprised by the early milfoil, making it even more difficult to Conservation Project arrival of this publication. We surmised identify! that most people’s interest in lake activities The first line of defense, our staff... Panther Pond 4 is greater in early summer rather than late We have been fortunate to acquire the ser- Watershed Survey in the season and it gives us a chance to let vices of Noralee Raymond as Executive Crescent & Raymond 5 you know about upcoming trainings and Director. She is in charge of education, Project Completed events, hence the change. Hope you agree. overall coordination, and is the person to Free Technical 5 And, what’s on our mind is... contact for all communications. She will Assistance Of course the milfoil situation. While it is be active in running both the Milfoil 2003 Water Quality 6 very true that Raymond is surrounded by Ranger Program and the Watershed Stew- Monitoring Results infected lakes (North-Parker Pond, East- ards Program.
    [Show full text]
  • Compilation of Information to Inform USFWS Principals on the Potential Effects of the Proposed Klamath Basin Restoration Agreeme
    Introduction Compilation of information to Inform USFWS Principals on the Potential Effects of the Proposed Klamath Basin Restoration Agreement (Draft 11) on Fish and Fish Habitat Conditions in the Klamath Basin, with Emphasis on Fall Chinook Salmon Introduction In late 2007, the Regional Director (Region 8) of the US Fish and Wildlife Service (Service) requested technical staff from the Arcata Fish and Wildlife Office to evaluate the potential effects of the proposed Klamath Basin Restoration Agreement (KBRA- Draft 11) on fish and fish habitat conditions. Staff had been providing various technical analyses and assistance to Service managers for several months during negotiation of the draft KBRA prior to receiving this assignment. Following public release of Draft 11 of the KBRA in February, 2008, staff completed a draft compilation in April 2008, and provided it to settlement parties for review and comment. On April 11 and 12, 2008, technical and policy representatives of settlement parties met in Mt. Shasta, CA to critically discuss the analyses contained in the report, and written comments were subsequently provided by several parties. The current draft version (November 2009) incorporates many of these comments, as well as additional comments solicited from State and Federal agencies in November, 2009. In addition, staff relied extensively on subject matter experts from both within and outside of the Service to review sections of the report that pertain to their specific area of expertise. The purpose of this report is to provide the Service managers involved in the on-going Klamath settlement negotiations with supporting information and documentation of the Service’s technical staff analyses, data interpretations, and professional opinions relating to anticipated changes in fish production and fish habitat conditions that would occur as a result of implementation of the KBRA and the draft Klamath Hydroelectric Settlement Agreement (KHSA), collectively referred to hereafter as the Agreements.
    [Show full text]
  • Milton Keynes Level 1 Strategic Flood Risk Assessment (April 2015)
    Milton Keynes Level 1 Strategic Flood Risk Assessment Final Report April 2015 47070452 UNITED KINGDOM & IRELAND Prepared for: Milton Keynes Council — Level 1 SFRA Update REVISION SCHEDULE Rev Date Details Prepared by Reviewed by Approved by 1 September Draft for Comment Sarah Littlewood Elizabeth Gent Elizabeth Gent 2014 Consultant Principal Consultant Principal Consultant Richard Karooni Consultant Ewan McCracken Consultant 2 April 2015 Final Report Sarah Littlewood Helen Judd Jon Robinson (incorporating Consultant Senior Consultant Operations Director - comments from Water MKC, the Joanna Bolding Environment Consultant Agency and Bedford Group of Gemma Hoad Drainage Boards) Senior Consultant URS Infrastructure and Environment UK Ltd 6-8 Greencoat Place London SW1P 1PL United Kingdom Telephone: +44(0)20 7798 5000 Fax: +44(0)20 7798 5001 LEVEL 1 STRATEGIC FLOOD RISK ASSESSMENT 47070452 April 2015 i Milton Keynes Council — Level 1 SFRA Update Limitations URS Infrastructure & Environment UK Limited (“URS”) has prepared this Report for the sole use of Milton Keynes Council (“Client”) in accordance with the Agreement under which our services were performed (URS Quotation of Services ‘Milton Keynes SFRA Level 1 Update - Quotation of Services.pdf). No other warranty, expressed or implied, is made as to the professional advice included in this Report or any other services provided by URS. The conclusions and recommendations contained in this Report are based upon information provided by others and upon the assumption that all relevant information has been provided by those parties from whom it has been requested and that such information is accurate. Information obtained by URS has not been independently verified by URS, unless otherwise stated in the Report.
    [Show full text]
  • I. Introduction: Cslap Data and Copake Lake Ii. Cslap Sampling Parameters: What And
    I. INTRODUCTION: CSLAP DATA AND COPAKE LAKE Water quality monitoring serves a wide variety of purposes. It provides a window for observing and starting to understand the numerous and complex interactions of lakes. Monitoring can help to evaluate contemporary water quality conditions and project future water quality trends, and may serve as a bridge between lake conditions and use of the lake. However, even the most extensive and expensive monitoring program cannot completely assess the water quality of lakes, but by looking at some basic chemical, physical, and biological indicators, it is possible to gain a greater understanding of the general condition of lakes. Such information is critical for managing lakes, assessing short- and long-term water quality conditions and trends, and for comparing lakes sharing common geographic settings and lake uses. The Citizens Statewide Lake Assessment Program (CSLAP) is a volunteer lake monitoring program conducted by the NYS Department of Environmental Conservation and the NYS Federation of Lake Associations. Founded in 1986 with 25 pilot lakes, the program now involves more than 175 lakes, ponds, and reservoirs and 1200 volunteers from eastern Long Island to the Northern Adirondacks to the western-most lake in New York, including several Finger Lakes, Lake Ontario, and lakes within state parks. In this program, lay volunteers trained by the NYSDEC collect water samples, observations, and perception data every other week in a fifteen-week interval between May and October. Generally, water samples are collected from the lake surface at the deepest part of the lake, using standard limnological equipment and sampling procedures. Water samples are analyzed by the NYS Department of Health.
    [Show full text]
  • Armand Bayou Watershed Plan Cover: Top Left Photo Courtesy Armand Bayou Nature Center; All Other Photos © Cliff Meinhardt Armand Bayou Watershed Plan Phase I
    Armand Bayou Watershed Plan COVER: TOP LEFT PHOTO COURTESY ARMAND BAYOU NATURE CENTER; ALL OTHER PHOTOS © CLIFF MEINHARDT Armand Bayou Watershed Plan Phase I A Report of the Coastal Coordination Council Pursuant to National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration Award No. NA170Z1140 Production of this document supported in part by Institutional Grant NA16RG1078 to Texas A&M University from the National Sea Grant Office, National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration, U.S. Department of Commerce, and a grant from ExxonMobil Coporation ii PHOTO © CLIFF MEINHARDT Contents Acknowledgements .......................................................................................................................................................1 Executive Summary .......................................................................................................................................................2 Introduction .............................................................................................................................................................2 The Armand Bayou Watershed Partnership ..................................................................................................................2 State of the Watershed ..............................................................................................................................................2 Institutional Framework ..............................................................................................................................................3
    [Show full text]
  • Environmental Quality and Natural Systems Open House Notes, 13 February 2018
    Bloomington Sustainability Action Plan Open House Meeting Notes 13 February 2018 City Hall McCloskey Room 4 pm – 5:45 pm Topic: Environmental Quality and Natural Systems (Air quality, Water quality, Storm water Management, Waste reduction, Protection of Biodiversity and Habitats) Facilitator: Lisa Marie Napoli Easel/Note Pad: Farhana Z. Khan and Allissa Aardema Computer notes: Daphney Richemond Number of participants: 8-9 Summary of Interests Discussed • Appreciation expressed for Lake Monroe Reservoir, waste management, sidewalks, parking system, walkability, parks, trees, IU commitment to natural gas, progress on food waste, public water system • Concerns expressed with water quality issues, recycling, deer management, education regarding Lake Monroe, stormwater management, privatization of water system • Green Camino food waste collection company indicates an opportunity for partnerships • Group expressed desire to learn more about existing City of Bloomington sustainability initiatives • Group recommended improvements in public transit, walkability, green walkways, clearinghouse for information about environmental issues, collaboration between groups, better air quality monitoring, food waste composting, better water quality data, city run recycling programs, balancing Lake Monroe tourism with need to protect water quality, nature center, plastic bag ban, renewable energy, education regarding overconsumption, waste minimization, planting of native species, preservation of green spaces, improved tree inventories, improved community
    [Show full text]
  • The Beach – Milton Keynes Preliminary Feasibility Study May 2006
    ITEM 7a P e l l F r i s c h m a n n THE BEACH – MILTON KEYNES PRELIMINARY FEASIBILITY STUDY MAY 2006 e x c l n t h r o u g i v a THE BEACH - MILTON KEYNES PRELIMINARY FEASIBILITY STUDY REVISION RECORD Report Ref: Rev Description Date Originator Checked Approved A Draft 19-08-05 R Ashiley M Elton B Second Draft 06-09-05 Various M Elton C Final 10-05-06 T Wray M Jordan M Jordan This report is to be regarded as confidential to our Client and it is intended for their use only and may not be assigned. Consequently and in accordance with current practice, any liability to any third party in respect of the whole or any part of its contents is hereby expressly excluded. Before the report or any part of it is reproduced or referred to in any document, circular or statement and before its contents or the contents of any part of it are disclosed orally to any third party, our written approval as to the form and context of such a publication or disclosure must be obtained Prepared for : Prepared by : Pell Frischmann Consultants Ltd. Lloyds Court, 659 Silbury Boulevard MILTON KEYNES MK9 3DP Pell Frischmann Form ref: CQF047/A THE BEACH - MILTON KEYNES PRELIMINARY FEASIBILITY STUDY EXECUTIVE SUMMARY In response to on-going public pressure, Pell Frischmann was commissioned by English Partnerships to undertake an environmental feasibility study to assess the potential for the creation of an artificial beach within the Milton Keynes area, with a particular initial focus on Willen Lake.
    [Show full text]
  • Making a Great City Greater
    MILTON KEYNES: MAKING A GREAT CITY GREATER Commission Working Paper 18 Water Sustainability Report Liz Varga, Cranfield University Milton Keynes Futures 2050 Commission MK Futures 2050 – Water Sustainability Report Liz Varga, Cranfield University May, 2016, final draft after feedback from the Commission Abstract This short report provides recommendations to the Milton Keynes Futures 2050 Commission regarding water systems. Water systems are a key component of the city’s infrastructure providing critical services by resourcing, supplying and removing water for residents, businesses and other stakeholders. The outlook for Milton Keynes is increasing uncertainty about both water stress, already evident in the catchment, and the ability of water drainage and conservation systems (with some Sustainable Drainage Systems- SuDS1) to cope with more severe flooding. So in the context of population growth, beyond that already planned to 2026, as well as potential impacts from climate change and water regulation for improved quality, water services are likely to become a priority as concerns over security of supply and damage to people and property escalate. These challenges recognized by water utility provider Anglian Water’s latest management plans. These recommendations should be considered now and planned for implementation from 2020. It is recognized that the recommendations are broader than the responsibilities of MK Council which are limited to activities such as building control, land use planning, permitting, and citizen engagement. For the recommendations to be effectively implemented requires MK Council to support and work with Anglian Water and the Environment Agency who both have largely commensurate ambitions in this area. 1. Reduce water demand through support for sustainable behaviour and where possible retrofit of efficient devices in the home and workplace, through early leak detection and repair using water systems telemetry, and through innovative charging models and behaviour change campaigns.
    [Show full text]
  • A Minnesota Story: Urban Shallow Lake Management
    Success Stories A Minnesota Story: Urban Shallow Lake Management William Bartodziej, Peter W. Sorensen, Przemyslaw G. Bajer, Keith Pilgrim, and Simba Blood Carp, alum, water quality, and aquatic plants was dominated by the native coontail (Ceratophyllum demersum) and flatstem Introduction alum treatment and carp management pondweed (Potamogeton zosteriformis), he Ramsey-Washington Metro approaches used to address internal P the invasive non-native Eurasian Watershed District (RWMWD) loading in Kohlman Lake. We report watermilfoil (Myriophyllum spicatum), Tmanages surface waters in a results and relate these to MPCA and curly-leaf pondweed (Potamogeton 65-square-mile watershed located on standards that were set for the lake. We crispus). In addition, a fringe of white the eastern side of the Twin Cities discuss how the change in lake water water lily (Nymphaea odorata) encircled Metropolitan Area in Minnesota. As quality corresponded to an increase in the lake. Plant control efforts focused on part of its directive, the RWMWD leads aquatic plant cover, and the management dock areas and boat channels (Figure 2). efforts to improve the water quality of challenges that now exist. lakes that are considered “impaired” by The management plan the Minnesota Pollution Control Agency Characterizing Kohlman Lake The RWMWD completed a (MPCA). Management efforts on one Kohlman is the northernmost lake comprehensive TMDL investigation for of these waters, Kohlman Lake, have of the Phalen Chain of Lakes in the Kohlman Lake where both in-lake and substantially improved water quality eastern portion of the Twin Cities (Figure watershed loading were estimated. The while also creating the need to address 1).
    [Show full text]