2012 - 2021 Watershed Management Plan Volume I October 2011
Comfort Lake-Forest Lake Watershed District Cover Image: Large Image: FL 44 Pond Small Image: Detail of a Green Heron (Butorides virescens) from FL 44 Pond
Document Component Specs Text: Staples • multipurpose paper, 24 lb. text – 50% post-consumer fibers, FSC Certified. Back Cover: Neenah Paper • Esse • Texture, Sapphire • 100 lb. cover • 30% post-consumer fibers, Green Seal® Certified Wire Binding: Manufactured using recycled high carbon steel TABLE OF CONTENTS
Volume 1
1. EXECUTIVE SUMMARY...... 1 2. INTRODUCTION ...... 3 2.1. Purpose...... 4 2.2. Mission...... 4 2.3. Layout of this Plan ...... 7 2.4. History of District...... 8 2.5. Board of Managers and Administration ...... 9 2.6. Committees...... 10 3. ISSUES & GOALS ...... 11 3.1. Floodplain ...... 11 3.1.1 Issue ...... 11 3.1.2 Goals...... 11 3.1.3 Objectives ...... 11 3.2. Lakes ...... 12 3.2.1 Issue ...... 12 3.2.2 Goals...... 12 3.2.3 Objectives ...... 12 3.3. Streams...... 14 3.3.1 Issue ...... 14 3.3.2 Goals...... 14 3.3.3 Objectives ...... 14 3.4. Wetlands ...... 15 3.4.1 Issue ...... 15 3.4.2 Goals...... 15 3.4.3 Objectives ...... 15 3.5. Upland Resources ...... 16 3.5.1 Issue ...... 16 3.5.2 Goals...... 16 3.5.3 Objectives ...... 16 3.6. Groundwater ...... 17 3.6.1 Issue ...... 17 3.6.2 Goals...... 17 3.6.3 Objectives ...... 17 3.7. Public Education ...... 18 3.7.1 Issue ...... 18 3.7.2 Goals...... 18 3.7.3 Objectives ...... 18 3.8. Interagency Communication ...... 19 3.8.1 Issue ...... 19 3.8.2 Goals...... 19 3.8.3 Objectives ...... 19
CLFLWD Watershed Management Plan
4. IMPLEMENTATION ...... 21 4.1. Introduction ...... 21 4.1.1 Management Areas ...... 22 4.2. Implementation Plan Structure ...... 22 4.3. Implementation Schedule and Cost Table...... 25 4.4. Administration (1000 Series) ...... 25 4.4.1 Board Administration (1001) ...... 25 4.4.2 General Office Expenses (1002) ...... 25 4.4.3 General Administration (1003)...... 25 4.4.4 Professional Services (1004)...... 26 4.5. Programs (3000 Series)...... 27 4.5.1 District Rules and Rulemaking (3001) ...... 27 4.5.2 Permitting (3002) ...... 28 4.5.3 Monitoring and Data Assessment (3003) ...... 30 4.5.4 Non-Point Source Pollution Abatement Program (3004)...... 33 4.5.5 Education and Outreach (3005)...... 36 4.5.6 Technical Resource Sharing and Interagency Communication (3006)...... 38 4.5.7 Research (3007) ...... 40 4.5.8 Measurement of Progress (3008)...... 41 4.6. Projects (5000 Series) ...... 42 4.6.1 Floodplain (5100 Series)...... 42 4.6.2 Lakes (5200 Series)...... 43 4.6.3 Streams (5300 Series)...... 55 4.6.4 Wetlands (5400 Series) ...... 58 4.6.5 Upland Resources (5500 Series)...... 63 4.6.6 Groundwater (5600 Series) ...... 64 4.6.7 Public Education (5700 Series) ...... 66 4.6.8 Interagency Communication (5800 Series) ...... 66
CLFLWD Watershed Management Plan 5. IMPLEMENTATION SCHEDULE AND COST TABLE ...... 75 6. MEASURING IMPLEMENTATION PROGRESS...... 81 6.1. Quantitative Assessment: Issue Areas Addressed...... 81 6.1.1 Projects ...... 81 6.1.2 Programs ...... 81 6.2. Adaptive Management: Meeting Lake Goals for Water Quality ...... 82 7. FINANCING APPROACH ...... 83 7.1. Funding Options...... 83 7.1.1 Ad Valorem Taxes ...... 83 7.1.2 Special Assessments...... 84 7.1.3 Water Management Fees ...... 84 7.1.4 Emergency Projects...... 84 7.1.5 Outside Funding Sources ...... 84 7.2. Proposed Funding Mechanisms ...... 85 7.2.1 General Funding ...... 85 7.2.2 Alternate Funding Methods...... 90 8. INTERGOVERNMENTAL COORDINATION AND IMPACT ...... 95 8.1. Local Government Agencies...... 95 8.1.1 Roles...... 95 8.1.2 Impact of Plan...... 95 8.2. State Government Agencies...... 101 8.2.1 Roles...... 101 8.3. Federal Government Agencies ...... 102 8.3.1 Roles...... 102 9. AMENDMENTS TO THIS PLAN...... 103 10. ANNUAL REPORTING ...... 105
CLFLWD Watershed Management Plan Volume 2
11. LAND AND WATER RESOURCE INVENTORY ...... 107 11.1. Location ...... 107 11.2. Climate and Precipitation...... 108 11.2.1 Climate Change ...... 112 11.3. Topography and Geomorphology...... 115 11.3.1 Meltwater Deposits and Ground Moraine ...... 116 11.3.2 Terminal Moraine Deposits...... 116 11.3.3 Lake Deposits ...... 116 11.4. Soils ...... 121 11.5. Geology ...... 122 11.5.1 Surficial Geology...... 123 11.5.2 Bedrock Geology ...... 124 11.6. Surface Water Resources ...... 131 11.6.1 Watershed Hydrology ...... 131 11.6.2 DNR Public Waters and Wetlands...... 132 11.6.3 Rivers and Streams ...... 141 11.6.4 Active Recreation Lakes ...... 143 11.6.5 Passive Recreation Lakes ...... 176 11.6.6 Wetlands ...... 189 11.6.7 Drainage Systems...... 197 11.7. Impaired Waters ...... 198 11.7.1 Lakes...... 198 11.7.2 Watercourses...... 200 11.8. Floodplain ...... 201 11.9. Natural Communities ...... 205 11.9.1 Minnesota Land Cover Classification System Mapping ...... 205 11.10. Fish & Wildlife...... 206 11.10.1 Fish ...... 206 11.10.2 Wildlife...... 206 11.11. Groundwater Resources...... 211 11.11.1 Aquifers...... 211 11.11.2 Groundwater Recharge, Groundwater Discharge, & Groundwater Flow ...... 212 11.11.3 Groundwater Appropriations, Well Head Protection Areas, and Source Water Assessment Areas ...... 213 11.11.4 Groundwater Quality and Quantity ...... 214 11.11.5 Groundwater Monitoring ...... 214 11.11.6 Groundwater Dependent Natural Resources...... 215 11.11.7 Groundwater Studies ...... 217 11.12. Monitoring...... 225 11.12.1 Ongoing Efforts ...... 225 11.12.2 Additional Project-Specific Monitoring Efforts...... 227 11.13. Land Use and Public Utilities...... 233 11.14. Unique Features and Scenic Areas...... 234 11.14.1 Rare Biological Features...... 234
CLFLWD Watershed Management Plan 11.15. Pollutant Sources ...... 247 11.16. Permitted Discharges ...... 247 11.16.1 Municipal Separate Storm Sewer System (MS4) Stormwater...... 247 11.16.2 Construction and Industrial Stormwater...... 247 11.16.3 Point Sources...... 248 11.16.4 Feedlots ...... 248 11.17. Potential Environmental Hazards ...... 249 11.17.1 Contaminated Sites...... 249 11.17.2 Leaking Above- & Below-ground Storage Tanks...... 249 11.17.3 Wells ...... 249 11.18. District Study Inventory...... 255 11.18.1 CLFLWD Six Lakes TMDL Implementation Plan (February 2010)...... 255 11.18.2 CLFLWD Six Lakes TMDL (February 2010)...... 255 11.18.3 Watershed and Lake Water Quality Modeling Investigation for the Development of a Watershed Capital Improvement Plan (Dec. 2007)...... 256 11.18.4 Hydraulic Capacity and Model Calibration Report (May 2005) ...... 256 11.18.5 Comfort Lake, Chisago County Phase I Resource Investigation (April 2000, last revised September 2002) ...... 256 11.18.6 Shoreland Inventory of Comfort Lake, Chisago County (April 1999) ...... 257 11.18.7 Lake Assessment Program, Big and Little Comfort Lakes, Chisago County, Minnesota (April 1995)...... 257 11.18.8 Abandoned JD 1 ...... 257 11.18.9 Lake Water Quality Summary for Shields, Bone, Sylvan (Halfbreed) and Forest Lakes (February 1990) ...... 258 11.18.10 A Stable Isotope/Chemical Investigation of Lake-Groundwater Interactions at Forest Lake (June 1990)...... 258 11.18.11 Lake Diagnostic Feasibility Study for Forest, Shields and Bone Lakes (November 1987)...... 259 11.19. Status of Local Comprehensive Plans and Water Plans...... 261 11.20. Shoreland and Floodplain Ordinances ...... 262 12. GAPS ANALYSIS...... 263 13. REFERENCES ...... 264
CLFLWD Watershed Management Plan List of Figures
Figure 1. CLFLWD Location...... 5 Figure 2. Project Locations in the Bone Lake Management District...... 67 Figure 3. Project Locations in the Little Comfort Lake Management District ...... 69 Figure 4. Project Locations in the Forest Lake Management District...... 71 Figure 5. Project Locations in the Comfort Lake Management District ...... 73 Figure 6. CLFLWD Lake Management Districts...... 93 Figure 7. County and Municipal Boundaries of CLFLWD...... 109 Figure 8. CLFLWD topography...... 117 Figure 9. CLFLWD geomorphology...... 119 Figure 10. CLFLWD soils by hydrologic group...... 125 Figure 11. The surficial geology of the CLFLWD...... 127 Figure 12. The bedrock geology of the CLFLWD...... 129 Figure 13. CLFLWD surface waters and major subwatersheds...... 133 Figure 14. Minor Subwatersheds...... 135 Figure 15. DNR public waters...... 137 Figure 16. District Streams ...... 139 Figure 17. Total phosphorus monitoring data for Bone Lake...... 147 Figure 18. Total phosphorus monitoring data of Shields Lake...... 153 Figure 19. Total phosphorus monitoring data for Little Comfort Lake...... 167 Figure 20. Total phosphorus monitoring data for Comfort Lake...... 173 Figure 21. Total phosphorus monitoring data for Moody Lake...... 179 Figure 22. Total phosphorus monitoring data for School Lake...... 187 Figure 23. CLFLWD national wetland inventory...... 191 Figure 24. Wetland Quality Classification based on Minnesota Land Cover Classification System data...... 193 Figure 25. CLFLWD impaired waters...... 203 Figure 26. Presettlement Vegetation data for Washington and Chisago County...... 207 Figure 27. Landcover (MLCCS) data for CLFLWD...... 209 Figure 28. Map of generalized groundwater contours for the Quaternary Water Table Aquifer...... 219 Figure 29. Map of Water Appropriations, Source Water Assessments, and Well Protection Areas ...... 221 Figure 30. Groundwater Dependent Plant Communities...... 223 Figure 31. Monitoring sites within CLFLWD...... 229 Figure 32. Water quality grades of CLFLWD lakes ...... 231 Figure 33. Percent of Watershed in each Land Use Category...... 233 Figure 34. CLFLWD Chisago County (1989) land use...... 235 Figure 35. CLFLWD Washington County (2005) land use...... 237 Figure 36. Future (2020) land use within CLFLWD...... 239 Figure 37. CLFLWD Metropolitan Urban Service Area...... 241 Figure 38. Open spaces and recreational areas...... 243 Figure 39. Minnesota County Biological Survey Sites...... 245 Figure 40. Permitted pollution sources...... 251 Figure 41. Environmental hazards...... 253
CLFLWD Watershed Management Plan List of Tables
Table 1. Lake water quality goals...... 13 Table 2. Implementation plan organization: categories and areas...... 24 Table 3. Lake water quality goals...... 82 Table 4. Capital Improvement Project Summary (all in 2010 dollars) ...... 87 Table 5. Areas of Lake Management Districts...... 90 Table 6. Current Local Water Management Plan (LWMP) and Ordinance Status...... 95 Table 7. Local Plan Adoption Deadlines...... 96 Table 8. Goals for In-lake Water Quality and Phosphorus Load Reductions...... 98 Table 9. 2000, 2020 and 2030 Populations by Municipality ...... 108 Table 10. Monthly temperature and precipitation averages for the period from 1958 through 2009 at National Weather Service Station Number 212881 in Forest Lake, MN...... 111 Table 11. Storm events and recurrence intervals...... 111 Table 12. Impacts to Minnesota water resources as a result of climate change...... 113 Table 13. Soil classification...... 121 Table 14. CLFLWD lakes impaired for aquatic recreation* due to excess nutrients...... 199 Table 15. CLFLWD impaired watercourses...... 200 Table 16. Existing 100-year Flood Elevations for District Lakes ...... 201 Table 17. Summary of lake monitoring through the Metropolitan Council's Citizen Assisted Lake Monitoring Program (CAMP) through 2009...... 226 Table 18. Summary of lake monitoring through the Chisago Volunteer Lake Monitoring Program...... 226 Table 19. Lake Watershed Land Use Summary...... 233 Table 20. Status of local water plans...... 261 Table 21. Status of floodplain and shoreland ordinances...... 262
CLFLWD Watershed Management Plan List of Appendices
Volume 1 Appendix A: Non-Point Source Pollution Abatement Program Descriptions
Appendix B: Sunrise River Water Quality and Flowage Project Petition
Appendix C: Washington County Budget and Financial Policy #2403
Volume 2 Appendix D: Water Quality Data Summary
Appendix E: Gaps Analysis
Appendix F: Rare Features
CLFLWD Watershed Management Plan 1. EXECUTIVE SUMMARY The Comfort Lake-Forest Lake Watershed District (CLFLWD) was created in 1999 to help solve and prevent water resource problems over a 49 square mile watershed encompassing drainage to Bone Lake, Forest Lake and Comfort Lake as well as drainage to a number of smaller lakes and streams. Drainage from Comfort Lake, the District’s “outlet”, enters the Sunrise River and ultimately drains to the St. Croix River. The District includes portions of the City of Wyoming, Chisago City, Chisago Lake Township, Franconia Township, the City of Forest Lake and the City of Scandia. The CLFLWD is governed by an appointed, five-member Board of Managers.
The Mission of the District is to protect and improve its water resources through adaptive management approaches and education of local stakeholders. This Watershed Management Plan is intended to support that mission as a guide for the activities of the Comfort Lake-Forest Lake Watershed District through the year 2021. The Plan outlines the issues the District will address and establishes the goals, objectives and actions the District intends to use to tackle the identified issues over the next ten years. Local water management plan requirements are outlined and build on or bring together existing plans and programs of the municipalities.
The Plan identifies eight major issue areas: Floodplain, Lakes, Streams, Wetlands, Upland Resources, Groundwater, Public Education, and Interagency Communication with goals focusing on the adaptive management of water and upland resources through District projects and programs and through education and coordination.
• Floodplain goals include conserving flood storage capacity and limiting flood damage. • Lake goals include management to protect and improve water quality, to limit the spread and entry of invasive species, and the preservation of shoreline buffers. • Stream goals are similar and focus on managing stream water quality and habitat, aquatic invasive species management education, and the preservation and establishment of stream buffers. • Wetland goals address coordination with local governments to ensure no net loss, improving wetland habitat, research on phosphorus cycling in wetlands and the preservation and establishment of wetland buffers. • Upland Resources goals include improving the beneficial use of upland areas for stormwater management, maintaining and restoring uplands, and promoting uplands conservation. • Groundwater goals address the protection of groundwater quality and quantity and maintaining the function of groundwater-dependent natural resources. • Public Education goals address providing education and outreach services to the public to increase knowledge of and appreciation for the resources of the District and increasing stewardship and participation in District programs. • Interagency Communication goals focus on partnerships that ensure efficient and cost- effective use of funds for water resource management and coordination of efforts toward managing water resources. Programs and projects are outlined to address the identified issues and goals at an average annual cost of about $2.7 million. The planned programs of the District are: District Rules & Rulemaking, Permitting, Monitoring & Data Assessment, Non-Point Source Pollution Abatement, Education & Outreach, Technical Resource Sharing & Interagency Communication, Research, and Measurement of Progress. Projects are outlined to address each of the issue areas and capital improvements are included where needed. Capital improvements are differentiated from other projects because capital improvements are larger, more complex projects that often require land acquisition or land rights and have long term maintenance and operation needs. The planned capital improvement projects implement methods to protect or improve the water quality of District lakes as well as enhance or improve wetlands, streams, and other natural resources.
2012-2021 Comfort Lake-Forest Lake Watershed Management Plan 1 (this page intentionally blank)
2012-2021 Comfort Lake-Forest Lake Watershed Management Plan 2 2. INTRODUCTION
Water resources are dynamic systems, fluctuating with climate, shifting with seasons, and changing over years and decades. The management of water resources requires an equally dynamic strategy; a strategy that can adapt and change with the climate, the seasons, and through the years as the resources reflect the changing conditions of the watershed.
Adaptive management is an iterative approach of implementation, evaluation, and course correction that reflects the dynamic nature of water resources. The District sets an adaptive management policy to be able to react to changing conditions while also remaining mindful of the long term goals for the resources of the District. One of the primary goals of the District is to restore and maintain lake water quality as appropriate to each resource. Excess nutrients are the main factor degrading water quality in most District Lakes. Nutrient load reduction projects have been initially defined as included in this Plan. However, the incorporation of additional practices, changes to the siting or type of practice, and changes to project scheduling may be needed to reflect conditions observed in the watershed. In-lake conditions do not necessarily respond quickly to changes in the watershed. Adaptive management decisions will therefore be made based on long term observed trends in lake water quality as well as evaluations of the effectiveness of specific practices.
Assess Design Progress Strategy
Adaptive Management
Evaluate Implement
Monitor
2012-2021 Comfort Lake-Forest Lake Watershed Management Plan 3
2.1. Purpose
The Comfort Lake-Forest Lake Watershed District (CLFLWD) is a special purpose unit of local government, established under Minnesota Statutes 103D, which was created to help solve and prevent water resource problems. The CLFLWD is governed by an appointed, five-member Board of Managers.
The Comfort Lake-Forest Lake Watershed District covers 49 square miles in southwestern Chisago County and northwestern Washington County (Figure 1). The District encompasses drainage to Bone Lake, Forest Lake and Comfort Lake as well as drainage to a number of smaller lakes and streams. Drainage from Comfort Lake, the District’s “outlet”, enters the Sunrise River and ultimately drains to the St. Croix River. The District includes portions of the City of Wyoming, Chisago City, Chisago Lake Township, Franconia Township, the City of Forest Lake and the City of Scandia.
This Watershed Management Plan is intended to guide the activities of the Comfort Lake-Forest Lake Watershed District through the year 2021. The Plan establishes the goals, objectives and actions the District intends to use to address the identified issues over the next ten years.
The CLFLWD is not the only organization working to address the types of issues identified in this plan. Other government agencies, private organizations, and local citizens play a large role in implementing solutions to the water and natural resource management issues within the Comfort Lake-Forest Lake Watershed District. The CLFLWD has identified actions in this plan which are intended to build on the efforts of these other entities and also position CLFLWD as a local leader in specific efforts to address issues of high priority to the District.
2.2. Mission
The Mission of the District is to protect and improve its water resources through adaptive management approaches and education of local stakeholders.
The District emphasizes adaptive management principles supported by sound scientific technologies and methods to develop uniform, fiscally responsible and integrated approaches to water management in an ongoing effort to protect and improve the District’s water resources. In addition, the District stresses education and outreach to Stakeholders, in order to: • increase awareness regarding water resource issues, and • understand their role in protecting and improving the quality of our water resources.
2012-2021 Comfort Lake-Forest Lake Watershed Management Plan 4 2012-2021 Comfort Lake-ForestLakeWatershed ManagementPlan
5
Figure 1. Location Map of the CLFLWD 5 2012-2021 Comfort Lake-Forest Lake Watershed Management Plan 6 2.3. Layout of this Plan
This Watershed Management Plan is broken into a number of sections that provide background, guidance, and direction for the District’s operations. The basis for the District’s work is outlined in the Issues and Goals section and spelled out in more detail in the Implementation section.
The issues, goals and objectives define the focus of the District’s work. The details of how the issues will be addressed and how the objectives will be met is outlined in the Implementation section. The planned programs and projects that will be implemented to address the identified issues and goals are detailed in the Implementation section, including project and program summaries, scheduling, costs, progress metrics, and funding guidance. Additional detail on evaluation of progress toward the District’s goals is included in the Measurement of Progress section and additional detail on the funding of District activities is included in the Funding section.
The District’s work interrelates with the activities of other government agencies. The Intergovernmental Coordination and Impacts section discusses how the District plans to work with local, state, and federal agencies and provides an analysis of the impact of this Plan on local governments, including the requirements for local water plans.
The District reports its activities through an annual report as summarized in the Annual Report section. In addition, the District may need to update or revise this Plan and the process to complete revisions to the Plan is included in the Plan Amendments section.
The final section of the Plan, the Land and Water Resource Inventory, includes background data on the surface water, groundwater, natural resources, and climate conditions of the District. This data and analysis, as well as the data collected annually by the District, provides the basis for the identified issues, goals, objectives, and implementation actions included in this Plan.
Example of Lake Summary included in Land & Water Resource Inventory (Vol. II)
2012-2021 Comfort Lake-Forest Lake Watershed Management Plan 7
2.4. History of District Since the early 1980s, some type of water management organization has operated within much of the present Comfort Lake-Forest Lake Watershed District (CLFLWD). The City of Forest Lake, Town of Forest Lake and Town of New Scandia developed a Joint Powers Agreement to establish the Forest Lake Watershed Management Organization (FLWMO), in accordance with Minnesota Statute sections 473.875 to 473.883, on December 19, 1983. The FLWMO expanded in 1987 to include the drainage areas for Bone and Twin Lakes. The FLWMO developed a plan, conducted several lake management studies and implemented permit and fertilizer management programs for lake protection.
As water management issues surrounding Judicial Ditch 1 became increasingly complex in the late 1990s and the ditch was ultimately abandoned, the FLWMO was expanded to create the New Watershed Management Organization (NEWMO). A primary purpose of expansion was to address the water management issues associated with the abandoned JD 1. Residents filed a petition for formation of the CLFLWD following the disbanding of the NEWMO, because of the lack of an agreeable financing mechanism.
Seventy-four residents within the proposed boundary for the Comfort Lake - Forest Lake Watershed (CLFLWD) petitioned the Board of Water and Soil Resources (BWSR) to establish the CLFLWD on November 18, 1998. Petitioners included various residents of the District including agricultural land owners and lakeshore landowners. The petition was also supported by the communities and county boards. A public hearing concerning the establishment of the CLFLWD was subsequently held on June 21, 1999 at the Forest Lake City Hall Council Chambers. The CLFLWD was formed by order of the BWSR on September 23, 1999.
The area described by the petition encompassed approximately 49 square miles in the Cities of Forest Lake and Wyoming, and the Towns of Chisago Lakes, Wyoming, Forest Lake and New Scandia. The petition included the area encompassed by the predecessor organization, the Forest Lake Watershed Management Organization (FLWMO), plus the drainage area of Comfort Lake in Chisago County; i.e., Joint Ditch No. 1 (JD 1). The Minnesota Department of Natural Resources recommended a larger boundary including the entire Sunrise River to the north, but the boundary outlined in the petition was approved. One of the exhibits to the establishment order consisted of a map showing the proposed boundary. Although not listed by the petition, this map showed a small portion of Columbus Township in Anoka County as included in the CLFLWD. After recognizing this discrepancy and realizing the Higgins Lake area consisted of a closed basin, BWSR removed this portion of Anoka County from the CLFLWD by order dated May 24, 2000.
Historic Agriculture in the Region
2012-2021 Comfort Lake-Forest Lake Watershed Management Plan 8
2.5. Board of Managers and Administration
The CLFLWD is governed by an appointed, five-member Board of Managers. Managers are appointed by the counties within which the Watershed District is located. Because the Comfort Lake - Forest Lake Watershed District is located within Chisago and Washington counties, the make up of the Board of Managers reflects the percent of the watershed within each County. Roughly 60 percent of CLFLWD is within Washington County and 40 percent is within Chisago County. Therefore, in CLFLWD, two managers are appointed by Chisago County and three managers are appointed by Washington County. The county board provides public notice before making appointments and may only appoint voting residents of the Watershed District who are not a public officer of the county, state or federal government. Soil and water conservation supervisors may be watershed district managers. Each manager holds a three-year term of office and may be reappointed for further three-year terms.
The District has an administrator on staff and contracts work with an engineering firm, legal firm, and accounting firm in addition to contracting work with the two County Soil and Water Conservation Districts.
The Board of Managers involved in the preparation of this Watershed Management Plan were:
Richard P. Damchik, President 9109 N. Shore Trail, Forest Lake, MN 55025 Representative County: Washington - Expires: 09-23-2013 Telephone: 651-464-5890 / E-mail: [email protected]
Jackie A. Anderson, Vice President 25484 East Comfort Drive, Forest Lake, MN 55025 Representative County: Chisago - Expires: 9-23-2012 Telephone: 651-792-3860 / E-mail: [email protected]
Wayne S. Moe, Secretary 22877 Mallard Ave North, Scandia, MN 55073 Representative County: Washington - Expires: 09-23-2012 Telephone: 651-433-4968 / E-mail: [email protected]
Jon W. Spence, Manager 25582 Comfort Drive, Chisago City, MN 55013 Representative County: Chisago - Expires: 09-23-2011 Telephone: 763-526-3126 / E-mail: [email protected]
John T. Lynch, Treasurer 920 15th Street SE, Forest Lake, MN 55025 Representative County: Washington - Expires: 09-23-2011 Telephone: 651-464-3022 / E-mail: [email protected]
2012-2021 Comfort Lake-Forest Lake Watershed Management Plan 9
2.6. Committees
The Comfort Lake - Forest Lake Watershed District Watershed (CLFLWD) has two committees that meet as needed to advise the District: a Citizens Advisory Committee and a Technical Advisory Committee.
The Citizens Advisory Committee (CAC) is a group that is made up of local citizens who provide input to the Board of Managers on water-related community concerns and issues. The CAC's purpose, as established by the Board of Managers is to provide public input to the CLFLWD regarding policy and project matters, provide a channel of communication to the Board Managers, aid in fostering a positive public image of the CLFLWD, and help to educate the public about the CLFLWD's goals and accomplishments.
The Technical Advisory Committee (TAC) is comprised of staff from cities and townships having all or a portion of their boundary within the CLFLWD. Further, the TAC includes technical staff from Chisago and Washington County, Metropolitan Council, DNR, MPCA, BWSR and other agencies. The TAC’s main purpose is to provide input on project and planning efforts of the District and assist in defining methods to coordinate water and natural resource management efforts of the various municipalities and agencies with the actions of the District.
CLFLWD Lake Clean Up 2006
2012-2021 Comfort Lake-Forest Lake Watershed Management Plan 10 3. ISSUES & GOALS The Comfort Lake-Forest Lake Watershed District identified key issues influencing the water and natural resources of the District and established goals and objectives to address the identified issues. Issues were identified by the Board, Technical Advisory Committee, and Citizen Advisory Committee based on the data identified in the Land and Water Resource Inventory and Gaps Analysis (see Volume II of this Plan) as well as individual knowledge of the issues affecting the resources in the District. While all of these issues are important to the District and its resources, some issues were identified as higher priority for focused efforts under this Plan. At this time, issues affecting the water quality of lakes are the main focus of District efforts as supported by public education and interagency coordination. The Implementation section of this Plan (Section 4) outlines the programs and specific actions planned to address each issue area.
District issues and goals are organized by the following Issue Areas as identified through the planning process:
1. Floodplain 5. Upland Resources 2. Lakes 6. Groundwater 3. Streams 7. Public Education 4. Wetlands 8. Interagency Communication
3.1. Floodplain 3.1.1 Issue Waterbodies and constructed stormwater management facilities within the District provide storage of flood waters. Flooding is a natural occurrence that is vital to the health of many ecosystems. However, the District risks losing flood storage volume through land and basin alterations. The loss of the 100-year flood storage volume and alterations to floodplains or stormwater facility outlets can increase the frequency, elevation, and duration of flooding and cause increased impacts to infrastructure, property and the natural environment.
3.1.2 Goals A. Prevent encroachment of the 100-year floodplain to conserve water storage capacity and maintain floodplain hydrology. B. Limit flood damage to infrastructure and natural resources. 3.1.3 Objectives 1. Rely on municipalities with state-approved floodplain ordinances to implement floodplain protection standards. 2. Implement floodplain protection standards through District Rules & Rulemaking Program and Permitting Program for municipalities that do not have a state- approved floodplain ordinance. 3. Limit the impact of flooding by managing stormwater runoff rates and volumes through the District Rules & Rulemaking Program and Permitting Program. 4. Reduce or mitigate in areas with known flooding and/or high water problems.
2012-2021 Comfort Lake-Forest Lake Watershed Management Plan 11
3.2. Lakes 3.2.1 Issue Lakes are popular recreational assets in the District. In addition, lakes provide detention of flood waters, feeding grounds for wildlife, and habitat for fish and other aquatic organisms. Lakes can also provide a certain degree of pollutant settling, treatment through in-lake processes, and cooling of stormwater runoff while still maintaining good water quality. However, land use and land management practices have caused excessive discharge of pollutants, impacting the water quality and recreational use of a number of lakes within the District. Other lakes are at risk of impacts to water quality and recreational use due to invasive species, current land use practices or land use and land management changes. This changing backdrop requires adaptive management.
3.2.2 Goals A. Adaptively manage District lakes to protect and improve water quality and recreational utility as appropriate to each lake (see Table 1). B. Be proactive in aquatic invasive species management through education and projects that improve lake water quality and/or reduce the risk of entry of invasive species. C. Preserve existing shoreland buffers and encourage the establishment of new buffers and lakescaping for water quality and habitat benefits.
3.2.3 Objectives 1. Implement projects and capital improvements identified in this Plan, as feasible, to reduce watershed nutrient loading to District lakes, limit internal nutrient loads, and manage for healthy fish and aquatic macrophyte populations. 2. Address a portion of the total phosphorus load reduction needed to attain total phosphorus load capacities of impaired lakes through the projects and capital improvements identified in this Plan. 3. Implement nutrient and sediment load reduction projects through the Non-Point Source Pollution Abatement Grant Program. 4. Monitor lake water quality through the Monitoring Program to guide adaptive management and provide the measure of progress. 5. Implement projects identified in this Plan to manage aquatic invasive species in lakes where these species present a water quality problem or that can lead to or be a cause of water quality degradation. 6. Work to limit the spread of aquatic invasive species to unimpacted lakes through the Education & Outreach Program and the Research Program. 7. Work to improve rough fish management for water quality through the Research Program. 8. Protect shoreland buffers through the District Rules & Rulemaking Program and Permitting Program. 9. Encourage and implement reestablishment of shoreland buffers and shoreline restoration through the Non-Point Source Pollution Abatement Grant Program.
2012-2021 Comfort Lake-Forest Lake Watershed Management Plan 12 Table 1. Lake water quality goals.
10-year 20-year Long Term In-Lake Total In-Lake Total In-Lake Total Measured Average Phosphorus Phosphorus Phosphorus Goal Goal Goal Lake Years 1 2 3 Concentration Concentration Concentration Load Concentration of Data Moody 384 μg/l TP 3 60 μg/l TP 40 μg/l TP 144 lb/yr 40 μg/l TP
Bone 85 μg/l TP 21 40 μg/l TP 40 μg/l TP 669 lb/yr 30 μg/l TP
Birch 90 μg/l TP 3 60 μg/l TP 60 μg/l TP 471lb/yr 60 μg/l TP
School 62 μg/l TP 4 50 μg/l TP 40 μg/l TP 452 lb/yr 40 μg/l TP Little 118 μg/l TP 5 40 μg/l TP 40 μg/l TP 577 lb/yr 30 μg/l TP Comfort Shields 336 μg/l TP 18 100 μg/l TP 60 μg/l TP 195 lb/yr 60 μg/l TP
Sylvan 21 μg/l TP 21 20 μg/l TP 20 μg/l TP 69 lb/yr 20 μg/l TP 3,312 Forest 41 μg/l TP 24 <40 μg/l TP <40 μg/l TP 30 μg/l TP lb/yr Heims 37 μg/l TP 1 <40 μg/l TP <40 μg/l TP NA <40 μg/l TP 2,339 Comfort 61 μg/l TP 12 40 μg/l TP 40 μg/l TP 30 μg/l TP lb/yr
Moody Lake Fish Harvest
1 The 20-year In-Lake Total Phosphorus Goal is equivalent to the state standards for in-lake water quality established by the Minnesota Pollution Control Agency. 2 For Moody, Bone, School, Little Comfort, Shields, Comfort Lakes from: Lake Total Phosphorus Assimilative Capacity from Comfort Lake-Forest Lake Watershed District Six Lakes Total Maximum Daily Load Study (MPCA, 2010). For all other lakes from: Comfort Lake-Forest Lake Watershed District (CLFLWD). 2007a. Watershed and Lake Water Quality Modeling Investigation for the Development of a Watershed Capital Improvement Plan. Prepared by Wenck Associates, Inc. 3 The Long Term In-Lake Total Phosphorus Goal was established by the CLFLWD Board of Managers and exceeds state standards for lakes defined by the District as active recreation lakes.
2012-2021 Comfort Lake-Forest Lake Watershed Management Plan 13
3.3. Streams 3.3.1 Issue Streams are an essential element to the hydrology and ecology of the District. Streams convey baseflow and floodwaters, connect District lakes, and provide habitat to both aquatic and terrestrial organisms. Stream reaches can interact with groundwater as discharge or recharge areas. District watercourses have been affected by ditching and by alterations in land use and land management that have disrupted the hydrology and ecology of the stream ecosystem. Man- made ditches in particular generally have lower water quality, and lack habitat and diversity of natural systems without proper restoration and management.
3.3.2 Goals A. Adaptively manage District streams to protect and improve water quality, maintain stream hydrology, and improve stream habitat. B. Be proactive in aquatic invasive species management education. C. Preserve existing stream buffers and encourage the establishment of buffers for water quality and habitat benefits.
3.3.3 Objectives 1. Implement studies identified in this Plan to improve the District’s understanding of its stream systems in order to improve water quality, hydrology, and habitat. 2. Implement projects identified in this Plan to improve the District’s stream systems in order to improve water quality, hydrology, and habitat as appropriate to the site. 3. Monitor stream water quality through the Monitoring Program to guide adaptive management and provide the measure of progress. 4. Work to limit the spread of aquatic invasive species to streams through the Education & Outreach Program and the Research Program. 5. Protect streambank buffers through the District Rules & Rulemaking Program and Permitting Program. 6. Encourage and implement reestablishment of stream buffers and stream bank restoration through the Non-Point Source Pollution Abatement Grant Program.
Meandering stream in CLFLWD
2012-2021 Comfort Lake-Forest Lake Watershed Management Plan 14
3.4. Wetlands 3.4.1 Issue Wetlands provide valuable ecological and hydrologic functions including water quality treatment, flood attenuation and storage, wildlife habitat, and recreational opportunities. Historically the area now designated as the District underwent a significant loss of wetland resources caused by wetland draining and filling. The District’s remaining wetland resources are at risk of further degradation from land use practices that increase stormwater input, decrease water quality, alter hydrologic patterns, and limit wildlife habitat within and adjacent to wetlands. Land use changes (including changes in hydrology, topography, soils, and land cover) can alter the natural hydrologic regime of the wetland and can alter the functions of the wetlands and affect downstream water resources.
3.4.2 Goals A. Ensure no net loss of wetland functions and values within the District. B. Coordinate with local government units to properly manage and protect wetlands. C. Increase type and habitat diversity of wetlands to support a broader range of wetland functions, values and ecological restoration objectives. D. Identify, investigate and better understand the physiological procession of wetlands to determine their role in water quality (e.g., source or sink for phosphorus). E. Preserve existing wetland buffers and encourage the establishment of buffers for water quality and habitat benefits.
3.4.3 Objectives 1. Develop a wetland inventory and wetland restoration evaluation to provide baseline knowledge on the District’s wetland resources and identify restoration opportunities. 2. Rely on municipalities and state and federal agencies to implement wetland protection and replacement standards within the District. 3. Coordinate with local government units to ensure wetlands within the District are protected by participating on Wetland Conservation Act Technical Evaluation Panels. 4. Conduct wetland restorations as guided by the Plan to support a broader range of wetland functions and values. 5. Evaluate wetlands that are suspected phosphorus sources as identified in this Plan and implement needed feasible restorations. 6. Work to better understand phosphorus cycling in wetlands through the Research Program. 7. Protect wetland buffers through the District Rules & Rulemaking Program and Permitting Program. 8. Encourage and implement reestablishment of wetland buffers through the Non- Point Source Pollution Abatement Grant Program.
2012-2021 Comfort Lake-Forest Lake Watershed Management Plan 15 3.5. Upland Resources 3.5.1 Issue Vegetated upland areas provide habitat for wildlife and enable the land in the watershed to retain, filter and/or infiltrate rainwater and stormwater runoff prior to discharge to District water resources. Land use practices that reduce coverage of vegetation increase stormwater runoff, erosion, and pollutant loading. Land use practices that incorporate diverse vegetated areas, stormwater treatment areas, buffers, and greenways provide a balance needed to sustain water quality and habitat while also enhancing community values. While the primary focus of the District is on water resources, the health of the upland resources must be considered to protect and improve the water quality and upland habitats of the District.
3.5.2 Goals A. Increase the beneficial use of upland areas such as open spaces, lawns, and landscaped areas for stormwater management. B. Maintain and restore forests and grasslands both adjacent to and away from waterbodies to increase the biodiversity and area of native ecosystems and the quality and quantity of wildlife habitat. C. Promote upland conservation and land protection strategies throughout the District.
3.5.3 Objectives 1. Conduct or support land cover classification studies within the District to provide data needed to plan for the protection and management of the District’s natural resources. 2. Encourage and implement improvements that enhance the beneficial use of upland areas for stormwater management through the Non-Point Source Pollution Abatement Grant Program. 3. Work with municipalities through the Technical Resource Sharing and Interagency Coordination Program to promote low impact and conservation development patterns that minimize the impact of development and redevelopment on existing upland resources and restore upland resources where they have been negatively impacted. 4. Promote upland conservation and land protection through the Education & Outreach Program.
Wetland at the north end of FL44 subwatershed
2012-2021 Comfort Lake-Forest Lake Watershed Management Plan 16
3.6. Groundwater 3.6.1 Issue Groundwater is the source of drinking water for District residents. Groundwater discharge can generate baseflow in streams and support lakes and wetlands. Land-altering activities have the potential to impact groundwater resources as well as groundwater dependent natural resources. Without proper land-use and water resource management, many impacts may occur including contaminated drinking water, reduced groundwater recharge, reduced groundwater quality, alterations to drinking water supply and alterations to the function and value of groundwater dependent natural resources.
3.6.2 Goals A. Protect groundwater from sources of contamination in order to maintain or improve groundwater quality. B. Sustain the quantity of groundwater resources in the District. C. Maintain or improve the function of groundwater dependent natural resources within the District. D. Coordinate efforts with Counties through groundwater plans and participation in Washington County Water Consortium.
3.6.3 Objectives 1. Complete a groundwater-dependent natural resource inventory and evaluation to provide baseline knowledge on the District’s groundwater-dependent natural resource and identify potential protection strategies. 2. Require groundwater protection methods for infiltration features installed in local projects as established in the District Rules & Rulemaking Program and Permitting Program. 3. Raise awareness of groundwater-dependent natural resources within the District through projects identified in this Plan and through the Education & Outreach Program.
2012-2021 Comfort Lake-Forest Lake Watershed Management Plan 17
3.7. Public Education 3.7.1 Issue Individuals within the community can make a significant difference in protecting District water resources. Effective education programs enhance participation in District activities and increase public knowledge relative to water. Many District residents do not feel a personal connection with water and natural resources and therefore do not have a sense of responsibility or ownership which hinders the District’s ability to change behaviors and increase stewardship. An informed community is empowered to take action in the interest of their land and water resources.
3.7.2 Goals A. Provide education and outreach services to the public to increase knowledge of and appreciation for surface water, groundwater and natural resources of the District. B. Educate residents on stewardship methods to protect and improve surface water, groundwater and natural resources. C. Increase public awareness and participation in the District’s activities, plans, and programs.
3.7.3 Objectives 1. Increase District stakeholders knowledge of and appreciation for surface water, groundwater and natural resources and their management through the Education & Outreach Program. 2. Incorporate educational and public access components into the District’s projects and capital improvements as feasible and as guided by this Plan.
Scouts stenciling “Dump no waste – Drains to Lake” at stormsewers in CLFLWD
2012-2021 Comfort Lake-Forest Lake Watershed Management Plan 18
3.8. Interagency Communication 3.8.1 Issue Interagency partnerships result in more cost-effective approaches to water resource management and provide the additional benefit of creating ownership of the resources by a broader constituent base. The District seeks to create and nurture existing partnerships with the counties, municipalities and the State. These entities have common goals and responsibilities for resource protection. The District is in the unique position to be able to identify and support collaborations between various partners/stakeholders with similar projects and programs. The District takes fiscal responsibility and efficiency seriously and is sensitive to the economic status of its residents.
3.8.2 Goals A. Coordinate efforts with partners to ensure the most efficient and cost-effective use of funds for water resource management. B. Act as the local office for facilitating public input on water resource-related issues; reacting in a timely manner to the concerns of citizens, and operating in an open and transparent manner. C. Actively participate in the evaluation of Total Maximum Daily Load (TMDL) studies and implementation of projects and programs to address impairments of waters within the District. D. Work with St. Croix Basin partners toward achieving the goals of St. Croix River Basin Planning Team and future TMDLs.
3.8.3 Objectives 1. Collaborate with municipalities, state and federal agencies, local organizations, and other stakeholders through the Technical Resource Sharing and Interagency Coordination Program.
Bone Lake Carp Harvest
2012-2021 Comfort Lake-Forest Lake Watershed Management Plan 19
(this page intentionally blank)
2012-2021 Comfort Lake-Forest Lake Watershed Management Plan 20 4. IMPLEMENTATION
4.1. Introduction Implementation activities in this plan are categorized as administration, programs and projects. Projects include a subset of projects that are specifically capital improvements. The implementation plan identifies the specific projects, studies, and other activities necessary to implement plan goals. This implementation plan identifies initiatives and activities identified by staff and Managers as necessary to achieve objectives that were suggested during the public involvement process. The initiatives contained in the implementation plan seek to protect and improve District resources. In many cases, implementation requires further action and/or approval and participation of other parties.
Inclusion of a program, project, or capital improvement in the implementation plan is not a set decision to implement that action. Implementation rests on annual Board decisions to budget for and fund the action, and in some cases may require further legal procedures and/or the approval or participation of other parties. The District will regularly evaluate the water resources needs within the District and make appropriate changes in priorities during the term of the implementation plan.
The implementation plan focuses on those resource concerns that are of interest to and a priority for the District to address in the next 10 years. This may result in some resource issues and concerns not being identified as a key area of focus in this Plan. This may be due to the fact that other units of government may already address these areas, or because the methods for management of these issues are not yet clear, or they are not a priority resource concern at this time. The District’s main focus at this time is on improving water quality in impaired or impacted lakes and on maintaining and enhancing water quality in high quality lakes.
The general strategy guiding District management and project planning is to implement improvements starting at the “top” of the watershed and move toward the outlet. This strategy will allow the District to begin improvements where the projects have the most impact throughout the watershed. Upstream water quality improvements lead to better water quality in downstream lakes, spreading water quality improvements through the watershed. Upstream improvements are supported by focused projects that address water quality improvements from upland areas draining directly to District lakes. For example, projects are planned first for Moody and Bone Lakes and progress downstream toward Comfort Lake. It is important to note that this general strategy is not intended to limit the District’s ability to implement projects in other portions of the watershed where there is strong local support, availability of grant funding, and/or the ability to add on to an existing project of another local unit of government.
Over the 10-year period of this implementation plan, as information becomes available, priorities evolve, new concerns emerge, or new technical approaches are developed, the District will likely adapt the implementation plan to reflect this new information. The listing of initiatives in the implementation plan is not intended to exclude other initiatives consistent with the goals identified in this Plan. If the new activity is widely different in scope or cost from that detailed in the implementation plan, plan amendments may be required. If not, the District could proceed with a new initiative under the existing implementation plan (see also Section 8: Amendments to this Plan).
2012-2021 Comfort Lake-Forest Lake Watershed Management Plan 21
4.1.1 Management Areas The District uses a natural resource framework, tied to the identified issues, to implement many of its activities and projects. The identified issue areas address major natural resource types in addition to public education and interagency communication and establish the planning topics that form the framework for much of the implementation plan:
• Floodplain • Upland Resources • Lakes • Groundwater • Streams • Public Education • Wetlands • Interagency Communication
Implementation actions are identified by the specific water bodies and/or resources which will be most directly impacted by the action. The implementation plan includes maps that group planned actions by their location within four designated Lake Management Districts (see Figures 2 – 5). The Lake Management Districts are tied to the four major subwatersheds within the District: Bone Lake, Forest Lake, Little Comfort Lake, and Comfort Lake (see Section 6: Funding).
4.2. Implementation Plan Structure
Activities are organized into three main categories: Administration (1000 Series) Programs (3000 Series) Projects (5000 Series)
The Administration (1000 series) and Program (3000 series) categories consist of the general, watershed-wide, operation of the District and are often carried out by District staff. The Projects category (5000 series) consists of feasibility studies and plans, as well as capital improvement projects, which are provided special designation throughout as (CIP). Within each category are activity areas identified with a 4-digit code and a title. Finally, the most specific level of the implementation plan structure is the implementation initiatives that were determined following a public input and review process. This method of assigning management categories, and codes to the various implementation actions is designed to facilitate the annual work plan and budgeting done by the District by providing similarities to the fiscal accounting system, as well as being able to transform it into a format that can be managed electronically.
2012-2021 Comfort Lake-Forest Lake Watershed Management Plan 22 Administration (1000 series) includes the four main areas of administrative activity and expenses. The types of activities and expenses conducted under each of the four areas is specified in Section 4.4 of this Plan. The four areas under Administration are:
• Board Administration (1001 series) • General Office Expenses (1002 series) • General Administrative (1003 series) • Professional Services (1004 series)
Programs (3000 series) include one program area for each unique program of the District. Specific initiatives of each program are described either under the “Ongoing Operations” discussion which outlines the types of activities the program regularly conducts or are listed as specific initiatives of the program. The specific initiatives may be ongoing, periodic or one-time actions or functions of the District. The identified programs are subdivided (300X) as follows:
• District Rules and Rulemaking (3001 series) • Permitting (3002 series) • Monitoring & Data Assessment (3003 series) • Non-Point Source Pollution Abatement (3004 series) • Education and Outreach (3005 series) • Technical Resource Sharing and Interagency Communication (3006 series) • Research (3007 series) • Measurement of Progress (3008 series)
Specific initiatives are identified with a letter. For example, the development of a comprehensive monitoring plan takes place under the Monitoring and Data Assessment Program (3003) as initiative B, so this initiative is identified as 3003B.
Projects (5000 series) are further defined based on the applicable management area as defined in the Introduction to the Implementation Plan; these management areas are subdivided by the hundreds-place (5X00) as follows:
• Floodplain (5100 series) • Upland Resources (5500 series) • Lakes (5200 series) • Groundwater (5600 series) • Streams (5300 series) • Public Education (5700 series) • Wetlands (5400 series) • Interagency Communication (5800 series)
In order to efficiently identify projects affecting the same District resource (e.g. Moody Lake), the last two digits of all Projects (5000 series) identify the waterbody most directly affected by the implementation initiative. The following are the last two-digit identifiers (50XX) for projects effecting specific District resources:
20 – District-Wide 27 – Sylvan Lake 21 – Moody Lake 28 – Forest Lake 22 – Bone Lake 29 – Comfort Lake 23 – Birch Lake 40 – Sunrise River 24 – School Lake 41 – Bone-Birch-School-Little Comfort 25 – Little Comfort Lake (BBSLC) Tributary 26 – Shields Lake 99 – Other
2012-2021 Comfort Lake-Forest Lake Watershed Management Plan 23 Specific projects are further identified with a letter. For example, the implementation of the Sunrise River Water Quality/Quantity Regional Stormwater Project has been defined as primarily benefitting Comfort Lake and is therefore listed under the lake projects specific to Comfort Lake (5229) as project A, so the project is identified as 5229A.
Information regarding the anticipated initiatives, partners, and costs involved for each of the implementation activities is presented in the implementation plan table and in narrative sections for each activity area.
Table 2. Implementation plan organization: categories and areas. Code ADMINISTRATION 1001 Board Administration 1002 General Office Expenses 1003 General Administrative 1004 Professional Services Code PROGRAMS 3001 District Rules and Rulemaking 3002 Permitting 3003 Monitoring & Data Assessment 3004 Non-Point Source Pollution Abatement 3005 Education and Outreach 3006 Technical Resource Sharing & Interagency Communication 3007 Research 3008 Measurement of Progress Code PROJECTS 5100 Floodplain 5200 Lakes 5300 Streams 5400 Wetlands 5500 Upland Resources 5600 Groundwater 5700 Public Education 5800 Interagency Communication
Shoreline Restoration
2012-2021 Comfort Lake-Forest Lake Watershed Management Plan 24
4.3. Implementation Schedule and Cost Table The implementation schedule and cost table (Section 5) provides a summary of key information about each implementation initiative including cost estimates, scheduling, specific issues areas that each implementation initiative addresses, potential partners, and level of financial commitment by the District. Where applicable, implementation initiatives and their associated cost estimates were taken from previous studies. In other cases, the indicated costs are planning-level estimates based on current understanding of the scope of the initiative. In general, the table provides a planning-level projection that can be used as a guide or starting point for the more detailed annual budgeting process.
The implementation plan table includes a general timeline of how the implementation initiatives could be implemented over the 10 years of the Plan. Cost estimates are shown as either a one-time cost (typical of feasibility studies and CIPs) or as annual costs in the case of on-going programs. An annual inflation rate of 3% has been applied to account for the expected increase in costs for initiatives which occur later in the schedule.
Any project in the implementation plan that requires the use of private landowner rights (including any future additions) will be implemented only with landowner concurrence and, as appropriate, a formal agreement.
4.4. Administration (1000 Series) The District’s Administration Program addresses the oversight and administration of the District’s basic functions and provides an office and staff presence for the District. The Administration Program includes the activities of the Board of Managers, the activities of the District Administrator and supporting staff, general professional services, and office expenses.
4.4.1 Board Administration (1001) The Board Administration program includes activities such as the completion of the annual audit and support of the citizen advisory committee. This administrative program also covers basic costs for insurance, association dues, and manager per diems and expenses.
4.4.2 General Office Expenses (1002) The General Office Expenses program addresses the basic costs associated with running the District office. The expenses included in this program are office rental, computer supplies, cell phone, copier lease, office supplies, postage, newspaper notices, bank fees, mileage reimbursement, and conference attendance costs.
4.4.3 General Administration (1003) The General Administration program includes the activities, salary, and benefits for District staff. The District Administrator oversees and coordinates the activities of the CLFLWD as guided by the Board and this Plan. The Administrator works with local municipalities, counties, and state and federal agencies to coordinate and facilitate progress toward the District’s goals. District Programs are led by the Administrator and are supported by activities of other government agencies, partnerships and consultants.
2012-2021 Comfort Lake-Forest Lake Watershed Management Plan 25 The General Administration Program also provides the opportunity for District staff to build their knowledge of water resource management and protection and the current science behind management practices and technologies. Specific areas of interest for staff education may include staying up to date on the science of aquatic invasive species management, innovative stormwater management best practices for urban, rural and agricultural areas, land conservation, in-lake treatments, fisheries management, and others.
4.4.4 Professional Services (1004) The Professional Services program addresses the basic expenses associated with general bookkeeping, engineering, and legal services. This program covers activities that address the general operations of the District such as ongoing bookkeeping and payment of bills and general legal and engineering advice to support District operations. Project specific professional services are budgeted and tracked under the specific projects and programs of the District.
Restored Shoreline in CLFLWD
2012-2021 Comfort Lake-Forest Lake Watershed Management Plan 26
4.5. Programs (3000 Series) The District implements a set of programs that support their goals and objectives. District programs are as follows:
• 3001 District Rules and Rulemaking • 3002 Permitting • 3003 Monitoring and Data Assessment • 3004 Non-Point Source Pollution Abatement • 3005 Education and Outreach • 3006 Technical Resource Sharing and Interagency Communication • 3007 Research • 3008 Measurement of Progress
Initiatives implemented through these programs address issues identified in the District and are compatible with District goals.
4.5.1 District Rules and Rulemaking (3001) Program Description A. Ongoing Initiatives: The District Rules and Rulemaking program establishes the District’s standards and Rules through a rulemaking process and periodic updates to the Rules and guidance documents. The program objectives are to utilize the District Rules to: • Protect and improve lake water quality through total phosphorus load reduction and volume control requirements. • Reduce the transport of sediment to District water bodies by implementing erosion control standards. • Protect water quality and improve habitat by requiring vegetated buffers along District water bodies and waterways. • Limit the impact of shoreline and streambank alterations on water resources by supporting the Minnesota Department of Natural Resources’ implementation of its shoreline and streambank alterations standards. • Ensure that the capacity of culverts and other conveyances are maintained in the District to limit changes to upstream and downstream flooding and to maintain hydraulic conditions needed to support District streams. • Limit increases in flooding through rate and volume control standards. • Limit floodplain impact and flood damage by supporting municipal implementation of state-approved floodplain protection ordinances. • Ensure no net loss of wetlands within the District by supporting municipal implementation of the Wetland Conservation Act. • Protect groundwater quality by requiring volume control through infiltration where feasible and by allowing alternative volume control measures and banking options where infiltration is not recommended due to contamination. • Address new or emerging issues.
2012-2021 Comfort Lake-Forest Lake Watershed Management Plan 27 B. Rule Implementation Review: Through this program the District will periodically review implementation of District Rules and the standards with input from municipalities, state agencies and other interested parties. Input from this review process will be used to update the Rules and associated guidance documents.
Progress Evaluation Metric Success in the District Rules and Rulemaking Program will be measured by the continued implementation of the District’s Rules and by the periodic reviews of rule effectiveness.
Potential Partners The primary partners for the implementation of the District Rules and Rulemaking Program are the local municipalities who provide input on the standards and their implementation.
Potential Funding Sources The District Rules and Rulemaking Program is expected to primarily be funded through the District’s annual levy.
4.5.2 Permitting (3002) Program Description A. Ongoing Initiatives: The Permitting Program implements the District Rules. The program provides ongoing review of permit applications for consistency with District Rules. The review of permit applications is conducted by staff and consultants while the decision on issuance of variances and approval of permits is conducted by the Board. In some cases the Board may allow administrative issuance of straightforward permits such as projects that only require compliance with the erosion control standard. Ongoing tracking of aspects of the permitting program such as the frequency of inspections and the need for enforcement actions is conducted under the Permitting program. The Permitting program conducts regular inspections of sites with active permits. Inspections are typically completed prior to soil disturbance, during construction activities and after site stabilization to ensure that activities meet the requirements of the permit, are constructed as designed, and do not negatively impact downstream resources. Activities that help integrate and support the standards implemented by local governments and state agencies are also part of the permitting program. These activities include participating in Wetland Conservation Act (WCA), Army Corps of Engineers (ACOE), and Department of Natural Resources (DNR) wetland impact reviews and supporting local floodplain ordinance implementation by providing District models and data as needed.
B. Volume Banking Program Oversight: A specific initiative of the Permitting Program will be the oversight of the stormwater runoff volume banking program. The volume bank is established to aid in the implementation of provisions of District Rule which allows for the sequencing of stormwater management including the replacement of required on-site volume control at an on off-site location or payment into a stormwater management fund. The purpose of the volume bank is to address the rule and to control the location of volume control mitigation sites to those areas of the District where the Board of Managers have determined to best serve the overall water quality and quantity objectives of the Plan. Stormwater runoff carrying nutrients to lakes and rivers is a major contributor to the water quality problems in the District. Although many pollutants can be captured in ponds and other types of best management practices (BMPs), reducing the volume of runoff being carried to downstream water bodies
2012-2021 Comfort Lake-Forest Lake Watershed Management Plan 28 is an effective way of reducing annual loading even if pollutant concentrations are very low. Local governments are more commonly requiring volume reduction in combination with traditional water quality ponds and BMPs as the District has required through its Rules. In some cases, volume reduction strategies such as those that focus on impervious surface reduction or infiltration are not practicable. In those cases, a stormwater volume banking program can provide needed stormwater volume reduction to compensate for areas where site constraints prohibit construction or volume reduction BMPs.
The volume banking program will be administered by the District. The program would function similar to a wetland bank where the District tracks debits and credits to the account. The District will also play a more active role by planning for and initiating capital projects in subwatersheds where volume reduction is needed to meet specific water resource management objectives (5220A & 5220B).
Progress Evaluation Metric Success in the Permitting Program will be measured by the number of permits issued which are inspected in compliance with the District Rules. Completion of inspections in compliance with the District Rules on 90% – 100% of active permits is measured as “Excellent”, 70% - 89% is measured as “Good”, 60% - 79% is measured as “Fair” and completion of inspections on less than 60% of active permits is measured as “Poor”.
Potential Partners The primary partners for the implementation of the Permitting Program are the local municipalities who assist in implementation of standards that protect resources within the District (e.g. Wetland Conservation Act, shoreland standards, floodplain standards) and who conduct inspections of projects.
Potential Funding Sources The Permitting Program is expected to primarily be funded through the review and inspection deposit required for non-government projects and through the District’s annual levy for government-led projects.
Raingarden Supported by a District Grant Program
2012-2021 Comfort Lake-Forest Lake Watershed Management Plan 29
4.5.3 Monitoring and Data Assessment (3003) Program Description A. Ongoing Initiatives: The Monitoring and Data Assessment program conducts the District’s water resource monitoring and completes evaluations of the collected data. The Monitoring and Data Assessment program will be guided by a monitoring and data assessment plan to be developed under this Watershed Management Plan. In general, the Monitoring program conducts regular in-lake, in-stream and discharge monitoring on priority waterbodies and watercourses including:
• Bone Lake • Forest Lake • Little Comfort Lake • Comfort Lake • Shields Lake • Sunrise River • Sylvan Lake
Monitoring Bone lake
In addition, monitoring will be conducted periodically on all other waterbodies as scheduled for lake studies, stream studies, or project-based investigations. Collected data will be provided for inclusion in the Minnesota Pollution Control Agency’s Environmental Data Access website4 so that it is readily available to District residents and local municipalities. Volunteers provide key support to this program and may allow increased monitoring or longer duration monitoring than can be completed with the funding levels of the District.
The Monitoring and Data Assessment program will evaluate collected data at least annually to evaluate the status and general trends in resource conditions. A separate initiative will conduct an in-depth review to guide adaptive management and evaluate localized conditions (3003C). This program will also include ongoing support such as updates or field verification for District inventories of wetlands, open space, natural areas, and stormwater management facilities after completion of specific projects. The District will monitor or otherwise measure the performance of the project to provide a specific numeric indication of the results of the project and its contribution toward the goals of the District when specific quantifiable results are desired to measure the success of a specific project beyond a modeled expected performance.
The Monitoring and Data Assessment program also has several specific initiatives including developing a monitoring plan and monitoring projects that
4 http://www.pca.state.mn.us/index.php/topics/environmental-data/eda-environmental-data-access/eda- environmental-data-access-home.html
2012-2021 Comfort Lake-Forest Lake Watershed Management Plan 30 are anticipated to inform potential future projects. The following is a summary of specific initiatives under this program.
B. Develop Monitoring Plan: The District will develop a comprehensive monitoring plan to include both chemical and biological monitoring of all natural resource types in order to strategically schedule and implement monitoring tasks that integrate the monitoring needs for TMDLs, District projects and programs, and general resource tracking and evaluation. The plan will be facilitate efficient use of monitoring dollars and timely collection of data in anticipation of future projects. The plan will also outline monitoring protocols for standard monitoring parameters and will indicate a process to evaluate and include monitoring for additional pollutants (e.g. chlorides, emerging contaminants) where specific conditions warrant.
C. Comprehensive Data Analysis: Every three years the District will conduct an in- depth analysis of monitoring data to more completely and effectively characterize the state of water bodies, identify potential pollutant sources (as applicable) and inform adaptive management and future resource management. Data will be analyzed for spatial and temporal trends, correlations on both spatial and temporal scales, and statistical tests of significance in the findings.
D. Bone - Birch Tributary and Wetland Monitoring: Monitor the tributary and wetlands between Bone Lake and Birch Lake under wet, dry and normal hydrologic conditions to identify the source of an elevated total phosphorus load to Birch Lake. Synoptic monitoring is recommended to allow comparison of concentrations along the tributary. Monitoring efforts along this tributary should be combined with monitoring efforts to identify E. coli and low dissolved oxygen sources and causes (5341D).
E. Birch – School - Little Comfort Lake Tributary Monitoring: Complete synoptic monitoring of phosphorus between the School Lake outlet and the Little Comfort Lake inlet to identify phosphorus sources and sinks to pinpoint the source of an increase in phosphorus load. As a secondary effort, complete synoptic monitoring of phosphorus between the Birch Lake outlet and the School Lake inlet to identify phosphorus sources and sinks in that section. Monitoring efforts along this tributary should be combined with monitoring efforts to identify E. coli and low dissolved oxygen sources and causes (5341D).
F. Forest Lake Subwatershed Wetland Outlet Monitoring (FL44 subwatershed): Conduct monitoring of the outflow from the FL44 subwatershed into Forest Lake to determine phosphorus loads under varying hydrologic conditions. Phosphorus load models completed by the District estimated a high phosphorus load to Forest Lake from this subwatershed, however subsequent monitoring showed phosphorus loads were low from this high quality wetland. However, hydrologic conditions were dry in the year of subsequent monitoring. Further monitoring will allow the District to verify whether or not this subwatershed is regularly a large source of phosphorus load to Forest Lake.
G. Stream Biotic Monitoring: Conduct periodic biotic monitoring District streams to evaluate stream health. Biotic monitoring will be conducted on the Sunrise and on the Bone-Birch-School-Little Comfort Tributary. This monitoring will provide data on stream health and will support evaluation of the streams for other water quality parameters. To reduce costs and engage the public, volunteers should be sought to conduct and assist with biotic monitoring. This effort will
2012-2021 Comfort Lake-Forest Lake Watershed Management Plan 31 build on the biotic monitoring conducted through the Intensive Watershed Survey of the Lower St. Croix Watershed5.
H. Wetland Monitoring: Conduct monitoring on wetlands identified as likely phosphorus sources to evaluate phosphorus sources and sinks and identify management options. Wetland phosphorus monitoring will include total dissolved phosphorus and soluble reactive phosphorus (also called dissolved ortho-phosphorus). Wetlands that may be targeted for investigation include FL44, Shallow Pond, NBL17, and SBL38.
I. Bone Lake Subwatershed Phosphorus Monitoring (NBL17 subwatershed): Complete additional monitoring of the phosphorus load from NBL17 (a Bone Lake subwatershed) to evaluate the need for a wetland restoration in that subwatershed. Synoptic monitoring to evaluate changes in concentration along the drainageway is recommended. Wetland phosphorus monitoring will include total dissolved phosphorus and soluble reactive phosphorus (also called dissolved ortho-phosphorus) and sediment evaluations.
J. Bone Lake Subwatershed Phosphorus Monitoring (SBL38 subwatershed): Complete a diagnostic study to evaluate the source of the elevated phosphorus load in the wetland along the tributary to Bone Lake through subwatershed SBL38 (a Bone Lake subwatershed) to evaluate the need for a wetland restoration in that subwatershed. Synoptic monitoring to evaluate changes in concentration along the drainageway is recommended. Wetland phosphorus monitoring will include total dissolved phosphorus and soluble reactive phosphorus (also called dissolved ortho-phosphorus) and sediment evaluations.
Progress Evaluation Metric Success in the Monitoring and Data Assessment Program will be measured by the completion of monitoring and data evaluation needed to support the District’s activities and evaluate progress toward water quality and resource goals and the quality and consistency of data collected.
Potential Partners The primary partners for the implementation of the Monitoring and Data Assessment Program are the local volunteers who conduct monitoring within the District through programs such as the Citizen Assisted Monitoring Program of the Metropolitan Council and the volunteer monitoring programs of the Department of Natural Resources.
Potential Funding Sources Funding for the Monitoring and Data Assessment Program is expected to be primarily through the District’s annual levy. Funds spent by the District are leveraged by the actions of volunteers who contribute their time to track the quality of the District’s resources.
5 http://www.pca.state.mn.us/index.php/water/water-monitoring-and-reporting/water-quality-and-pollutants/water- quality-condition-monitoring/watershed-sampling-design-intensive-watershed-monitoring.html
2012-2021 Comfort Lake-Forest Lake Watershed Management Plan 32
4.5.4 Non-Point Source Pollution Abatement Program (3004)
Program Description A. Ongoing Initiatives: The CLFLWD implements four Non-Point Source Pollution Abatement Grant Programs, with the goal of providing public education and acceptance by demonstrating innovative and small-scale practices, constructing distributed stormwater management facilities to reduce nutrient and sediment loads to District waterbodies and improving shoreline condition and habitat. The four programs are a residential landowner focused program, an agricultural and rural lands focused program, a commercial property and community focused program, and a municipal infrastructure and urban area focused program. The programs allow the implementation of retrofit projects on single family residential property, multifamily residential, commercial, non-profit, public or private school property, agricultural, and municipal property. The programs target different sized projects for these various types of property and allow the District to incorporate stormwater management and habitat improvements in areas of the District that would not require upgrades under District Rules. In addition, the programs engage the CLFLWD community in water resource management and protection.
The grant programs accept applications from interested property owners. Each application is reviewed by a committee of Board members and staff members to provide a recommendation for approval by the full Board. Each year, the Board will establish a budget and levy for these four programs in keeping with the Board’s assessment of the District’s needs and funding limitations. The budget allocated to a specific grant initiative is intended to be used to cover project costs as indicated by the specific initiative (e.g. to implement best practices on shorelines). The costs of administering the program are allocated under ongoing initiatives.
If a grant is approved by the Board, a grant and maintenance agreement or recorded maintenance instrument is required for the project. Upon completion of the project, staff will conduct a final site inspection for approval of the installation. Grant funding agreed to by the CLFLWD Board will be granted to the applicant only after the project installation has been approved. Written guidelines are established for evaluation of projects under each program. Appendix A includes a full description of each of the programs and a summary of each program is given below.
B. Residential Landowner Grant: The CLFLWD Residential Landowner BMP cost- share grants are available for all CLFLWD residents. Applications are accepted at any time however, funds are limited and awarded on a first-come, first-serve basis. Potential projects are expected to improve onsite stormwater management and/or improve the condition of the shoreline or streambank. Typical projects include implementation of shoreland restoration, shoreland buffers, and rain- gardens. Cost share assistance for residential projects covers 50% of the cost for all materials and professional or volunteer labor (volunteer labor rates are determined annually) and 100% of design costs through the respective County SWCDs for a maximum grant of $3,000 (or as designated annually by the Board). The current program description is included in Appendix A. The Board may adjust terms of funding.
2012-2021 Comfort Lake-Forest Lake Watershed Management Plan 33 C. Agricultural and Rural Best Management Practice Incentives/Cost-Share: Best Management Practices (BMPs) are soil and water conservation practices designed to maintain desirable water quality by preventing or reducing non-point source pollution. BMPs for agricultural areas are designed specifically to prevent or minimize water quality degradation by controlling sediment, runoff velocity levels, and the amount of fertilizer, pesticides, and animal waste transported in runoff. The CLFLWD works with its local conservation agencies to enhance and promote the local BMP incentive programs already available by providing additional cost-share incentives as well as one-time up-front incentive bonuses. Priority will be placed on the promotion and installation of vegetated buffer strips, pasture management and livestock exclusion, wetland restoration, nutrient management, and ag-waste management. The level of cost-share and incentive payments will be established on a semi-annual basis in coordination with the local conservation agencies.
D. Commercial/Community Grant: The CLFLWD Community Grant program offers grant grants for projects on commercial, multi-family residential, and non- profit properties that improve water quality and/or decrease stormwater runoff and/or preserve native plant and wildlife communities affected by lakes, rivers and wetlands. Potential projects include shoreline and streambank restoration/stabilization, pervious parking lots, raingardens, infiltration facilities, biofiltration facilities, and other stormwater management practices. Highest priority is given to projects resulting in measureable reductions in stormwater and nutrient loadings to receiving water resources and those with opportunities for public education. Applications are accepted at any time however, funds are limited and awarded on a first-come, first-serve basis. Grant assistance for community projects covers up to 75% of project design and construction costs for a maximum grant of $15,000 (or as designated annually by the Board). The current program description is included in Appendix A. The Board may adjust terms of funding.
E. (CIP) Municipal Stormwater Remediation Grant: The CLFLWD Municipal Grant program offers grants for projects on municipal property and right-of-ways to incorporate features that address stormwater management in areas that developed without adequate stormwater management and in areas where additional water quality treatment is needed. Applications are accepted on an annual basis in a competitive solicitation and funding cycle. Projects are expected to address stormwater that drains to a priority waterbody and demonstrate estimated reductions in runoff volume and/or pollutants of concern. Applications must include an overall project justification, the conceptual design of the project, as well as cost estimates and an estimation of water quality benefits and/or volume reduction. Grant assistance for municipal projects covers up to 50% of estimated project costs for a maximum grant of $50,000 (or as designated annually by the Board). The program requirements are included in Appendix A.
2012-2021 Comfort Lake-Forest Lake Watershed Management Plan 34
Progress Evaluation Metric Success in the Non-Point Source Pollution Abatement Grant Program will be measured by the portion of allocated funding directed toward the completion of projects meeting program standards in each program area. Completion of 80 – 100% of the goal is measured as “Excellent”, 50% - 79% is measured as “Good”, and completion of less than half is measured as “Fair” and no completion is measured as “Poor”.
Potential Partners The primary partners for the implementation of the Non-Point Source Pollution Abatement Grant Programs are the Chisago and Washington County Soil and Water Conservation Districts (SWCD) who assist in the design of projects in the Residential Landowner Grant Program. The SWCDs and the Natural Resources Conservation Service (NRCS) are also partners in the determination of available conservation programs and design for conservation improvements in the Agricultural and Rural Best Management Practices Cost-Share/Incentive Programs. Landowners, municipalities, and other grant recipients will also be partners through implementation of projects.
Potential Funding Sources Funding for the Non-Point Source Pollution Abatement Grant Programs is expected to be primarily through the District’s annual levy. Funds spent by the District are leveraged by the grant recipients who contribute to the cost of the project.
Raingarden
2012-2021 Comfort Lake-Forest Lake Watershed Management Plan 35
4.5.5 Education and Outreach (3005)
Program Description A. Ongoing Initiatives: The District’s Education and Outreach program provides opportunities for District residents, local governments, and District staff to build their knowledge and understanding of local water resources, the connection to upland resources and other water resources, and methods to protect and improve water and upland resources. The program is primarily conducted at this time through the East Metro Water Resources Education Program and is further supported by the activities of District staff and Managers. The program engages local residents through volunteer activities such as shoreline plantings and lake and stream monitoring, through the Citizen Advisory Committee, through newspaper articles, and by holding interactive training and “how-to” sessions on actions residents and/or municipal staff and/or District visitors can take to protect and improve the quality of District resources. Sessions may address a variety of topics such as shoreline and streambank plantings, lakescaping, grazing and livestock management, raingardens, stormwater harvesting and reuse for irrigation, land conservation, forest and prairie restoration, landscaping for wildlife, non-point education for municipal officials, turfgrass management, native aquatic vegetation, and/or aquatic invasive species control in addition to other topics. The program also provides education on well sealing and the Chisago County and Washington County programs that assist well owners in sealing abandoned wells.
District staff and Managers conduct outreach and education efforts by attending local events and lake association meetings to interact with residents and facilitate public input on water-resource related issues. Events typically attended by District staff and/or Managers are the Children’s Water Festival and the Washington County Fair. The Education and Outreach Program also provides education to local officials through support and encouragement of participation in the Non-point Education for Municipal Officials (NEMO) program which educates local officials on the connections between land use and water quality.
The Education and Outreach program encourages resident participation in county and statewide programs such as the Minnesota Department of Health well sealing program, the Department of Natural Resources volunteer lake level monitoring program, and the Minnesota Pollution Control Agency’s Citizen Lake Monitoring program. The District also maintains an up-to-date website with information on District activities, projects, and plans to help inform District residents, permit applicants, and local governments on the activities of the District.
B. Summer Boat Launch Monitoring: A specific initiative of the District’s Education and Outreach program supports efforts to provide enthusiastic, engaged and knowledgeable summer staff or others (e.g. intern, lake resident) at boat launches to offer education and supervision of actions to limit the spread of invasive species.
2012-2021 Comfort Lake-Forest Lake Watershed Management Plan 36 C. Standard Project Signage: Coupled with the general activities of the Education and Outreach Program, a signage program is recommended to increase local awareness of the District, the watershed and its resources. A unified series of signage themes will be developed for standard District initiatives and messages, such as lakeshore buffers/stabilization; wetland restoration/protection; raingardens; etc. Each message will communicate a typical water resource challenge and/or initiative in the District and at the same time increase the presence of the District.
D. Local Student Engagement: The District will work to engage local students and their teachers through participation in District activities and through interactive exhibits. The District will work to engage local teachers and their students in efforts such as resource monitoring, shoreline photographic surveys, native plantings, storm drain stenciling, and other activities as appropriate. Interactive exhibits at events such as the Children’s Water Festival will also help to engage local students.
Progress Evaluation Metric Success in the Education and Outreach Program will be measured by the level of participation and exposure to the District’s education and outreach efforts.
Potential Partners The primary partners for the implementation of the Education and Outreach Program are the East Metro Water Resources Education staff, who implement education efforts on behalf of the District as well as the local municipalities and residents who participate in education programs.
Potential Funding Sources The Education and Outreach Program is expected to primarily be funded through the District’s annual levy.
Surveying near Bone and Moody Lakes
2012-2021 Comfort Lake-Forest Lake Watershed Management Plan 37
4.5.6 Technical Resource Sharing and Interagency Communication (3006) Program Description A. Ongoing Initiatives: The CLFLWD Technical Resource Sharing and Interagency Communication Program focuses on supporting the efforts of other government agencies and regional teams by providing data, studies, reports, and analyses conducted by the District that would assist their work. The District will actively participate in regional teams and efforts such as the St. Croix Basin team, the Washington County Water Consortium, and the East Metro Water Resources Education Program to assist in building and sustaining key partnerships and to encourage the transfer of information between groups. For example, the District will provide the CLFLWD hydrology/hydraulic model to municipalities, counties, and state and federal agencies as needed to support floodplain mapping and management and will include work with BWSR and the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers (ACOE) to ensure replacement of wetlands through banks or new wetlands within the District. In addition, the District will coordinate with municipalities, counties, neighboring watersheds and state agencies on common initiatives such as education efforts, establishment and analysis of regional TMDLs (e.g. Sunrise River, St. Croix River), completion of regional studies (e.g. Sunrise River Watershed Study), water quality improvement efforts to address TMDLs and impaired waters, monitoring and assessment of resources, acquiring grants and funding for water quality and natural resource improvement projects, implementation of projects and capital improvements, and development and enforcement of standards, rules, and ordinances. Another major initiative of this program is to facilitate planning and implementation for water and natural resource related projects that cross municipal boundaries. For example, the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers Sunrise River Study will include information on wetland banking opportunities, watershed assessment data, and a water quality model for the entire Sunrise River Watershed. When available the District will utilize this information in its programs and projects.
The District’s Technical Resource Sharing and Interagency Communication Program also addresses coordination for implementation of the recommendations of CLFLWD Six Lakes TMDL and Implementation Plan as well as any needed District involvement or support for future TMDL and implementation efforts. The District will track the estimated or measured phosphorus load reduction from each of its projects to assist the MPCA in evaluating progress toward the TMDLs. The District will actively participate in, or lead as needed, evaluations of impaired streams and will participate in the overall Sunrise River Watershed Assessment and TMDL Project. The Sunrise River Watershed Assessment and TMDL Project will address all impairments in the Sunrise River watershed, which includes CLFLWD. The Lake St. Croix TMDL will address the impairment of Lake St. Croix through an evaluation of the full watershed to Lake St. Croix, which also includes the area of the CLFLWD.
B. Provide Comment on Municipal Variance Requests: The District will work with municipalities to ensure that the District receives notice and is aware of variance requests from Municipal Ordinances that may have a direct or potential impact on water resources. The District will review the specific conditions of the site and the variance request and will provide comment to the municipality on variance considerations that are likely to impact the water and natural resources within the District.
2012-2021 Comfort Lake-Forest Lake Watershed Management Plan 38
C. Modeling: The District prepared a watershed-wide hydrologic/hydraulic study in 2005. As conditions in the watershed change with revisions to culverts, roadways, land use, and stormwater management, the District will periodically update the hydrologic/hydraulic model to reflect current watershed conditions. The model may also need to be updated to reflect changes in FEMA standards or changes in sizes of rainfall events. The District has also prepared a watershed loading model to estimate the expected phosphorus load to each of the lakes in the District. This model will also need periodic updates as land uses change and as unit area load values are updated.
D. Geographic Information Systems (GIS): The CLFLWD Geographic Information Systems initiative will establish and maintain a mapping database of District projects, BMP grant projects and permit sites as well as other supporting information needed to evaluate progress in plan implementation and changes in the physical landscape of the watershed. The District will maintain a list of District-specific GIS data that is available for those working on projects and studies within the District.
E. District Web Mapper: The District will develop a map viewer interface to view relevant information about the District’s resources, landscape, and activities. The viewer is expected to be available to District staff and possibly also on the internet to allow viewing of location and type of permits issued, projects completed by the District or through the Non-Point Source Pollution Abatement Grants Program, and to view basic data about land use, watershed boundaries, and resource data. The Web Mapper will primarily utilize existing data available from the District, Chisago and Washington Counties, state agencies, and municipalities.
F. Watershed Management Plan Update: Develop a watershed management plan for 2022 through 2031. The plan will incorporate all required elements including an updated land and water resource inventory, issues and goals, and a complete implementation plan for the next decade.
Progress Evaluation Metric Success in the Technical Resource Sharing and Interagency Communication Program is measured in two ways. Success in the Technical Resource Sharing aspect of the program is measured by the use of District data and information by other parties. Success in the Interagency Communication aspect of the Program will be measured by the percent of District initiatives and projects that are conducted in partnership or cooperation with another agency and the distribution. Completion of 70 – 100% of the District projects in cooperation with other agencies is measured as “Excellent”, 50% - 69% is measured as “Good”, 30% - 49% is measured as “Fair” and less than 30% is measured as “Poor”.
Potential Partners The primary partners for the implementation of the Technical Resource Sharing and Interagency Communication Program are the other agencies and municipalities who are interested in utilizing information collected by the District and are interested in partnering on projects and initiatives of the District.
Potential Funding Sources The Technical Resource Sharing and Interagency Communication Program is expected to primarily be funded through the District’s annual levy.
2012-2021 Comfort Lake-Forest Lake Watershed Management Plan 39
4.5.7 Research (3007) A. Ongoing Initiatives: The District’s Research Program will allow the CLFLWD to stay up to date on current and future trends in water resource management and evaluation. The District recognizes the importance of understanding processes that affect their water resources. Sound scientific research has the potential to develop new technologies or management strategies that can help the District meet its water quality goals. Initiatives of this program will include partnerships with the University of Minnesota or other institutions to conduct research that will inform watershed management activities.
A specific initiative of the Research and Positioning Program will be to conduct and/or partner to implement research projects. Some of the research topics will be specific to the District and others may benefit the broader water resources of the State. Research topics of particular interest to the District include: • Phosphorus cycling in flow-through wetlands, • Invasive species control • Entry risk for invasive species • Rough fish management • Innovative water quality treatment best management practices
The District will actively pursue grant opportunities and partners to augment the cost of research projects that have the potential to inform resource management decisions in their watershed.
Progress Evaluation Metric Success in the Research Program will be measured by the number of updates on current research received by the Board and on the number of research initiatives completed by the District or in partnership with the District. Completion of four updates and one research project per year is anticipated.
Potential Partners The primary partners for the implementation of the Research Program are educational institutions such as the University of Minnesota as well as relevant local, state and federal agencies.
Potential Funding Sources The Research Program is expected to be funded through the District’s annual levy and supported by outside grants.
Monitoring Station
2012-2021 Comfort Lake-Forest Lake Watershed Management Plan 40
4.5.8 Measurement of Progress (3008) A. Ongoing Initiatives: The District’s Measurement of Progress Program will build on the results of the Monitoring and Data Assessment Program to annually review progress toward meeting the goals of the Plan (see also Section 5 Measuring Implementation Success). An annual report will be developed through this program that catalogs and evaluates the activities and initiatives of the District each year and assesses the effectiveness of those initiatives in the short term through targeted monitoring or other evaluations and assesses longer term trends in water quality to determine progress toward District goals and the need for changes to the planned efforts outlined in the adaptive management strategy.
The plan outlines progress evaluation metrics for each program and for each set of projects addressing a certain issue area. The annual evaluation under the Measurement of Progress Program will provide a:
• List comparing planned projects and initiatives for the year (Section 5) against accomplished projects and initiatives to provide a year-by-year evaluation of progress,
• Numeric evaluation of each program or project area’s progress evaluation metrics to provide an evaluation of ongoing progress toward completion of planned efforts,
• Narrative evaluation of specific programs, initiatives, and projects completed or underway to provide individual evaluation of the success of specific efforts,
• Summary of lake water quality trends to evaluate progress towards achieving water quality goals and to guide adaptive management.
Progress Evaluation Metric Success in the Measurement of Progress Program will be based on completion of the annual progress report.
Potential Partners The Citizen Advisory Committee may be used to provide input on the success of District projects and programs.
Potential Funding Sources The Measurement of Progress Program is expected to be funded through the District’s annual levy.
Surveying in Bone Lake
2012-2021 Comfort Lake-Forest Lake Watershed Management Plan 41 4.6. Projects (5000 Series) In addition to ongoing initiatives, the District has identified specific projects to be completed as one-time efforts. Projects identified in this Plan are likely to generate additional projects in future District plans, but each project has a defined timeline and is thereby considered distinct from ongoing initiatives implemented through District programs. District projects are organized based upon the following Issue Areas as identified in Section 3 Issues & Goals: Surveying near Bone Lake
5100 Floodplain 5500 Upland Resources 5200 Lakes 5600 Groundwater 5300 Streams 5700 Public Education 5400 Wetlands 5800 Interagency Communication
A number of the projects planned for the CLFLWD require the construction of physical infrastructure through capital improvements. These projects are identified parenthetically by ‘(CIP).’ Approximate locations of planned projects are identified in Figure 2 through Figure 5.
4.6.1 Floodplain (5100 Series)
District-Wide (5120) None at this time. Projects are anticipated to involve response to issues (as they arise) regarding changes in floodplain.
Sunrise River (5140) A. (CIP) Sunrise River Water Quality/Quantity Regional Stormwater Project: Implement modifications to increase flood storage as identified in the feasibility and design phase of the project (5229B). The project’s main goal is to reduce the phosphorus load to Comfort Lake with a secondary goal of reducing flowing and flooding issues in localized areas along the Sunrise River. This project was initiated by petition of Chisago County (Appendix B). Floodplain improvements may include modifications to wetlands that restore wetland function and quality including floodplain storage or installation of stormwater management facilities that provide flood storage in addition to water quality treatment.
Progress Evaluation Metric Success in addressing the issue areas identified in this plan relies on the completion of the majority of the identified projects in each issue area. The metric for successful implementation of Floodplain Projects is the completion of one project over the course of this Plan.
Potential Partners The likely partners for a floodplain project are the municipality in which the project is located as well as state and federal agencies such as the Department of Natural Resources and the Army Corps of Engineers, who may also have an interest in floodplain improvements.
Potential Funding Sources The Floodplain Projects are expected to be funded primarily through the District’s annual levy, though projects with localized benefits may be funded through a location-specific method such as a subwatershed-based charge or special assessment on benefitting properties.
2012-2021 Comfort Lake-Forest Lake Watershed Management Plan 42 4.6.2 Lakes (5200 Series)
District-Wide (5220) A. Volume Control Facility Planning & Design : The District has identified the management of runoff volume as a key method to move toward pre-development hydrology and reduce phosphorus loads and flooding concerns. The District Rules allow the use of banked volume credits in cases where volume control has been maximized on site. Implementing a successful volume control banking facility requires an understanding of the watershed in terms of the nutrient reduction needs, flooding issues caused by excessive runoff volume and the physical constraints of the system. The volume control facility siting and feasibility evaluation process will include a needs-based assessment of subwatersheds throughout the District. Once priority watersheds are selected, site evaluations will be required to determine suitability for regional stormwater volume banking projects. Ultimately, a feasible volume control facility location will be identified. Identified facilities may be used as volume control banks or to provide needed volume control and water quality benefits for the District.
B. (CIP) Volume Control Facility Implementation: The District Rules allow the use of banked volume credits in cases where volume control has been maximized on site, however no bank sites have been constructed at this time. The District will construct a volume control facility to be used as a volume bank for properties that cannot provide volume control under District Rules due to unfavorable site conditions. Construction will be based on findings of the volume control feasibility study (5220A).
C. Invasive Species Control Pilot Projects: Lead or partner on pilot projects and studies needed to control and minimize the entry of invasive species into District lakes. The District will lead or actively partner to implement pilot projects and studies to test innovative methods to limit and control the entry and spread of invasive species in the District’s lakes. An example of an invasive species control and risk management study that may be pursued is the evaluation of the susceptibility of Forest Lake to zebra mussels or the addition of iron to the lake bed to manage curly-leaf pondweed. Methods found to be effective will be implemented as appropriate throughout the District.
D. Chemical Treatment of Inflows: A method to be considered through adaptive management after completion of planned projects for each lake is the chemical treatment of inflows. If, through adaptive management evaluation, it is identified that lake water quality is not trending toward improvement and no additional “on the ground” water quality practices, including innovative practices, are found to be effective in the lake’s watershed, then chemical treatment of inflows is an option that should be considered. This method treats lake inflow with chemicals that bind to phosphorus, causing it to settle out and be collected.
Dock on Forest Lake
2012-2021 Comfort Lake-Forest Lake Watershed Management Plan 43
Moody Lake (5221) A. (CIP) Moody Lake Inlet Fish Barrier: Rough fish disturb the bottom sediments of lakes and can cause increases in the internal load of phosphorus in the lake when the fish are overly abundant. Moody Lake was identified as a lake with overabundant rough fish. To address the movement of rough fish into Moody Lake the District will install a fish barrier at the inlet to Moody Lake. The barrier at the lake inlet will limit the movement of rough fish into habitat areas in the wetland north of Moody Lake. The fish barrier is planned to use an innovative design that prevents fish passage upstream and downstream. The method is appropriate for low-gradient sites and includes the installation of draintile on the upstream side of a culvert. The project is expected to be funded through grants and supported by District funds.
B. Curly-Leaf Pondweed Management: Manage curly-leaf pondweed in Moody Lake to reduce the internal phosphorus load. Curly-leaf pondweed will be managed, as allowed by DNR, through herbicide or harvesting treatments annually to limit the growth and decomposition of vegetation that results in an increase in the phosphorus load to the lake.
C. Alum Treatment: Conduct alum or other in-lake treatment to reduce the internal load of phosphorus to Moody Lake. First, the rough fish population likely would be stabilized through harvesting (previously completed project and 5221D) and installation of fish barriers (5221A), the lake would be treated with alum or other in-lake treatment to reduce the release of phosphorus from lake bottom sediments.
D. Rough Fish Management: Remove rough fish to limit resuspension of lake bottom materials and reduce internal phosphorus load in Moody Lake. Rough fish harvests will be conducted on the lake to decrease the rough fish population to a level that does not detrimentally impact the lake water quality.
E. Macrophyte & Invasives Survey: A survey of aquatic macrophytes will be conducted periodically on Moody Lake to track the balance of aquatic vegetation. Aquatic macrophytes provide a metric of lake health that supports the water quality data collected by the District. The intent is to conduct an aquatic macrophyte survey every five years for the active recreation lakes of the District. The macrophyte survey will document the aquatic vegetation of the lake. In addition, an evaluation of the presence and extent of any invasive aquatic species will be conducted more frequently to be able to proactively manage invasive species and to track the effect of any aquatic invasive management conducted. Macrophyte surveys will be coordinated with the Department of Natural Resources.
Bullhead Harvest on Moody Lake
2012-2021 Comfort Lake-Forest Lake Watershed Management Plan 44 Bone Lake (5222) A. (CIP) Bone Lake Inlet and Outlet Fish Barriers: Rough fish disturb the bottom sediments of lakes and can cause increases in the internal load of phosphorus in the lake when the fish are overly abundant. Bone Lake was identified as a lake with overabundant rough fish. To address the movement of rough fish into Bone Lake the District will install a fish barrier at the outlet of Bone Lake and at the inlet to Bone Lake from Moody Lake in order to limit the movement of carp within the Bone Lake system. The barrier at the lake outlet will limit the possibility of fish moving into the lake from the outlet stream and the barrier at the inlet from Moody Lake will limit the movement of carp into habitat areas in the wetland between Bone and Moody Lakes. The fish barriers are planned to use an innovative design that prevents fish passage upstream and downstream. The method is appropriate for low-gradient sites and includes the installation of draintile on the upstream side of a culvert. The project is expected to be funded through grants and supported by District funds.
B. Bone Lake Infiltration Basin Planning and Design (SBL07 subwatershed): Plan and design an infiltration basin to provide volume reduction and water quality improvement for drainage through subwatershed SBL07. The likely site is east of the creek and along Oakhill Road North. The project would include diversion of flow to a constructed infiltration or water quality treatment basin.
C. (CIP) Bone Lake Infiltration Basin Implementation (SBL07 subwatershed): Construct an infiltration basin to provide volume reduction and water quality improvement for drainage through Bone Lake subwatershed SBL07 based on the design developed (5222B). The facility will likely need to be located with private landowner participation. .
D. Shoreline Survey: Conduct a shoreline survey to identify areas for improvements in shoreline buffers and lakescaping and to provide a means for documentation of changes in shoreline condition. The shoreline survey is planned to include photographs of the entire shoreline of the lake. The shoreline survey could also include more detailed analysis of shoreline properties including parcel specific soils and erosion evaluation or identification of key areas for protection or restoration.
E. Curly-Leaf Pondweed Management: Manage curly-leaf pondweed in Bone Lake to reduce the internal phosphorus load. Curly-leaf pondweed will be managed, as allowed by DNR, through herbicide or harvesting treatments to limit the growth and decompostion of vegetation that results in an increase in the phosphorus load to the lake.
F. Alum Treatment: Conduct alum or other in-lake treatment to reduce the internal load of Bone Lake. After stabilization of the rough fish (carp) population through harvesting (previously completed project and 5222G) and installation of fish barriers (5222A), the lake would be treated with alum or other in-lake treatment to reduce the release of phosphorus from lake bottom sediments.
G. Macrophyte & Invasives Survey: A survey of aquatic macrophytes will be conducted periodically on Bone Lake to track the balance of aquatic vegetation. Aquatic macrophytes provide a metric of lake health that supports the water quality data collected by the District. The intent is to conduct aquatic macrophyte surveys will be conducted every five years for the active recreation lakes of the
2012-2021 Comfort Lake-Forest Lake Watershed Management Plan 45 District. The macrophyte survey will document the aquatic vegetation of the lake. In addition, an evaluation of the presence and extent of any invasive aquatic species will be conducted more frequently to be able to proactively manage invasive species and to track the effect of any aquatic invasive management conducted. Macrophyte surveys will be coordinated with the Department of Natural Resources.
H. Rough Fish Management: Remove rough fish (carp) to limit resuspension of lake bottom materials and reduce internal phosphorus load in Bone Lake. Carp harvests will be conducted on the lake to decrease the carp population to a level that does not detrimentally impact the lake water quality. Carp management activities may be supported by the installation of a fish barrier through a separate project.
Birch Lake (5223) A. Phosphorus Source Assessment & Implementation Plan: Identify timing and location of any identified elevated phosphorus load to Birch Lake based on data collected in the tributary and wetlands between Bone Lake and Birch Lake (2003D). Identify sources of elevated phosphorus load in order to inform future implementation activities.
School Lake (5224) No projects planned for School Lake drainage area at this time.
Shoreline Restoration on Forest Lake
2012-2021 Comfort Lake-Forest Lake Watershed Management Plan 46 Little Comfort Lake (5225) A. Phosphorus Source Assessment & Implementation Plan: Evaluate the change in phosphorus load between the School Lake outlet and the Little Comfort Lake inlet to identify the source of an estimated 200 pound increase in phosphorus load and identify methods to reduce the load. Analyze synoptic monitoring data collected along the stream between School Lake and Little Comfort Lake to identify phosphorus sources and sinks.
B. Shoreline Survey: Conduct a shoreline survey to identify areas for improvements in shoreline buffers and lakescaping and to provide a means for documentation of future changes in shoreline condition. The shoreline survey is intended to include photographs of the entire shoreline of the lake. The shoreline survey could also include more detailed analysis of shoreline properties including parcel specific soils and erosion evaluation or identification of key areas for protection or restoration.
C. Curly-Leaf Pondweed Management: Manage curly-leaf pondweed in Little Comfort Lake to reduce the internal phosphorus load. Curly-leaf pondweed will be managed, as allowed by DNR, through herbicide or harvesting treatments or other methods to limit the growth and decomposition of vegetation that results in an increase in the phosphorus load to the lake.
D. Rough Fish Management: Remove rough fish to limit resuspension of lake bottom materials and reduce internal phosphorus load in Little Comfort Lake. Rough fish harvests will be conducted on the lake to decrease the rough fish population to a level that does not detrimentally impact the lake water quality.
E. Alum Treatment: Conduct alum or other in-lake treatment to reduce the internal load of Little Comfort Lake. First, the carp population likely would be stabilized through harvesting, then the lake would be treated with alum or other in-lake to reduce the release of phosphorus from lake bottom sediments.
F. Macrophyte & Invasives Survey: A survey of aquatic macrophytes will be conducted periodically on Little Comfort Lake to track the balance of aquatic vegetation. Aquatic macrophytes provide a metric of lake health that supports the water quality data collected by the District. The intent is to conduct aquatic macrophyte surveys every five years for the active recreation lakes of the District. The macrophyte survey will document the aquatic vegetation of the lake. In addition, an evaluation of the presence and extent of any invasive aquatic species will be conducted more frequently to be able to proactively manage invasive species and to track the effect of any aquatic invasive management conducted. Macrophyte surveys will be coordinated with the Department of Natural Resources.
Little Comfort Lake - winter
2012-2021 Comfort Lake-Forest Lake Watershed Management Plan 47 Shields Lake (5226) A. Feasibility Study – Biomanipulation: Conduct a feasibility study on the biomanipulation (manipulation of the balance between resident biological species, typically through modifications to the fish community) of Shields Lake to shift the shallow lake from the turbid water state to the clear water state. The feasibility study entails background data collection, analysis of data and some limited monitoring (samples and surveys). A final report will identify the need and approach for biomanipulation activities. The load reduction due to biomanipulation is anticipated to have the potential to reduce approximately 70% of the calibrated internal load, or approximately 600 pounds.
Interactions between fish and zooplankton can have direct effects on algal density, which is connected to in-lake phosphorus levels. Biomanipulation includes lake management procedures that either alter the food web to favor grazing on algae by zooplankton, or that eliminate fish species that recycle nutrients, helping to shift the lake towards a clear water state. The stocking of sport fish is a common example of biomanipulation. Biomanipulation activities would be conducted in close cooperation with the Department of Natural Resources to ensure that fish population, water quality, and fishing concerns are addressed in a manner that best benefits the lake and its users.
B. Rough Fish Management: Remove rough fish to limit resuspension of lake bottom materials and reduce internal phosphorus load in Shields Lake. Rough fish harvests will be conducted on the lake to decrease the rough fish population to a level that does not detrimentally impact the lake water quality.
C. Curly-Leaf Pondweed Management: Manage curly-leaf pondweed in Shields Lake to reduce the internal phosphorus load. Curly-leaf pondweed will be managed, as allowed by DNR, through herbicide or harvesting treatments to limit the growth and decomposition of vegetation that results in an increase in the phosphorus load to the lake.
D. Shoreline Survey: Conduct a shoreline survey to identify areas in need of improvements to shoreline buffers and lakescaping and to provide a means for documentation of future changes in shoreline condition. The shoreline survey is intended to include photographs of the entire shoreline of the lake. The shoreline survey could also include more detailed analysis of shoreline properties including parcel specific soils and erosion evaluation or identification of key areas for protection or restoration.
E. Macrophyte & Invasives Survey: A survey of aquatic macrophytes will be conducted periodically on Shields Lake to track the balance of aquatic vegetation. Aquatic macrophytes provide a metric of lake health that supports the water quality data collected by the District. The intent is to conducet aquatic macrophyte surveys every five years for the active recreation lakes of the District. The macrophyte survey will document the aquatic vegetation of the lake. In addition, an evaluation of the presence and extent of any invasive aquatic species will be conducted more frequently to be able to proactively manage invasive species and to track the effect of any aquatic invasive management conducted. Macrophyte surveys will be coordinated with the Department of Natural Resources.
2012-2021 Comfort Lake-Forest Lake Watershed Management Plan 48 Sylvan Lake (5227) A. Stormwater and Shoreline BMP Planning: Target the Sylvan Lake watershed for implementation of stormwater and shoreline best management practices. Site and design raingardens, biofiltration basins, shoreline restoration and other best management practices to protect the high quality lake.
B. (CIP) Stormwater and Shoreline BMP Implementation: Sylvan Lake is a high quality resource identified for protection of water quality. To protect water quality in Sylvan Lake, the CLFLWD plans installation of distributed stormwater best management practices in the Sylvan Lake watershed. The project would include the installation of raingardens, biofiltration, shoreline restoration and other practices in the Sylvan Lake watershed to provide stormwater treatment and encourage groundwater recharge to protect the high quality lake.
C. Shoreline Survey: Conduct a shoreline survey to identify areas for improvements in shoreline buffers and lakescaping and to provide a means for documentation of changes in shoreline condition. The shoreline survey is intended to include photographs of the entire shoreline of the lake. The shoreline survey could also include more detailed analysis of shoreline properties including parcel specific soils, groundwater seeps, and/or erosion evaluation or identification of key areas for protection or restoration.
D. Macrophyte & Invasives Surveys: A survey of aquatic macrophytes will be conducted periodically on Sylvan Lake to track the balance of aquatic vegetation. Aquatic macrophytes provide a metric of lake health that supports the water quality data collected by the District. Aquatic macrophyte surveys will be conducted every five years for the active recreation lakes of the District. The macrophyte survey will document the aquatic vegetation of the lake. In addition, an evaluation of the presence and extent of any invasive aquatic species will be conducted more frequently to be able to proactively manage invasive species and to track the effect of any aquatic invasive management conducted. Macrophyte surveys will be coordinated with the Department of Natural Resources.
Typical Shoreline Macrophytes
2012-2021 Comfort Lake-Forest Lake Watershed Management Plan 49 Forest Lake (5228) A. Diagnostic Study and Implementation Plan: Conduct a diagnostic study or submit current studies to be approved as a Diagnostic Study equivalent for the Forest Lake watershed and develop a detailed implementation plan for water quality protection. Funding can be sought through the MPCA’s Clean Water Partnership program.
B. (CIP) Forest Lake Diagnostic Study Implementation: Forest Lake has the third highest water quality of the monitored lakes within the District, however, phosphorus concentrations have been hovering near impairment for many years. The lake is impacted by activities and land management in its contributing watershed. The CLFLWD will implement the water quality protection measures as identified in the Forest Lake Diagnostic Study and Implementation Plan (5228A) to address the protection and improvement of water quality in Forest Lake. Measures implemented are likely to include a wide range of BMPs including buffers, agricultural land management practices, bioretention facilities, infiltration facilities, filtration features.
C. Urban Stormwater Retrofit Planning and Design (FL01 and FL81 subwatersheds): The more urbanized areas of the City of Forest Lake primarily developed at a time prior to the widespread installation of stormwater management features. Therefore, the drainage from these areas enters Forest Lake with little pre-treatment. This project will prepare a plan identifying locations for installation of a retrofit project that address untreated runoff entering Forest Lake from the urban portions of the City of Forest Lake. Retrofit projects will be evaluated in the subwatersheds FL01 and FL81, which include the most urbanized areas draining to Forest Lake. Due to the nature of retrofits, private landowner participation may be necessary to implement some identified projects. Potential projects that are deemed feasible because of landowner cooperation and technical implementation potential will be designed for construction.
D. (CIP) Urban Stormwater Retrofit Implementation (FL01 and FL81 subwatersheds): Projects designed under the Urban Stormwater Retrofits Planning and Design Project (5228C) will be constructed. Retrofits may include a wide range of BMPs to improve water quality prior to entering Forest Lake, including raingardens, bioretention facilities, infiltration trenches, iron-enhanced filtration, biofiltration, tree boxes, stormwater capture and reuse, proprietary devices and a variety of other practices.
E. Shoreline Survey: Conduct a shoreline survey to identify areas for improvements in shoreline buffers and lakescaping and to provide a means for documentation of future changes in shoreline condition. The shoreline survey is intended to include photographs of the entire shoreline of the lake. The shoreline survey could also include more detailed analysis of shoreline properties including parcel specific soils, groundwater seep locations, and/or erosion evaluation or identification of key areas for protection or restoration.
F. Macrophyte & Invasives Survey: A survey of aquatic macrophytes will be conducted periodically on Forest Lake to track the balance of aquatic vegetation. Aquatic macrophytes provide a metric of lake health that supports the water quality data collected by the District. The intent is to conduct aquatic macrophyte surveys every five years for the active recreation lakes of the District. The macrophyte survey will document the aquatic vegetation of the lake. In addition,
2012-2021 Comfort Lake-Forest Lake Watershed Management Plan 50 an evaluation of the presence and extent of any invasive aquatic species will be conducted more frequently to be able to proactively manage invasive species and to track the effect of any aquatic invasive management conducted. Macrophyte surveys will be coordinated with the Department of Natural Resources. Due to the size of Forest Lake, the macrophyte and invasives survey may have to be completed separately for each basin. Lakes 1 and 3 (west and east basins) where the public accesses are located are of higher priority than Lake 2 (center basin).
G. Aquatic Macrophyte and Invasive Species Management: The CLFLWD will assist the City of Forest Lake and the Forest Lake - Lake Association in developing a plan for the management of aquatic macrophytes and invasive species in Forest Lake. The lake’s aquatic vegetation is currently managed based on landowner interest in aquatic macrophyte management. This plan would ensure that vegetation is managed holistically with a view toward the overall health of the entire lake. The District also will assist the City of Forest Lake and the Forest Lake - Lake Association in the implementation of the developed management plan.
H. Imperial Avenue Area BMP Design (FL44 subwatershed): The FL44 Wetland Assessment and Feasibility Study (CLFLWD, 2010d) identified a number of projects that can be implemented to improve water quality in the FL44 subwatershed wetland contributing to Forest Lake. This project will design buffers, biofiltration, and other practices within the Imperial Avenue area of the Forest Lake FL44 subwatershed in areas where the shoreline has been disturbed or is maintained as lawn and where drainage is not currently treated prior to entering the wetland. This project will focus on untreated roadways, untreated residential areas, and low quality buffers and provide treatment for this high quality wetland in subwatershed FL44 and for the un-impaired Forest Lake.
I. (CIP) Imperial Avenue Area BMP Implementation (FL44 subwatershed): Implement buffers, biofiltration, and other practices within the Imperial Avenue area of the Forest Lake FL44 subwatershed as identified in the project design.
J. North Shore Trail BMP Design (FL44 subwatershed): The FL44 Wetland Assessment and Feasibility Study (CLFLWD, 2010d) identified a number of projects that can be implemented to improve water quality in the FL44 subwatershed wetland contributing to Forest Lake. This project will design a biofiltration feature or other suitable feature to capture runoff from North Shore Trail and treat it prior to discharge to the Forest Lake subwatershed FL44 wetland. The project would provide treatment to an untreated area entering this high quality wetland in subwatershed FL44 and for the un-impaired Forest Lake.
K. (CIP) North Shore Trail BMP Implementation (FL44 subwatershed): Implement biofiltration basin or other designed feature to capture runoff from North Shore Trail & treat it prior to discharge to the Forest Lake subwatershed FL44 wetland. The project would provide treatment from an untreated area entering this high quality wetland in subwatershed FL44 & for the un-impaired Forest Lake.
L. In-Lake Treatment – Conduct alum or other in-lake treatment as appropriate to reduce the internal load of Forest Lake, if determined to be necessary for improving in-lake water quality and/or for Comfort Lake water quality. In-lake treatments are likely to be targeted to Lakes 2 and 3 (the central and east basins of Forest Lake), as these areas were identified in past studies as having higher internal loads.
2012-2021 Comfort Lake-Forest Lake Watershed Management Plan 51
Comfort Lake (5229) A. Sunrise River Water Quality/Quantity Regional Stormwater Project Feasibility and Design: Evaluate feasible project options and design a project in the Sunrise River drainage area to reduce phosphorus loads to Comfort Lake. This project was initiated by petition of Chisago County (Appendix B). The project may include urban retrofits, wetland restoration, ponding, filtration, biofiltration, or other methods to reduce phosphorus loads.
B. (CIP) Sunrise River Water Quality/Quantity Regional Stormwater Project: Implement the project designed under the Sunrise River Water Quality/Quantity Regional Stormwater Project Feasibility and Design project (5229A) to reduce phosphorus loads to Comfort Lake from the Sunrise River subwatershed.
C. Shoreline Survey: Conduct an updated shoreline survey of Comfort Lake and compare it to the 1998 shoreline survey to evaluate the amount of change that has occurred and to identify areas for improvements in shoreline buffers and lakescaping. The shoreline survey could also include more detailed analysis of shoreline properties including parcel specific soils and erosion evaluation or identification of key areas for protection or restoration.
D. BMP Feasibility Study for District’s Tax Forfeited Land: Comfort Lake requires a phosphorus load reduction from the contributing watershed in order to meet CLFLWD and state water quality goals. This project will conduct a feasibility study for an infiltration, filtration, or wetland treatment system on the District’s tax forfeited land to provide nutrient reduction to Comfort Lake.
E. (CIP) BMP Implementation on District’s Tax Forfeited Land: Complete an infiltration, filtration, or wetland treatment project on the District’s tax forfeited property to provide water quality benefits for Comfort Lake based on findings from the feasibility study.
F. Bixby Park Stormwater Pond Design: Balancing wetland impact with water quality benefit, design stormwater management features in Bixby Park to manage drainage to Comfort Lake from the more urban portions of the City of Forest Lake that developed prior to the incorporation of comprehensive stormwater management facilities. The primary objective is to reduce sediment and phosphorus loads from developed and commercial areas of the city around 35W and US 8 to the Sunrise River. A site in the Bixby Park area is likely because it has a large drainage area but is upstream of the inflow from Forest Lake. The drainage from Forest Lake, while often amounting to a fairly large phosphorus load, is of low concentration and is difficult to treat in a stormwater pond. The features would be intended to provide water quality treatment for areas that have already developed with inadequate water quality treatment as well as undeveloped areas draining through Bixby Park.
G. (CIP) Bixby Park Stormwater Treatment Implementation: Construct stormwater management features in Bixby Park or area identified in 5229F. These facilities are intended to manage drainage to Comfort Lake from the more urban portions of the City of Forest Lake that developed prior to the incorporation of comprehensive stormwater management facilities. Construction would likely occur in winter when frost makes it possible to drive on wetland soils.
2012-2021 Comfort Lake-Forest Lake Watershed Management Plan 52 H. Macrophyte & Invasives Survey: A survey of aquatic macrophytes and aquatic invasive species will be conducted periodically on Comfort Lake to track the balance of aquatic vegetation. Aquatic macrophytes provide a metric of lake health that supports the water quality data collected by the District. The intent is to conduct aquatic macrophyte surveys every five years for the active recreation lakes of the District. The macrophyte survey will document the aquatic vegetation of the lake. In addition, an evaluation of the presence and extent of any invasive aquatic species will be conducted more frequently to be able to proactively manage invasive species and to track the effect of any aquatic invasive management conducted. Macrophyte surveys will be coordinated with the Department of Natural Resources.
Comfort lake - sunset
2012-2021 Comfort Lake-Forest Lake Watershed Management Plan 53 Lake Studies (5299) Conduct lake water quality studies and develop management plans for lakes in the District that have not been evaluated (listed below). The study will include a watershed assessment, which entails watershed modeling and evaluation of livestock operations, septic systems and other potential point sources of pollutants. An in-lake assessment will include evaluating bathymetry, sediment samples, fish, zooplankton/phytoplankton and macrophyte populations. An in- lake model will be developed to identify the phosphorus assimilative capacity of the lake. A lake management plan will be developed based on lake water quality goals (developed as a part of the study through the public involvement process) and modeling of phosphorus-reduction scenarios. Ultimately, an implementation plan will identify specific activities, as well as appropriate responsible parties, necessary to meet the management objectives for the lake. These studies will incorporate available data and information acquired from past studies into the new investigations.
A. Heims Lake G. Nielsen Lake B. First Lake H. Clear lake C. Second Lake I. Twin Lake D. Third Lake J. Cranberry Lake E. Fourth Lake K. Elwell Lake F. Sea Lake L. Lendt Lake
Progress Evaluation Metric Success in addressing the issue areas identified in this plan relies on the completion of the majority of the identified projects in each issue area. The metric for successful implementation of Lakes Projects is the completion of the planned projects over the course of this Plan. Completion of 90% - 100% of the planned projects is rated as “Excellent”, completion of 80% - 89% is rated as “Good”, 50% - 79% is rated as “Fair”, and less than half the projects completed is rated as “Poor”. The ultimate indicator of success in the implementation of Lakes Projects is the attainment of goal water quality in the District’s lakes. Progress toward this ultimate goal will be tracked following an adaptive management process (Section 5.2).
Potential Partners The likely partners for Lakes Projects, especially capital improvements, are the municipalities in which the project is located. Lake management and data collection projects may involve partnerships with local lake associations as well as local, state, and federal agencies such as Soil Water Conservation Districts and the Minnesota Pollution Control Agency, who may also have an interest in lake improvements. The Department of Natural Resources is a likely partner for any lake management efforts, especially those pertaining to aquatic invasive species or fisheries management.
Potential Funding Sources The Lakes Projects are expected to be funded primarily through the District’s annual levy and supported as possible through grants. Large projects may be funded through bonds. Projects with localized benefits may be funded through a location-specific method such as a subwatershed-based charge or fee.
2012-2021 Comfort Lake-Forest Lake Watershed Management Plan 54
4.6.3 Streams (5300 Series)
District-Wide Projects (5320) None at this time.
Sunrise River (5340) A. Stream Assessment: Conduct a stream conveyance and geomorphology survey on the Sunrise River. Any resource restoration and/or stormwater/flood management project directly related to the Sunrise River will require critical knowledge of this system. This information is necessary to make more informed decisions regarding the resource and to develop associated watershed improvement projects. This project will build on data available through the Sunrise River watershed assessment projects.
The project would include office study as well as a field survey. The field survey provides detailed information for refinement of the initial classification as well as the analysis and design process. It would include as a minimum the collection of the channel dimension, pattern and profile, condition, capacity, controlling elevation and type of crossings, and the bed and bank materials (type and size).
It is important to assess the condition of the stream as it relates to current and forecasted stability and state. This assessment process will address entrenchment, width/depth & sinuosity, bank & bed stability, sediment supply and transport, aggradation/degradation, and evolutionary trending. A review of historic ditch records will also be conducted to evaluate the history of changes that have impacted the river.
Identifying unstable stream reaches and rectifying problem areas is a priority for the District. The process will be initiated by identifying potential problem areas and prioritizing the sites for further investigation. By quantifying sediment yield on eroding waterways, it’s possible to more accurately assess the cost benefit of proposed stabilization projects. Feasibility studies can be conducted on selected stream reaches and future capital projects implemented on those that meet District objectives.
Streambank project prioritization will consider the extent to which a project would address a systemic problem or ecological concern, the breadth of the project’s benefits (e.g. diversity of habitat, water quality), the location in the watershed, the contribution to a larger watershed plan, the degree of controversy and technical feasibility versus need.
B. E. coli Source Assessment and Implementation Plan: Evaluate the source of high E. coli concentrations found in the stream and recommend methods for control. Support established or in-process TMDL projects by providing the data, source evaluation, and implementation recommendations needed to address elevated E. coli levels in the river. Provide this data either in support of the overall Sunrise River Watershed Assessment and TMDL or as a separate initiative of the District. This project will likely be conducted concurrently with project 5341D.
C. (CIP) Forest Lake Outlet Channel Design and Restoration: The Forest Lake outlet channel has been identified in monitoring reports as a source of sediment and nutrient loading, and in past studies as having excessive channel bank erosion and siltation. Considerations for project design and implementation may
2012-2021 Comfort Lake-Forest Lake Watershed Management Plan 55 include vegetative bank stabilization (native plants, etc.) and structural bank stabilization (e.g., riprap, concrete, etc.) where necessary to protect the banks and surrounding buildings. Dredging of the channel could also be conducted to remove any deposited sediment. A management plan for neighboring properties would be developed in conjunction with landowners to minimize future disturbances and promote a stable channel.
Bone-Birch-School-Little Comfort Tributary (5341) A. Stream Assessment: Conduct a stream conveyance and geomorphology assessment on the Bone-Birch-School-Little Comfort Tributary. Any resource restoration and/or stormwater/flood management project directly related to the Bone-Birch-School-Little Comfort Tributary will require knowledge of the system. This information is necessary to make more informed decisions regarding the resource and to develop associated watershed improvement projects.
The project will include office study as well as a field survey. The field survey provides detailed information for refinement of the initial classification, as well as the analysis and design process. It would include as a minimum the collection of the channel dimensions, pattern and profile, the condition, capacity, controlling elevation and type of crossings, and the bed and bank materials (type and size). It is important to assess the condition of the stream as it relates to current and forecasted stability & state. This assessment process will address entrenchment, width/depth & sinuosity, bank & bed stability, sediment supply and transport, aggradation/degradation, evolutionary trending.
Identifying unstable stream reaches and rectifying problem areas is a priority for the District. The process will be initiated by identifying potential problem areas and prioritizing the sites for further investigation. By quantifying sediment yield on eroding waterways, it’s possible to more accurately assess the cost benefit of proposed stabilization projects. Feasibility studies can be conducted on selected stream reaches and future capital projects implemented on the projects that meet District objectives. The geomorphic assessment will support efforts to identify causes of high nutrient loads and/or low dissolved oxygen.
B. School-Little Comfort Tributary Stream Restoration Design (LCL04 subwatershed): Based on results of phosphorus monitoring along the School- Little Comfort Tributary, design, as needed, a stream restoration for the channel downstream of School Lake in the LCL04 subwatershed.
C. (CIP) School-Little Comfort Tributary Stream Restoration (LCL04 subwatershed): Restore natural channel downstream of School Lake in the LCL04 subwatershed as designed (5341B). The project may include installation of a new outlet for School Lake, the removal of a beaver dam and service road culvert that are restricting flow through the channel, and the restoration of vegetation to channel banks.
D. E. coli and Dissolved Oxygen Source Assessment and Implementation Plan: Evaluate the source of high E. coli concentrations and the cause of low dissolved oxygen concentrations found in the stream and recommend methods for control. Support the established or in-process TMDL projects by providing data, analysis, source evaluation, and implementation recommendations needed to address elevated E. coli levels in the river. Provide this data in support of the overall
2012-2021 Comfort Lake-Forest Lake Watershed Management Plan 56 Sunrise River Watershed Assessment and TMDL or as a separate initiative of the District. This project likely will be conducted concurrently with project 5340B.
E. Buffer Survey: Complete a photographic buffer survey along the Bone-Birch- School-Little Comfort Tributary to evaluate the condition of existing buffers and to target buffer improvement projects. This project could be conducted in conjunction with the stream assessment (5341A).
Progress Evaluation Metric Success in addressing the issue areas identified in this plan relies on the completion of the majority of the identified projects in each issue area. The metric for successful implementation of Stream Projects is the completion of the planned projects over the course of this Plan. Completion of 80% - 100% of the planned projects is rated as “Excellent”, completion of 60% - 79% is rated as “Good”, 40% - 69% is rated as “Fair”, and less than 40% the projects completed is rated as “Poor”.
Potential Partners The likely partners for Stream Projects are the municipalities in which the project is located as well as the Sunrise River Basin team and state and federal agencies such as the Department of Natural Resources (DNR), Minnesota Pollution Control Agency (MPCA), and US Army Corps of Engineers (ACOE), who may be interested in the collected data and restoration efforts.
Potential Funding Sources The Stream Projects are expected to be funded primarily through the District’s annual levy and supported as possible through grants.
Sunrise River 2012-2021 Comfort Lake-Forest Lake Watershed Management Plan 57
4.6.4 Wetlands (5400 Series)
District-Wide (5420) A. Wetland Inventory: Complete a functional inventory of District wetlands. The CLFLWD recognizes the important functions and services wetlands provide in their watershed. The District places high value on functions such as water quality and flooding as evidenced by their identified issues and goals. The first step in addressing these issues and meeting goals is a thorough understanding of the wetland resources and their functional capacity. This understanding will be facilitated through a wetland functional assessment using the most recent state approved Minnesota Routine Assessment Methodology (MnRAM). This methodology provides a standardized process for mapping, inventorying and scoring wetlands for a suite of wetland functions. A public values survey, typically conducted through the Citizen Advisory Committee and Watershed Board, will support the functional assessment by providing important information used to identify priority issues amongst the constituency. The inventory will specifically identify partially drained wetlands. These priority issues help guide policy and capital projects that protect and enhance wetlands providing key services most valued by the public. Protection of groundwater dependant wetland resources, as well as wetlands that improve water quality for downstream water bodies are important for the District. At a minimum, the District will conduct a basic wetland inventory in conjunction with the Chisago County MLCCS study and Washington County MLCCS update.
Often a wetland inventory, functional assessment, values survey and resource protection prioritization/classification is completed under the auspices of Comprehensive Wetland Protection and Management Plan (CWPWP). The Wetland Conservation Act (WCA) provides specific guidance for completing a CWPMP and also requires notification to affected agencies prior to initiation. CWPMPs can be completed by agencies that operate as the WCA Local Governing Unit (LGU) or by entities that are not a WCA LGU. Within the CLFLWD there are multiple WCA LGUs. Ultimately a CWPMP is the process by which local agencies develop or adopt rules or ordinances that provide the desired level of protection for their wetland resources. If CLFLWD communities decide in the future that a CWPMP would be desirable, the CLFLWD would envision itself as a partner in that effort.
B. Wetland Restoration/Bank Feasibility Study: Conduct a feasibility study to investigate the creation of wetland banks within the District, potentially in partnership with the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers using the results of the Sunrise River Watershed Mitigation Pilot Study.
Similar to most areas in Minnesota, the District has lost a significant percentage of the presettlement wetlands or many of the existing basins have been affected by drainage. Realizing the benefits wetlands provide to the resources in the watershed, the District will examine reestablishing and restoring degraded basins in subwatersheds where restoration would be feasible and most beneficial to downstream resources. An outcome of the Wetland Inventory and Functional Assessment will be a prioritization of restoration sites that will help guide the selection of suitable restoration sites and a feasibility study of a selected site.
2012-2021 Comfort Lake-Forest Lake Watershed Management Plan 58 Wetland mitigation credits are a potential outcome of the wetland restoration projects. Credits generated by these types of projects are a useful commodity for public and private organizations. The District may have interest in partnering with other entities to select, design and build wetland restoration sites that generate credits for deposit into the State wetland bank. Embarking on a wetland banking project requires planning, interagency coordination, money to purchase the land or easement, and capital improvement funds for construction, long term monitoring and administration.
The project will further provide preliminary designs for wetland restoration of those degraded basins identified in the feasibility study.
C. (CIP) Wetland Restoration/Bank Implementation: Reestablish and restore degraded basins in subwatersheds where the generation of wetland credits is feasible and where it provides benefits to downstream resources. The project focus will be to restore the diversity and hydrology of the identified former wetlands and/or degraded wetlands and may create wetland banks within the District. This effort will potentially be in partnership with Army Corps of Engineers, Board of Water and Soil Resources and WCA LGUs. Findings from the Feasibility study (5420B) will guide siting and design.
Purple Loosestrife (invasive species) in regional wetland
2012-2021 Comfort Lake-Forest Lake Watershed Management Plan 59 Moody Lake (5421) A. (CIP) Wetland Restoration and Cattle Exclusion (NBL12 subwatershed): To improve water quality contributing to Moody Lake, this project will restore wetland hydrology in Moody Lake subwatersheds NBL11, NBL12, and NBL19, and exclude livestock from the wetlands in Moody Lake subwatersheds NBL11 and NBL12. The project is located west of Lofton Avenue and primarily north of 250th St. N. There is currently a herd of cattle having access to the stream and much of the area near the stream is bare soil. The project will include improvements that eliminate uncontrolled access to the wetland by livestock to restore wetland quality and improve downstream water quality.
Bone Lake (5422) A. Phosphorus Source Assessment (NBL17 subwatershed): Complete a phosphorus source assessment to evaluate the source of the elevated phosphorus load in the wetland and drainage between Moody Lake and Bone Lake. Monitoring in 2003 indicated an elevated phosphorus load from this NBL17 subwatershed. A phosphorus source assessment will be conducted to evaluate phosphorus sources under wet, dry and normal hydrologic conditions and to provide a more detailed evaluation of potential watershed sources.
B. Wetland Restoration Feasibility and Design (NBL17 subwatershed): An elevated phosphorus load was previously identified to Bone Lake from the NBL17 subwatershed, this project will evaluate the feasibility of identified options and design a wetland restoration phosphorus load reduction project in the wetland directing flow from Moody Lake to Bone Lake, if the wetland is identified as a source through the Phosphorus Source Assessment (5422A). Three alternatives were previously identified as potential methods to isolate the conveyance of the Moody Lake discharge to Bone Lake from the wetland (CLFLWD, 2007a), however a variety of options may be considered based on the findings of the phosphorus source assessment (5422A).
C. (CIP) Wetland Restoration (NBL17 subwatershed): Restore the wetland in Bone Lake subwatershed NBL17 as designed in 5422B. The project may include alterations to the NBL17 wetland including changes in drainage, channel alterations, and/or changes to the wetland hydroperiod in order to reduce phosphorus while restoring wetland function.
D. Phosphorus Source Assessment (SBL38 subwatershed): Complete a phosphorus source assessment to evaluate the source of the elevated phosphorus load in the wetland along the tributary to Bone Lake through subwatershed SBL38.
E. Wetland Restoration Planning & Design (SBL38 subwatershed): An elevated phosphorus load was previously identified to Bone Lake from the SBL38 subwatershed, this project will develop plans for restoration of the wetland along the tributary to Bone Lake through subwatershed SBL38 as needed based on diagnostic study.
F. (CIP) Wetland Restoration (SBL38 subwatershed): Restore the wetland along the Bone Lake tributary through subwatershed SBL38. The restoration is expected to include improvements to habitat and plant diversity, installation of water level control structures, and pretreatment of inflow. The project may result in wetland banking credits.
2012-2021 Comfort Lake-Forest Lake Watershed Management Plan 60 Birch Lake (5423) A. Phosphorus Source Assessment (LCL20 subwatershed). An elevated phosphorus load was previously identified to Birch Lake from the LCL20 subwatershed, this project will conduct an assessment of the source of high phosphorus loads in the inflow to Birch Lake. One cause of loading may be the alternating flooding, draining and drying of the wetland sediments in the LCL20 subwatershed. The assessment will evaluate the LCL20 subwatershed, as well as the remainder of the drainage area to Birch Lake.
B. Wetland Restoration Design (LCL20 subwatershed): Design a wetland restoration in Birch Lake subwatershed LCL20, as guided by the phosphorus source assessment (5423A). The design is expected to address needed changes in the hydraulic management of the wetland to limit cycling between wet and dry conditions that can increase phosphorus release.
C. (CIP) Wetland Restoration (LCL20 subwatershed): Implement a wetland restoration in Birch Lake subwatershed LCL20. The project may include installation of water level control structures to restore consistent wetland hydrology.
School Lake (5424) No projects planned for School Lake drainage area at this time.
Little Comfort Lake (5425) No projects planned for Little Comfort Lake drainage area at this time.
Shields Lake (5426) No projects planned for Shields Lake drainage area at this time.
Sylvan Lake (5427) No projects planned for Sylvan Lake drainage area at this time.
2012-2021 Comfort Lake-Forest Lake Watershed Management Plan 61 Forest Lake (5428) A. (CIP) Wetland Restoration and Cattle Exclusion (FL44 subwatershed): To improve water quality in the FL44 subwatershed wetland contributing to Forest Lake, this project will exclude livestock from the wetlands in Forest Lake subwatershed FL44. One source of the most concentrated estimated load to FL44 is from the livestock operation at the northeast end of FL44. The project will include the installation of fencing, along with a 30-foot buffer to eliminate livestock access.
Comfort Lake (5429) No projects planned for Comfort Lake drainage area at this time.
Progress Evaluation Metric Success in addressing the issue areas identified in this plan relies on the completion of the majority of the identified projects in each issue area. The metric for successful implementation of Wetlands Projects is the completion of the planned projects over the course of this Plan. Completion of 80% - 100% of the planned projects is rated as “Excellent”, completion of 60% - 79% is rated as “Good”, 40% - 69% is rated as “Fair”, and less than 40% the projects completed is rated as “Poor”.
Potential Partners The likely partners for Wetlands Projects are the municipalities in which the project is located as well as the Sunrise River Basin team and state and federal agencies, such as the Department of Natural Resources (DNR), Minnesota Pollution Control Agency (MPCA), and US Army Corps of Engineers (ACOE), who may be interested in the collected data and restoration efforts.
Potential Funding Sources The Wetlands Projects are expected to be funded primarily through the District’s annual levy and supported as possible through grants.
Green Heron in Wetland in FL44 subwatershed
2012-2021 Comfort Lake-Forest Lake Watershed Management Plan 62
4.6.5 Upland Resources (5500 Series)
District-Wide (5520) A. MLCCS Update: Conduct an MLCCS assessment of the District. Understanding land cover is important to evaluating basic hydrology, water quality and natural resources. A standardized land cover mapping tool has been developed by the Minnesota Department of Natural Resources called the Minnesota Land Cover Classification System (MLCCS). This mapping system is being used state-wide to map existing land cover and when done periodically, it can be used to track changes over time. MLCCS is being used in many watershed management applications, such as hydrology modeling and natural resource inventories. The Chisago County portions of the District have not been mapped using MLCCS. The Washington County portions of the District have MLCCS mapping. It is a priority for the District to first complete MLCCS mapping for Chisago County and to update Washington County data in areas where changes have occurred since the last mapping effort.
Since the MLCCS includes both upland and wetland resources, it is a companion data layer for any wetland inventory but also provides the information necessary to inventory, prioritize and protect high valued upland resources. Often the MLCCS is used to develop a Natural Resources Management Plan, which identifies priority upland resources in the District and develops strategies for their long term protection.
B. Natural Resources Inventory and Prioritization: The District will analyze the collected MLCCS data to compile a natural resources inventory and set priorities for protection and management of these resources.
C. Invasive Species Management Plan: Prepare a management plan to guide the District’s activities for upland invasive species management. The plan will provide methods and goals to address upland invasive species such as buckthorn where their presence is causing a water quality or habitat issue.
Progress Evaluation Metric Success in addressing the issue areas identified in this plan relies on the completion of the majority of the identified projects in each issue area. The metric for successful implementation of Upland Resources Projects is the completion of the planned projects over the course of this Plan. Completion of all of the planned projects is rated as “Excellent”, completion of two projects is rated as “Good”, completion of one project is rated as “Fair”, and completion of no projects in this area is rated as “Poor”.
Potential Partners The likely partners for Upland Resources Projects are Chisago and Washington Counties, as well as the Sunrise River Basin team and municipalities who may be interested in the collected data.
Potential Funding Sources The Upland Resources Projects are expected to be funded primarily through the District’s annual levy and supported through grants and funding partnerships.
2012-2021 Comfort Lake-Forest Lake Watershed Management Plan 63 4.6.6 Groundwater (5600 Series) District-Wide (5620) A. Groundwater Dependent Natural Resource Inventory and Review: Inventory and verify groundwater dependent natural resources in the District. The groundwater dependent natural resources inventory can be conducted in conjunction with the MLCCS study (5520B) and the wetland inventory (5420A). Groundwater dependent resources are often unique in plant species present, are often of higher quality that other local resources, and require different techniques for management to ensure that the groundwater input is sustained. The inventory will catalogue the groundwater dependent resources in the District.
B. Groundwater Dependent Natural Resource Action Plan: Develop a plan for the protection, restoration, management, and education needs for the identified groundwater dependent natural resources. Based on the results of the Groundwater Dependent Natural Resource Inventory (5620A), an action plan for protection, restoration, and management of these resources will be prepared to guide the actions of the District. Since these resources are often unique, the plan will also include recommendations for targeted educational efforts regarding Groundwater Dependent Natural Resources.
C. Provide Comments on Water Appropriation Permit Applications: The CLFLWD will review water appropriation permit applications submitted to CLFLWD from the Department of Natural Resources and will provide comments to the DNR.
Moody Lake (5621) No projects planned for Moody Lake drainage area at this time.
Bone Lake (5622) No projects planned for Bone Lake drainage area at this time.
Birch Lake (5623) No projects planned for Birch Lake drainage area at this time.
School Lake (5624) No projects planned for School Lake drainage area at this time.
Little Comfort Lake (5625) No projects planned for Little Comfort Lake drainage area at this time.
Shields Lake (5626) No projects planned for Shields Lake drainage area at this time.
Sylvan Lake (5627) A. Groundwater Recharge Protection Feasibility Study: Groundwater interactions are the largest components of Sylvan Lake’s water budget. Sylvan Lake does not have a surface discharge. Excess inflow is lost to groundwater and evaporation. A feasibility study will identify the types of groundwater protection measures that can be implemented around Sylvan Lake and the benefits of these measures. The study will also evaluate historic lake levels, groundwater levels, and historic photographs to increase the understanding of the interaction between lake levels and groundwater levels in Sylvan Lake.
2012-2021 Comfort Lake-Forest Lake Watershed Management Plan 64 B. (CIP) Groundwater Recharge Protection Implementation: Groundwater interactions make up the largest component of Sylvan Lake’s water budget and contribute to the high quality of the lake. In order to sustain healthy groundwater interactions with Sylvan Lake, the groundwater protection measures identified through the feasibility study (5637A) will be implemented around Sylvan Lake to protect the lake’s interaction with groundwater and to protect the lake’s water quality. Implementation measures may include infiltration features, pollution prevention practices,
Forest Lake (5628) A. Groundwater Dependent Natural Resource Interpretive Feature Feasibility Design and Planning (FL44 subwatershed): Groundwater dependent wetlands are unique resources within CLFLWD that can be highlighted as an asset to the community. This project will evaluate the feasibility and design an interpretive trail or overlook along the groundwater-dependent FL44 subwatershed wetland to provide educational access to the resource and to provide information on the characteristics of this groundwater-dependent resource. Locations on existing public land will be evaluated and the project will be planned in cooperation with landowners.
B. Groundwater Dependent Natural Resource Interpretive Feature Implementation (FL44 subwatershed): Implement an interpretive trail or overlook along the groundwater-dependent FL44 subwatershed wetland to provide education about the characteristics of this groundwater-dependent resource as guided by the design and planning efforts (5628A).
Comfort Lake (5629) No projects planned for Comfort Lake drainage area at this time.
Progress Evaluation Metric Success in addressing the issue areas identified in this plan relies on the completion of the majority of the identified projects in each issue area. The metric for successful implementation of Groundwater Projects is the completion of the planned projects over the course of this Plan. Completion of all of the planned projects is rated as “Excellent”, completion of three projects is rated as “Good”, completion of two project is rated as “Fair”, and completion of less than two projects in this area is rated as “Poor”.
Potential Partners The likely partners for Groundwater Projects are Chisago and Washington Counties as well as the municipalities in which the project is located.
Potential Funding Sources The Groundwater Projects are expected to be funded primarily through the District’s annual levy and supported as possible through grants.
Lesser Duckweed and Watermeal in Wetland in FL44 subwatershed
2012-2021 Comfort Lake-Forest Lake Watershed Management Plan 65
4.6.7 Public Education (5700 Series) District-Wide (5720) A. Education in Public Parks – Land/Water Connection and District Resources: Utilize the District’s tax forfeited land and/or partnerships with other public land holders to, in one or more public parks, provide educational information on the water resources and natural resources of the watershed and demonstrate the connection between water quality and water quality best management practices, upland resources, and land management practices. Signage specific to the resources and connections to be highlighted at the park will be developed to increase public understanding of the local resources and to highlight important aspects of the interactions within the natural system. Trails, overlooks, and other methods will be used to encourage interaction with the informational signage.
Progress Evaluation Metric The metric for successful implementation of Public Education Projects is the completion of the planned project over the course of this Plan.
Potential Partners The likely partners for Public Education Project are Chisago and Washington Counties as well as the municipalities in which the project is located.
Potential Funding Sources The Public Education Project is expected to be funded primarily through the District’s annual levy and supported as possible through grants.
4.6.8 Interagency Communication (5800 Series) No specific Interagency Communication projects at this time.
Scouts Stencil Stormsewers in CLFLWD
2012-2021 Comfort Lake-Forest Lake Watershed Management Plan 66
Project Locations in the Bone Lake Management District Figure 2.
2012-2021 Comfort Lake-Forest Lake Watershed Management Plan 67 2012-2021 Comfort Lake-Forest Lake Watershed Management Plan 68
Project Locations in the Little Comfort Lake Management District Figure 3.
2012-2021 Comfort Lake-Forest Lake Watershed Management Plan 69 2012-2021 Comfort Lake-Forest Lake Watershed Management Plan 70
Project Locations in the Forest Lake Management District Figure 4.
2012-2021 Comfort Lake-Forest Lake Watershed Management Plan 71 2012-2021 Comfort Lake-Forest Lake Watershed Management Plan 72
Project Locations in the Comfort Lake Management District Figure 5.
2012-2021 Comfort Lake-Forest Lake Watershed Management Plan 73 2012-2021 Comfort Lake-Forest Lake Watershed Management Plan 74 5 Implementation Schedule and Cost Table COSTS Implementation Initiatives Issue Areas CIP One-Time/ Annual Timeframe 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016 2017 2018 2019 2020 2021 10-Year Total
(current year, Lakes Streams Wetlands Upland Resources Groundwater Public Education Interagency Communication Floodplain for comparison)
TOTAL COSTS $17,438,000 $936,000 $1,007,009 $2,853,924 $3,155,647 $3,201,799 $3,598,477 $3,057,585 $3,194,926 $1,930,779 $2,091,057 $1,928,911 $2,717,451 $27,730,557
ADMINISTRATION 0 $191,000 $190,820 $196,545 $202,441 $208,514 $214,770 $221,213 $227,849 $234,685 $241,725 $241,725 $248,977 $2,429,263
1000 Administration 0 $191,000 $190,820 $196,545 $202,441 $208,514 $214,770 $221,213 $227,849 $234,685 $241,725 $241,725 $248,977 $2,429,263 1001 Board Administration x x x x x x x x - $23,400 Annual $23,400 $24,102 $24,825 $25,570 $26,337 $27,127 $27,941 $28,779 $29,642 $29,642 $30,532 $297,897 1002 General Office Expenses x x x x x x x x - $21,470 Annual $21,470 $22,114 $22,778 $23,461 $24,165 $24,890 $25,636 $26,405 $27,198 $27,198 $28,013 $273,327 1003 General Administration x x x x x x x x $145,950 Annual $145,950 $150,329 $154,838 $159,484 $164,268 $169,196 $174,272 $179,500 $184,885 $184,885 $190,432 $1,858,038
PROGRAMS $251,000 $423,000 $226,000 $468,000 $449,000 $477,000 $476,000 $496,000 $515,000 $527,000 $627,000 $613,000 $655,000 $5,529,547
3001 District Rules and Rulemaking $5,000 $1,000 - $6,180 $1,061 $6,556 $1,126 $6,956 $1,194 $7,379 $1,267 $7,601 $7,829 $47,148 3001A Ongoing Initiatives x x x x $1,000 Annual - $1,030 $1,061 $1,093 $1,126 $1,159 $1,194 $1,230 $1,267 $1,267 $1,305 $11,731 3001B Rule Implementation Review x x x x x x $5,000 Every other year - $5,150 - $5,464 - $5,796 - $6,149 - $6,334 $6,524 $35,417
3002 Permitting 0 $22,000 $20,000 $22,660 $23,340 $24,040 $24,761 $25,504 $26,269 $27,057 $27,869 $27,869 $28,705 $278,074 3002A Ongoing Initiatives x x x x x x x $20,000 Annual $20,000 $20,600 $21,218 $21,855 $22,510 $23,185 $23,881 $24,597 $25,335 $25,335 $26,095 $254,613 3002B Volume Banking Program Oversight x x x - $2,000 Annual - $2,060 $2,122 $2,185 $2,251 $2,319 $2,388 $2,460 $2,534 $2,534 $2,610 $23,461
3003 Monitoring & Data Assessment $103,000 $56,000 $56,280 $66,208 $59,707 $70,240 $63,344 $65,244 $76,754 $69,217 $71,294 $81,428 $83,871 $763,588 3003A Ongoing Initiatives x x x x x x $56,000 Annual $56,280 $57,968 $59,707 $61,499 $63,344 $65,244 $67,201 $69,217 $71,294 $71,294 $73,433 $716,481 3003B Develop Monitoring Plan x x x x $15,000 2012 - $15,450 ------$15,450 3003C Comprehensive Data Analysis x x x x $15,000 Every 3 years - - $15,914 - - $17,389 - - $19,002 - - $52,304 3003D Bone - Birch Tributary and Wetland Monitoring x x x $12,000 2012-2013 - $6,180 $6,365 ------$12,545 3003E Birch - School - Little Comfort Lake Tributary Monitoring x x x $12,000 2012-2013 - $6,180 $6,365 ------$12,545 3003F Forest Lake Subwatershed Wetland Outlet Monitoring (FL44 subwatershe x x $5,000 2012-2013 - $2,575 $2,652 ------$5,227 3003G Stream Biotic Monitoring x $20,000 2015, 2020 - - - - $22,510 - - - - $25,335 $26,095 $73,941 3003H Wetland Monitoring x $8,000 Periodic - - - $8,742 - - $9,552 - - $10,134 $10,438 $38,867 3003I Bone Lake Subwatershed Phosphorus Monitoring (NBL17 subwatershed) x x $8,000 2011 ------3003J Bone Lake Subwatershed Phosphorus Monitoring (SBL38 subwatershed) x x $8,000 2012 - $8,240 ------$8,240
3004 Non-Point Source Pollution Abatement Grant 0 $271,000 $133,000 $278,615 $286,973 $295,583 $304,450 $313,584 $322,991 $332,681 $342,661 $342,661 $352,941 $3,306,141 3004A Ongoing Initiatives x x x x x x $16,000 Annual $15,500 $15,965 $16,444 $16,937 $17,445 $17,969 $18,508 $19,063 $19,635 $19,635 $20,224 $197,325 3004B Residential Landowner Grant x x x x x $30,000 Annual $58,750 $30,900 $31,827 $32,782 $33,765 $34,778 $35,822 $36,896 $38,003 $38,003 $39,143 $410,669 3004C Agricultural and Rural Best Management Practice Incentives/Cost-Share x x x x x $30,000 Annual - $30,900 $31,827 $32,782 $33,765 $34,778 $35,822 $36,896 $38,003 $38,003 $39,143 $351,919 3004D Commercial/Community Grant x x x x x $45,000 Annual $58,750 $46,350 $47,741 $49,173 $50,648 $52,167 $53,732 $55,344 $57,005 $57,005 $58,715 $586,629 3004E Municipal Stormwater Remediation Grant x x x x x x YES $150,000 Annual - $154,500 $159,135 $163,909 $168,826 $173,891 $179,108 $184,481 $190,016 $190,016 $195,716 $1,759,597
3005 Education and Outreach $18,000 $29,000 $16,900 $48,307 $30,660 $31,580 $32,527 $33,503 $34,508 $35,543 $36,610 $36,610 $61,194 $397,942 3005A Ongoing Initiatives x x x x x x - $17,000 Annual $16,900 $17,407 $17,929 $18,467 $19,021 $19,592 $20,179 $20,785 $21,408 $21,408 $22,051 $215,148 3005B Summer Intern at Boat Launches x x - $10,000 Annual - $10,300 $10,609 $10,927 $11,255 $11,593 $11,941 $12,299 $12,668 $12,668 $13,048 $117,306 3005C Standard Project Signage x x x x x x x $18,000 - 2012, 2021 - $18,540 ------$23,486 $42,026 3005D Local Student Engagement x x x x x x x - $2,000 Annual - $2,060 $2,122 $2,185 $2,251 $2,319 $2,388 $2,460 $2,534 $2,534 $2,610 $23,461
3006 Technical Resource Sharing + Interagency Communication $125,000 $15,000 - $14,935 $15,383 $15,845 $16,320 $16,809 $17,314 $17,833 $109,576 $79,173 $81,548 $384,736 3006A Ongoing Initiatives x x x x x x x x - $2,000 Annual - $2,060 $2,122 $2,185 $2,251 $2,319 $2,388 $2,460 $2,534 $2,534 $2,610 $23,461 3006B Provide Comment on Municipal Variance Requests x x x x x x $5,000 Annual - $5,150 $5,305 $5,464 $5,628 $5,796 $5,970 $6,149 $6,334 $6,334 $6,524 $58,653 3006C Modeling x x x x x $5,000 Annual - $5,150 $5,305 $5,464 $5,628 $5,796 $5,970 $6,149 $6,334 $6,334 $6,524 $58,653 3006D Geographic Information Systems (GIS) x x x x $2,000 Annual - $2,060 $2,122 $2,185 $2,251 $2,319 $2,388 $2,460 $2,534 $2,534 $2,610 $23,461 3006E District Web Mapper x x x x x x x x $5,000 $1,000 2011 - $515 $530 $546 $563 $580 $597 $615 $633 $633 $652 $5,865 3006F Watershed Management Plan Update x x x x x x x x $120,000 2019-2021 ------$91,207 $60,805 $62,629 $214,642
3007 Research 0 $25,000 - $25,750 $26,523 $27,318 $28,138 $28,982 $29,851 $30,747 $31,669 $31,669 $32,619 $293,266 3006A Ongoing Initiatives x x $25,000 Annual - $25,750 $26,523 $27,318 $28,138 $28,982 $29,851 $30,747 $31,669 $31,669 $32,619 $293,266
3008 Measurement of Progress 0 $5,000 - $5,150 $5,305 $5,464 $5,628 $5,796 $5,970 $6,149 $6,334 $6,334 $6,524 $58,653 3008A Ongoing Initiatives x x x x x x x x $5,000 Annual - $5,150 $5,305 $5,464 $5,628 $5,796 $5,970 $6,149 $6,334 $6,334 $6,524 $58,653
2012-2021 Comfort Lake-Forest Lake Watershed Management Plan 75
CLFLWD 2011 Watershed Management Plan‐DRAFT ‐ 10/27/2010 2012-2021 Comfort Lake-Forest Lake Watershed Management Plan 76 5 Implementation Schedule and Cost Table - cont. COSTS Implementation Initiatives Issue Areas CIP One-Time/ Annual Timeframe 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016 2017 2018 2019 2020 2021 10-Year Total
(current year, Lakes Streams Wetlands Upland Resources Groundwater Public Education Interagency Communication Floodplain for comparison)
PROJECTS $17,187,000 $322,000 $590,009 $2,189,574 $2,504,254 $2,516,660 $2,907,414 $2,339,995 $2,452,225 $1,169,487 $1,222,053 $1,073,841 $1,813,243 $20,778,756
5100 Floodplain 0 0 ------5140A Sunrise River Water Quality/Quantity Regional Stormwater Project x x x x x YES see 5228H see 5229A 2012-2016 ------
5200 Lakes $14,254,000 $319,000 $488,000 $1,717,010 $2,398,377 $2,240,418 $1,749,716 $2,013,543 $2,354,791 $1,167,519 $1,112,351 $362,423 $1,811,156 $17,415,303 5220A Volume Control Facility Planning & Design x $70,000 2018 ------$86,091 - - - $86,091 5220B Volume Control Facility Implementation x YES $700,000 2019 ------$886,739 - - $886,739 5220C Invasive Species Control Pilot Projects x $40,000 2017 ------$47,762 - - - - $47,762 5220D Chemical Treatment of Inflows x YES $1,000,000 $200,000 unscheduled - - 5221A (Moody) Moody Lake Inlet Fish Barrier x YES $75,000 2011 $75,000 $77,250 ------$152,250 5221B (Moody) Curly-Leaf Pondweed Management x - $15,000 Annual - $15,450 $15,914 $16,391 $16,883 $17,389 $17,911 $18,448 $19,002 $19,002 $19,572 $175,960 5221C (Moody) Alum Treatment x $54,000 2011 $37,000 ------$37,000 5221D (Moody) Rough Fish Management x $13,000 Every other year $23,500 $13,390 - $14,205 - $15,071 - $15,988 - $16,468 - $98,622 5221E (Moody) Macrophyte & Invasives Survey x $7,000 $3,000 Every 5 years, Annual - $10,300 $3,183 $3,278 $3,377 $3,478 $11,941 $3,690 $3,800 $3,800 $3,914 $50,760 5222A (Bone) Bone Lake Inlet and Outlet Fish Barriers x YES $210,000 2012 - $216,300 ------$216,300 5222B (Bone) Bone Lake Infiltration Basin Planning and Design (SBL07) x $65,000 2012 - $66,950 ------$66,950 5222C (Bone) Bone Lake Infiltration Basin Implementation (SBL07) x YES $425,000 2013 - - $450,883 ------$450,883 5222D (Bone) Shoreline Survey x $8,700 2014 - - - $9,507 ------$9,507 5222E (Bone) Curly-Leaf Pondweed Management x $56,000 Annual - $57,680 $59,410 $61,193 $63,028 $64,919 $66,867 $68,873 $70,939 $70,939 $73,067 $656,916 5222F (Bone) Rough Fish Management x $13,000 Every other year $23,500 $13,390 - $14,205 - $15,071 - $15,988 - $16,468 - $98,622 5222G (Bone) Alum Treatment x $260,000 2013 - - $275,834 ------$275,834 5222H (Bone) Macrophyte & Invasives Survey x $7,000 $3,000 Every 5 years, Annual - $3,090 $10,609 $3,278 $3,377 $3,478 $3,582 $12,299 $3,800 $3,800 $3,914 $51,227 5223A (Birch) Phos. Source Assessment & Implementation Plan x $20,000 2017 ------$23,881 - - - - $23,881 5225A (Little Comfort) Phos. Source Assessment & Implementation Plan x $25,000 2012 - $25,750 ------$25,750 5225B (Little Comfort) Shoreline Survey x $5,200 2013 - - $5,517 ------$5,517 5225C (Little Comfort) Curly-Leaf Pondweed Management x $8,000 Annual after 2016 ------$9,552 $9,839 $10,134 $10,134 $10,438 $50,098 5225D (Little Comfort) Rough Fish Management x $21,000 Every other year - - - - - $24,345 - $25,827 - $26,602 - $76,774 5225E (Little Comfort) Alum Treatment x $54,000 2020 ------$68,406 - $68,406 5225F (Little Comfort) Macrophyte & Invasives Survey x $7,000 $3,000 Every 5 years, Annual - $3,090 $3,183 $3,278 $3,377 $11,593 $3,582 $3,690 $3,800 $3,800 $13,048 $52,440 5226A (Shields) Feasibility Study - Biomanipulation x $34,000 2017 ------$40,598 - - - - $40,598 5226B (Shields) Rough Fish Management x $21,000 Every other year - - - - - $24,345 - $25,827 - $26,602 - $76,774 5226C (Shields) Curly-Leaf Pondweed Management x $7,500 Annual after 2016 - - - - - $8,695 $8,955 $9,224 $9,501 $9,501 $9,786 $55,661 5226D (Shields) Shoreline Survey x $5,200 2018 ------$6,395 - - - $6,395 5226E (Shields) Macrophyte & Invasives Survey x $7,000 $3,000 Every 5 years, Annual - $3,090 $3,183 $10,927 $3,377 $3,478 $3,582 $3,690 $12,668 $3,800 $3,914 $51,708 5227A (Sylvan) Stormwater and Shoreline BMP Planning x $15,000 2014 - - - $16,391 ------$16,391 5227B (Sylvan) Stormwater and Shoreline BMP Implementation x YES $80,000 2015 - - - - $90,041 ------$90,041 5227C (Sylvan) Shoreline Survey x $5,800 2016 - - - - - $6,724 - - - - - $6,724 5227D (Sylvan) Macrophyte & Invasives Survey x $7,000 $3,000 Every 5 years, Annual - $3,090 $3,183 $3,278 $3,377 $11,593 $3,582 $3,690 $3,800 $3,800 $13,048 $52,440 5228A (Forest) Diagnostic Study and Implementation Plan x $120,000 2016 - - - - - $139,113 - - - - - $139,113 5228B (Forest) Forest Lake Diagnostic Study Implementation x YES $800,000 2018-2020 ------5228C (Forest) Urban Stormwater Retrofit Planning & Design (FL01, FL81) x $50,000 2017 - $51,500 ------$51,500 5228D (Forest) Urban Stormwater Retrofit Implementation (FL01, FL81) x YES $600,000 2018 - $618,000 - - - - $716,431 $737,924 - - - $2,072,356 5228E (Forest) Shoreline Survey x $13,000 2015 - - - - $14,632 ------$14,632 5228F (Forest) Macrophyte & Invasives Survey x $25,000 $3,000 Every 5 years, Annual $28,840 $29,705 $30,596 $3,377 $3,478 $3,582 $3,690 $35,470 $35,470 $36,534 $210,740 5228G (Forest) Aquatic Macrophyte and Invasive Species Management x $10,000 Annual $10,300 $10,609 $10,927 $11,255 $11,593 $11,941 $12,299 $12,668 $12,668 $13,048 $117,306 5228H (Forest) Imperial Ave Area BMP Design (FL44) x $12,000 2017 ------$14,329 - - - - $14,329 5228I (Forest) Imperial Ave Area BMP Implementation (FL44) x YES $60,000 2018 ------$73,792 - - - $73,792 5228J (Forest) North Shore Trail BMP Design (FL44) x $20,000 2015 - - - - $22,510 ------$22,510 5228K (Forest) North Shore Trail BMP Implementation (FL44) x YES $80,000 2016 - - - - - $92,742 - - - - - $92,742 5228L (Forest) In-Lake Treatment x $1,230,000 2021 ------$1,604,871 $1,604,871 5229A (Comfort) Sunrise Regional Stormwater Project Feasibility & Design x $330,000 2011 $329,000 ------$329,000 5229B (Comfort) Sunrise Regional Stormwater Project Implementation x YES $990,000 2012-2016 - $203,940 $210,058 $216,360 $222,851 $229,536 - - - - - $1,082,745 5229C (Comfort) Shoreline Survey x $8,500 2013 - - $9,018 ------$9,018 5229D (Comfort) BMP Feasibility Study for District's Tax Forfeited Land x $50,000 2013 - - $53,045 ------$53,045 5229E (Comfort) BMP Implementation on District's Tax Forfeited Land x YES $500,000 2014 - - - $546,364 ------$546,364 5229F (Comfort) Bixby Park Stormwater Ponds Design x $264,000 2012 - $271,920 ------$271,920 5229G (Comfort) Bixby Park Stormwater Treatment Implementation x YES $5,600,000 $1,600 2013-2017 - - $1,188,208 $1,225,603 $1,262,371 $1,300,242 $1,339,249 $1,968 $2,027 $2,027 $2,088 $6,323,781 5229H (Comfort) Macrophyte & Invasives Survey x $7,000 $3,000 Every 5 years, Annual $3,090 $3,183 $10,927 $3,377 $3,478 $3,582 $3,690 $12,668 $3,800 $3,914 $51,708 5299A (Heims) Lake Water Quality Study x $20,000 2012 - $20,600 ------$20,600 5299B (First) Lake Water Quality Study x $20,000 2013 - - $21,218 ------$21,218 5299C (Second) Lake Water Quality Study x $20,000 2013 - - $21,218 ------$21,218 5299D (Third) Lake Water Quality Study x $20,000 2013 - - $21,218 ------$21,218 5299E (Fourth) Lake Water Quality Study x $20,000 2014 - - - $21,855 ------$21,855 5299F (Sea) Lake Water Quality Study x $20,000 2014 - - - $21,855 ------$21,855 5299G (Nielsen) Lake Water Quality Study x $20,000 2015 - - - - $22,510 ------$22,510 5299H (Clear) Lake Water Quality Study x $20,000 2016 - - - - - $23,185 - - - - - $23,185 5299I (Twin) Lake Water Quality Study x $20,000 2017 ------$23,881 - - - - $23,881 5299J (Cranberry) Lake Water Quality Study x $20,000 2018 ------$24,597 - - - $24,597 5299K (Elwell) Lake Water Quality Study x $20,000 2019 ------$25,335 - - $25,335 5299L (Lendt) Lake Water Quality Study x $20,000 2020 ------$25,335 - $25,335
2012-2021 Comfort Lake-Forest Lake Watershed Management Plan 77
CLFLWD 2011 Watershed Management Plan‐DRAFT ‐ 10/27/2010 2012-2021 Comfort Lake-Forest Lake Watershed Management Plan 78 5 Implementation Schedule and Cost Table - cont. COSTS Implementation Initiatives Issue Areas CIP One-Time/ Annual Timeframe 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016 2017 2018 2019 2020 2021 10-Year Total
(current year, Lakes Streams Wetlands Upland Resources Groundwater Public Education Interagency Communication Floodplain for comparison)
5300 Streams $464,000 $2,400 - $50,264 $849 $51,140 $62,803 $308,135 $955 $984 $1,013 $1,013 $1,044 $478,201 5340A (Sunrise) Stream Assessment x $48,000 2012 - $49,440 ------$49,440 5340B (Sunrise) E. coli Source Assessment & Implementation Plan x $10,000 2015 - - - - $11,255 ------$11,255 5340C (Sunrise) Forest Lake Outlet Channel Design and Restoration x YES $50,000 2016 5341A (BBSLC Tributary) Stream Assessment x $38,000 2014 - - - $41,524 ------$41,524 5341B (BBSLC Tributary) School-Little Comfort Tributary Stream Restoration Design x $30,000 2015 - - - - $16,883 $17,389 - - - - - $34,272 5341C (BBSLC Tributary) School-Little Comfort Tributary Stream Restoration (LCL04 x YES $250,000 $800 2016 - $824 $849 $874 $900 $290,746 $955 $984 $1,013 $1,013 $1,044 $299,203 5341D (BBSLC Tributary) E. coli & DO Source Assessment & Imp. Plan x $30,000 2015 - - - - $33,765 ------$33,765 5341E (BBSLC Tributary) Buffer Survey x $8,000 2014 - - - $8,742 ------$8,742
5400 Wetlands $2,147,000 $800 $102,009 $383,160 $83,811 $162,816 $968,838 $927 $955 $984 $108,689 $634,398 $1,044 $2,447,632 5420A Wetland Inventory x $145,000 2012-2014 - $89,610 $30,766 $31,689 ------$152,065 5420B Wetland Restoration/Bank Feasibility Study x $85,000 2019 ------$107,675 - - $107,675 5420C Wetland Restoration/Bank Implementation x YES $500,000 2020 ------$633,385 - $633,385 5421A (Moody) Wetland Restoration and Cattle Exclusion (NBL12) x x YES $62,009 2011 $62,009 ------$62,009 5422A (Bone) Phosphorus Source Assessment (NBL17) x x $25,000 2012 - $25,750 ------$25,750 5422B (Bone) Wetland Restoration Feasibility & Design (NBL17) x x $25,000 2013 - - $26,523 ------$26,523 5422C (Bone) Wetland Restoration (NBL17) x x YES $260,000 2012 - $267,800 ------$267,800 5422D (Bone) Phosphorus Source Assessment (SBL38) x x $25,000 2013 - - $26,523 ------$26,523 5422E (Bone) Wetland Restoration Planning & Design (SBL38) x x $25,000 2014 - - - $27,318 ------$27,318 5422F (Bone) Wetland Restoration (SBL38) x x YES $240,000 2015 - - - - $270,122 ------$270,122 5423A (Birch) Wetland Phosphorus Source Assessment (LCL20) x x $30,000 2014 - - - $32,782 ------$32,782 5423B (Birch) Wetland Restoration Design (LCL20) x x $65,000 2014 - - - $71,027 ------$71,027 5423C (Birch) Wetland Restoration (LCL20) x x YES $620,000 $800 2015 - - - - $698,716 $927 $955 $984 $1,013 $1,013 $1,044 $704,653 5428A (Forest) Wetland Restoration & Cattle Exclusion (FL44) x x YES $40,000 2011 $40,000 ------$40,000
5500 Upland Resources $79,000 - - $30,900 $21,218 $24,040 $7,879 ------$84,037 5520A Invasive Species Management Plan x $7,000 2015 - - - - $7,879 ------$7,879 5520B MLCCS Update x $50,000 2012-2013 - $30,900 $21,218 ------$52,118 5520C Natural Resources Inventory and Prioritization x $22,000 2014 - - - $24,040 ------$24,040
5600 Groundwater $183,000 0 - $8,240 - $38,245 $50,648 $17,389 $95,524 - - - - $210,047 5620A GW-Dependent Natural Resource Inventory and Review x $8,000 2012 - $8,240 ------$8,240 5620B GW-Dependent Natural Resource Action Plan x $20,000 2014 - - - $21,855 ------$21,855 5227A (Sylvan) Groundwater Protection Feasibility Study x x $15,000 2014 - - - $16,391 ------$16,391 5227B (Sylvan) Groundwater Protection Implementation x x YES $45,000 2015 - - - - $50,648 ------$50,648 5628A (Forest) GW-Dep. Natural Resource Interpretive Feature Feasibility (FL44) x $15,000 2016 - - - - - $17,389 - - - - - $17,389 5628B (Forest) GW-Dep. Natural Resource Interpretive Feature Implementation (FL44) x $80,000 2017 ------$95,524 - - - - $95,524
5700 Public Education $60,000 - - - - - $67,531 - - - - $76,006 - $143,537 5720A Education in Public Parks – Land/Water Connection and District Reso x x x x x x x $60,000 2015, 2020 - - - - $67,531 - - - - $76,006 - $143,537
2012-2021 Comfort Lake-Forest Lake Watershed Management Plan 79
CLFLWD 2011 Watershed Management Plan‐DRAFT ‐ 10/27/2010 2012-2021 Comfort Lake-Forest Lake Watershed Management Plan 80 6. MEASURING IMPLEMENTATION PROGRESS The following tools for measuring successful implementation of this plan are to be used annually under the District Program Measurement of Progress. The primary metric for evaluation of progress by the District is the movement toward lake water quality goals as measured by water quality trends (Section 5.2, Adaptive Management). The key metric is a trend of total phosphorus concentrations in District Lakes moving toward or maintaining goal concentrations (see Lakes Goal A). Because changes in lake quality resulting from alterations in the landscape take significant time to become evident within the lake, especially given variations in hydrologic conditions, a secondary metric is the completion of planned programs and projects. This secondary metric is a quantitative assessment of the completion of projects and the success of programs. This quantitative assessment will also allow evaluation of specific projects and initiatives and allow evaluation of resource goals that are not directly tied to lake water quality.
6.1. Quantitative Assessment: Issue Areas Addressed The quantitative measurement of the District’s accomplishment of projects and programs will indicate progress on addressing District Issue Areas from the short term perspective of successful completion of planned program initiatives and projects.
6.1.1 Projects The District will perform an annual inventory of District projects accomplished under each Issue Area in the preceding year. Results will provide for a simple assessment of which Issue Areas have received attention through project work and how that compares to project work that was intended for completion that year. Progress in each issue area will be evaluated based on the Progress Evaluation Metrics identified in each issue area addressed by projects (see Section 4.6).
When specific quantifiable results are desired to measure the success of a specific project beyond a modeled expected performance, the District will monitor or otherwise measure the performance of the project to provide a specific numeric indication of the results of the project and its contribution toward the goals of the District.
6.1.2 Programs Ongoing initiatives conducted through District Programs will be evaluated in a similar manner. Since ongoing initiatives, by definition, have no point of completion, District Board and staff will assign a numerical score (e.g., from 1- 10) to each ongoing initiative based on the level of effort put into that program in the preceding year.
Additional evaluation of the success of District Programs will be completed by evaluating progress toward the goals of the program. Progress will be evaluated based on the Progress Evaluation Metrics identified in the program description (see Section 4.5).
2012-2021 Comfort Lake-Forest Lake Watershed Management Plan 81 6.2. Adaptive Management: Meeting Lake Goals for Water Quality Many of the implementation actions of District Programs (ongoing initiatives) and specific projects are intended to decrease the total phosphorus loading to District’s lakes. Ten of these lakes have specific water quality goals based on findings from existing and ongoing studies. Specific projects have been identified for many of these lakes. However, at this stage, nutrient reduction activities have not been identified for all of the lakes to the extent needed to fully meet the goals of this plan. In addition, the actual performance of planned practices may vary from what was estimated after installation. Since the cumulative effect on water quality of planned and future projects is also unknown, a feedback loop is necessary that evaluates lake water quality and then tailors implementation actions to the findings.
Measuring the success of meeting lake water quality goals will therefore be conducted through an adaptive management process. As practices are implemented in a lake’s watershed, lake water quality will be monitored to evaluate the impact of the practice and the proximity of phosphorus concentrations to the respective goal (10-year, 20-year or long term – see Table 3). If water quality is nearing the goal, the implementation actions will continue as planned. If water quality does not show improvement, the implementation action will be reviewed and adapted as necessary.
Table 3. Lake water quality goals. 10-year 20-year Long Term In-Lake Total In-Lake Total In-Lake Total Measured Average Phosphorus Phosphorus Phosphorus Goal Goal Goal Lake Years 6 7 8 Concentration Concentration Concentration Load Concentration of Data Moody 384 μg/l TP 3 60 μg/l TP 40 μg/l TP 144 lb/yr 40 μg/l TP
Bone 85 μg/l TP 21 40 μg/l TP 40 μg/l TP 669 lb/yr 30 μg/l TP
Birch 90 μg/l TP 3 60 μg/l TP 60 μg/l TP 471lb/yr 60 μg/l TP
School 62 μg/l TP 4 50 μg/l TP 40 μg/l TP 452 lb/yr 40 μg/l TP Little 118 μg/l TP 5 40 μg/l TP 40 μg/l TP 577 lb/yr 30 μg/l TP Comfort Shields 336 μg/l TP 18 100 μg/l TP 60 μg/l TP 195 lb/yr 60 μg/l TP
Sylvan 21 μg/l TP 21 20 μg/l TP 20 μg/l TP 69 lb/yr 20 μg/l TP 3,312 Forest 41 μg/l TP 24 <40 μg/l TP <40 μg/l TP 30 μg/l TP lb/yr Heims 37 μg/l TP 1 <40 μg/l TP <40 μg/l TP NA <40 μg/l TP 2,339 Comfort 61 μg/l TP 12 40 μg/l TP 40 μg/l TP 30 μg/l TP lb/yr
6 The 20-year In-Lake Total Phosphorus Goal is equivalent to the state standards for in-lake water quality established by the Minnesota Pollution Control Agency. 7 For Moody, Bone, School, Little Comfort, Shields, Comfort Lakes from: Lake Total Phosphorus Assimilative Capacity from Comfort Lake- Forest Lake Watershed District Six Lakes Total Maximum Daily Load Study (MPCA, 2010). For all other lakes from: Comfort Lake-Forest Lake Watershed District (CLFLWD). 2007a. Watershed and Lake Water Quality Modeling Investigation for the Development of a Watershed Capital Improvement Plan. Prepared by Wenck Associates, Inc. 8 The Long Term In-Lake Total Phosphorus Goal was established by the CLFLWD Board of Managers and exceeds state standards for lakes defined by the District as active recreation lakes.
2012-2021 Comfort Lake-Forest Lake Watershed Management Plan 82 7. FINANCING APPROACH 7.1. Funding Options The CLFLWD can fund its administration, projects, and programs in a number of ways as defined by Minnesota Watershed Law, Minnesota Statute Chapter 103D and the Metropolitan Surface Water Management Act, Minnesota Statute Chapter 103B. These methods include ad valorem taxes, special assessments, water management fees, emergency funding, and other sources. 7.1.1 Ad Valorem Taxes An ad valorem levy is a levy on real property in which the amount of the levy corresponds to property value. The watershed-wide ad valorem levy produces tax revenue from all taxable properties within the watershed.
With respect to projects funded by an ad valorem levy, the Watershed District may:
• Use a portion of the Administrative Fund for construction and maintenance of projects of common benefit to the watershed district (Minnesota Statutes 103D.905). Since this fund is normally used for the basic organizational needs of the District, it is difficult to fund large projects using this source.
• Levy to pay the cost attributable to the basic water management features of projects initiated by petition of a governmental subdivision of the watershed district (Minnesota Statutes 103D.905). The per project levy may not exceed 0.00798 percent of the taxable market value for a period of time not to exceed 15 consecutive years.
• Levy for those improvements included in the watershed management plan and implement planned projects without a petition (Minnesota Statutes 103B.231). Watershed districts may levy ad-valorem taxes to pay for capital improvements including maintenance of improvements either over the entire watershed (Minnesota Statutes 103B.241) or over all property within a portion or subwatershed of the watershed district (Minnesota Statutes 103B.245 and Minnesota Statutes 103B.251). In order for the District to use either funding mechanism, projects, studies, and project maintenance must be adequately described in the watershed management plan.
Shoreline restoration and temporary erosion and sediment controls
2012-2021 Comfort Lake-Forest Lake Watershed Management Plan 83
7.1.2 Special Assessments For certain types of projects, the CLFLWD may assess costs to property owners solely on the basis of benefits received. This form of taxation generally must follow very exacting legal procedures by the Board to authorize a project and determine damages and benefits to specific properties resulting from the project.
• Projects may be paid for by assessment of benefited property if the project is initiated by a petition, unanimous resolution of the managers, or other method prescribed in Minnesota Statute Chapter 103D.
• Cities or residents may petition a watershed district for a project. The petitioners must guarantee the funds used to pay for the preliminary feasibility studies (Minnesota Statutes 103D.705).
• A project may be instituted by resolution of a majority of the watershed district managers, but the project must be financed by one or more grants totaling at least 50 percent of the estimated cost and the total estimated cost to the watershed district may not be more than $750,000 (Minnesota Statutes 103D.601).
7.1.3 Water Management Fees Water management fees are fees which raise money based on the benefits a parcel receives from an expenditure of watershed district funds or that parcel’s contribution to the water resource impact that the expenditure is for the purpose of addressing. Typically, a water management fee is a property charge based on stormwater characteristics for a type of land use (e.g. estimated phosphorus load, runoff volume).
• Watershed districts may establish a watershed management district for the purpose of collecting revenues and paying costs of projects initiated under Minnesota Statutes section 103B.231, and Minnesota Statutes sections M103D.601, 605, 611, or 730 (Minnesota Statutes 103D.729). For watershed districts to use this funding mechanism, it must be included in the district’s watershed management plan, or the plan must be amended to include this funding mechanism.
7.1.4 Emergency Projects Watershed district managers may declare an emergency and order work to be done without a contract. The cost of work can be paid for either by special assessment or an ad valorem tax levy, if the cost is not more than 25 percent of the most recent administrative ad valorem levy (Minnesota Statutes 103D.615) or without levy limits (Minnesota Statutes 103B.252).
7.1.5 Outside Funding Sources Other revenue/funding and financing options include state, federal, or private grants or cost-share participation from other governmental bodies, expenditures by program/project partners, fees, contract payments, and District or county bonds. The Implementation section of this Plan outlines potential funding partners, grant sources, and other funding mechanisms that are likely to be used for the programs and projects of the District.
2012-2021 Comfort Lake-Forest Lake Watershed Management Plan 84 If the District unexpectedly requires funds outside of the levy cycle, it may obtain loans from Chisago or Washington counties, a commercial lender or another lender on negotiated terms.
Funding from Washington County is also an available mechanism for funding capital improvement projects. Washington County funding is governed at this time by the County’s Financial and Budget Policy # 2403 (Appendix C). The policy establishes guidelines for the project stating that the project must be financially sound, serve a public purpose of county-wide importance, and the project will not have a negative financial impact on the County. Funds must be requested by April 1st of the year prior to the time when funds will be needed.
7.2. Proposed Funding Mechanisms 7.2.1 General Funding Administrative, Program, and General Project Funding The Comfort Lake-Forest Lake Watershed District obtains the majority of its funding for water resource programs and projects from property taxes through a watershed-wide ad valorem levy. Other sources of funding include grants or cost- share from other governmental bodies, expenditures by program/project partners, and permit fees. The direct financial burden on watershed residents has been moderated by the CLFLWD’s success in securing grant or cost-share funds through programs administered by the Minnesota Board of Water and Soil Resources, the Minnesota Pollution Control Agency and the Minnesota Department of Natural Resources. The participation of volunteers in the District’s programs and projects also helps to reduce the levied costs. The Implementation section of this Plan outlines potential funding partners, grant sources, and other funding mechanisms that are likely to be used for the programs and projects of the District.
The CLFWLD maintains three funds: a General Fund, an Insurance Fund and a Projects/Programs Fund. The general fund addresses basic operations of the District’s activities. The levy limit for this fund is $250,000 (Minnesota Statutes 103D.905). The general fund is levied annually by the CLFLWD to support the costs associated with maintaining administrative staff, consultant retainers, office space and equipment, insurance, manager per diems and similar basic administrative expenses. The Insurance Fund levy is about $8,000 and covers the cost for liability insurance for the District (Minnesota Statutes 466.06). The Projects/Programs Fund levy covers the cost of implementing the projects and programs of the District as guided by this Plan. This levy varies in amount, but was $445,458 in 2009 and $497,000 in 2010 and 2011. The Projects/Programs Fund allows the District to implement water and natural resource related programs, projects and capital improvements. The funds may be accumulated to pay for these projects and programs (Minnesota Statutes 103B.241).
This levy authority highlights the importance of the Plan for CLFLWD activities. The Plan defines the programs and projects for which the CLFLWD may exercise its taxing authority. The Minnesota Board of Water and Soil Resources, which oversees watershed district activity, has confirmed that the 103B.241 levy may be used broadly to fund the CLFLWD Watershed Management Plan preparation and both the administrative and project costs of carrying out the implementation program in the plan.
2012-2021 Comfort Lake-Forest Lake Watershed Management Plan 85 The CLFLWD budget and levy process is: • Each year, the Board approves a budget and sets the amount of the levy for the following year. • The Board must, by September 15, certify to the Washington County and Chisago County Auditors the amount of the CLFLWD levy for the following year. The watershed-wide ad valorem levy is apportioned between the two counties in proportion to the net tax capacity of each. This levy may be adjusted before a late-December date established by each county auditor. • The Counties include the CLFLWD levy in their tax statements, collect the levy, and distribute the proceeds to the CLFLWD, half the following July and half the January thereafter.
Capital Improvement Project Funding A watershed district which has adopted a watershed management plan in accordance with Minnesota Statutes 103B.231 may fund capital improvement projects in a number of different ways including:
1. using its ad-valorem authority under Minnesota Statues 103B.241 to accumulate funds to pay for capital improvement projects identified in its watershed management plan,
2. certify for payment by the county all or any part of a capital improvement contained in the capital improvement program of the plan, Minnesota Statute 103B.251 (see Appendix C for Washington County Policy), and
3. certification to the counties for all or parts of a capital improvement project initiated by petition under Minnesota Statutes 103D including assessment levies against the benefited properties.
The District expects that the majority of Capital Improvement Projects will be funded through the District’s Minnesota Statues 103B authorities. The Projects/Programs Fund levy covers the cost of implementing the projects and programs of the District as guided by this Plan. As discussed in the Administrative, Program, and General Project Funding section above, this levy varies in amount, but was $445,458 in 2009 and $497,000 in 2010 and 2011. This Projects/Programs Fund allows the District to implement water and natural resource related programs, projects and capital improvements. The funds may be accumulated to pay for these projects and programs (Minnesota Statutes 103B.241).
The planned capital improvement projects to be funded through this plan and the estimated project costs are summarized in Table 4. Each of these projects are described in more detail in Section 4.6. The District will annually review its capital improvement plan to refine the schedule and costs of planned projects as needed.
2012-2021 Comfort Lake-Forest Lake Watershed Management Plan 86
Table 4. Capital Improvement Project Summary (all in 2010 dollars)
Proposed Capital Implementation Average Total Improvement Schedule Annual Cost Projects Budget Begin End
Municipal Stormwater Remediation Grant 2012 2021 $150,000 $1,500,000
Volume Control Facility Implementation 2019 2020 $350,000 $700,000
Moody Lake Inlet Fish Barrier 2011 2012 $37,500 $75,000
Bone Lake Inlet and Outlet Fish Barriers 2011 2012 $105,000 $210,000 Bone Lake Infiltration Basin Implementation 2013 2014 $212,500 $425,000 (SBL07 subwatershed) Sylvan Lake Stormwater and 2015 2016 $40,000 $80,000 Shoreline BMP Implementation Forest Lake Diagnostic Study Implementation 2018 2020 $267,000 $800,000 Urban Stormwater Retrofit Implementation (FL01 2018 2019 $300,000 $600,000 and FL81 subwatersheds) Imperial Avenue Area BMP Implementation 2017 2018 $30,000 $60,000 (FL44subwatershed) North Shore Trail BMP Implementation 2019 2020 $40,000 $80,000 (FL44 subwatershed) Sunrise River Water Quality/Quantity 2012 2016 $198,000 $990,000 Regional Stormwater Project BMP Implementation on District’s 2014 2015 $250,000 $500,000 Tax Forfeited Land Bixby Park Stormwater Pond Implementation 2013 2017 $1,120,000 $5,600,000
Forest Lake Outlet Channel Restoration 2016 2017 $30,000 $50,000 School-Little Comfort Tributary Stream Restoration 2016 2017 $125,000 $250,000 (LCL04 subwatershed) Wetland Restoration/Bank Implementation 2020 2021 $250,000 $500,000 Wetland Restoration and Cattle Exclusion (NBL12 2011 2012 $31,000 $62,000 subwatershed) Wetland Restoration (NBL17 subwatershed) 2012 2013 $130,000 $260,000
Wetland Restoration (SBL38 subwatershed) 2015 2016 $120,000 $240,000
Wetland Restoration (LCL20 subwatershed) 2015 2016 $310,000 $620,000 Wetland Restoration and Cattle Exclusion 2011 2012 $20,000 $40,000 (FL44 subwatershed) Groundwater Protection Implementation 2015 2016 $22,500 $45,000 Un- Un- Chemical Treatment of Inflows $200,000 $1,000,000 scheduled scheduled
2012-2021 Comfort Lake-Forest Lake Watershed Management Plan 87 Funding for capital improvements may also be supplemented by outside grants and funding partnerships with municipalities or agencies as appropriate to the project. One specific area where capital improvements are consistently funded through the Project/Program Levy as supported by partnerships is in the District’s Municipal Stormwater Remediation Grant Program. Under this program, grant or cost-share funding will be used to implement stormwater management improvements in the existing built landscape. The funding for any given project will be moderate, providing up to a maximum of $50,000 per project. Further, the District believes that an efficient process for reviewing proposals and committing cost-share funds is necessary for capital projects such as those that may be funded through the Municipal Stormwater Remediation Grant Program that have certain characteristics: they involve modest District expenditure, involve practices and locations that cannot be identified in advance, and require the District to act quickly to take advantage of an opportunity.
Local government or District representatives often become aware of opportunities that arise within the context of an infrastructure or private redevelopment project. For water quality elements to be incorporated into the project, or to make use of the retrofit cost efficiencies that the project offers, action often must occur quickly. For these reasons, the District does not intend to undertake further formal amendments to this plan as individual projects are identified. Rather, the District intends to follow a set of steps in reviewing individual proposals that will ensure thorough review and a full opportunity for input from public agencies, watershed residents and other interested parties. For the Municipal Stormwater Remediation Grant Program, these steps are as follows: 1. First, the overall program funding level will be set annually through the District’s budgeting process, not to exceed $400,000 per year. This is an open process that occurs in August and early September each year, and includes a public hearing required by statute at which all parties can review and address the Board of Managers on the District’s proposed program budget.
2. Second, grant funding proposals will be processed and evaluated according to a written set of guidelines adopted by the Board of Managers. The primary purposes of these guidelines are to:
• provide for consistency in District review and selection of proposals for funding; • direct District funds to projects and locations that will improve water quality in the most effective manner and consistent with the priorities of the District plan; and • ensure that funding is formalized in a grant agreement that guarantees project completion and maintenance.
2012-2021 Comfort Lake-Forest Lake Watershed Management Plan 88 The Board may revise these terms from time to time, but any revisions will not deviate from the three purposes cited. The guidelines adopted by the Board of Managers, after adoption of this Plan, must include the following criteria: • Funding up to 50 percent of estimated project cost, limited to water quality improvement elements and not to exceed $50,000. • An annual, competitive solicitation/funding cycle with limited opportunity for funding outside of the cycle. • Application requirements including conceptual design, project justification including water quality benefit estimates, and detailed cost estimate. • Evaluation criteria include that the project: - Addresses stormwater that drains to a priority waterbody; - Demonstrates a reduction in runoff volume or identified pollutants; - Is designed consistent with established good engineering practices; and - Concerns a redevelopment retrofit or roadway improvement, and not new development. • Required execution of a written cost-share agreement including, among other things, the applicant’s commitment to maintenance of the funded facilities in perpetuity or, in the judgment of the Board of Managers, for a term of years appropriate to the nature of the improvement. • Fifty percent of funds payable only on project completion. • All project documentation maintained in the public record.
3. Third, the citizens’ advisory committee will have a formalized role in reviewing submitted proposals and the Board carefully will consider the committee’s recommendations.
4. Fourth, the District will follow the procedure of Minnesota Statutes §103B.251 before funding approval. This section requires that a public hearing be held to consider the merits of the proposal, with prior published notice, as well as written notice to all counties and cities within the watershed. The Board will hear and consider all public comments and make funding decisions in open public meeting.
The District expects to fund the Municipal Stormwater Remediation Grant Program from the ad valorem property tax levied annually on property within the Watershed District for the Project/Program Levy. However, other funding sources such as regional, state or federal grants; subwatershed levies; or water management fees could be explored in the future. The financial impact of the program on property taxpayers within the watershed will not be substantial. The annual cost of the program is expected to remain a small part of the District’s overall annual expenditures. Further, the program was developed specifically to complement the District’s capital project and permitting programs with a tool to identify and achieve water quality gains that those other programs cannot cost- effectively address. The financial impact of the program on local units of government will be beneficial, as it will reduce stormwater infrastructure costs. Local units receiving program funds will assume maintenance and other obligations involving cost, but if that cost is unacceptable in a given case, program funding is voluntary and need not be accepted.
2012-2021 Comfort Lake-Forest Lake Watershed Management Plan 89
7.2.2 Alternate Funding Methods The CLFLWD expects that a watershed-wide ad valorem levy will be the primary source of funding for planned programs, projects, and capital improvements. However, the Board may determine that an alternate funding method is more appropriate for specific projects and programs. The specific alternate methods identified in this Plan are permit and inspection fees, special assessments, subwatershed taxing districts and water management fees.
Permit Review and Inspection Fees The CLFLWD implements its Rules through a permitting process. In order to cover the costs associated with the review and inspection of permitted sites, the permittee pays the District a non-refundable permit fee and cash escrow established to reflect the District's actual costs of permit application review and field inspection of the work, including investigation of the area affected by the work, analysis of the work, services of a consultant, including engineering and legal consultants, and activity performed to determine or secure compliance with the permit and District rules. The permit fee and escrow schedule are established, and amended from time to time, by resolution of the Board of Managers.
Water Management Fee Through a subsequent plan amendment, the District may establish water management districts smaller than the entire watershed district, including four Management Districts to provide for the funding of projects with more localized benefit. The Management Districts are defined on a subwatershed basis through previous hydraulic and hydrologic and water quality modeling studies (CLFLWD, 2005 and CLFLWD, 2007a). Table 5 describes the four Management Districts and provides the areas of each and Figure 6 displays the location of the four districts.
Table 5. Areas of Lake Management Districts Area Lake Drainage Areas Major (acres) Management (subwatersheds) Waterbodies & (CLFLWD Districts (See Figure 6) Water Courses 2007a) Bone (includes North Bone, FLSL01-FLSL24 Bone, First, Moody, South Bone, and First 8,057 NBL01-NBL24 Sea, Second, and and Second Lake SBL01-SBL39 Third lakes subwatersheds) Aston, Comfort, and Comfort Heims lakes, and (includes Comfort Lake 5,407 CL01-CL82 Abandoned JD1 and subwatersheds) south branch of the Sunrise River Forest Forest, Shields, and (includes Forest, Shields FL01-FL77 Sylvan lakes, and 9,577 and Sylvan lake SL01-SL11 the south branch of subwatersheds) the Sunrise River Little Comfort (includes Birch, School, Birch, Little Comfort, 4,355 LCL01-LCL52 and Little Comfort Lake and School lakes drainage)
2012-2021 Comfort Lake-Forest Lake Watershed Management Plan 90 The water management fee likely will establish a property charge based on stormwater characteristics for a type of land use. The fees will be tied to a parcel’s contribution to the cost of addressing downstream impacts. Runoff volume and total phosphorus loading from parcels are parameters commonly used to determine the water management fee for a parcel.
There are many variations in the mechanisms used to compute water management fees. A common approach is to assign a value equivalent to the amount of stormwater runoff generated by a parcel under a specified precipitation event or an annual average runoff volume. Factors such as slope, percent impervious, runoff coefficients, size of parcel and landuse, or a combination, may be used to refine the runoff estimate from a parcel of land.
The District is currently considering two approaches to establishing parcel fees; a runoff approach and a phosphorus export approach.
• The runoff approach uses standard runoff coefficients for parcels having different landuse characteristics (i.e., percent impervious, runoff coefficients based on formula calculating each land parcel’s stormwater contribution, size of parcel and landuse, or a combination) to determine the parcel’s fee. Average discharge (runoff volume) for a certain size storm is affected by land use in predictable ways, so the total runoff volume from a parcel can be estimated and used to determine the fee.
• The phosphorus export approach uses estimated phosphorus discharges from a parcel to determine each land parcel’s fee. Lakes within the District are impacted most strongly by the nutrient phosphorus and the phosphorus load to each waterbody directly influences its water quality. Using standard phosphorous export coefficients for different land uses results in the determination of the phosphorus load from each parcel, and a fee can be calculated in order to address the load.
In each case, discharges from individual parcels will be adjusted by an “equivalent hydraulic area” factor and applied to take into account the amount of the runoff which actually is expected to reach a downstream waterbody.
The District will amend this plan accordingly once the fee calculation approach, and needed information is determined, calculated and prepared. In order to fulfill requirements under Minnesota Statutes section 103D.729 the following need to be determined in order to set-up and defined:
• Description of Management Districts • Method Used to Determine Charge • The Amount that will be Raised Annually (can have as a cap or max. amount unit/yr) • Length of time Charge Will be in Place
2012-2021 Comfort Lake-Forest Lake Watershed Management Plan 91
(this page intentionally blank)
2012-2021 Comfort Lake-Forest Lake Watershed Management Plan 92 Y Y Y Y Y Y Y Y Y Y Y Y Y Y Y Y Y Y Y ?A@8 Y Y Y Y Y Y Y Y Y Y Y Y
Y Y Y Y Y
CL55 Y Y NBL14
Y
Y
Y Y
Y Y Y
Y
Y CL56 Y Y
Y Y NBL01 Y Y
Y
Y 8 £ Y ¤ Y
Y
Y Y Y Y
Y Y Y Y Y Y Y Y Y Y Y NBL25 Y Y Y Y Y
Y Y NBL13
Y Y CL57 Y Y Y Y NBL02
Y EGH8 Y
Y
Y Y
Y Y
Y CL54
CL59 Y Y Y Y Y Y
Y Y Y Y Y Y Y Y
Y Y Y Y Y CL39 Y Y Y
Y Y Y
Y Y
Y Y Y
Y CL58 Y Y Y Y 35 Y
Y Y Y Y Y NBL20 FLSL01 Y Y CL53
§ Y
¨¦ Y
Y
Y Y Y Y Y Y
Y Y
Y Y
Y Y NBL07 Y Y Y Y Y Y Y
Y Y
Y Y
Y NBL08 Y Y NBL21
Heims Y Comfort Y LCL01 Y
Y Y Y
Y Y
Y Y
35 Y Y Y Y Y Y FLSL02
Y Y
Y Y Y
Y Y Y Y § Y ¨¦ CL42 Y Y Y
Y Y Y Y Y
Y
CL20 Y Y Y Y Y
Y Y
CL41 Y Y Y Y Y Y Y Y
Y
Y
Y FLSL23 Y Y
Y Y Y Y
Y Y
Y Y LCL32 Y Y NBL12 Y
Y NBL04 Y Y Y LCL26Y Y Little Comfort
Y Y FLSL03
Y Y Y NBL05 Y
Y LCL52 Y Y Y Y Y Y Y LCL12
CL38 Y Y
Y Y Y Y Y LCL02
Y Y LCL03 LCL24
Y Y Y Y Y Y CL51 Y Y
Y Y Fourth FLSL24Y
Y
Y Y Y Y
Y
Y
Y LCL42
LCL05 Y NBL24
CL40 Y Y Y Y Y
Y NBL23 Y Y Y LCL07
Y NBL16
Y NBL09 Y Y Y Y
CL27 Y Y FLSL05 Y
Y CL43 CL49 CL52 Y Y Y Y Y NBL11
LCL43 LCL40 Y Y Y Y Y Y Y Y NBL19 Y Y Y Y LCL04 Y Y CL22 Y
CLFLWD Lake Management Districts CLFLWD
YY LCL49 Y Y
LCL21 Y FLSL06 CL37 Y Y LCL06 Y LCL41
Y Y
Y Y Y
LCL25 Y
CL26 Y
Y Y LCL08 School Y Lendt Y Y Y Y
CL25 CL50 Y LCL48 LCL13 YNBL18
Y LCL34 Y
Y Y LCL51 Y
Y Y
Y Y Y NBL06 Y FLSL07
Y Y
Y Y LCL35 Y Second Y Y Y LCL46 Y Y
Y Birch FLSL04
Comfort Y
CL24 LCL11 Y
CL23 Y FL11 Y First
Y
Y
Y Lendt
CL65 Y Y Moody Second
Y CL31 Y
Y Y Y
Y Y
Y
Y CL46 Y Y Y
Y Y Y
Y Y
Y CL44 LCL50 LCL33
CL36 Y Y CL21 Y Y LCL44 Y Third
Y CL19 Y
Y Y Y Y Y NBL17 CL45 Y Y
Little Comfort Figure 6. Y
Y Y LCL20 Y Y
Y
Y Y Y Y NBL22
Y FL09
Y
Y Y Y FLSL08 Y Y Y
Y Y
Y Y
Y Y
CL62 Y Y LCL27 Y
Y Y LCL36
Y Y FLSL22
Y Y Y Y LCL39Y
Y LCL45
Y
Y Y Y
Y Y Y Y Y Y Y Y Berglund Marsh
Y Y Y
Y Y Y Y
Y Y Y
Y Y
Y
Y Y Y Y
Y Y
CL18 CL48 Y Y FL10 FL12 LCL09 Y
Y Y Y Y
Y Y Y Y
Y FLSL10
Y Y Y Y
Y Y Y Y
Y Y
LCL47 Y LCL14 Y Y
FL02 Y
Y
Y Y LCL10 Y
CL16 Y Y Y
Y Y Y Y
Y
Y Y Y Y Y Y Y Y LCL37 Y
Y
Y Y Y Y Y Y
Y Y
Y Y
CL47 Y FL14 Y Y NBL10 Y Y Y Y
Y FL13 Y Y Y Y Y Y Y Y LCL30 CL34 Y Y Y
FL87 Y Y
CL15 CL35 Y
Y Y FLSL09 Y
Y Y LCL38 Y
Y
Y SBL03
Y Y FL16
Y
Y Y Y
Y Y Y LCL29 Y
Y
Y Y
Y
CL17 Y Y Y Y LCL15 Y Y Y Y LCL28
Y Y
Y FLSL11
Y Y Y
Y FL15 Y
Y FLSL21 Y Y
Y
CL14 Y LCL16 Sea Y
Y Y
Y Y Y Bone Y Y
Y Y Y Y Y Y SBL02
CL10 Y Y Y
Y Y Y Y Y FL18 Y FLSL25 Y FL19 Y Y Y
Y
Y
Y Y Y
Y Y Y Y Y
CL13 Y
FL25 FL17 Y Y
Y Y Y
FL42 Y
CL11 FL43 Y Y Y
Y Y Y Y
FL81 Y Y
Y Y Y
Y Twin Y Bone
FL47 Y Y Y CL30
Y Y
Y
LCL22 SBL34 SBL04 FLSL13 Y
FL26 FL23 Y Y Y SBL01 FLSL12 Y CL12 FL20 Y SBL06
CL09 Y
Y Y
CL08 Y Y
Y
Y Y
Y Y
FL24 Clear Y
Y
Y Y Y Y Y Y Y
Y LCL17 SBL05 FL22 Y Y CL07 Y Y FL46 Nielson FLSL14 Y
Y Y FL21 Y
Y Y Y
Y Y CL06 Y SBL08
Y Y
CL61 FL27 Y
Y Y Y
Y Y Y
CL29 Y Y
Y CL01 Y
Y Y Y Y Y
CL05 Y
FL44 FLSL17 Y
Y Y Y
Y Y
Y
FL29 Y FLSL15
Y Y
Y Y FL41 FL28
Y Y
Y Y Y
Y
Y Y Y
Y FL01 FL45 FL30 Y Y
Y Y SBL07
Y SBL09
Y
Y Y
Y Y
LCL31Y
CL02 Y FLSL18
Y
CL04 CL28 FL31 Y Y Y SBL38 Y
Y Y
Y FLSL16 Y SBL10
Y
Y CL03 Y
Y Y
Y FL32
Y Y Y Y
Y Y Y Y Y
Y SBL11 Y
CL82 Y Y
Y
Y Y
Y
Y FLSL19 Y
Y Y Y
Y Y
Y
FL38 Y Y
Y Y
Y FL37 Y Y
Y LCL18
Y
Y Y FL33
Y
Y Y
Y Y Y
Y
Y Y Cranberry SBL17
Y CL33 Y
Y SBL12
Y Y Y Y
Y CL32 Y SBL13 Y
CL64 Y
Y
Y
Y Y
Y
Y Y Y
Y FL35 Y
Y Y Y
Y Forest FL36 FL34 SBL15 Y Y SBL18 SBL39 Y Y SBL20 SBL16
FL01 FL40 Elwell Y
Forest Y Y Y
Y
Y Y
Y SBL14 Y
Y Y Y
FL39 Y
Y Y
Y SBL19
Y
FL50 Y SBL21 Y Y Y
Y FL48 Y Y FL53 Y
Y
Y FL49
FL01 Y
Y
Y SBL37
Y
Y SBL27 SBL23
Y Y Y Y FL51
Y
Y Y Y Y Y Y
Y Y
Y SBL22 Y SBL28 Y SBL24 SBL25
Y Y Y
SBL35 Y
Y
FL54 Y Y Y Y
FL63 FL70 FL52 Y SBL29 Y
Y SBL26 Y
Y Y
Y SBL30
Y Y Y
Y
Y
Y
Y Y Y Y Y Y Y Y Y Y
Y
Y FL64 Y
Y
Y Y
Y
Y SBL36 Y
SBL33Y
Y Y
Y
Y
Y Y Y
FL55 SBL31 SBL32 Y Y Y Y
Y FL69 Y Y
Y
Y Y Y Y Y Y Y Y Y Y
Y
Y Y
Y Y FL62 Y Shields FL71 SL08 Y
Y FL56 Y SL07
Y SL10 SL06 Y
Y FL68 FL76 FL72 Y Y FL77 Y FL74
Y SL11 Sylvan Y FL61 SL05 Y
FL65 FL67 FL78 Y
Y
Y Y
Y
Y SL09 SL01
FL58 FL57 Y Y
Y FL73 FL75 Y
Y SL04
FL66 Y
Y Y Y Y Y Y Y Y Y Y Y
Y Y Y Y
Y Y
Y Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
61 Y
?A@ Y Y
Y
Y Y FL60Y
FL59 Y
Y Y Y Y Y Y
Y
Y Y
SL02 SL03 Y
Y
Y
Y
¤£61 Y Y
Y
Y Y
Y
Y Y EGH61 Y
EORInc X:\Clients_WD\00376_CLFLWD\0104_Watershed_Management_Plan\09_GIMS_ProjectName\GIS\LkMgmtDist.mxd Date: 11/23/2010 10:08:07 AM Name:ejensen
Political Boundary County Boundary
YYY Y Y
Y Y Y Y Lake Managment District o
0 0.5 1 Miles
2012-2021 Comfort Lake-Forest Lake Watershed Management Plan 93 2012-2021 Comfort Lake-Forest Lake Watershed Management Plan 94 8. INTERGOVERNMENTAL COORDINATION AND IMPACT
8.1. Local Government Agencies 8.1.1 Roles The Comfort Lake-Forest Lake Watershed District works to ensure that its activities coordinate with and build on, but do not duplicate, those of the municipalities and counties present within the Watershed. The District works to coordinate with and support efforts of counties and municipalities toward the protection and improvement of water and natural resources. The District will work to coordinate with Counties and SWCDs as outlined in their respective water plans on efforts addressing common goals and implementation. Another area of coordination is in the implementation of District Rules. The Rules focus on water and watershed management issues, but defer to existing municipal and state permitting and review processes where those processes meet the goals of the District. Therefore, municipalities and counties implement floodplain management standards where ordinances have been approved by the state and implement the Wetland Conservation Act. The MN Department of Natural Resources implements shoreline alterations standards and issues permits for activities below the ordinary high water level. Beyond direct stormwater management and water resource protection, municipalities and counties manage land use and a number of other types of infrastructure such as roadways, water treatment systems, and septic systems which can impact surface and groundwater resources as well. The municipality’s local water plan and county water plans will address the impact of these factors on local surface and groundwater resources.
8.1.2 Impact of Plan Local Plan Adoption Each municipality within the District is required to complete a local water management plan (LWMP) that conforms to Minnesota Statues 103B.235 and Minnesota Rules 8410.0160. The current status of LWMPs in each community within the District is summarized below:
Table 6. Current Local Water Management Plan (LWMP) & Ordinance Status Floodplain Shoreland Wetland Muni- LWMP Ordinance Ordinance Conservation cipality Status Status Status Act Status Chisago City is No Plan State Approved State Approved City LGU Approved Chisago Through County, Through County, County County is LGU Lake Twp State Approved State Approved Plan City is Forest Lake Approved State Approved State Approved LGU Approved Franconia Through County, Through County, County County is LGU Twp State Approved State Approved Plan City is Scandia Approved State Approved State Approved LGU City is Wyoming No Plan State Approved State Approved LGU
2012-2021 Comfort Lake-Forest Lake Watershed Management Plan 95
After adoption of this District Watershed Management Plan, municipalities are required to revise or prepare LWMPs in accordance with Minnesota Statues 103B.235 and Minnesota Rules 8410 that conform to this District Plan. Following BWSR approval and District Board's final adoption, the District will notify each municipality of the requirement to revise or prepare LWMPs that conform to this plan.
In accordance with Minnesota Statues 103B and Minnesota Rules Chapter 8410.0160, municipalities will adopt LWMPs within two years of the Board of Water and Soil Resources' approval and the District’s adoption of this plan . The City of Forest Lake and the City of Scandia are located within more than one watershed district. Therefore, these cities have to consider standards for multiple watershed organizations when developing LWMPs and official controls. The District understands the need to be sensitive to consistency and coordination with the adjacent watershed districts of Rice Creek and Carnelian Marine-St. Croix in implementation of watershed standards and projects while maintaining the integrity of District goals. The District will discuss with each municipality the options that address its circumstances and will collaboratively determine the most practical approach to meeting the requirements of this plan and Minnesota Rules Chapter 8410. Table 7 lists the municipalities within the CLFLWD and identifies the other watershed organizations within each municipality. The table provides the two year deadline for local plans and provides a recommended date for local plan adoption that would satisfy all watershed plans and therefore eliminate duplicative planning efforts.
Table 7. Local Plan Adoption Deadlines Required Municipality Watersheds Date of Recommended Date for within Watershed Date for Local Local Plan Municipality Plan Update Plan Adoption* Adoption
Chisago City CLFLWD Nov. 2011 Nov. 2013 Nov. 2013
Chisago Lake CLFLWD Nov. 2011 Nov. 2013 Nov. 2013 Twp CLFLWD Nov. 2011 Nov. 2013 Forest Lake Nov. 2013 RCWD Jan. 2010 Jan. 2012 Franconia CLFLWD Nov. 2011 Nov. 2013 Nov. 2013 Twp CLFLWD Nov. 2011 Nov. 2013 Scandia CMSCWD Aug. 2010 Aug. 2012 Nov. 2013 RCWD Jan. 2010 Jan. 2012
Wyoming CLFLWD Nov. 2011 Nov. 2013 Nov. 2013
*November 2013 represents the 2 year rule requirement for local plan adoption, however local units of government may submit a local plan prior to that date.
After the District approves a LWMP, the municipality shall adopt and implement the LWMP within 120 days and shall amend its official controls (ordinances, etc.) accordingly within 180 days. If a municipality later wishes to amend its plan, it must submit the proposed amendment to the District for review of consistency with the District's management plan.
2012-2021 Comfort Lake-Forest Lake Watershed Management Plan 96
The District’s requirements for LWMP content coincide with or add on to the requirements of Minnesota laws and rules. The District is especially interested in seeing that the LWMP include the identification of local problems and corrective actions that affect District concerns stated in this plan or require District collaboration. LWMPs may adopt by reference all or portions of the District Plan. In addition, the District has established two sets of requirements for LWMPs:
• Level 1 – a list of LWMP requirements for all local units of government and are required whether or not all or parts of the District Plan are adopted by reference
• Level 2 – a list of LWMP requirements and ordinance and official control requirements for local units of government that wish to assume sole permitting authority. If a local unit of government wishes to be the sole permitting authority (issue permits for activities regulated by the District’s Rules in lieu of the District issuing these permits), the local unit of government must first prepare a LWMP, obtain District approval of the plan, and then adopt and enforce the appropriate ordinances consistent with or more stringent than District standards and rules. In this situation, the LWMP needs to meet additional requirements. The detailed requirements are described below.
Level 1 Requirements for LWMP Content: All LWMPs must meet the requirements of Minnesota Statute 103B.235 and Minnesota Rule 8410.0160 except as addressed by adoption of the District’s Plan by reference. All LWMPs, even those that adopt portions, or all, of the District’s Plan by reference the LWMP must:
1. Include a map of stormsewer system. 2. Describe the existing and proposed land use. 3. Discuss how existing and proposed land uses support or impact water and natural resources. Municipalities are unique in their responsibility to regulate and manage land use. The LWMP provides an opportunity to consider any historical, current, or future connections between land use and water and natural resources. 4. Include a listing of any impaired waters (as shown on the MPCA’s 303(d) list) and approved TMDLs that are likely to result in wasteload or load allocations within the local unit of government’s jurisdiction. The LWMP must describe the local unit of government’s plan for implementing measures to address approved TMDLs and the municipality’s allocated load. 5. Outline the implementation actions planned to address lake water quality and phosphorus reduction goals outlined in Table 8. NPDES MS4 permit communities must also integrate their Stormwater Pollution Prevention Program (SWPPP) policies, goals and actions into their LWMPs, in accordance with MPCA requirements and schedules. Anti-degradation requirements, policies, goals, and actions, must also be included, if applicable. 6. Describe the local unit of government’s process which will be used to inform the District of requests for variances from municipal ordinances. The District will provide comment to the municipality on variance requests that appear likely to impact the water and natural resources of the District.
2012-2021 Comfort Lake-Forest Lake Watershed Management Plan 97
Table 8. Goals for In-lake Water Quality and Phosphorus Load Reductions 10-year 20-year In-Lake Total In-Lake Total Phosphorus Goal Phosphorus Goal Maximum Total Load Lake Municipal Portion In-Lake In-Lake Load to Reduction of Drainage Area Concentration Concentration Lake9 Needed9 Chisago Lake Twp 98% Moody 60μ g/l TP 40 μg/l TP 144 lb/yr 879 lb/yr Scandia 2%
Scandia 96% Bone 40 μg/l TP 40 μg/l TP 669 lb/yr 560 lb/yr Chisago Lake Twp 4% Scandia 53% Chisago Lake Twp 29% Birch 60 μg/l TP 60 μg/l TP 471 lb/yr 451 lb/yr Chisago City 11% Forest Lake 7% Chisago City 82% School Forest Lake 10% 50 μg/l TP 40 μg/l TP 452 lb/yr 476 lb/yr Chisago Lake Twp 8% Wyoming 46% Little Chisago City 41% 40 μg/l TP 40 μg/l TP 577 lb/yr 678 lb/yr Comfort Forest Lake 13%
Shields Forest Lake 100% 100 μg/l TP 60 μg/l TP 195 lb/yr 911 lb/yr
Scandia 62% Sylvan 20 μg/l TP 20 μg/l TP 69 lb/yr 0 lb/yr Forest Lake 38% Forest Lake 93% Forest Scandia 6% <40 μg/l TP <40 μg/l TP 3,312 lb/yr 153 lb/yr Chisago City 1%
Heims Wyoming 100% <40 μg/l TP <40 μg/l TP NA NA
Wyoming 63% Comfort Forest Lake 36% 40 μg/l TP 40 μg/l TP 2,339 lb/yr 127 lb/yr Chisago City 1%
9 For impaired lakes: Lake Total Phosphorus Assimilative Capacity and reduction from Comfort Lake-Forest Lake Watershed District Six Lakes Total Maximum Daily Load Study (MPCA, 2010) or, for un-impaired lakes: Comfort Lake-Forest Lake Watershed District (CLFLWD). 2007a. Watershed and Lake Water Quality Modeling Investigation for the Development of a Watershed Capital Improvement Plan. Prepared by Wenck Associates, Inc.
2012-2021 Comfort Lake-Forest Lake Watershed Management Plan 98
7. Outline the local unit of government’s schedule for inspection, maintenance and repair of stormwater management systems including schedules for: – sweeping of public and private streets and parking lots, – inspecting stormwater outfalls, skimmers, sumps, and ponds, and – maintenance and repair programs for stormwater facilities and water control structures (e.g., cleaning catch basins, trash racks, pond excavation, facility repairs, etc.). 8. Summarize the municipality’s spill containment and clean-up plans. Identify the status of septic systems (if any) and describe the regulatory tools in place, including local enforcement of existing local septic system ordinances, and whether ordinances are in conformance with the MPCA 7080 Rules and Metropolitan Council requirements.
For those communities that choose to adopt the District Plan by reference, the items listed above can be provided to the District in memo form along with a letter that documents that the City: • is adopting the District Plan by reference, and • indicates that it will not be seeking delegation of District permitting authority.
Level 2 District Requirements for sole permitting authority: In addition to the requirements listed for Level 1, Municipalities desiring sole permitting authority must also address the following additional requirements: 1. The LWMP must describe the local unit of government’s ordinances and specific regulatory provisions which are already in place and satisfy the District Rules . 2. The LWMP must describe any additional ordinances and regulatory provisions that need to be developed or revised to satisfy and incorporate the District standards and District Rules and regulations. 3. The LWMP must acknowledge and describe the respective roles of the District and the local unit of government in managing the water quality of the District-managed water bodies. 4. The LWMP must describe the local unit of government’s permitting, inspection, and enforcement process (or proposed process) for land and water alteration work as related to activities regulated by the District Rules. This description should include outlining the process for: – Reviewing development and redevelopment proposals and permit applications – Review of preconstruction plans – Coordinating permit requests with other simultaneous reviewers – Coordinating timelines with other permitting agencies – Site inspections prior to project initiation, during construction, and after site stabilization. – Enforcement in cases on non-compliance. 5. The applicable Municipal ordinances and local controls, including inspection and enforcement programs, must be reviewed and approved by the District prior to initiating sole permitting authority.
2012-2021 Comfort Lake-Forest Lake Watershed Management Plan 99 In approving a Level 2 LWMP, the District may include reasonable conditions to ensure that regulatory oversight of potential water resource impacts is preserved at the same level as if the District were continuing to apply its rules in parallel with the local unit of government. For example, the District may reserve its authority to apply its permitting requirements to actions by state agencies, actions of the local unit itself, and in other respects where the local unit does not have the same authority as the District to provide regulatory oversight. The District also may prescribe reasonable reporting or review arrangements so that the District and the local unit can periodically review their mutual permitting activities with respect to water resources.
Delegation of District permitting will be done through a formal agreement between the local governmental unit and the District, including a formal mechanism for the auditing of the local program, annual reporting, and enforcement of non-compliance after delegation takes place.
Financial Impact The financial impact of this plan on local governments includes the development of or updates to a local water management plan as well as costs associated with assisting in the implementation of projects and programs outlined in this plan. Each of the municipalities within the District are required to update their local water plan within two years of adoption of this Plan. The cost for developing the local water plan can range from $15,000 to $100,000 depending on the level of detail.
As identified in the implementation plan, the District intends to seek financial participation from its partners on projects of mutual benefit. The implementation plan identifies specific projects the District would consider implementing and the likely sources of funding. In some cases the District will fund the entire project and for others supplemental funding will be needed. The potential partners are also listed. The Plan identifies sources of outside funding which could come from the partner entities listed or from other funding sources such as grants. The District intends to seek funding for these projects from the municipalities and other local government units which will benefit from the project and will pursue outside funding sources such as grants to offset the expense. Numerous Federal and State funding opportunities exist to implement water quality improvement projects.
Local Water Management Plan Approval and Amendments The Local Water Management Plan (LWMP) must be submitted for review and approval through the following process (103B.235). Amendments made to the LWMP after its approval by CLFLWD are reviewed and approved following this same process. • Each municipality will submit its LWMP to CLFLWD for review and approval. Municipalities within Washington County will also submit their LWMP to the County and to the Metropolitan Council. LWMPs required to be submitted to Washington County should address groundwater protection consistent with the Washington County Groundwater Plan and require a discussion of conflicts between infiltration and wellhead protection areas. Municipalities within Chisago County will submit their LWMP to the County if the County has completed a state-approved Groundwater Plan.
2012-2021 Comfort Lake-Forest Lake Watershed Management Plan 100 • The County and Metropolitan Council will complete its review within 45 days and provide comments to CLFLWD on the consistency of the LWMP with the applicable County or Metropolitan Council plans. • The CLFLWD will complete its review and take action on the LWMP within 60 days unless an extension of the review period is agreed to by both parties.
8.2. State and Regional Government Agencies 8.2.1 Roles The state agencies that primarily interact with the CLFLWD on issues of water and natural resource management are the Minnesota Board of Water and Soil Resources, the Minnesota Department of Natural Resources, and the Minnesota Pollution Control Agency. The regional agency that interacts with CLFLWD and the municipalities within CLFLWD is the Metropolitan Council.
The Board of Water and Soil Resources (BWSR) is the agency that oversees Watershed Districts and their activities. BWSR also oversees Soil and Water Conservation Districts, Watershed Management Organizations, and County Water Managers. Directly relevant to Watershed District activities, BWSR reviews and approves Watershed Management Plans, assists in administration of the Wetland Conservation Act, and administers a number of grant and easement programs.
The Department of Natural Resources (DNR) manages a variety of natural resource and water-related concerns in Minnesota. Those DNR activities that relate most closely with the goals of the CLFLWD are: • collection of water resource-related data (e.g. fisheries, aquatic vegetation, surface and groundwater levels, stream flow) • oversight and issuance of permits for shoreline standards and shoreline alterations, alterations in public waters and public wetlands, management of aquatic vegetation, and management of streams • establishment and review of floodplain standards • permits for surface- and ground-water use appropriations • native plant community and rare plant and animal data • fish stocking and fisheries management • providing lake accesses • wetland management and enforcement
The CLFLWD often utilizes data collected by the DNR in its analysis of lakes and streams in the District. The District depends on the DNR for its review and permitting of aquatic vegetation management activities, water appropriations, and shoreline, in-lake, and streambank alterations and works with the DNR toward common goals such as the management of rough fish populations.
The Minnesota Pollution Control Agency (MPCA) manages and tracks water resources and other natural resources such as air and soil from a pollution prevention perspective. The MPCA implements the Federal Clean Water Act within Minnesota and through that program, evaluates lakes and streams for compliance with state water quality standards. Water bodies that do not meet state standards are listed as “impaired” and measures to improve water quality are enacted through total maximum daily load (TMDL) standards implemented through MPCA permits to dischargers including Municipal Separate Stormwater
2012-2021 Comfort Lake-Forest Lake Watershed Management Plan 101 Systems (MS4), construction and industrial stormwater, feedlots, and wastewater. The MPCA also oversees volunteer programs to monitor lakes and streams and acts as a repository for collected water quality data throughout the state. The CLFLWD works with the MPCA to address impaired waters within the District and engages local volunteers to assist in water resource monitoring through the MPCA’s programs.
The Metropolitan Council is a regional planning agency providing guidance and oversight of municipal plans for growth within the 7 county metropolitan area. The Metropolitan Council provides guidance addressing a number of topics for Municipal Comprehensive Plans including land use and surface water management. Municipal Comprehensive Plans, Local Water Management Plans and Watershed District Watershed Management Plans for communities are reviewed by the Metropolitan Council. The Metropolitan Council also provides a number of services and programs within the metropolitan area. The program most relevant to the work of the CLFLWD is the Citizen Assisted Monitoring Program (CAMP) which engages and trains volunteers to collect water quality data on area lakes.
The Minnesota Department of Transportation is responsible for the state’s transportation system including freeways and trunk highways. The Minnesota Department of Transportation is the designated government unit responsible for implementing the Wetland Conservation Act within the state road right-of-way.
8.3. Federal Government Agencies 8.3.1 Roles The United States Army Corps of Engineers (ACOE) is the main federal agency with whom the CLFLWD regularly interacts. The ACOE regulates activities such as dredging and filling in waters of the United States through Section 404 of the Federal Clean Water Act. In 2009 through 2011, the ACOE conducted a pilot study on watershed-based mitigation for the Sunrise River watershed. The Comfort Lake-Forest Lake watershed is part of the Sunrise River watershed and is incorporated into the study area of this project. The CLFLWD will build on the findings of this study in its wetland banking and management programs.
The CLFLWD also interacts with the Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA) through floodplain determinations and regulation. Standards for building and filling activities near or within the floodplain are implemented locally by municipalities enrolled in the FEMA National Flood Insurance Program. In support of the National Flood Insurance Program, 100-year flood elevations for local lakes are determined by FEMA through modeling efforts. The CLFLWD has provided its hydrologic/hydraulic model to FEMA for use in floodplain determination efforts.
Shoreline restoration supported by District Grant Program
2012-2021 Comfort Lake-Forest Lake Watershed Management Plan 102 9. AMENDMENTS TO THIS PLAN The Comfort Lake-Forest Lake Watershed District (CLFLWD) Board of Managers intends that this Plan extend through 2021. The CLFLWD may need to revise this Plan prior to the next update for it to remain a useful long-term planning tool. Plan amendments will be needed if significant changes are required involving goals, policies, administrative procedures, funding or the capital improvement program, or if problems arise that are not addressed in the Plan. This Plan will remain in full effect through 2021 unless an updated plan is approved by BWSR prior to that date. Plan amendments may be proposed to the CLFLWD Board by any agency, person, county, city or township, but only the CLFLWD Board may initiate the amendment process. All proposed plan amendments must be submitted to the Board in writing, along with a statement of the problem, rational for the amendment and an estimate of associated costs.
Technical information (i.e. from District initiated studies and monitoring and new data from District partners) will require frequent updating. The CLFLWD intends to post this updated information on the District website. Technical information that results in new action items will be incorporated into District operations through implementation of the District’s programs, projects and watershed management strategies as appropriate. Generally, these technical updates and studies are considered part of the normal District operations consistent with the intent of the 2010 Plan and will not trigger a Plan amendment. This includes implementation projects resulting from “Focused” and “Impaired” watershed management activities that include a public input process. However, when the new technical information or study findings result in a significant policy change, or the District intends to initiate a program or construct a capital improvement not sufficiently identified in the 2010 Plan, a plan amendment is required.
Should the CLFLWD or BWSR decide that a general plan amendment is needed, the District will follow the general plan amendment process described in Rule 8410.0140, Subp.2 and MS 103B.231, Subd. 11. The general plan amendment process is the same review process as the process followed for the review of a plan update. The following are examples of situations where a general plan amendment might be required:
• The addition of a capital improvement project that is not included in the 2012 Plan.
• The establishment of a water management district(s) to collect revenues and pay for projects initiated through MS 103B.231, MS 103D.601, 605, 611 or 730.
• The addition of new District programs or initiatives that are inconsistent with District objectives and policies or have the potential to create significant financial impact.
Unless the entire document is reprinted, all amendments adopted by the District will be printed in the form of replacement pages for the plan, each page of which will:
A. Show deleted text as stricken and new text as underlined on draft amendments being considered; and B. Be renumbered as appropriate; and C. Include the effective date of the amendment.
The District will maintain a distribution list of agencies and individuals who have received a copy of the plan and will distribute copies of amendments within 30 days of adoption. The District will consider sending drafts of proposal amendments to all plan review authorities to seek their comments before establishing a hearing date or commencing the formal review process.
2012-2021 Comfort Lake-Forest Lake Watershed Management Plan 103 Minor amendments to this plan may also be needed periodically as new data is collected and resource evaluations are conducted in the District. Minor plan amendments include plan revisions such as clarification or recodification of the Plan and its policies, inclusion of additional data, and other revisions to planned actions that will not adversely affect a local unit of government or diminish the CLFLWD’s ability to achieve its plan goals or implementation program.
The CLFLWD will follow the following process for minor plan amendments:
• The District will send copies of the proposed minor plan amendments to the affected cities and townships, Metropolitan Council, Washington County, the state review agencies, and BWSR for review and comment at least 30 days before a holding a public meeting. The deadline for receipt of review comments will be the date of public meeting. • The District will hold a public meeting to explain the proposed amendments and publish a legal notice of the meeting twice, at least 7 days and 14 days before the date of the meeting . • The District will adopt and distribute the amendment after BWSR has either agreed it is a minor amendment or failed to act within 45 days of receipt of the amendment. • The following are examples of situations when the District would seek a minor plan amendment:
– When the share of project cost to be funded through District levy, at any time up until the project is ordered by the Board of Managers, exceeds the amount identified in the Capital Improvement Program (CIP) by more than 25%, adjusted for inflation.
– When District completes an implementation plan or a study that results in projects that are not specifically described in the District’s CIP.
Historic Round Barn at Moody Lake
2012-2021 Comfort Lake-Forest Lake Watershed Management Plan 104 10. ANNUAL REPORTING The CLFLWD will annually prepare a report on the financial conditions of the District, the status of all projects, the business transacted by the District and other matters affecting the interests of the watershed as guided by Minnesota Statutes 103D.351 and Minnesota Rules 8410.0150. The annual report will also include the CLFLWD work plan for the next year.
The annual report will summarize the activities of the District over the past year. The report will include basic information about the District such as a list of the Watershed District's Board members and their contact information, advisory committee members and Board member vacancies at the end of the reporting year and a list of organization employees and consultants, along with their contact information. The report will also highlight the actions of the District over the course of the year including:
• a review of the previous year's work plan goals and objectives and whether or not they were achieved • a summary of the Watershed District's stormwater and drainage design performance standards • a summary of the permits or variances issued and any enforcement action initiated by the Watershed District or its local units of government • a summary of water quality monitoring data collected by the District or its local units of government • an evaluation of the status of local plan adoption and implementation based upon a review of the previous year's activities • the status of any locally adopted wetland banking program • a summary of activities related to the biennial solicitations for legal, professional, or technical consultant services • a description of the costs of each program element with respect to the overall annual budget
The annual report will include a projected work plan for the next year. The work plan will be developed based on the planned activities outlined in this Plan as refined by the priorities and budget constraints of the Board.
The CLFLWD annual report will also contain a financial report with the approved budget, District revenues and expenditures, an assessment of changes in fund balances, a description of the costs of each program element with respect to the overall annual budget, as well as the financial audit report. The audit will be completed by a public accountant or the state auditor. A work plan designates program categories and work tasks or projects within each category each fiscal year.
Copies of the report will be submitted to the BWSR, the Commissioner of the Department of Natural Resources and the Director of the Division of Waters of the Department of Natural Resources.
2012-2021 Comfort Lake-Forest Lake Watershed Management Plan 105 (this page intentionally blank)
2012-2021 Comfort Lake-Forest Lake Watershed Management Plan 106 Appendices A-B-C
Volume I Appendix A: Non-Point Source Pollution Abatement Program Descriptions 220 North Lake Street, Forest Lake, MN 55025
Phone 651.209.9753 Fax 651.209.9752 www.clflwd.org
Comfort Lake ––– Forest Lake Watershed District CommunityCommunity----BasedBased CostCost----ShareShare Incentive Program
The Comfort Lake – Forest Lake Watershed District (CLFLWD) offers cost-share grants for projects that improve water quality and/or decrease stormwater runoff and preserve native plant and wildlife communities affected by lakes, rivers and wetlands. Potential projects include shoreline and streambank restoration/stabilization, pervious parking lots, raingardens and erosion control projects. Highest priority is given to collaborative projects resulting in measureable reductions in stormwater and nutrient loadings to receiving water resources and those with opportunities for public education.
Eligibility CLFLWD BMP cost-share grants are available for municipal, commercial or multi-landowner/multi-parcel BMP projects located within CLFLWD on a first come first serve basis. These projects generally involve public dollars as matching funds and/or multiple landowners. For projects dealing with surface water on individual properties, please refer to the District’s Residential Cost-Share Incentive Program .
Application and Project Approval Process First, the potential applicant should schedule a site visit or pre-proposal meeting with CLFLWD and County SWCD staff to determine whether the project/site is a candidate for the cost-share grant program by calling CLFLWD offices at 651.209.9753.
At the initial site visit and/or pre-proposal meeting CLFLWD and SWCD representatives will meet with the applicant to discuss the assistance request, the potential BMP project, design needs, and the partners and options for completing the project.
If staff determines that the proposed project and project site is a candidate for the cost- share grant program, the applicant must then complete a CLFLWD cost-share grant application including workplan and submit it to CLFLWD offices at 220 North Lake Street, Forest Lake, MN 55025. Applications can be downloaded from the District’s website, clflwd.org , or can be requested by calling the CLFLWD offices.
The resulting application will be reviewed and ranked by the CLFLWD cost-share selection subcommittee and forwarded to the CLFLWD Board of Managers for approval. If approved for funding, work on the project may begin after all required permits are obtained by the applicant and CLFLWD staff is notified of start date. CLFLWD representatives may be available to assist throughout the project as determined in the planning phase of the project. A cost-share and maintenance agreement/easement will be required for the project (details of which can be obtained by contacting the District office).
Available Funds Cost-share assistance for projects cover a Board-determined percentage (not to exceed 75%) of project costs up to a maximum grant of $15,000. Expenses incurred before the grant is approved are not eligible.
Reimbursement of Funds Upon completion of the project, CLFLWD and County SWCD staff will conduct a final site inspection for final approval of the installation. Cost-share funding agreed to by the full CLFLWD Board (and not to exceed original estimate), will be granted to the applicant only after the project installation has been approved, all receipts for the project have been received and the full Board has approved payment. 220 North Lake Street, Forest Lake, MN 55025
Phone 651.209.9753 Fax 651.209.9752 www.clflwd.org
CLFLWD Community-Based BMP Cost-Share Incentive Program Applica tion
Applicant Information Organization
Mailing Address
City State Zip Code
Email or webpage Tax status (e.g. local government, 501(3)(c), etc.)
Organization Contact Project Manager
Organization Contact Phone Project Manager Phone
Organization Contact Cell Phone Project Manager Cell Phone
Organization Contact Email Project Manager Email
Project Information Project Name
Project Location Address or Description
City Township/Range/Section Waterbody
Project Start Date Project End Date
Project Type (e.g. innovative practice, restoration, buffer enhancement, etc.)
Total Cash Contributions From Partners Total In-Kind Contributions From Partners
Total Grant Funds From Other Sources Estimated Overall Project Cost
Submission Date Grant Funds Requested 220 North Lake Street, Forest Lake, MN 55025
Phone 651.209.9753 Fax 651.209.9752 www.clflwd.org
Community-Based Grant Program Application ( continued )
Work Plan Address each line item in the outline below in either a narrative or outline format. Items B and C may be brief in the initial application and developed further later in the project planning and development process. A. Proposed Work Plan a. Describe the type of project proposed and the specific water resource issue or need addressed. b. Briefly describe the assistance needed for implementing the project (i.e. engineering/design assistance, financial assistance, project management, community outreach, etc.). c. Describe the anticipated water resource impacts and/or the alternate project that will occur if the funding is not available. d. Describe the overall context of the project, if it is meeting the goals of a local comprehensive or lake management plan, if it is a continuation or expansion of an existing project, etc. e. Provide a timetable for project implementation; including any deadlines or time-sensitive issues. This information may potentially be used to generate a payment schedule for grant funds and/or to assist in leveraging other funds. B. Project Operation and Maintenance (a maintenance agreement will be required for the project). The maintenance agreement will address the following: a. Required maintenance activities and timetables for the project as detailed in the required maintenance agreement b. Landowner and other parties responsible for the maintenance activities c. Funding source(s) for short- and long-term maintenance A copy of the District’s required maintenance agreement can be obtained by contacting the District office.) C. Project Budget a. Provide a description of the budget for the project. This may be in table format. Include the following information: i. Budget category (i.e. engineering, materials, labor, oversight) ii. Brief description of the category iii. Funds requested for each category iv. Partner contributions for each category v. Total budget for the project vi. Total grant amount requested D. Resolution committing the applicant organization to the project and necessary project contributions .
220 North Lake Street, Forest Lake, MN 55025
Phone 651.209.9753 Fax 651.209.9752 www.clflwd.org
Community-Based Grant Program Application ( continued )
Permit Information (project may not begin until all required permits are received)
Permit Date Submitted Date Received Permit # Required CLFLWD YES City/Township/County Y or N Grading DNR Aquatic Plant Y or N DNR Public Waters Y or N
Wetland Conservation Act Y or N MPCA Feedlot Y or N MPCA NPDES Y or N
Army Corps Y or N Other Y or N
FOR CLFLWD USE ONLY Cost Share Information Date application received Cost share amount approved (may not exceed 75% of total estimated costs)
CLFLWD Representative Board meeting date
Amount Authorized for Payment Total eligible expenses from receipts Amount authorized for payment (may not exceed cost share amount approved)
CLFLWD Representative Board meeting date
220 North Lake Street, Forest Lake, MN 55025
Phone 651.209.9753 Fax 651.209.9752 www.clflwd.org
Comfort Lake ––– Forest Lake Watershed District Residential CostCost----ShareShare Incentive Program
The Comfort Lake – Forest Lake Watershed District (CLFLWD) offers cost-share grants for projects that improve water quality and/or decreases stormwater runoff and preserves native plant and wildlife communities affected by lakes, rivers and wetlands. Potential projects include shoreline and streambank restoration/stabilization, raingardens and erosion control projects. Highest priority is given to collaborative projects and those with opportunities for public education.
Eligibility CLFLWD BMP cost-share grants are available for all CLFLWD residents, non-profit organizations, government agencies, businesses and corporations located within CLFLWD, and public and private schools located within the CLFLWD. Applications are accepted at any time however, funds are limited and awarded “first-come, first-serve.” For municipal, commercial, and multi-landowner/multi-parcel projects, please refer to the District’s Community-Based Cost-Share Incentive Program .
Application and Project Approval Process First, the potential applicant should schedule a site visit with CLFLWD and County SWCD staff to determine whether the site is a candidate for the cost-share grant program by calling CLFLWD offices at 651.209.9753.
If staff determines that the site is a candidate for the cost-share grant program, they will help the applicant with a conceptual design of the site. The applicant must then complete a CLFLWD cost-share grant application and submit it to CLFLWD offices at 220 North Lake Street, Forest Lake, MN 55025. Applications can be downloaded from the District’s website, clflwd.org , or can be requested by calling the CLFLWD offices.
The resulting application will be reviewed and ranked by the CLFLWD cost-share selection subcommittee and forwarded to the CLFLWD Board of Managers for approval. If approved, CLFLWD and County SWCD staff will help develop final design of the project with cost estimates. The final design provides specific details of what types of plants, rock, mulch, edger, etc. If approved, a cost-share and maintenance agreement will be required for the project details of which can be obtained by contacting the District office).
Available Funds Cost-share assistance for residential projects cover 50% of all materials and professional or volunteer labor (volunteer labor rates are determined annually) and 100% design through the respective County SWCD for a maximum grant of $3,000. Design’s other than those done through the County SWCD are 100% reimbursable up to a maximum of $500. Expenses incurred before the grant is approved are not eligible; the landowner can not be paid for more than their out of pocket expense.
Reimbursement of Funds Upon completion of the project, CLFLWD and County SWCD staff will conduct a final site inspection for final approval of the installation. Cost-share funding agreed to by the full CLFLWD Board (and not to exceed original estimate), will be granted to the applicant only after the project installation has been approved, all receipts for the project have been received and the full Board has approved payment. 220 North Lake Street, Forest Lake, MN 55025
Phone 651.209.9753 Fax 651.209.9752 www.clflwd.org
CLFLWD Residential BMP Cost-Share Incentive Program Applica tion
Contact Information Name
Address
City State Zip Code
Project Location (if different than above)
Lake or Stream (if applicable) Previous Grant Recipient? What Project?
Home Phone Work or Cell Phone
Email Address Other Contact Info
Project Information
Project Description: (Use additional sheets as necessary) Please let us know what types of BMP you want to install, if you will use only native plants, and who you are planning to have do most of the work.
Water Quality Issues the Project will Address: Clean water, invasive species removal and/or reduce amount of water going downstream.
Area treated by project (attach two-ft Maximum Size of Practice Landuse in Drainage Area topography)
Cost-Share Request Total Project Cost (Attach itemized list – required for cost-share) CLFLWD Cost-Share Request (Max of 50% of material and installation and 100% of SWCD design [$500 design maximum for designs other than SWCD] up to a maximum reimbursement cap of $3,000).
Collaborators (List partners and contributing funds, if applicable)
I certify to the best of my knowledge that the information included in this application is true, complete, and accurate.
Signature Date
For Official Use Only Subcommittee Evaluation Date & Score Board Review Date Board Approved Approval Amount Yes No Payment 1 (Amount and Date Approved) Payment 2 (Amount and Date Approved) 220 North Lake Street, Forest Lake, MN 55025
Phone 651.209.9753 Fax 651.209.9752 www.clflwd.org
Comfort Lake- Forest Lake Watershed District Residential BMP Cost-Share Incentive Program Application Steps and Procedures
Applicant’s Step 1: Schedule a site visit with CLFLWD staff at 651-209-9753 or email us at [email protected] , or through the Chisago County SWCD (651-674-2333) or Washington Conservation District (651-275-1136).
CLFLWD Staff Step 1: CLFLWD and County SWCD staff will meet you at the site for a review to determine whether the site is a candidate for the cost-share grant funds. The staff person will walk your site with you with a map to determine options for potential cost-share projects.
Applicant’s Step 2: If CLFLWD and County SWCD staff determine your site is a candidate for the cost-share grant program, complete and submit your application to Doug Thomas by mail at 220 North Lake Street, Forest Lake, MN 55025), fax (651-209- 9752), or email ( [email protected] ). Applications can be requested by calling the CLFLWD office at 651-209- 9753, or by downloading the application from the CLFLWD website ( clflwd.org )
CLFLWD Staff Step 2: CLFLWD and County SWCD staff will review the application and if it seems to be a good candidate, the staff will help the applicant with a conceptual design of the site. This will be a collaboration of staff and the applicant. When the conceptual plan is complete with a cost estimate, it will go to the District’s selection subcommittee for their ranking. A conceptual design will determine the size of the project but will not provide specific details of materials or plant species used, but rather general descriptions like grass, flower, shrub or tree.
CLFLWD Staff Step 3: Following the subcommittee decision, you will receive written notification about whether your application was approved for funding. If funding was not approved, the staff may still provide technical assistance on the project. If funding is approved, CLFLWD and County SWCD staff will help develop a final design of the project with the cost estimate. The final design provides specific details of what types of plants, rock, mulch, edger etc. This final design will go before the full board for final approval.
Applicant’s Step 3: Upon Board approval, the applicant is approved to start working on the project. Receipts of materials, and labor will need to be kept and filed for reimbursement when the project is completed. The applicant will need to contact the CLFLWD staff when the project is starting and at any major new task of work during the project. Any changes to the project design or extra materials or labor added to the project at this point do not qualify for cost share unless the Board authorizes the additions or changes.
CLFLWD Staff Step 4: Upon contact by the applicant, CLFLWD and County SWCD staff will visit the site to provide technical assistance and site inspections. Site inspections will continue throughout the project construction. Upon completion of the project, CLFLWD and County SWCD staff will conduct a final site inspection and approval of the installation. Cost-share funding agreed to by the full Board will be granted to the applicant only after the project installation has been approved, all receipts for the project have been received, and the full Board has approved payment.
MUNICIPAL/URBAN STORMWATER REMEDIATION GRANT PROGRAM DESCRIPTION
District cost-share funding for any given project will be moderate, to a maximum of $50,000 per project. Further, the District believes that an efficient process for reviewing proposals and committing cost-share funds is necessary. Local government or District representatives often become aware of opportunities that arise within the context of an infrastructure or private redevelopment project. For water quality elements to be incorporated into the project, or to make use of the retrofit cost efficiencies that the project offers, action often must occur quickly. For these reasons, the District does not intend to undertake further formal amendments to this plan as individual projects are identified. Rather, the District intends to follow a defined process in reviewing individual proposals that will ensure thorough review and a full opportunity for input from public agencies, watershed residents and other interested parties.
The process is as follows: 1. The overall program funding level will be set annually through the District’s budgeting process, not to exceed $400,000 per year. This is an open process that occurs in August and early September each year, and includes a public hearing required by statute at which all parties can review and address the Board of Managers on the District’s proposed program budget.
2. Cost-share funding proposals will be processed and evaluated according to a written set of guidelines adopted by the Board of Managers. The primary purposes of these guidelines are to: provide for consistency in District review and selection of proposals for funding; direct District funds to projects and locations that will improve water quality in the most effective manner and consistent with the priorities of the District plan; and ensure that funding is formalized in a grant agreement that guarantees project completion and maintenance. The Board may revise these terms from time to time, but any revisions will not deviate from the three purposes cited.
After adoption of the District’s 2012 -2021 Watershed Management Plan, the Board of Managers must adopt guidelines that specify the following: • Funding up to 50 percent of estimated project cost, limited to water quality improvement elements and not to exceed $50,000. • An annual, competitive solicitation/funding cycle with limited opportunity for funding outside of the cycle. • Application requirements including conceptual design, project justification including water quality benefit estimates, and detailed cost estimate.
Evaluation criteria include that the project: • Addresses stormwater that drains to a priority waterbody; • Demonstrates a reduction in runoff volume or identified pollutants; • Is designed consistent with established good engineering practices; and • Concerns a redevelopment retrofit or roadway improvements, and not new development. • Required execution of a written cost-share agreement including, among other things, the applicant’s commitment to indefinite maintenance of the funded facilities. • Fifty percent of funds payable only on project completion. • All project documentation maintained in the public record.
3. The citizens’ advisory committee will have a formalized role in reviewing submitted proposals and the Board carefully will consider the committee’s recommendations.
4. The District will follow the procedure of Minnesota Statutes 103B.251 before funding approval. This section requires that a public hearing be held to consider the merits of the proposal, with prior published notice as well as written notice to all counties and cities within the watershed. The Board will hear and consider all public comments and make funding decisions in open public meeting
Appendix B: Sunrise River Water Quality and Flowage Project Petition
Appendix C: Washington County Budget and Financial Policy #2403 Financial and Budget
Policy #2403
Water Management Organization Capital Projects Financing
Policy
The county will only consider approval for using its taxing authority to fund capital projects contained in the capital improvement program of the watershed management plan during plan implementation and upon receipt of an engineer’s report that includes a detailed project scope and information on the amount and timing of the needed funds.
Guidelines
A. The following requirements will apply for projects that will use county funds.
1. The following criteria must be met for the county to consider funding the project: a. the proposed project serves a public purpose and is of countywide significance; b. the proposed project is financially sound; and c. the amount and timing of the funds will not have a significant negative financial impact on the county.
2. The water management organization must submit the certification for payment prior to April 1 st of the year preceding the year in which the funds are needed;
3. Upon receipt of a certification of payment for the cost of a capital improvement the county will determine whether to use current revenue or to issue bonds to make the payment. a. The county will use current revenue when the county’s fund balance is sufficient to make the payments for the project and when the cost of issuing bonds outweighs the benefits. b. The county will issue bonds when current revenue is not sufficient to make the payments for the project and when the benefits outweigh the costs of issuing bonds.
Implemented: July 26, 2005 Page 1 of 3 Revised: August 23, 2005 Policy #2403
4. The amount needed to make the payment using current revenue or to make the debt service payment on bonds will be added to the county’s proposed property tax levy in the year following receipt of the certification of payment and will be paid in the following manner: a. For payments being made using current revenue, payment will be made as part of the county’s normal process of distributing tax levies to all political subdivisions, on July 6 of the following year (year 1) and January 25 of the year after the following year (year 2) of receipt of the final certification for payment. b. For payments requiring the issuance of bonds, payment will be made upon sale of the bonds, but no sooner than 90 days after receipt of the final certification for payment. c. The county may, at its discretion, offer to make payment at any time of the year.
5. To receive county funds the water management organization must submit the following information with the certification of payment: a. Watershed management organization resolution ordering the project and certifying the county cost. b. Copy of the capital project plan. c. When certifying costs for projects located within a new special taxing district, the watershed management organization must submit, to the county auditor, by July 1, a list of parcels comprising the special taxing district.
6. All costs incurred by the county related to providing its full faith and credit to the watershed management organization and the cost of issuance of bonds shall be reimbursed by the organization.
7. To recoup the costs of making the payment, the county will appropriate the proceeds of a tax levied on all taxable property located within the territory of the watershed management organization or subwatershed unit in which the project is located.
B. The following requirements will apply for costs not requiring county funds but requiring county involvement.
1. When using an ad valorem property tax levy for payment of all or a portion of the costs of a capital improvement project, the watershed management organization must include the project cost as part of its annual property tax levy certified to the county by September 15 th for the proposed levy and by December 28 th for the final levy.
Implemented: July 26, 2005 Page 2 of 3 Revised: August 23, 2005 Policy #2403
2. When using a watershed management tax district for payment of all or a portion of the costs of a capital improvement project, the watershed management organization must notify the county auditor of the establishment of the district by July 1 st in order to be effective for taxes payable and paid out in the following year and must submit the following information: a. Legal description and/or list of affected parcels (the county prefers a complete list of property identification numbers); b. Amount to be levied; and c. Ordinance or resolution establishing the special tax district.
3. When using a storm water utility for payment of all or a portion of the costs of a capital improvement project, the watershed management organization must certify all unpaid outstanding charges and must submit a list of parcels and the amount to be charged to each parcel to the county auditor by October 15 th for taxes due and payable in January of the following year. All administrative costs incurred by the county administering a storm water utility on behalf of a water management organization shall be reimbursed by the water management organization.
4. The county would administer the property tax levy, storm water utility, and special assessments according to the process prescribed by state statutes and would make payment through its normal process of distributing tax levies to political subdivisions on July 6 of the following year (year 1) and January 25 of the year after the following year (year 2).
Responsibility
A. The Department of Assessment, Taxpayer Services and Elections will administer this policy.
B. For situations requiring bonding, the responsible parties are as described in County Policy #2401 – County Debt Policy.
Source
MN Statute Section 103B.251,103D.901, subd. 2; and 103D.729; Chapter 241, 245, 444 County Board action July 26, 2005
Implemented: July 26, 2005 Page 3 of 3 Revised: August 23, 2005