09-144Council File # U 9 -i �`f
Green Sheet # 3066015
CITY
Presented by
RESOLUTION
SAINT PAUL, MINNESOTA �j �J
1
2 WHEREAS, Minnesota Statutes 462.353, subd. 1, grants a municipality the authority to prepare a
3 comprehensive pian, which is defined in Minnesota Statutes 462.352, subd. 5 as "a compilation of policy
4 statements, goals, standards, and maps for guiding the physical, social and economic development, both
5 private and public, of the municipality and its environs. ..."
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
29
30
31
32
33
34
35
36
37
38
39
40
41
42
43
44
45
WHEREAS, Minnesota Statutes 473.856 requires that municipalities prepare comprehensive
plans consistent with the development guide and the metropolitan system statements adopted by the
Metropolitan Council; and
WHEREAS, Minnesota Statutes 473.859 details the content of the comprehensive plan; and
WHEREAS, Minnesota Statutes 473.864, subd. 2, requires that municipalities review and update
as appropriate their comprehensive plans every ten years and submit them to the Metropolitan Council for
review; and
WHEREAS, Section 107.02 of the City of Saint Paul administrative code authorizes the Planning
Commission to organize and facilitate the preparation of the Comprehensive Plan and any subsequent
updates and to transmit its recommend to the Mayor and to the City Council; and
WHEREAS, Section 107.04 of the City of Saint Paul administrative code authorizes the Planning
Commission to appoint task forces as advisory bodies to study technical issues identified by the
commission and to report their findings to the commission for its consideration; and
WHEREAS, the Comprehensive Planning Committee of the Planning Commission in January
2006 began the coordination of tasks necessary to prepare the Comprehensive Plan update; and
WHEREAS, the Planning Commission on September 22, 2006 initiated the preparation of the
Water Resources Management Plan ("Water chapter"), one of six chapters in the Saint Paul
Comprehensive Plan update; and
WHEREAS, the Planning Commission appointed several Saint Paul residents and representatives
from water-related agencies and advocacy organizations to participate on the Water Comprehensive Plan
Task Force, which was chaired by a member of the Planning Commission; and
WHEREAS, the task force met from March 2006 through March 2008 to prepare the public
hearing draft of the Water chapter; and
WHEREAS, the Planning Commission held a public hearing on the Water chapter on August 8,
2008, notice of which was duly given in the Saint Paul Legal Ledger on July 24, 2008, and mailed to the
Early Notification List and other interested parties; and
WHEREAS, the Planning Commission recommended changes to the Water chapter, after
considering the public comments; and
o y -%��f
46 WtiEREAS, the Pfanning Commission and the Mayor hereby recommend adoption by the City
47 Council of the Water chapter of the Saint Paul Comprehensive Plan update.
48
49 NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED that the City Council adopts the Water chapter of the
50 of the Saint Paul Comprehensive Plan update, contingent on further review by adjacent
51 communities and the Metropolitan Council.
52
53
Yeas Nays Absent Re ested by Department oE
Bostrom � � � I
Carter � � Yl ' rl ��--�-f: �S!(V'`ji,L� ` "�.�L' Y0�^.�
Harris ,/� B :
Helgen ,i Ap e e of Financia] Services
c anvy � BY
Thune ✓ Approved by Ciry Attomey
� s /.�l✓, �- r-2c-oq
Adopted by Council: Date ��h��09 Approv d b ay or i nis ion Cou cil
t
Adoption Certified by Counci Secretary By:
BY� l/1�//i' d�f"/L��v�
Approvedby,A4ayar: at /Z
BY� � � \ r b'LG
u
a � -i��
� Green Sheet Green Sheet Green Sheet Green Sheet Green Sfieet Green Sheet
�
�
DepartmenUOffice/Council: Date Initiated: �
PE _PlanningBEconomic I pZ-JAN-09 Green Sheet NO: 3066015
Development
Confact Person & Phone: Deoartrnent Sent To Person Initial�
LaffySodO�holm 0 launin &EconomicDevelo me La Soderhoim
26fY6575 1 lannin & Economic Develo me D'vectorlC. Bedor
Assign 2 i ptcurne Ci Attorne Z' 4 �
Must Be ort Councit Agenda by {Date): Number
04-FEB-09 e , fJ For 3 a or's 0t8ce Ma or/ASSistant
Routing 4 onnc0 G7 Council
Doa Order 5 i Clerk Ci Clerk
E-Document Required: Y
Document Contact: Larry Soderhulm
Contact Phone: 266-6575
Total # of Signature Pages _(Clip All locations for Signature)
Action Requested:
Approve resolution to adopt Water Plan following a public heazing.
Recommentlations- Approve (A) or Reject (R): Personal Service Contrects Must Answer the Following Questions:
�_ Planning Commission 1. Has this person/firm ever worked under a contract for this department�
CIB Committee Yes No '
Civil Service Commission 2. Has this person/firm ever been a city employee?
A Depts of Water, Public, DSI, ves No
3. Does this personffirm possess a skilf not normally possessed by any
and PED current city employee?
Yes No
Enplain ai{ yes answers on separeM sheet and attach to green sheet.
Initiating Problem, Issues, Opportunity (Who, What, When, Where, Why):
State law requires municipalities wiChin the metro area to update their Comprehensive Plans every ten years. A Water Resources
Management Plan is required. This plan was done by the Planning Commission and condenses more technical engineering plans,
which have previously been done and adopted. It makes wa[er policy more accessible to interested citizens and ties it in with the other
chapters of the Comprehensive Plan, which cwer Land Use, Transportation, Pazks and Recreation, Housing, and Historic
Preservation. After Council adoption, the Comprehe�sive Plan must be sent to the Metropolitan Council for review and approval.
Advantages If Approved:
The City will have a cleaz description of water policy and will meet state legal requirements.
DiSadvanhages If Approved: '
None.
Disadvantages H Not Approved: �
The City will not have a clear description of water policy or mze[ state legal requirements. Also, LCDA funding is being withheld
until the Comprehensive Plan is complete and submitted to the Me4opolitan Council.
Total Amount of
Trensaction: CosNRevenue Budgeted:
Funding Source: Activity Number:
Financial Information:
(Explain)
January 22, 20Q9 2:52 PM Page 1
� �-���f
(� OF SAIN'I' PA�. 390 Ciry HaU Telephone: 651-266-8510
Christopher B. Coleman, Mayor IS West Kellogg Bou[evard Facsimile: 651-266-8513
Saint Pau[. MN 55102
January 27, 2009
Council President Kathy Lantry
and members of the City Council
310 City Hall
Saint Paul, MN 55102
Dear Council President Lantry and Councilmembers:
It is my pleasure to transmit to you the Water chapter of the Saint Paul Comprehensive Plan. The
Water chapter is one of six that, along with the Int�oducYion and Implementation sections, will
comply with state law that the City update its comprehensive plan every 10 years.
The Water chapter was prepared by a task force appointed by the Planning Commission and
chaired by Commissioner George Johnson. The task force included representatives from Saint
Paul Regional Water Services, Public Works, various water-related agencies and advocacy
organizations, and district councils. While technical, engineering plans are legally mandated and
have been done and adopted by the City before, this is the first time that a water plan has been
done for a general audience of policy makers and interested citizens, and made a co-equal part of
our Comprehensive Plan.
The Water Plan has three broad strategies that deal with the three different "types of water," that
is, the public water supply to our homes and business, surface water from rain and snow, and
sanitary sewage. The three broad strategies are:
1. Ensure a safe and affordable water supply system. Policies under this strategy focus on
having a reliable supply of `Yaw" water flowing to the McCarrons Water Treahnent Plant,
providing the public with excellent "finished" water from the plant, promoting water
conservation, and being prepared for emergencies.
2. Reduce pollutant loads to water bodies. The biggest changes on the part of the City and the
general public fall under this section of the plan. We need to improve water quality in the river
and our lakes, both as a goal of the City and to meet tightening federal and state standards.
Policies under Strategy 2 focus on educating the public about urban run-off and pollution; using
best management practices (BMPs) for run-off from streets, parking lots, and rooftops; using
water-wise landscaping; and protecting shorelands and wetlands.
3. Operate and maintain a cost-effective sanitary sewer infrastrueture. Policies under this
strategy call for continuing to connect properties with on-site systems to public sewers, reducing
�
d y- i�y
the inflow and infiltration of clean water into sanitary sewer pipes, and maintaining adequate
funding for our aging sanitary sewer infrastructure.
Once adopted, the Comprehensive Plan will guide development and revitalization of Saint Paul
for the next ten yeazs as the city grows. Clearly we all will need to give very serious attention to
environmental issues during this period.
The Planning Commission has reviewed the Water Plan, held a public hearing and recommends
adoption. I concur with the Commission's recommendation.
Sincerely,
C� �' 'G�"' / _ � ���"""^"°�_
Christopher B. Coleman
Mayor
Enclosure
69_ i�y
city of saint paul
planning commission resolution
file number 09-01
date Januarv 02. 2009
Saint Paul Comprehensive Plan
RECOMMENDATfON TO ADOP7 THE
WATER CHAPTER OF THE COMPREHENSIVE PLAN
WHEREAS, Minnesota Statutes 462.353, subd. 1, grants municipalities the authority to
prepare a comprehensive plan, which is defined in Minnesota Statutes 462.352, subd. 5 as "a
compilation of policy statements, goals, standards, and maps for guiding the physical, social and
economic development, both private and pubiic, of the municipality and its environs. ...°
WHEREAS, Minnesota Statutes 473.856 requires that municipalities in the Saint Paul-
Minneapolis metropolitan area prepare comprehensive plans consistent with the development
guide and the metropolitan system statements adopted by the Metropolitan Council; and
WHEREAS, Minnesota Statutes 473.859 details the content of the comprehensive plan;
and
WHEREAS, Minnesota Statutes 473.864, subd. 2, requires that municipalities review and
update as appropriate their comprehensive pians every 10 years and submit them to the
Metropolitan Council for review; and
WHEREAS, Section 107.02 of the City of Saint Paul administrative code authorizes the
Planning Commission to organize and facilitate the preparation of the Comprehensive P/an and
any subsequent updates and to transmit its recommendations to the Mayor and to the City
Council; and
WHEREAS, Section 107.04 of the City of Saint Paul administrstive code authorizes the
Planning Commission to appoint task forces as advisory bodies to study technical issues
identified by the commission and to report their findings to the commission for its consideration;
and
moved by Morton
seconded by
in favor Unanimous
against
Planning Commission Resolution
l� y- ��`�
Saint Paul Comprehensive Plan — Water Chapter
Page 2
WHEREAS, the Comprehensive Planning Committee of the Planning Commission in
January 2006 began the coordination of tasks necessary to prepare the Comprehensive Plan
update; and
WHEREAS, the Planning Commission on September22, 2006, initiated a public participation
process for the Comprehensive Plan, including a Water Chapter, and established the Water
Comprehensive Plan Task Force; and
WHEREAS, the Planning Commission appointed 16 representatives of Saint Paul residents,
stakeholder groups, and people with knowledge and expertise in water resources to participate on
the Water task force, which was chaired By a member of the Planning Commission who is an
environmental scientist by profession; and
WHEREAS, the task force met from March 2007 through March 2008 to prepare the pubiic
hearing draft of the Water chapter; and
WHEREAS, the Planning Commission held a public hearing on the Water Plan on August 8,
2008, notice of which was duly given in the SaintPaul Lega1 Ledgeron July 24, 2008, and mailed to
the Early Notification List and other interested parties; and
WHEREAS, the Planning Commission considered the public testimony and recommended
changes in some of the policies as wriften in the public hearing draft.
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED, that the Planning Commission hereby
recommends adoption by the City Council of the Water Chapter of the Saint Paul
Comprehensive Plan update; and
BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED, that the City's adoption of this plan is contingent on
further review by adjacent communities and the Metropolitan Council.
� �-��l�
Water Resources
Management Plan
The Saint Paul Comprehensive Plan
Planning Commission Draft
The Water Resources Management Plan ("Water Plan") is one of six chapters of the
Saint Paul Comprehensive Plan 2020. It was approved by the Planning Commission on
January 2, 2009, and is scheduled for a public hearing at the City Council on �}fl� See
http://www.stpaul.c,�ov/compplan to view the chapters of the plan. Comments and questions
about the Water Resources Management Plan can be directed to
larrv.soderholm @ci.stoauV. mn. us.
Revised 01 /07/09
0 9- i�ly
Table of Contents
Introduction
1
Strategy 1.0 Ensure a safe and affordable water supply system 5
Reliable Municipal Water Sources ("Raw"Water)
Waier Conservation
Excellent Municipal Water ("Finished"Water)
Being Prepared for Emergencies
Future Capital Investments
An Educated Public on Water Supply
Strategy 2.� Reduce pollutant loads to water bodies 13
Cleaner Runoffthrough Public Education
Cleaner Lakes/Cleaner River
A Water-Wise City Landscape
Aquifers with Pure Water
Valued Wetlands
Etfective Water Infrastmcture
Strategy 3.0 Operate and maintain a cost effective
sanitary sewer infrastructure 25
Sanitary Sewer Operating Procedures
Future Opportunities
Implementation Matrix
29
Appendices Staff research for the Water Resources Management Plan is contained in 12
appendices to the plan, which are listed at the end on page 31.The appendices
are not part of the plan adopted by the City CounaL For anyone interested in the
appendices as background information, they are available on the aty's website or
as hard copies from the Department of Economic Development.
Credits
G9-iy�
Introduction
A nation that fai/s to plan intelligently for the development and
proteciion ofits precious waters will be condemned to wither
because ofits shortsightedness. The ha�d lessons ofhistory are clear,
written on the deserted sands and ruins ofonce proud civilizations.
Lyndon B.Johnsoo
36�" President of the United States
Only one percent of earth's total water is fresh water available for use; terrestrial
life —all of us included—depends on it.
The Water Plan focuses on three main topics: municipal water, surface water, and
sanitary sewers. On each of these topics the City is required by state law to meet
certain requirements fortechnical planning and enforceable standards.
• Municipal drinking water is supplied bythe Saint Paul Regional WaterService
(SPRWS), a distinct governmental entity associated with the City of Saint
PauI.5PRW5 completed a Water5upplyPlan (WSP), which was reviewed by
the Metropolitan Council in Z007. (See an executive summary of the WSP in
Appendix A.)
Surface water management deals with how rain and snowmelt are handled
on private and public property. Groundwater issues are also covered in
this section.The Saint Paul Local SurfaceWaterManagementPlan (LSWMP),
reviewed bythe Metropolitan Council and approved byall appropriate
watershed managemenT organizations, recently fulfilled the city's surface
water management requirements. (See an executive summaryofthe LSWMP
in Appendix B.)
Sanitary sewers are integral to the health and functioning of our City;
yet, buried underground, they are rarely considered by citizens. Saint
Paul's Department of Public Works has fulfilled the Metropolitan Council's
requirements for sanitary sewer p{anning.
Purpose of the Water Plan
The Water Plan addresses the three major topics listed above.lt simplifies and
combines the main points from the technical plans and requirements to make
them useful for a general audience.The Water Plan does not replace the W5P or
LSWMP and is meant to be complementary and consistent with them. Additionally,
the Comprehensive Plan contains broader policies and goals rather Than being a
specific implementation manual. On some issues the Water Plan goes beyond the
technical plans that have already been approved and provides policy for issues
that are farther out on the horizon.
�
o��-��y
The general purposes ofthe Saint Paul Water Plan are:
t. To continue ensuring the safety and proper use ofwater forthe health of
citizens and the protection and improvement of waier resources.
2. To strengthen, consolidate, and disseminate the City of Saint Paul's position on
water issues.
3. To educate Saint Paul citizens, government officials, and city staff and raise the
public profile of water issues on the City agenda.
4. To integrete water policies with other Comprehensive Plan chapters.
Overview ofAgencies and Legislation Managing Water Resources
Even more than most resources, water requires interagency collaboration. Water
is not confined by municipal boundaries and how one municipality uses its waTer
affects water quantity and quality elsewhere. Coordination among the various
water management agencies is necessary. A list of agencies and legislation
involved with Saint Paul's water is included in Appendix C.
Water Resources
Saint Paul and the region developed afongside abundantwater resources.The
rivers, lakes, and streams were crucial to the development ofthe region, although
most ofthem within the city were modified in some way. Early developers turned
some wetlands into lakes, like Como Lake; others were drained and filled. Creeks
were buried in pipes.Though water resources were integral to the area's early
prosperity, they were commonly neglected and abused. Raw sewage was running
into the Mississippi River as late as the 1970's.
. � . , _ .. � :_,
. c�o�m ,.�e�w ' �
,qN6]p03500� � �,��� .
. d � ._ . RNUOILW`��
'� �1[bnXNO� ! � I � I`~ 1 .
�? . I
d � �� � P�1�81lNpp � . �.. :
fr \ ! �
���iPWp,� �. �� VM�9WAi0".� MSEI<Latr.
� ' . PN162W4�40 .
! �_ yhS�SLVwI ` i
t� YY • ��CevsNUM NII BL P2 M
MBXZU3 [YAtlO%TH
� FM3 IMq) m9).: , c +
�,, _ �� t ti' 't � . .� � �
w� �
a. ` 1Qy.YO4 5Mp � ; OlVaolnW � �
•, . . NenG�
, � �`..-S ' . tt ,Rb�uamwm_� �ISR._ 6twe �M . ... � �
FigureA. DNRPublicWaters
City of Saint Paul Comprehensive Plan �
65-i�f�
Water bodies completely or partially
within Saint Paul:
• Airport Marsh
• Ames Lake*
• Battle Geek
• BeaverLake
• Burlington Pond
• Como Lake
- Gosby Lake
• Eagle Lake (NOrth Star Lake)
• Fish Creek`
- Frost Lake
• LakePhalen
• Little Pig's Eye Lake
• Loeb Lake
• Mallard Marsh/Hwy280 Ponds
• Mississippi River
• Pickerel Lake
• Pig's Eye Lake
• Pike Island Marsh
• SuburbanPond
• UpperLake
• Theaquifersystem'
Each of these water bodies is
discussed briefly in Appendix D.
* Not public water bodies regulated by
the Department of Natural Resources
(DNR).
In recent decades, pollution has been reduced in our waterways.The river's
ecology is improving and the downtown riverfront is revitalizing.Today, Saint Paul
relies on the Mississippi for trade, recreation, and our water supply. Furthermore,
Saint Paul is continuing its riverfront revival with the National Great River Park
Plan, which will bring city neighborhoods and residents into closer contact with
the river.
Plentiful water supplies characterize the city and Che state. Several lakes and
wetlands lie within Saint Paul including Como Lake and Lake Phalen, which are
centers for major parks. Battle Creek and Fish Creekflow briefly through Saint Paul
on their way to the Mississippi River. Saint Paul and the region also rest above
several high-quality aquifers.
KeyTrends for Water Planning
Growing environmental awareness. One of Saint Paul's goals is to be a
leader on environmental issues, particularlyfor the river and its ecology.
Changing climate and weather patterns: Climatologists predict that
Minnesota will have heavier rains and longer droughts due to global climate
change. This will affect our water supply, our water usage, erosion, and
surges into storm sewers.
Tougfier standards for surface water: Some water bod ies in the city have
been declared"impaired"underthe Federal Clean WaterAct, most notably
the Mississippi upstream from Lake Pepin. Studies are currently underway
ihat will lead to new standards to correct these impairments.
Increasing importance of non-pointsource poliution: While point-source
pollution has decreased dramatically due to the Ciean Water Act, non-point
source pollution has become increasingly problematic. Non-point source
pollution does not originate from a single factory or pipe and is more
difficultto regulate and controf.
—J
o�-i�y
Challenging time for funding public infrastructure: Many parts ofthe
city's infrastructurefor water and sewers are old and need rehabilitation or
replacement. A regular capital funding program for infrastr�cture must be
set despite competing requests for more visible public projects.
• Need for emergency preparedness: Given the risks that rainfall patterns
may change or contaminants will pollute the river, the City should, to be
prudent, develop more reserve capacity in the water supply system.
CiTy of Saint Paul Gomprehensrve Pian �
6 � - t�`�
Strategy 1:
Ensure a safe and affordable water supply system
Description of Municipai Water System
The Saint Paul Water Company began supplying water to Saint Paul in the
late 1860s. The fledgling private water supply company was bought by the
City of Saint Paul in 1882 and grew quickly. A water treatment plant was
built in 1921 and the Mississippi River became the source of our municipal
water in 1925. Frequent improvements have been made since then to allow
Saint Paul Regional Water Services (SPRWS) to serve over 400,000 residents
of the East Metro today.
Figure B. SPRWS Raw Water So
1. Mississippi River (Principap
2. Vadnais Lake Watershed (P)
3. Wells (Reserve)
4. Rice Creek Chain of Lakes (R)
5. Otter and Bald Eagle Lakes iR)
The City's water system is owned by
the City of Saint Paul, operated by Saint
Paul Regional WaterServices (SPRWS)
and governed by the Board of Water
Commissioners of the City of Saint Paul,
as established by the Minnesota Special
Laws of 1885.The seven-member Board
of Water Commissioners consists of three
Saint Paul City Council members, two
Saint Paul citizen members representing
the public and two members representing
the suburbs served by SPRWS.
SPRWS provides retail water service to
the cities of Saint Paul, Falcon Heights,
Lauderdale, Maplewood, Mendota,
Mendota Heights, and West Saint Paul,
and wholesale service to the cities of
Little Canada, Roseville and Arden Hills
(via Roseville). (See Figure M for Water
Supply Sourcet in the7win Cities Region
in Appendix E.)
Monicipal Water Planning and
Regulations
Minnesota Statute 473.859{3)(4) requires
water supply plans to be completed
by all local government units in the
seven county metropolitan area as part
ofthe local comprehensive planning
process. SPRWS prepared a Water Supply
Plan (WSP) and the plan was checked
for consistency and reviewed by the
Metropolitan Council and the DNR in
2008. Due to its length and technical
detail, the WSP is not included in its
entlrety in this Saint Paul Water Plan, but
it is herewith incorporated into the City's
Comprehensive Plan by reference. Most
ofthe policies below are informed by the
WSP and municipal water supply trends.
L5 ,
nmrea„a�,.m
wwa�+sy�,«n
�y- iyy
Reliable Municipal Water Sources ("Raw"Water)
Most ofthe"raw"water processed by SPRWS, comes from three principal sources-
-the Mississippi River, the Vadnais Lake watershed, and wells.The Mississippi River
supplies around 75 percent ofthe total raw water. River water is pumped from the
Fridley intake and flows into the Vadnais chain of Iakes.The Vadnais Lake water-
shed consists offour interconnected, natural lakes with a combined watershed
area of 28 square miles and an avaifable supply of 3.6 bilfion gaflons (enough
waterfor 20 to 30 days).The Vadnais chain of lakes is an important natural puri-
fication and storage system for SPRWS. From Vadnais Lake, water flows through
conduits to McCarronsTreaTment Plant. Severel wells are connecTed to These con-
duits to augment the flow of water to McCa rrons when needed. These wells d raw
from the Prairie du Chien-Jordan aquifer and are currently able co pump about 26
million gallons per day (MGD).
7.1 Coordinate with the State of Minnesota and local units of government to
develop and implement the Saint Paul Regional Water Services'Source Water
Protection Plan (SWPP)
The condition of source water directly impacts the quality of finished drinking
water.The federal Safe Drinking WaterAct required the Minnesota Departmentof
Health to conduct source water assessments for public water systems. SPRWS and
the Cities of Minneapolis and St. Cloud decided to do more than just an assess-
ment.They entered into a joint powers agreement known as the Upper Mississippi
River Source Water Protection Project (UMRSWPP).The Minnesota Department of
Health (MDH), Metropolitan Council, Minnesota Pollution Control Agency, and the
Minnesota Rural Water Association have all assisted the UMRSWPP with their ef-
forts. It promotes better land use and watershed management Throughout north
central Minnetota.
The SPRWS SWPP has also done its own SWPP for the chain of lakes and wells,
which has been approved by the Board and submitted iZ008) to MDH for approv-
al. (A map of the Source Water Protection Area and an Executive Summary of the
SPRWS SWPP is included in Appendix F.)
Cityof Saint Paul Gomprehensive Plan �
FigureG. ContributionsfromDifferentSourcestoWaterSupply(Unit:MillionGallons)
Q �-i�f�f
72 Advocate forVadnais take Area Watershed Management Organization
(VLAWMO) to comply with its adopted Watersfied Management Plan within its
watershed.
VI_AWMO oversees the sucface water management for the Vadnais chain of lakes.
Their Watershed Management Plan sets minimum water quality standards which,
when met, will benefit the chain of lakes and reduce maintenance a�d purification
costs for SPRWS.
13 Ensure the implementation afihe Wellhead Protection Plan prepared by
the SPRWS in 2007.
Near lake Vadnais SPRWS has six welis in the Prairie du Chien-Jordan aquifer with
a capacity of approximately 26 million gallons per day (MGD). The wells provide
an alternate source to ihe surface waier supplyfrom the Mississippi River. SPRWS
is expanding groundwater tapacityto equal the average annuaf daily demand
from surface water sources of approximately 46 MGD. Two wells were under
construction in 2008.
The Wellhead Protection Plan establishes the drinking water source management
area. Within this management area, special measures are taken to protect
groundwater from potential contaminants and prevent land uses that covld affect
source water quality. (See the Welihead Protection Plan in Appendix G.)
1.4 Minimize use of municipal well water during times when the Mississippi
River has normal or higfi flows with normal water quality.
When the flow ofthe Mississippi River is sufficient for municipal water needs,
the SPRWS should eliminate unnecessary ground water withdrawals. SPRWS
does use ground water to mitigate e�ctremes in surface water temperatures.This
practice saves money and can improve water quality; it should be continued, but
monitored to minimize groundwater withdrawals.
1.5 Prohibit new private wells where public water service is available and
encourage the discontinuance of existing ones. Discontinued wells should be
properly sealed.
Wells are direct routes for the coniamination of groundwater and should be
properly sealed when they are no longer in use.
Water Conservation
The SPRWS has seen per capita water consumption decrease in recenT years in
Saint Paul.This is a result of successful water conservation strategies, loss of major
industries, and no major droughts. Water conservation programs are intended to
reduce water demand, reduce water losses, and increase efficiency of use.
The city's sources of water (river, chain of lakes, wells) are adequate to meet
current and projected demands, including normal dry summer conditions.
When extreme droughY conditions occur, the source system is adequate to
meet the foreseeable demand if demand is properly managed. This would
entail a conservation strategy laid out in the WSP, and, if necessary, additional
7�
� 9-��`�
SeeEQ6'sReport"UseofMinnesota's groundwaterorriverwaterpumping.However,theMinnesotaEnvironmenTal
RenewableWater Resources:MOVing Quality Board (EQB) is making a renewed call to cities and counties and especially
TowardsSustainabiliry^atthe RamseyCounty,asthestate'smosturbanized,toconservewaterandreduce
webpage: htto://www.eqb t� draw-downs from local aquifers.
m o.us/resource.htmi?Id=19064
For more information on water
conservation, visit The Saint Paul
Regional Water Services website
and through the EPA WaterSense
program.
1.6 Become a regional leader in public education for water conservation.
The City and the SPRWS have ongoing educational and information campaigns.
Public education is an i�creasingly important aspect of water resource
management and the SPRWS should become a more visible leader.
1.7 Promote and advocate ways to reduce indoor water use through better
fi#ures and appliances and also by changing personal habits.
Indoor water use accounts for roughly 35 percent of total per capita water use.The
SPRWS should explore several options to reduce indoor water use:
a. Restarting a retrofitting program for high e�ciency water fixtures and
appliances. This could be coordinated with the federal Environmental
Protection Agency's (EPA) Water Sense program;
b. Raising retrofit-upon-sale regulations for statewide consideration, under
which new, e�cient fixtures would be required when a building is sold to a
new owner; and
c. Enactment of green developmenT guidelines such as Leadership in Energy
and Environmental Design (LEED) or the state 63 guidelines. Saint Paul has
committed to achieving LEED-silver or 63 for new City-owned buildings.
Figure D. Mean Daily Per Capita Water Use
Mean dady pei cap�ta water use, 12 study vtes
�, Avg.Ballons pvg lifiis r Intloor �
�iFizture/EndUse percapitaper, percapifa � use ,TOtaluse,l
' ' tlay 'I perday ' percent '�i percent
Toilet � 1&5� 700I 309% �OS%
IClothes w9sher 15 �� 58.8 � 25 1% 8 7%
'�Shower ' i� 61� 439 794% I 68% I
—'r
iFauCBt i �0.91 4�3� t821� 63°!0,
sii z�i; osi;
as iori� o�i�
'Dishwasher � 1� 38I L7/� O6%
'�IntloorTOfal 59.8� � 226.3 f00.0% r � � 34.8%���,
Leak 9 51 36 0' NA I b 5%',
Nnknown� -�, �17:� 64i� NA� 10%�
!�Omtloor � '., -- 7008�i 381�5 NA' S87%i
TOTAL � V 1.8 � 650.J I NA � t00.0°l0
1.8 Advocate for change ofthe state plumbing code to allow forthe safe reuse
and recycling of gray water.
Gray water systems are becoming more popular and are included in guidelines
for green development such as LEED. However, the state p�umbing code currently
does not address water reuse or recycling adequately. Gray water systems are
currently not allowed in Minnesota and should not be used until a standard
process and designation is developed. Eventually gray water systems could be
used for landscape irrigation or even to reuse water within buildings. (Also see
Policy 3.10)
City of Saint Paul Comprehensive Plan �
09-��{Y
For more information on sustainable
lawn care see the Ramsey-Washing-
ton Metro Watershed District web-
site on Natural Landscaping tips and
through the BlueThumb program at
httoJ/btuethumb.orq[
1.9 Advocate for reduced lawn watering needs through the use of native
plants, rain barrels, gray water for irrigation, drip irrigation rystems etc.
Lawn watering and other outdoor water uses account for a significant percentage
of municipal water use in the summec DaTa from the last 10 years indicates that
summer water use increases from 15 to 40 percent over winter rates.
Multiple solutions are available to reduce lawn watering needs:
a. For landscaping that needs irrigation, use drip irrigation or install and
maintain moisture-sensors on sprinklers;
b. Watering only in the mornings or evenings;
c. Native landseaping, which saves waier, reduces use of fertilizers and
herbicides, reduces mowing (less air pollution), provides habitat, and restores
the soil's fertility and permeability.
7.70 Seek continuing reductions in the amount of lost ("unaccounted-for")
water throughout the system.
SPRWS has an excellent record of holding the amount of lost or "unaccounted-
for" water down to a minimum. The American Water Works Association (AWWA)
recommends that unaccounted-for water not exceed ten percent. The average
percent of unaccounted-for water for SPR WS over the last five years is 9.89%. SPRWS
should:
a. Continue the leak detection and survey;
b. Continue aggressive replacement of mains; and
c. Institute new operations or maintenance if they are cost effective.
Excellent Municipal Water ("Finished"Water)
At the McCarrons Treatment plant, water is purified to meet federal drinking water
standards and refine its taste and odor.The treatment plant has a capacity of144
MGD, approximately three times the average daily demand of the service area (48
MGD estimated from 1995 -2004). Once the water leaves the plant it can be used
immediately or stored. If the water is not drawn offfor immediate use, it is piped
to water storage tanks, reservoirs and standpipes located throughout Saint Paul
and nearby communities.The system has 731 million gallons offinished water
storage capacity, nearlythree times the average daily demand. Care must be
taken to preserve the safety and quality of water in storage until it is delivered to
consumers'taps.
1.11 Continueprogremsthatensuretheoverallsafetyandqualityofwater
reachirtg the consumer.
For more information about
how SPRWS purifies their
water, visit their website
THIS IS THE PREEMWENT AND OVERRIDING POLICY IN THE MUNICIPAL WATER
SUPPLY SECTION OFTHE PLAN. The EPA imposes strict regulations that limit the
amount of contaminants in water provided by public water uiilities. Water is
continuously tested as it leaves the plant to ensure compliance with the sTandards
set bythe EPA and the Minnesota Department of Health. By law, SPRWS is required
to notify its consumers ifthe water is ever out of compliance with federal or state
drinking water standards. SPRWS' preeminent objective is to provide water that
is both safe and appealing. Clean water, free of contaminants, is a cornerstone of
good publit heahh, protecting citizens from diseases, lead poisoning and other
harmful contaminants, while bolstering human health with adequate amounts of
fluoride.
�, , i
Q9- iy�
1.12 Continue efforts to increase SPRWS'customer base to include nearby
municipa{ities.
SPRWS projects water demand will increase by roughly 10 percent between now
and 2030 due io populaTion increases in the municipalities it serves. With an
average current daily demand of around 44 MGD, an expecied increase to 49 MGD,
and a daily capacity of144 MGD, the SPRWS's plant is operating significantly below
its capacity.
Ifthe McCarrons Treatment Plant increased its daily output, it would achieve
a higher level of operating efficiency and the cosT per gallon of finished water
would be lower. Providing waterto additional suburbs would increase the planYs
efficiency. Moreover, extending the SPRWS would help to diversity the metro area's
water supply and reduce groundwater demands since the suburbs that are not
connected to the Saint Paul or Minneapolis systems rely on groundwater as their
only water source.
FigureE. SPRWSDemandProjections
Projected Average Day YSasimum Day
Year PO Demand� Demand Demand
Served i GY MGD �IGD
2910 442,340 16,145 442 84.0
2020 464,�60 17.003 46.i 883
2030 488,260 17,819 48.8 92.8
1. Popt�lation ptojecticros are madz consiste�II with those in ihe Metropolitan
Council's 2030Regional Dzvelopment Frmncnvork. Sco Tablo N.&2.
2. Tha samc m�thodology is uscd to prcdici the dcmand as in Pari 1, Scction ll.
Projected am�ual demand =(Overall par capita da'rly demnnd} -� (Dsys v� the
yuar) x(Poptilatio� serv�ed). Ch�crall per capitu daity demund is assumod to bo
106 oallons fmm 2010 to 2630.
3. Avcrage da}' dcmand —(Projccmd demand)i(Uags in ihc ycar).
4. Tlie ratio of maxunum dav deanand to average day demaiid is 1.9.
1.13 Promote Saint Paul public drinking water as a safe and cheaper alternative
to bottled water.
The City and SPRWS should promote the high quality water that SPRWS
distributes. As an alternative to single-serving bottled water, tap water is at least as
safe, comparable in taste, and much cheaper. Furthermore, single-serving bottled
water has high environmental costs due to shipping and the plastic in the bottle.
The following steps should be considered:
a. Further reducing or eliminating altogether City purchases of bottled water
for events and canceling its bottled water contracts;
b. Revivingthe"QualityonTap"marketingprogramoftheSPRWS;and
c. Endorsing or joining the national "Think Outside the Bottle" campaign as
Minneapolis has done.
Cityof5aintPaul ComprehensivePlan mi
0 9-i��(
7.14 Encourege the provision of clean drinking fountains in public spaces.
Drinking fountains can be an essential service in public spaces. They can be heavily
used, especially during special evenYS or hot weather. Knowing that clean public
drinking fountains are available is likely over time to decrease private purchases of
bottled water.
Being Prepared for Emergencies
In the event of an emergency (e.g., drought, spill of contaminants, sabotage, or
power outage), the SPRWS maintains an emergency plan to reduce the extent and
duration of any service loss.
7.75 Review and update SPRWS' Emergency Preparedness and Response plan
every year.
1.76 Continue to seek funding forthe connection of the Minneapolis and Saint
Paul municipal water supply systems.
Forthe benefit of the entire Twin Cities, the SPRWS and Minneapolis Water Works
systems should be interconnected.The connecTion would provide a partial backup
if one or the other ofthe major treatment plants went offline. If river water became
unusable for any reason, Saint Paul with its chain of lakes, has at least 20 to 30 days
of rawwaYer available in reserve;whereas, Minneapolis has much less.
Future Capital Investments
The SPRWS is entirely self-supporting with revenue obtained through the
sale of water and receipts for its other services. State law provides that the
rates charged be adequate to cover all costs of facilities, operations, and
maintenance.The utility receives no tax money.
7.17 Maintain the SPRWS' capital budgeting system to preserve and improve
infrastructure for the municipal water supply system.
The municipal water supply is an essential public service; capital budgeting for it
must provide for its long-term maintenance, repair, and updating.
Caoital lnvestments Planned: 2008-2017
1. Water main replacement
2. Lead service replacement
3. Hydrant replacement
4. Drillnewwells
S. Aeration system at Pleasant Lake
6. New water meters and metering system
7. SaintPaul-Minneapolisinterconnect
�
v
m
A
N
O
�
�
�
v
�
m
3
�
n
S
a
m
11
6q-i��f
An Educated Public on Water Supply
fncreasing public education on water conservation can reduce water usage.
Technical and mechanical improvements inaease water use efficiency, but
residential customers are the primary end users ofwaterfrom SPRWS. Changes in
customers daily habits could conserve significant amounts of water.
1.78 Augmentexistingeducationalprogramsforschool-agechildren.
SPRWS should do more to educate children about our municipal water supply.
SPRWS should explore allowing school groups to visit the treatment plant, as
personal experience can be the best educational method.
1.19 Expand and broaden general public education efforts.
Small amounts of educational information are currently included ln the water
bill and SPRWS quarterly reports. More could be done. Efforts to reach and
engage a broader population should be initiated, although SPRWS should not be
solely responsible for their i n itiaTion or implementation. Some topics for future
educational efforts might be:
a. The inter-relationship of the water cycle and water users across geographic
scales and through time.
b. Antibiotics, drugs and watec An initiative describing the dangers of flushing
antibiotics and drugs into the water (leftover drugs should be discarded in
the garbage).
c. Groundwaterprotection.Thepublicshouldhaveagreaterappreciationofthe
need to protect groundwater, for example, finding and sealing abandoned
wells.
d. Communicating to a multicultural population. Different cultures learn and
spread knowledge in various ways; thus, different media may be needed to
reach different demographic groups.
Cityof5aintPaW ComprehensivePian m
D�-i�y
Strategy 2: Reduce pollutant loads to water bodies
Sources of Water Pollution
Water pollution comes from many sources. For regulatory purposes, they are
divided into two broad categories: point source pollution and non-point source
pollution (see sidebar). Point source pollution (e.g., from industries and sewage
heatmeM planTS) has been largely regulated by the Clean Wa2er Act of 1977 and
has become a relatively smaller threat. However, as urbanization has expanded,
non-point source pollution (e.g., from rooftops, parking lots, and roads) has
become the larger source of urban water pollution and it is more complicated
to control and regulate.Therefore, managing surface water runoff has gained
importance as a method of improving urban water quality. The techniques for
managing runoff are also rapidly evolvi�g.Therefore, this section ofthe Water Plan
contains more policy changes than the sections on the municipal water supply
and sanitary sewers.
' •--. �� � �`'�.
e
�.:c �.� �'' � . ..
.F °
�' � �A1 ��
Point source pollution; a single,
localized and identifiable source of
poliution, such as a smokestack, storm
sewer or effluent pipe.
Saint Paul's original drainage system ofwetlands, creeks
and streamsflowing intothe Mississippi River had roughly
10 percent of rain water run offthe land. Over time the area
has become urbanized and few wetlands or streams remain.
(See Figure F.) The smaller water features were filled in
decades ago and trunk storm sewers were built deep under
the cicy. Returning to any semblance of the natural drainage
system is, with rare exceptions, infeasible. We have to start
from what we have and make incremenTal improvements.
With urban development, impervious surfaces—the
rooftops, parking lots, and roads--prevent waterfrom
soaking into the ground. More and more water runs off
the surface, disrupting an essential part of the water cycle.
Runoff is captured by storm drains and sewers which
pipe the water underground to ponds, lakes and rivers.
Over 90 percent ofthe runoff in Saint Paul goes directly
to the Mississippi River through storm sewers and surface
drainage; the rest goes to the area's lakes before ending
up in the river. (See Figure P for a map of Subwatersheds in
Saint Paul in Appendix E.)
Intergovernmental Roles
Governmental roles in surface water management are
confusing due to the multiple layers of regulation and
governmental units that have a role in carrying them out. A web of laws and
organizations regulate surface water mana9ement. (See Appendix C for brief
descriptions of governmental bodies and legislation that affect water resources.)
Minnesota statute 7036 provides for special purpose governmental units that
govern a particular watershed's surface water management. These units, which
can take the form ofjoint powers watershed management organizations tWMOs)
or watershed districts (WDs) follow the natural boundaries of a watershed, cutting
across municipal Iines. WDs are independent governmental bodies that can levy
their own taxes and set rules that the City and citizens must follow. WMOs are
established byjoint powers agreements among the affected cities and counties
and they typically choose to exercise fewer powers than WDs.
13
Non-point source pollution: a generaf,
diffuse poilution source such as surface
runoff or atmospheric deposition.
o �-���
Two watershed districts encompass the majority of Saint Paul: the Capitol Region
Watershed District (CRWD) and the Ramsey-Washington Metro Watershed District
(RWMWD).The two districts'regulations are virtually identical.The West Side and a
section of Saint Anthony Park are each controlled by separate WMOs: respectively,
the Lower Mississippi River and the Mississippi River WMOs.
The Saint Paul Local Surface Water Management Plan is for legal purposes
incorporated by reference as an addendum to this Water Chapter of the Saint
Paul Comprehensive PIan.The policies and recommendations for surface water
management that follow are consistent with the Local Surface Water Management
Plan; they both summarize the approved plan and extend its recommendations
into emerging issue areas.
Cleaner Run-offThrough Public Education
Runofffrom rooftops, parking lots, roads, and even lawns flows into storm sewers
and directly into the Mississippi River or a lake. Pollutants that are washed into
storm sewers are carried into public water bodies. As a practical matter, water must
be treated orfiltered before it reaches a storm sewer and drops underground.This
means that in order to improve water quality in the metropolitan region both public
and private property owners must change their management of surface water
on their own properties. Therefore, all Saint Paul property owners should act
asthoughtheirpropertywerewaterfrontproperty. Significantwaterquality
improvements in Saint Paul will come from minor changes made by many property
owners.
2.1 Ensure delivery of public education programs on urban water quality in
coilaboration with oYher organizations.
Cityof5aintPaul ComprehensivePlan m
Figure G. Watershed Management Organization Boundaries in Saint Paul
o�-���
Behavioralchangesthatimprove
urban waYer quality:
- pick up pet was[e and trash;
- redirec[ downspouu from pavement
to landscaped areas;
- remove leaves and debris from
storm sewer grates.
- redute erosion;
- reduce the use of fertilizers and
de-icers;
- and wash cars at car wash
6usinesses (iheir drains mnnea to
sanitary sewers) instead of on the
street.
These individual choices and actions
can reduce non-point source pollution.
Partners with Saint Paul on
water issues:
• Watershed Management
Organizations
• Ramsey Conservation Distria
• Friends of the Mississippi River
• Great River Greening
• Lower Phalen Creek Project
• Ciean WaterACtion,
• MississippiNationalRiverand
Recreation Area
• Metro WaterShed Partners
• BlueThumb
Pubiic education is criticaf to changing habits that cause water poilution. A varieTy
ofgovernmental and non-profit organizations offereducation about water qua�ity.
The City shoufd assist and coordinate these efforts and filf in gap5 where they
exi5t.5ome ofthe educational material should be targeted to developers and City
staff to inform them of various best management practices (BMPs) and to become
comfortable using them. (See Appendix I for explanations and examples of urban
BMPs.)
2.2 Disseminate knowledge nf the regulations regardirtg surface water
management and engage citizens and other stakeholders in meeting
regulations through best management practices (BMPs�.
Saint Paul and the watershed districts need to raise the level of public knowledge
surrounding regulations and stormwater management techniques. There are many
ways this can be done, such as:
a. Investigate the creation of a City website dedicated to information regarding
regulations, storm sewers, BMPs, sanitary sewers etc.
b. Work closely with district councils to incorporate water quality into local
planning and encourage active communication between district councils,
the City Water Resources Coordinator, watershed districts and other partners
to effectively leverage opportunities for achieving Saint Paul's water-related
goals.
c. CollaboretewithbothTraditionalandnon-traditionalpartnersonwaterissues.
Organizations and entities that may not normally deal with waier issues, such
as churches or school groups can help the city reach a wider audience.
d. Raise public awareness of watershed management organizations.
e. Undertake demonstration projects.
f. Use the National Great River Park Plan to help meet ihis policy.
Cfeaner Lakes/Cteaner River
High quality water is an expectation of Minnesotans and many believe pollution
controls could be stricter (Minnesota Report Card on Environmental Literacy, 2002).
The general goal of surface water management is to move backtoward more
natural,"predevelopmenY'conditions by reducing surges of runoffand minimizing
pollutants.
Impervious cover disrupts the normal water cycle by blocking waterfrom
AIISaintPaulproperryowners �nfiltratingintothegroundandcausingrunoSf.Thewatersheddistrictshavedone
sfiouldoctasrhoughtheir estimatesoftheamountofimperviouscoverintheirpartsofthecity.(SeeFigures
properiywere waterfront U and V for graphs of impervious surface percentages for each Watershed Districi
property in Appendix H.) Taken as a whole, about 40 percent of Saint Paul is covered with
impervious surfaces; streets, parking areas, and rooftops are the major categories.
The major contaminants of non-point source pollution include sediment, organic
compounds (in excess of natural levels), trace meials and chlorides. (See Figure W
for a description of urban stormwater pollutants and their effects in Appendix H.)
These pollutants are contaminating and disrupting the natural balance in many of
Saint Paul's water bodies. The primary method for achieving better water quality and
reducing surges of runoff is to infiltraie more water into the ground. (See Figure X for
the estimated pollutant removal effectiveness for infiltretion basins in Appendix H.)
75
0 9- ��y
SaintPaul'simpairedwaterslistasof Cleanerriversandlakesimprovetheenvironmentalhealthoftheecosystem
zooa,n4PCn: and evesyone associated with +t. Water quality and quantity that mirrors
Mississippi Riveradjacentto Saincvaul- predevelopment conditions is best for the plant and animal life that live in or
fecalcoliform,mrbidiry,PCBs,PFOsinfish dependonthelocalwatenNay.
tissue, and mercuryin watermlumn and
fish tissue 23 Comply with existing and future plans, permits, laws and rules for surface
como�ake-phosphorus,me.cu.yinfish watermanagement,andupdatethemwhenrequired.
Beaver Lake — phospfioms, mercuryin fish
BattleCreek-chlorides Surface water management regulations are becoming tougher due to boTh federal
Lakeahalen-PFOsinfisht/ssue andlocalrequirements.Totalmaximumdailyload(TMDL)studies,aresultofthe
Clean Water Act, are becoming increasingly common and require local redudion
of pollutant loads to impaired waters. (See Appendix C for a list of existing plans,
permits and other regulations that applyTO property owners in the city.)
What is a TMDL? As part of the Clean
Waier Att, staxes are required to submit
a lisi of impaired waters to the U.S.
Environmental Protettion Agency every
tvuo years. A water is impaired if it fails
to meet one or more basic federal water
quality sia�ards. As a result of an
impairment, the state (administered by
the MPCA) must evaluate the pollutant
sources and make reasonable progress
towards addressing the impairment.
A TMDL study is undertaken for each
ofthe impairments. Each study is
composed of several parts. The study
determines the amount of a pollutant
that is currently entering the water.
Then, it determines the maximum
amount of the pollutant that can be
preserrt in the water while meeting
water quality standards. The difference
between These two levels is how much
pollutant musi be removed from the
system. A list of the mntributing water
bodies and sources must be prepared,
indi[ating hoW much ofthe pollutant
they contribute and how much they will
have to reduce their pollutant loads.
Timelines are created for at[ions to be
taken within two years, within five years,
and longer term. More information on
TMDLs can be found either through the
EPA or the MPCA.
2.4 Establish a Litter-Free Saint Paul campaign in conjunction with district
councils and other non-profits.
Not all trash makes itto landfills; in fact the amount found on our roadways is
staggering. (See figureYfor the amount of litterfound on Ohio roads annualfy in
Appendix H.) Litter is not only unsightly, it harms wildlife and, as it degrades, releases
pollutants into the water.
2.5 Strengthen the City ordinance against raking leaves irito the street, and
disseminate information about the damage autumn leaves do to water quality.
(See City Legislative Code, Sec.106.02.)
The current ordinance allows property owners to rake leaves into the street ifthey
have fallen from trees on public property.The ordinance should be revised to
prohibit raking any leaves into the street. Leaves in the street that areflushed down
storm sewers cause high phosphorus levels in the receiving water bodies. Instead,
leaves should be composted, used or taken to yard waste drop-off sites.
2.6 Participate in total maximum daily load (TMDL) studies and implement
programs and projects to comply with load requirements set by approved
TMDLs.
Several water bodies in Saint Paul have been found to be impaired by the MPCA (see
sidebar). Each ofthese will require its own TMDL study and will have localized effects.
The IargestTMDL study in Minnesota to date is the Lake Pepin TMDL. Saint Paul,
lying upstream from Lake Pepin, will be impacted by the findings and requirements
to reduce sediment loads reaching the River. Other impairments for the Mississippi
River have been found and will be addressed through otherTMDLs.
As part of Battle Creek's TMDL for chlorides, an edutationa{ or citizen engagement
component should be developed and communicated citywide to help local
government officials and staff, citizens, and businesses understand the importance
of appropriate salt use and application.
2.7 Reduce erosion throughout Saint Paul.
Within the CRWD section of Saint Paul, nearly 3,000,000 pounds of suspended solids
entered citywater bodies from 17,000 acres of land during the months from April to
November (CRWD Monitoring Report, 2006).That means roughly 270 pounds per
Cityof5aintPaul ComprehensivePlan m
6 5- i�ly
acre of suspended solids washed into water bodies in less than one year. (See Figure
Towisuspendedsolids(TSS)isthe ZforthetotalsuspendedsolidsyieldinCRWDinAppendixH).Thisisastaggering
dry-weightof particlestrapped by amount, and it needs to be reduced through the following methods:
afilter,xypicailyofaspecfiedpore a. Improve Saint Pauf's regulatory enforcement and management of erosion
size i.e. dirt and other particles conTrol ln construction zones. The City must do this in accordance with the
suspended in a liquid National Pollution Discharge Elimination System (NPDES) permit issued tothe
After adding rain gardens to
a Burnsville neighborhood,
stormwater runoff decreased
nearly 90% compared to the
control neighborhood
httnJlwww.humsville.ora!
DocumentUew asp?DID=450
�a.. �»..a
\\� '�,. � �s,�..e
\ \ �y --� °�,
�.� �� �
Ro w�� � rw r�kr �Na>vuc�
4fmA. Pm6rrgfw.Jcerr/�oxudvecedroGry+escd
tv1�J; wv/Sm.' d�¢ wammvatv➢�,
Figure H. Alternative Parking Lot
Designs So Improve SYOrmwater
Retention and Infiltration
City by the Pollution Control Agency; and
b. Identify erosion-prone areas of publicly-owned land and determine solutions
case bycase,which may involve revising mowing and snow dearing practices,
replanting wiih native vegetation, re-grading, or adding retaining walls. (See
po{icy 2.15 J
2.S Reduce the negative impacts that roadways in the city have on water
quality and water resources.
Impervious cover associated with transportation infrastructure has the highest
pollutant load of any land use (Storm Water Strategies: Community Responses to
Storm Water Pollution, 1999). While roads do not actually produce pollutants, they
hold pollutanis uniil they are cleaned up or washed into storm drains. Curreni
BMP programs such as street sweeping and cleaning out catch basins reduce the
amount of pollution that reaches local waterways.
Paved roads cover more acres in the citythan any other category of impervious
surface.The Residential Street Vltality Program (RSVP) it the City's primary paving
program. Most RSVP projects fall under Watershed District requirements for
infiltrating water. During RSVP projects, the City should:
a. Work with district councils to meet city and neighborhood needs while also
meeting watershed, regional and State requirements. (Referto Policy 22b.)
b. Use Low Impad Design (LID) concepts and tools where feasible;
c. Undertake demonstration projects or programs; and
d. Encourage the construction of residential rain gardens without sacrificing
boulevard tree health or residential densities (Referto Policy 2.19).
2.9 Reduce the negative impacts that parking lots in the city have on water
quality and water resources.
Parking lots are another major source of impervious surfaces in the city. Many
methods exist to reduce runoff and pollutant loads from these areas. As with
streets, the solutions tend to be more difficult and costly to accomplish in urban
areas. The City should change its off-street parking requirements and implement
other actions to reduce the size of surface parking lots. Pervious pavement
also works well in areas of lowtraffic or overflow parking. (See policy _ in the
Transportation Plan).
2.10 Reduce the negative impacts that alleys in the city have on water quality
and water resources.
The City should consider alternatives to standard alley resurfacing, such as giving
citizens the option to repave their alley with porous pavement, that will reduce
alley runoffand be more aesthetically appealing.
s
v
�
�
�� —
Seattle's Street Edge Alternatives
(SEA) Streets Project reduced
stormwater runoff by 99%.
G 9-���
2.17 Review and Implement improvements in the City's day-to-day
operations ("housekeeping') in order to reduce adverse impads on water
quality and resources, (ag., de-icing, lawn mowing, tree removal, street
sweeping, catch basin cleaning, vehicle washing, sidewalk sweeping, etc.)
Tidy"housekeeping" on the city's streeSS and elleys can reduce water pol{ution
significantly. This is an important category for aciion in the City's National
Pollution Discharge Elimination System (NPDESJ permit.
2.12 Reduce the negative impacts of rooftop runoff on water quality and
water resources.
The final major category of impervious surface in the city is rooftops. Many
strategies existto reduce runoff and pollution from rooftops.The City should
control runofffrom its municipal buildings and encourage others to do likewise at
their buildings through the following techniques:
a. Using cisterns and rain barrels, which first reduce runoff and then conserve
on municipal water needed for irrigating lawns and gardens;
b. Redirectingdownspoutstowardsperviousareasorthroughplanterboxes;
and
c. Constructing green roofs. Green roofs come in a variety of depths and costs.
Depending on the desired function, they can be as thin as a few inches
planted in succulents or as thick as a foot of soil planted with grasses, shrubs
or even vegetables. Depending on rain inYensity and green roof depth,
between 15 and 90 percent of potential runoff can be absorbed; 50 to 60
percent is typical. Green roofs have addixionaf benefits such as decreasing
the urban heat island effecY, decreasing building energy costs, extending
roof lifespan and making the cityscape more beautiful.
2.73 Continue to use site plan review as an opportunity to improve surface
water management on proposed developments.
While maintaining the density and economic feasibility of projects undergoing site
plan review, the City should encourage:
a. Designs and landscaping that clean and minimize runoff i.e., above-ground
BMPs;
b. Above-ground BMPs, which may or may not use runoff, as a placemaking
amenity and for public art.
c. Maximization of pervious areas; and
d. Preservation of natural areas and mature trees.
The City should also:
e. Maintain a catalog of BMPs to be used during site plan review;
f. Encourage the use of Low Impact Development (LID) concepts and tools
during larger redevelopment projects; and
City of Saint Paul Comprehensive P{an m
Green Roof at the Bureau of
Criminal Apprehension
7430 Maryland Aven�e East
a 5 - ���
For more information see Metro
Council's Urban Small Sites BMP
Manual
g. Continue to workwith the watershed district staff on projects that trigger
their rules (projects over one acre in size).
2.14 Explore ways to reduce stormwater runoff and improve water quality
fram existing sites.
Only new construction at sites larger than one acre is subjed to watershed
district rules. (See Figure AA for a list of permitted pro}ects in CRWD and RWMWD
since 2006).Therefore, improvements in overall water quality due to the existing
regulations will be tediously incremental. Additio�al methods that encourage
retrofitting current sites to reduce stormwater runoff should be pursued.The City
should:
a. Reevaluate, as information systems grow, whether it would be practical
io change the City's storm sewer service charge from generalized land
use categories to site-specific charges, that is, a system for charging each
propertyfor the actual amount of runoff it contributes to the storm sewer
system;
b. Develop incentives for property owners to retrofit their stormwater systems
voluntarily to meet infiltration and water quality standards;
c Encourage the use of cistems and construction of rain gardens in appropriate
areas; and
d. Evaluatetheneedforastandardizedprocesstodeterminerequestsforcurb
openings to residential rain gardens.
2.15 Develop and adopt appropriate standards for stormwater management
on development sites smaller than one acre.
Within the CRWD, 85 percentof all parcels are smaller than an acre in size.These
parcels make up roughly 3,000 of the 91,000 acres of the district, over 25 percent of
the district, including virtually every residential Iot.These smaller lots should also
contribute to water quality improvements. The City should:
a. Set up an interagency process to establish criteria for parcels smaller than an
acre. (See policy2.77.)
b. Revise Saint Paul's stormwater ordinance (Saint Paul's Legislative Code, Sec. 52).
'I.�.99...
�
�
A
0
�
�
3
�
�
3
3
n
S
�
m
A rain garden in the St. Anthony
Park neighborhood with a curb
opening to accept street runoff.
o�- ���
2.16 Work on an area-wide or citywide scale to identify and use sites to meet
volume reduction requirements in the best and most cost-effective manner.
The resultr must recognize different land uses and empha:ize cooperation and
communication between City departments.
A 2008 rtudy categorizes the infiltration potential of land citywide. Different areas
ofthe City have good or bad infiltration potential.The City will identify infiltration
opportunities on good sites in orderto bank infiltration credits. CiTy departments
will have to cooperate and communicate about the amount of water to be
infiltrated, who will maintain the BMPs, and how it will balance with other uses of
the site. Other factors to consider:
a. The City and WMOs may need io acquire land in certain situations to help
meet area-wide requirements;
b. The City should workto establish area-wide infiltration"banks°to meet
volume reduction requirements; and
c. The City will need to solicit input and assistance from other agencies, and
local government u�itz such as Watershed Districts, Minnesota Departme�t
ofTransporcation, Ramsey County, Saint Paul Public Schools, and adjacent
municipalities.
2.17 Strive toward consistent surface water management regulations
throughout the city.
Multiple layers of regulation exist and, due to watershed district boundaries,
part of St. Anthony Park and all of the West Side neighborhood have different
regulations than the rest of Saint Paul. (See Figure G WMO Boundaries in Saint Paup.
Steps toward simplifying the rules and regulations could aid development and
public participation in water management. Saint Paul should form an interage�cy
coordination committee to harmonize and streamline requirements citywide. The
committee should review stormwater guidelines and the Wetland Conservation
Act (WCA) authority with respect to areas outside of watershed districtjurisdiction.
Erosion control authority should also be reviewed.
A Water-�se City Landscape
Nearly 70 percent of Saint Paul is developed, half ofthat with housing.The other 30
percent is open space and includes parks, cemeteries, golf courses, the lakes and
river.This variety of land uses contributes to a gradation of landscapes in the city.
Some areas, like downtown, are almost completely covered in impervious surfaces
with little greenery, while most residential districts have boulevard trees, lawns and
gardens.There are also areas along the Mississippi Riverthat are largely unmanaged
and left wild.
This objective focuses on the non-built environment. ln terms of water
management, plants and soils are not all equal.5ome areas are good at infiltrating
water, some are erosion-prone, some are polluted and some are too compacted
to soak up much watec Sand and undisturbed, un-compacted native soils are the
best at infiftrating water. Wetlands can remove pollutants from water as can other
plants and soi1. Green areas of the city provide many benefits; among them is the
improvement of water qualiry. More policies related to this objective for a water-
wise city landscape can be found in the Parks and Recreation Chapter.
Cityof5aintPaW ComprehensivePlan .�i
0 9- i��{
2.1 S Encourage the use of native vegetation for appropriate land uses.
Deep-rooted plants can improve soil conditions by building and loosening soil,
increasing infiltration and reducing erosion.They are especially useful on urban
soils which are compacted or disturbed. Saint Paul has a preference for native
plants and cultivars, but non-
native plants that are deep-rooted
and non-invasive are acceptable.
Invasive non-natives should be
discouraged.The Cityshould
collaborate with partners to
providetechnical assistance about
desirable and undesirable plant
species.
2.79 Promote tree planting
and improved tree planting
strategies to reduce runoff by
increasing the survival rates and
tifespans of trees.
Trees play a role in stormwater
management as well as overall
city aesthetics (see sidebar).The
City requires trees to be planted in parking lots, around developments and along
boulevards. Unfortunately, manytrees die young before their benefits are realized.
Research from Chicago estimates that trees must live between nine and 7 S years
before the benefits outweigh the costs to the community (Chicago's Urban Forest
Ecosystem: Results ofthe Chicago Urban Forest Climate Project, McPherson E.G,
7994).Typical problemsfor urban trees include limited soil volume and organic
matter, compacted soil, elevated temperatures, and lack of watering.Therefore, the
City should:
a. Evaluate proposed landscaping requirements for parking lots in the
Mississippi River corridor and possibly apply them citywide. Draft regulations
for parking lots in the Mississippi River Critical Area, which are under review
by the City Council in 2009, would require two square feet of landscaped
area for everyten square feet of paving (doublethe current levep; one
canopy tree per six parking spaces in lots with less than 100 spaces and one
canopy tree per eight parking spaces in lots with greaterthan 100 spaces;
b. Promote better designs, and planting and management techniques such
as increasing soil volumes, reducing soil compaction before planting, using
pervious pavement and ensuring adequate amounts of topsoil are used;
c. Promote design standards for trees that incorporate stormwater collection
and infiltration that improve tree survival rates and reduce stormwater
volumes;
d. Encourage increased tree planting by private property owners by assisting
and strengthening tree planting programs; and
e. Identify tree canopy cover dtywide.
(See Strategy 3 of the Parks and Recreation Chapter.)
21
o �-«�
Stormwater Benefits ofTrees:Trees
in[ercept rdinfall in their leaves and
bark, decreasing the amount thai
�eaches the ground. Tree canopies
also decrease the intensity of rainfall,
decreasing erosion and runoff.Trees
also delay the onset and reduce ihe
intensity of peak runoff flows. Of course
trees provide many benefiu beyond
theirhydrological ones—Yney improve
aerthetics, decrease energy corts,
reduce air pollutanu, sequester carbon,
decrease air temperatures, increase
propertyvalues,and provide habitat.
For more information see the Midwest
CommuniTyTree Guide from the United
States Department of Agriculture
NSDA).
2.20 Preserve and restore native shorelines to improve water quality.
Shorefine land use and vegetation type and quaiity can affect water quafity,
habitat value and human health. Regulations for shoreline buffers depend on
whether they are for the Mississi ppi River or other water bodies in the city. For ihe
river, the Mississippi River Critical Area amendmeMS, which are under review by
the Clty Council in 2009, propose stricter regulations forthe river's shorelands.
For other water bodies, the DNR has auChorityto require local adoption of model
shoreland standards by ordinance.The DNR has not exercised this authority in
Saint Paul becausevirtuallyall of5aint Paul'swater bodies are surrounded by
parkland, and the DNR has higher priorities for its shoreland program elsewhere.
Whenever the DNR requests the City to adopt a shoreland ordinance, Saint Paul
will do so.
Even in the absence ofi an ordinance, the Parks and Recreation Department has
been and will continue to redesign and renaturalize shorelines of many ofthe lakes
and streams in the city. Doing so is broadly consistent with the City's own goals.
Additional policies are found in the Parks and Recreation Chapter.
2.21 Preserveorimproveaccessibilitytowaterbodies.
Saint Paul has more Mississippi River shoreline than any other city. Preserving pub-
lic access to the river and to other city water 6odies—consirtent, of course, with
public safety and environmental protection—is a priority. Places where one can see,
hear, and touch bodies of water grip the imagination and lend a special charm to
the city.This topic is also discussed in the Parks and Recreation Chapter. (See Figure
O for water access features in Appendix EJ
2.22 Implement the Trout Brook-Lower Phalen Creek Small Area Plan.
The plan calls for daylighting a stream that is currently buried in stormwater pipes.
The stream would create wetlands and on-site park amenities, capturing all storm-
water at the end of streets and channeling it into wetlands that would cleanse the
water before it is discharged into the storm sewer. The Bruce Vento Nature Sanc-
tuary below Mounds Park and theTrillium site, located between the North End
neighborhood and I-35E, are examples of environmental restoration projects with
educational components that can serve as examples for other parts of the city.
2.23 Analyzetherelationshipbetween densityand waterqualityaspropos-
alsfor higherdensitiesandtallerbuildingsoccuratparticularlocations.
For manyyears, lower density housing and deveiopment has been presumed to
be betterfor water quality because each site has less impervious cover. But recent
research shows ihat, ai the metro scale, lower density development can lead, region-
ally, to increased runoff and greater water pollution, primarily due to the increased
amount of developed land (Protecting Water Resources with Higher Density Devel-
opment, EPA 2006). Higher densities in neighborhoods designed forwalking and
public transit can redirect urban sprawl and reduce rooftops, roads and parking lots
in the metro area. In addition, with higher densities the costs of implementing BMPs
can be decreased per person by sharing the costs with greater numbers of people.
Aquifers �th Pure Water
Groundwater is an invaluable resource, but it is hard io regulate since it flows with
no relationshiptojurisdictional boundaries, noteven watershed boundaries. Aqui-
fers are used primarily for municipal water supplies, but they are tapped for other
uses as well. Groundwater movement and its interactions with surface water are
Cityof5aintPaul ComprehensivePlan �
o9-iy�l
not completely understood. Contaminated surface water and leaking pollutants
seep into the groundwater and can move into rivers and Iakes through shallow
aquifers or may continue sinking over a fong period of time into the deeper aqui-
fers that are used for well water.Thus, restrictions on hazardous materials or land
uses in areas with sensitive groundwater can protect groundwater qualiry and
human health. (See policy 1.3 in the Land Use chapter and Figure Q for a map of
Sensitive Groundwater Areas in Saint Paul in Appendix E.)
2.24 Strongly encourage an update to the Ramsey County Groundwater Qual-
ity Protection Plan that will include specific action steps for municipalities.
Withio Mionesota, counties typically are the entities to monitor and protect
groundwater resources. The 1996 Ramsey County Groundwater Quality Protection
Plan was written Yo provide:
• An assessment of groundwater resources in Ramsey County and threats to it;
• A framework for coordinating groundwater protection among local govern-
mental units; and
Programs and techniques for the protection ofthis resource.
ImplemenTation ofthe plan is voluntary and relies on proactive preventive activi-
ties to maintain the amount and quality of groundwater. However, the plan needs
to be updated and should contain at least the following:
a. Actionstepstoprotectgroundwaterfromcontamination;
b. Recommendationsfor each municipality; and
c. Identification of abandoned wells in Saint Paul that need to be sealed as
required by Mlnnesota Department of Health rules.
Figure I. Generalized Twin Cities Metropolitan Area Geologic Cross-Section
II90lI Glaci`vlAlaleriul a¢�[aa�oUS �Yemmyi
1050 T`� /�A� � { I�� R iM����— �
sao
% �so
; saa
� ��o
5 aoo
' iw
3
_ o
-�� j 1 — = 1 '
� v.aasse� �
-soa a w zu m,�� �w 0 aa -o
❑CIaNWbrttt ■AqWee ❑ConEnlegY.a�x
v.nK aaico¢xn Vv.'�aar/eb) 4l
2.25 Advertise and communicate the importance of well-sealing programs.
While no one in Saint Paul still uses well waterfor their drinking water, there
arethousands of abandoned wells in the area. Wells provide direct routes for
contaminants to enter groundwater. More emphasis could be placed on finding
these abandoned wells and properly sealing them to protect groundwater for
human health.The watershed districis and county currently have well-sealing cost
share programs that should be more widely advertised and expanded if necessary.
The City should assist in advertising the programs.The Ramsey Conservation
District should also advertise the abandoned well rules of the state Department of
Health and rehire a groundwater specialist.
�
�
�
�
"o
�
�
3
�
�n
3
'�
n
a
m
23'
d 5-l��
Wetlands
Weilands provide valuable functions such as cleaning runoff, infiltrating water,
recharging aquifers, providing habitat for plants and animals, including some on
threatened and endangered species lists wch as Minnesota's state flower, the
Ladyslipper. One such habitat is the Mississippi River Flyway, which is the largest
flyway for migratory birds in North America. Historically Saint Paul had many more
wetlands than today, but most have been drained or converted into Iakes. Wetlands
are regulated largely bythe Minnesota's Wetland Conservation Ad (WCA), which is
administered locally and generally requires no-net-loss of wetlands.
2.26 Complete a Wetland Management Plan for Saint Paul and implement its
findings.
In order to protect and restore wetlands, the Wetland Management Plan will
conduci assessments, coordinate deparcments and agencies, and develop
management strategies.The City will cooperate with WMOs to implement the plan.
To start the process in 2008, the City completed a wetland inventory that dassified
them and rated their environmental values.
Effective Water Infrastructure
Providing storm drains and sewers for the city is a valuable function that increases
safety and health. However, many ofthem were constructed a hundred or more
years ago and are expensive to maintain or replace. (See Figure R for a map of major
storm sewers in Saint Paul in Appendix E.)
2.27 Remain abreast of the repidly evolving field of stormwater BMPs in
order to find the most efficient and cost-effective ones. Work to minimize
maintenance costs and improve the functioning of BMPs.
With continuous improvement in stormwater BMPs in the coming decade, ongoing
training and feedback will be essential for staff, policy leaders and construction
companies that install them. (See policy 22.) Monitoring the performance,
maintenance and cost effectiveness ofvarious BMPs will be important.
2.28 Provide adequate funding to operate and maintain adequate storm
sewer infrastructure and service in all parts of the city.
Saint Paul operates over 450 miles of storm sewer pipes and tunnels.There are
106 discharge points from the storm sewer system, ofwhich almost 60 go to the
river. In addition, there are over 26,000 catch basins and 20 stormwater ponds.The
operation of separate sanitary and storm sewer systems has eliminated combined
sewer overflows and minimized flooding.
The Sewer Utility's 2007 budget is $54 million, ofwhich the major expenditures
include: debt service of $7 7 million, payment to the regional treatment facility
(MCES) of $16 million, capital improvements of $17 million, and six million for
operations and maintenance.This includes both storm and sanitary sewers. In
addition, 51.2 miilion is budgeted annually to impfement watershed rules on street
projects.
2.29 Advocate for an equitable share of the funds from the 2008 state
constitutional amendment for environmental funding to be allocated to the
improvemeM of urban water quality.
Saint Paul should be engaged in the allocation process for this new state funding
sourceto see thatwater quality improvements are undertaken in afl parts of the
state, including cities and towns, and, specifically, to seek funding for proposals in
this plan.
City of Saint Paul Comprehensve Plan m
a y- l�y
HisWry nf Saint Pau14
Sanitary Sewer System
Middle-}gppg: Generaf sewer rystem
follows natural topography and drains
to the Mississippi River, one pipe for
both sanitary and stormwater flows
7920's: Major sewer reconstruction due
to flooding and sewer back-ups
1933: Saini Paul and Mmneapotiz form
the Minneapolis-Saint PaUI Sanitary
Dis[rict to treat sewage from both citie5
and the suburbs
7938: Metropolitan Wastewater
Treatment Plani is built; however,
mmbined sewer overflows (CSOs7 are
still a problem
Middle 1950's:5evereflooding and
back-ups contribute to a long-range
program forsewer relief
7969: Metropolitan Council tookover
the region's sewage treatment from the
Sanitary District
1984: Saint Paul, South Saint Paul,
Minneapolis and the Metropolitan
Council decide to completely separate
the rtorm and sanitary sewer pipes
1996: Saint Paul finishes the Combined
SewerSeparation Project,efiminating
sewer over-Flows to the river and back-ups
into neighborhoods
Strategy 3: Operate and maintain a cost effective sanitary
sewer infrastructure
Introduction
Collecting and treating sanitary sewage is a shared responsibility between Saint
Paul and the Metropolitan Council.The sanitary sewers collects wastewater from
homes and other buildings and convey ii to huge regional sewer interceptor pipes
ieading to the Metropolitan Wastewater Treatment ?lant (MeYropoliTan Plant). After
treatmeni, the water that is put back into the river is cleaner than the normal flow in
the river. An effective sewage treatment sySTem is critical for pubfic health and the
natural environment.
Saint Paul owns and operates 806 miles of sanitary sewers and 23 sanitary sewage
pumping stations, which would cost more than a billion dollars to replace.This
section ofthe Water Plan is about the maintenance and operation of the City's
sanitary sewer system.
The Metropolitan Council Environmental Services (MCES) is charged with planning
for wastewater treatment throughout the Twin Cities area. In addition, they own
and operate the regional interceptors.The Metropolitan Plant treats nearly SO
percentofthe7winCities'wastewater.Designedtotreat251 milliongallonsdaily
(MGD) of wastewater, the plant treated an average of 185 MGD in 2006. (See Figure
J.) The Metro Plant has a� outstanding record of compliance with state and federal
clean water discharge permits. Beyond what is included in this plan, M�ES has
additional requirements for municipal wastewater planning that are being met
separately bythe Public Works Department.
Figure !. Total Annual Volume (Millions of Gallons) Treated at the Metropolitan
WastewaterTreatment Plant
Communitv
Minneapolis
St. Paul
Edina
Plymouth
Coon Rapids
Brooklyn Park
St. Louis Park
2003
18,851.24
11,038.47
2,302.62
2,718.51
2,160.32
7,91222
2,210.84
41,19422
2004
18,475.09
8,634.70
2,264.76
2,733.53
2,087.16
1,904.78
2,122.90
38,222.92
2005
18,046.90
8,666J9
2,276.52
2,727.72
2,747.74
2,082.74
2,046,92
37,994.73
2006
18,042.54
8,674.07
2,277.41
2,779.82
2,142.26
2,089.34
2,079.70
35,079.74
Metro W W TP
7 CiTy Total 1 to W WTP
St. Paul % to WWTP
70,921.40 68,789.D0 68,318.80 67,681.80
58.08 55.57 55.61 56.�7
15.56 12.55 12.69 12.82
Sanitary Sewer Operating Procedures
3.1 Operate and maintain the sanitary sewer infrastructure and provide
service throughout the city.
Ongoing sanitary sew er operation, maintenance and rehabilitation programs
include:
a) Major Sewer Repair:The purpose ofthis program has been to repair both
sanitaryand storm sewer systems throughout the Cityto eMend service life
and reduce inflow and infiltration (I&I).
25
G9-i��
b) Sewer Inspedion: In 2004, the City began inspecting its sanitary sewers on a
ten-year cycle.5ince then, 35 percent ofthe City's sanitary sewers have been
cleaned and inspected.
c) Sewer Lining:The Sewer Utility has been lining approximately 74 miles of
sewer a�nually since1997 with another150 mifes scheduled tobe Iined.The
linings prolong the life of pipes by 50 years; decrease friction within pipes,
which increasesflow speed; and eliminate inflow and infiltration, which is
explained under Policy 35.
d) Tunnel Rehabilitation:This program was started in 2006 and includes the
rehabilitation of both storm and sanitary sewer tunnels. Each year needed
repairs arefunded through This program.
e) Maintenance: Routine maintenance keeps sewers in good and safe condition
by repairing defects as they occur including removal of debris, tree roots,
and other blockages and repair of minor sewer defects.
3.2 Provide sanitary sewer service, wherever prectical, to properties now
operating on-site disposal systems with a goal of eliminating on-site systems
by 2025.
In 2008 a6out 120 residential proQertles are not served by sanitary sewers, down
from about 200 in 199S.These properties remain unconnected to the sanitary
system because of high bedrock, low density development and other reasons that
Inflowand Infiltretiorr"Inflow" lead to high costs for sewer construction. They are concentrated in the Highwood
referstoclearwaterorrainwaterthat neighborhood.(SeeFigureSforamapoflndividualSewageTreatment5ystem
entersthesanitarysewersthrough IocationsinAppendixE.)
conneccions or leaks in the plumbing
systems of buildings."Infiltration"refers A step toward implementing the goal of eliminating on-site systems would be for
to groundwaterthacseeps intoche planning staffwho review plans for new houses in Highwood to advise builders on
sa�iwry sewers through cracks orjoincs whether the elevation of the lowest floor is compatible with a gravity wnnection
ofmanholesandpipes,andleaking toafuture5ewerorwillrequirepumping.
water lines to houses. Infiltration occurs
most often in areas with clay soils and 33 Ensure that individuai sewage treatment systems are opereted
highgroundwaterleveis.lnflowand effectivelywithinthestandardssetbytheMinnesotaPollutionControl
infikrafion (called I&I) result in higher pyenty.
sewage treatment costs because clean
water is being pipedtothe sewage Saint Paul's management and control program of individual sewage treatment
treatment plant.l&I also increasesthe systems (ISTS) meets the current Minnesota Pollution Control Agency (MPCA)
riskofasewerpipecoliapse,sinkhoie, standards.AdescriptionofSaintPaul'sprogramandacopyoftheordinance,
orsurface depressions. Lastly, italso Which was updated in 1998, are included in Appendix J.
can cause Combined Sewer OverFlows
(CSOs) if the combined clear water 3.4 Ensure adequate sanitary sewer capacity for more intensive
and wastewater are greater than the
treatment planYs capacity. redeVelopment.
Sanitary sewer capacity is ample for the city's projected growth in population and
employment although it is important wherever major redevelopment is planned to
verify that sewer capacities in the vicinity are adequate for the projected inaeases.
(See FigureTfor a map of major sanitary sewers in Saint Paul in Appendix E.)
3.5 Coordinate with Metropolitan Council Environmental Services towards
a fair comprehensive and cost-effective resolution to the reduction of inflow
and infiltretion into the sanitary sewer system.
In 2006, Metropolitan Council Environmental Services (MCES) adopted a
Surcharge Program to impose significantly higher wastewater treatment fees in
municipalities that have excess amounts of I&I and fail to implement programs to
reduce it over time. Fifty-six communities including Saint Paul and Minneapolis
exceeded their I&1 allowances, and therefore face the threat of high wastewater
treatment bills (which come to property owners as a line item on their water bills).
Cityof5aintPaW ComprehensivePlan m
6�-��y
Reducing I&I is much more cost-effective than building additional sewer capacity.
The biggest source of inflow in the city used to be rain leaders from rooftops
connected directlyto the sanitary sewers. Since 1955, almost all ofthe rain leaders
have been disconnected and now discharge onto the ground.
In 2007, Saint Pauf did a pilot study of!&I in the Highland Park neighborhood,
where "smoke'was forced through the pipes to fi�d where leaks were.The City
is working with MCES tA seaf up leaks and apply the findings in other areas of the
city. (See Appendix Kfor definitions of I&I and description ofthe I&I pilot study).
Saint Paul is concerned about the 1&f occurring in the MCES interceptor pipes as
they flow under the city. Saint Paul has many more MCES interceptors carrying
more wastewater from other communities than any other municipality. MCES does
recognize that I&I occurs on its own pipes and it is undertaking efforts to reduce
the problem, but Saint Paul may be charged for 1&I that is occurring on MCES
interceptors.
3.6 Provide adequate funding to support replacement of deteriorating
infrastructure and to maintain the integrity of the Sewer Utility Enterprise Fund.
MCES bills the City monthly for sanitary sewer treatment charges based on the
volume of water measured by MCES.The City in turn bills property owners as part
of the water billing system.The payments go into the Sewer Utility Enterprise
Fund, which receives no tax moneyfrom the City's General Fund.The Sewer Utility
Enterprise Fund is dedicated to the maintenance and operation of the storm and
sanitary sewer system.
It is estimated that the replacement cost ofthe entire sewer system would be well
over one billion dollars.The Sewer Utility's 2007 budget is $54 million, of which the
major expenditures include: debt service of $17 million, payment to the regional
treatment facility (MCES) of $16 million, capital improvements of $11 mi!lion and six
million for operations and malntenance.
27
Figure K. Inflowand Infiltration Sources
U �-/�y
3.7 Prevent, minimize and report sanitary sewer overflows according to EPA
standards.
A SaniTary sewer overflow is an over-
flow, splll or diversion of wastewater
from a sanitary sewer system.
The City shall properly operate and maintain all facilities and systems of treatment
to prevent and minimize sanitary sewer overflows. Overflows must be reported to
the MPCA as required.
3.S Report inter-municipal sanitary sewer connections to the MCES as
required.
The City has several small inter-municipal connections on the edges of Saint Paul.
Just over 200 properties citywide are connected to other municipalities. (See
Appendix L for a list of sanitary sewer connections to other municipalities.)
Future Opportunities
3.9 Investigate alternative systems that reuse gray water and advocate
changes in the state plumbing code to allow alternative treatment systems as
long as health and safety are maintained.
Alternative ways to reduce water demands and reuse wastewater are being
City of Saint Paul Comprehensive Plan ��'.
Oberlin College's living machine purifies wastewater
which is then recycled within the building.
� 9- �y�
Implementation
Water issues always crossjurisdictiona� boundaries and thus involve more than one unit of government.
Effedive cooperation among agencies is essential for this plan to be implemented. Appendix C describes the
roles that various agencies play.The matrix below identifies the roles that City departments and other water-
related agencies will have in implementing this plan.
Implementation matrix
Depariments SaintPaul Watershed Ramsey District
- oftheCityof Regional Management Conservation Councils&
SainTPaul WaterService Organizaiions Distnci Advocacy
(SPRWS)
' � WATER SUPPLY, STRATEGY 1
1.1: Source Water Protection Plan X
1.2: VLAWMO
13: Welihead Proteaion Plan
7.4: Minimizewellwaterwithdrawals
1.5: Prohibitnewprivatewellswhere...
1.6: Publiceducationforwaterconservation
1.7: Reduceindoorwateruse
1.8: State plumbing code and graywater
1.9: Reduce lawn watering needs
7.70: Reduce
PW
DSI
DSI, M
DSI
DSI
;�
DSI
X
X
X
X X � �_� __� _
X X X
X
X
��.._„..,.-.,,- .. � ��u. �
X X X X
X
1.17: Ensure safety X
1.1 I ncreas e SP RWS'customer base X
1.13: Pmmote public drinking water P& R, L X ��� �� � X
7.14: Publicdrinkingfountains ?? X
7.15: SPRWS Emergency Preparedness Plan X
1.16: Minnea polisandSaintPaul i nterconnection M X
. ..>LL _._, . ,.�-.-eu�-�.--._.,:...w-�.—�;�.;._. ,.�,::�:.u.,=.-� -- .—�-�-�.,�,. ..
L77: Clearcapitalbudgeting X
1.18: Educationprogramsforchildren P&R,L X
1.19: Educational prog�amsonmunicipalwateruse X
Designations for CiTy Departments
DSI: Departmentof5afetyandinspections
L: Libraries
M: Mayor's Office
PED: Planning and Economic DeveloQment
P&R: ParksandRecreation
PW: PublicWorks
SPFA: SaintPaulPoriAUthor�ty
�
a
�
A
�
0
�
m
3
3
�
3
m
rt
n
'�a
m
29
a 5- /y�r
Departments SaintPaul Watershed Ramsey Distnct
ofiheCityof Regional Manaqemerrc Conservation Councils&
PoliCleS SaintPaul WaterService Organizations District Advocacy
continued (SPRWS)
•� SURFACE WATER MANAGEMENT, STRATEGY 2
2.1: Educationonurbanwaterquaiity PW X X
2.2: SpreadlviowledgeofreguiationsandBMPs DSI,PW X X
23: Complywith exiRing pians DSI, PW, PED, P& R
2.4: Anti-littercampaign M X X
2.5: Prohibit raking leaves into street PW �` � v � �� X �
2.6: ParticipateinTMDLstudies PW X
2.7: Reduce erosion PW, DSI, P& R
2.8: Reduceroadwayimpactr PW X
. ...�.�,.,.�..�,.��._ �_-t-�-..=.
..._ . _�. �. �„�_.._ �_,_.e,—.—�.�.�
2.9: Reduce parking lot impaas DSI X X
2.10: Reducealleyimpacts PW X X
2.77: "Housekeeping" on streets and alleys PW
2.12: Reduce rooftop impac DSI, PED X X
y � .�._-� �..� _ - ._.�. -�---�—�°���
Z.13: Site plan review DSI, PED, PW X X
2.74: Reduceimpactsiromexistingsites
2.15: Developstandardsonsmallsites
2.76: Workonarea-widescale
2.17: Consistentregulations
2.18: Encouragenativevegetation
2.14: Promotetreeplanting
210: Nativeshorelines
2Z1: Accesstowaterbodies
2.22: TroutBrook/PhalenCreek
223: Benefiuofdensityforwaterquality
PW, DSI, PED, SPPA
DSI, PED, PW
PW,P&R,PED
DSI, PW, PED
DSI,P&R
P&R,DSI
P & R, PED, SPPA
P&R
P&R,PW
PED
X X
X
X X
X 4
X X X
X X X
X X X
�..-... .,�-�..22,...--� .�.._��
X
X X
X
214: UpdateRamseyCountyGroundwaterProtectionPlan X X
... ,..� ..�.�_�...�.:�..,_�- .-�� -.�,..� ..--,- .. ._�.�.u..� �-,--�-,..,.--.-�
2.25: Well-sealing programs DSI X X
2.26: WetlandManagementPlan
2.21: FollowdevetopmenTOfBMPs
2.28: Adequatefundingforstormsewers
PW, DSI
PW, DSI
PW
X
X
229 Fundingfromconstitutionalamendment PW,P&R X X X X
WASTEWATER, STRATEGY 3
WastewatersecUon (all polides) PW
Cityof5aintPaui ComprehensivePlan �
Designations for City Departments
D51: Departmentof5aferyandlnspections
L: Libraries
M: Mayor'sOffice
PED: Planning and Economic Development
P&R: ParksandRecreation
PW: Public Works
SPPA: Saint Paul Port Authority
0 9- /��
Appendix A.
Appendix B.
Appendix C.
Appendix D.
Appendix E.
Appendices: Background InfoTmation
The appendices listed below contain staff research for the Water Plan. They were not
adopted as part ofthe Saint Paul Comprehensive Plan. For anyone interested in the
appendices as background information, they are available on the city's website or as
hard copies from the Department of Economic Development.
Executive Summary of the Water Supply Plan
Executive Summary ofthe Saint Paul Local Surface Water Management Plan
Overview of Agencies and Legislation Affecting Water Resources
WaterBody Reports
Maps:
Figure M- Water Supply Sources in theTwin Cities Region
Figure N- Watershed Management Organizations in the Twin Cities Region
Figure 0- Water Access Features
Figure P- Saint Paul Subwatersheds
Figure Q- Groundwater Sensitive Areas
Figure R- Storm Sewer Locations
Figure S- Individ ual Sewage 7reatment System Locations
Figure T- Sanitary Sewer System
AppendixF. ExecutiveSummaryoftheUpperMississippiRiverSourceWaterProtectionPlan
Appendix G. Water Body Reports
Appendix H. Surface Water ManagemenT Data
Appendix 1. Explanation and Examples of Urban Best Management Practices
Appendix J. Individual Sewage Treatment Systems:
General Information
Appendix K.
Appendix L.
Legislative Code Chapter 50 ISTS
Inflow and Infiltration (I&p:
General Definitions
Pilot I&I Monrtoring and Modeling Project
Sanitary Sewer Connections to Other Municipalities
3i
O �-/Ny
Credits
Chris Coleman, Mayor
City Council
Jay Benanav (to 12f07)
Dan Bostrom
Melvin Carter
Pat Harris
Lee Helgen
Kathy Laniry
Debbie Montgomery (to 72/07)
Russ Stark
DaveThune
Water Comprehensive Plan Task Force
George Johnson* (Chair) Hokan Milfer
CliffAichinger GregoryPage
Sarah Clark Tom Petersen
MarjEbensteiner ShirleyReider
Bruce Elder Steve Schneider
Bob Fossum Obi Sium
Steve Johnson Ron Struss
Boa Lee John Wells
Yung-Kang Lu* Rebecta Wooden
* Planning Commission member
Saint Paul Planning Commission
Barbara A. Wencl Jim Bellus
Bob Cudahy Jon Commers
Bob Spaulding Kathi Donnelly-Cohen
Brian Alton (Chair) Kristina Smitten
Carole MurphyFaricy Marilyn Porter
Dennis Rosemark Michael Margulies �
fduardo Barrera Richard 1 F Kramer
Erick L. Goodlow Stephen D Gordon
Gaius Nefson Susan McCall
George E. Johnson Yung-Kang Lu
Gladys Morton
Department of Planning and Economic Development
Cecile Bedor, Director
LarrySoderholm, Planning Administrator
Research and Planning
Larry Soderholm, Planner-in-Charge
Andrew Jambson
Saint Paul Employees, Staffto theTask Force
Phil Belfiori Anne Weber
AnneHunt LarryZangs
�BrianTourtelotte JieZhao
Kou Vang
Report Production
Joan Chinn
Cityof5aintPaul ComprehensivePlan m
o y. ���
CITY OF SAIN"T PAUL
Chrrsropher B Coleman, Mayor
DATE:
TO:
f ROM:
Re:
December 11, 2008
Brian A7ton, Chair
PLANNING COMMISS70N
2j West FourtH Stree!
Sct:nt P¢ul, M/✓ 55102
Q
7elephone: 65l-266-6700
Facsrmile 657-128-3220
Comprehensive la ning Committee
Larry Soderhol , rv.soderholm(a�ci.stpaul.mn.us, 651-266-6575
Revisions made to the Water Plan based on Comprehensive Planning
Committee discussion of public hearing comments
Backqround & Requested Action
7he Planning Gommission held a public hearing on the Water Resources Management Plan
("Water Plan") August 8, 2008. It is one of the six new citywide chapters of the Saint Paul
Comprehensive Plan. On November 10, the Comprehensive Planning Committee reviewed the
public hearing comments and decided what items in the plan should be revised and in most
cases decided the language for the revisions.
On December 8, I met with Peter Warner of the City Attorney's O�ce. He had read the plan
carefully and suggested refinements in the drafting of four or five policies, which I'll review at the
committee meeting. We also decided that the appendices should not be legaliy adopted as part
of the plan, but should be kept as references that would be available to citizens who want to dig
into water issues.
This memo summarizes all of the substantive revisions to the plan. Staff recommends that the
Committee the revised version of the Water Plan (dated 12/11/08) and forward it to the full
Planning Commission. The Planning Commission is set to consider this plan on January 2, 2009.
Revisions to Suecific Policies
1. Policy 2.11
Previous policy would be struck and re�laced with a broader one:
��
'_ -
. .. s - - - - --
_a• r_
oy- iv�
New Policv 2.11:
2. Policy 2.22
Add examples to the end of the policv:
2.2Z. Implement the Trout Brook-Lower Pha(en Creek Sma(! Area P(aR.
The plan ca1/s for dayiighting a st�eam that is currently buried in stormwate� pipes. The st�eam
would create wetlands and on-site pa�k amenities, captuiing all stoimwater at the end of streets
and channeling it into wet/ands that would c%anse the water before it is discharged into the
sto�m sewer. The Bruce �ento Natu�e Sanctuary be%w Mounds Park and the T�i/lium site
located between the Noith End nei4hbo�hood and I-35E. are envi�onmenta/ �esto�ation �roiects
wrth educatrona! components that can serve as exama/es for other parts of the citv.
3. Introductory paragraph on Weflands
Previouslv:
Weflands provide va/uable functions such as cleaning runoff, infi�trating wafer, recharging aquifer,
provrding habitat and reducing flooding. Historical/y Saint Paul had many more wef/ands, but
most have been drained or converted into lakes. Wetiands are regulated largely by the
Mrnnesota Wetland Conservation Act (WCA), which is administered local/y and requires no-net-
loss of wet/ands (generally through a two-to-one replacement ratio).
Revised paraqraqh:
Wetlands provide va/uab/e functions such as cleaning runoff, infiltrating water, recharging
aquifers, reducing flooding and providing habrtats forp/ants and animals. includinq some on
threatened or endanqered species lists such as Minnesofa's Sfafe Flower, the Lady Slrppe� One
such habitaf is the Mississippi River Flvwav, which is the larqest f(ywaV for miqratorv Birds in
North Amerrca. Hisfoncally Sainf Pau! had many more weHands than todav, buf mosf have been
drained or converted into lakes. Wetlands are regulated largely by the Minnesota Wetland
Conservation Act, which is administered /ocally and qene�allv requrres no-net-loss of wetlands.
4. Policy 2.25 (renumbered as 2.26)
Previouslv:
2.25. Complete a Wet/and Management Plan for Saint Paul and implement its findings.
0 9- /��
The objecfives of the Wetland Management Plan are to collect background information,
coo�dinate departments and agencies, conduct assessments, c/assify wetlands and deve/op
management strategies. The City will a/so cooperate with WMOs to implement the pfan.
Revised 2 25 which becomes 2 26 due to a numberinq error in the public hearinq draft:
226. Comp/efe a Wet/and Management Plan for Saint Paul and imp/emenf its frndrngs.
In order to protect and restore wetlands the Citv will do a Wetland Manaqement Plan, which will
involve collectin background information, coordinati� departments and agencies, conducti�
assessments, classifyi� wetlands, and developing managemenf strafegies. The City will a/so
cooperate with the watershed districts and WMOs to implement the plan. To start the process in
2008 the Citv como/efed a wetland inventorv that ciass�ed them and rated their environmenta!
values.
5. Add Policy 2.29 on state constitutional amendment as funding source
2 29 Advocate for an evuitable share of the funds from the 2008 state constitutional amendment
for environmental fundinq to be allocated to the improvement of urban water qualitv.
6. Delete Policy 3.10 (Fiber optic cable in sewers)
r - - -- - - - - -- - -
- -- - -- - ----- - -- -
r I ' ' ' " _ _"" ""
" " "" " _ '_ '"" " ' " "
___ _ _ _ _ _ _. .. _ _ _
��: _ _' _ _
Impiementatioa Matrix
Based on public hearing requests by organizations to be involved in implementation, staff added
six more "X" marks on the tabfe.
cc: Anne Weber, Public Works
Phil Belfiori, DSI
Larry Zangs, DSI
Anne Hunt, Mayor's Office
Peter Warner, City Attorney's Office
Cliff Aichinger, Ramsey Washington Metro Watershed District
Bob Fossum, Capitol Region Watershed District
AN AFFIRMATIVE ACTION EQUAL OPPORTUNITY EMPLOYER
CITY OF SAINT PAUL
Chrrsropher B, Coleman, Mayar
Brian Alfon, Chatr
SAINT
YAU{.
�
AAAA
DATE:
TO:
FROM:
Re:
Background
November 5, 2008
PLANNMG COMMISSION
25 West Fourth Streei
Saim PauL !dN SSIOZ
o s- iyy
Q
Telephone: 65l-?66-6100
Facsrmtle: 65/-128-3220
Comprehensi e P nning Committee
Larry Soderh�rv.soderholm(a�ci.stpaul.mn.us, 651-266-6575
Review of public hearing comments on the Water Plan
The Planning Gommission held a public hearing on the Water Resources Management Plan
("Water Plan") August 8, 2008. It is one of the six new citywide chapters of the Saint Paul
Comprehensive Plan. Only two people spoke, primarily in support of the plan plus some
suggestions for improvement. Also, four people sent letters and emails, again primarily in support
plus some suggestions for improvement. The minutes from the public hearing and the written
testimony are attached to this memo.
This memo summarizes the issues raised and presents stafF comments and recommendations for
the Water Plan in response to the public input.
Overview of pubfic hearing comments
There was relatively little testimony. From the testimony that was presented, there are seven key
issues the staff would like to address:
1. City day-to-day operating praciices
2. Stormwater reduction standard for smaller sites
3. Consistent citywide stormwater reduction standard
4 Shoreland standards
5. Wetlands policy
6. Recognition of groups participating in surface water management
7. Fiber optic cables in sewers.
Issue 1: Review of day-to-day City operations
Policy 2.11. Implement the practices and equipment improvements recommended in the
Minnesota DOT Guidance document, Minnesota Snow and /ce Control —Field Handbook for
Snowp/ow Operators. (Pubfic Hearing Draft, p. 18)
Saint Paul, among other communities, has moved towards straight salt or high-salt de-icers
instead of sand and sa/t mixtures in its winfer mainfenance programs. This change in de-icers
without corresponding changes in equipment and application procedu�es may have contributed to
chloride impairment of waters thioughout the region, inciuding Baftie Creek in Saint Pau�. By
implemenfing the recammendafions in the Minnesota Snow and Ice Control field handbook
(Augusf, 2005), such as advanced truck ca/ibration equipment and road temperafure sensors,
a y-i�y
safety on roadways wil/ be maintained while the application of salt will be reduced.
Public comment. The Capitol Region Watershed District recommends that over the next ten years
the City should review all its day-to-day operations and look for ways to reduce their impacts on
water quality. Doing so would contribute to the City's goal of sustainability.
Staff response: The staff agrees with the Capitol Region Watershed that all of the City's day-to-
day operations offer many opportunities for better water resource management, not only
regarding de-icing practices.
Staff recommendation: Generalize the language of 2.11 to read:
Policv 2.91. Review and implement improvements in the Citv's dav-to-day operations
Lhousekeepinp'7 in order to reduce adverse impacts on water pualitv and resources (e.q.. de-
icinq lawn mowing tree removal street sweepinq catch basin c�eaninq, vehicle washinq
sidewa/k swee in etc, .
A startinq point wou/d be to review and follow the MnDpT Guidance document. Minnesota Snow
and ice Controi Field Handbook to determine BMPs.
Issue 2: Stormwater reduction standard for smaller sites
Policy 2.15. Develop and adopt appropriate standards for stormwater management on
developmenf sites smaller than one acre. (PUblic Hearing Draft, p. 19)
Within the CR WD, 85 percent of all parcels are smaller than an acre in size. These parcels make
up roughly 3, 000 of the 11, 000 acres of the district. Comprising over 25 percent of the district,
including virtually every residential lot, these areas can demonstrate appropriate surface water
management techniques for citizens. The City should:
a. Set up an interagency process to establish criteria for parcels smaller than an acre. (See
policy 2.17.)
b. Revise Saint Paul's sto�mwater ordinance (Saint Paui's Legis/ative Code, Sec. 52).
Public comment. The Capitol Region Watershed District believes the City should revise its
stormwater ordinance to include a volume reductio� standard that would apply to sites between
10,000 square feet and one acre in size The existing standard applies to sites over one acre.
Staff comment. The staff thanks Capitol Region Watershed District highlighting the importance of
improving stormwater management on every site in the City, regardless of size. The staff
believes the current language in Policy 2.15 already addresses the Capitol Region Watershed
DistricYs concern regarding smaller sites. Moreover, current City actions--such as an internal
evaluation of the pragmatics of having stormwater management requirements on smaller sites--
are already moving this policy forward.
Staff recommendation. No change.
Issue 3: A consistent stormwater reduction standard for all areas of the City
Policy 2.17. Strive toward consistent surface water management regulations th�oughout the city.
(Public Hearing Draft, p. 20)
Multiple layers of regulation exist and, due to watershed district boundaries, part of St. Anthony
Park and the entire WesY Side neighborhood have different regulations than the rest of Saint
2
0 9- i��
Paul. (See Figure G, WMO Boundaries in Saint Paul). Steps toward simplifying the rules and
regvlations could aid developmenf and public participation in water management. Sainf Pau!
should form an interagency coordination committee to harmonize and streamline requirements
citywide. The committee should review stormwafer guidelines and the Wetland Conservation Act
(WCA) authority with respect to areas outsrde of watershed drstrict jurisdiction. Erosion confrol
authority should a/so be reviewed.
Public comment. Capitol Region Watershed district believes the City should revise its stormwater
ordinance to include a volume reduction standard that would apply to alI areas of the City.
Staff resAOnse. As indicated in the previous staff comment, the staff thanks Capitol Region
Watershed for highlighting the importance ot improving stormwater management on every site in
the City. The staff believes that Policy 2.17 speaks to Capitol Region Watershed DistricYs
concerns about developing citywide standards. Policy 2.17 emphasizes that the cooperation of
various agencies, particularly on the part of the four watershed districts a�d organizations, is
necessary to harmonize and streamline regulations.
Staff recommendation. No change.
Issue 4: Native shoreland regulations
Policy 2.20. Preserve and restore native shorelines to improve water quality. (Public Hearing
Draft, p. 21-22)
Shoreline land use and vegetation type and quality can affect water quality, habitat value and
human health. Regulations for shoreline buffers depend on whether they are for the Mississippi
River or other water bodies in the cify. For the river, the Mississippi River Critica/ Area
amendments. which are under review by the Planning Commission in 2008, propose changes to
the current regulations (Article ll. 68.210 of the Zoning Code). These amendments wil/ set stricter
standards and regulation for development in the Critical Area.
For other water bodies, the DNR has authority to require local adoption of model shoreland
standards by ordinance. The DNR has not exercised this authority in Saint Pau/ because virtually
al/ of Saint Paul's water bodies are surrounded by parkland, and the DNR has higher priorrties for
its shore/and program e/sewhere. Whenever the DNR requests the City to adopt a sho�eland
o�dinance, Saint Paul will do so.
Even in the absence of an ordinance, the Parks and Recreation Division has been and wi/l
continue to redesign and re-natura/ize shorelines of many of the lakes and streams in the city.
Doing so is broad/y consistent with the City's own goa/s. Additional policies are found in the
Parks and Recreation Chapfer.
Public comment. Tom Dimond urged the Planning Commission to support the adoption of
shoreland standards by ordinance as soon as possible, rather than waiting to see if and when the
DNR requires the City to do so.
Staff response. The City has no substantive objections to developing and adopting shoreland
regulations. The staffs hesitancy boils down to a cost-effectiveness question for City staff time
and zoning reviewers' time. Adoption of shoreland regulations would have little practical effect
because: (a) Shoreland along the river is already regulated by Critical Area zoning, which is
proposed to be strengthened; (b) Almost all of the lake and creek shorelines in the city are within
parks; and (c) Parks and Recreation is doing shoreline re-naturalization projects anyway. The
practical question for the City is securing budgets for these projects, not creating regulations.
Many other recommendations in the Water Plan are more deserving of City staff time. This
appears to be the same for the DNR.
d9- iy�
Although the City is not scheduied to do zoning standards for shoreland development, the City fs
moving forward on other shoreland improvement activities. In addition to Park's projects, the City
has hired a consuitant who is neariy fmished (November 2008) with an inventory and rating of
wetlands according to their environmental value and function. It includes recommendations for
wetlands ma�agement strategies, some of which relate ta shorelines and shorelands.
Staff recommendation. No change.
Issue 5: Wetlands
Introductory paregraph on "Wetlands". Wet/ands provide va/uable functions such as cleaning
runoK, rnfiltrating water, recharging aquifer, providing habitat and reducing flooding. Nistorically
Saint Paul had many more wedands, but most have been d�ained or converted into lakes.
Wetlands are regulated /arge/y by the Minnesota Wet/and Conservation Act, which is
administered locally and requires no-net-loss of wetlands (generally through a two-fo-one
replacement ratio). (Public Hearing Draft, p. 24)
Public comment. Tom Dimond believes it is important to mention the value of the wetland for
plants and animals. He further states that the long-range policy should increase the acreage and
quality of wetlands.
Staff response. By using the term "hab�taY' the staff was referencing plants and animals, however
the staff does not see a problem with saying "plants" and "animals" specifically and giving more
detail. Regarding Mr. Dimond's recommendation on increasing the amount of wetlands, the State
of Minnesota and this Water Plan already call for a no-net-loss policy, which commonly includes
two-for-one replacement, and it is not practical to extend that policy fuRher because it is so hard
to find land in a fully developed city.
Staff recommendation. Re-word the introductory paragraph on Wetiands to read (page 24}
Wetlands. Wetlands provide valuab/e functions such as c/eaning runoff, infiltrating water,
recharging aquifers, reducing flooding and providing habitats for plants and anima/s includinq
some on threatened or endanqered specres /ists such as Minnesota's State F/ower the Ladv
Slippec One such habitat is the Mississippr River Flvway which is the /arpest flvwav for miqratorv
birds in North America. Histoncally Saint Paul had many more wet/ands than todav. but most
have been drained or converted into lakes. Wetlands are regulated largely by the Minnesota
Wedand Conservation Act, which is administered locally and requires no-net-loss of wetlands
(generally through a two-to-one rep/acement ratio).
Policy 2.25. Comp/ete a Wet/and Management Plan for Saint Pau/ and imp/ement its findings.
(Public Hearing Draft, p. 24)
The objectives of the Wet/and Management Plan are to collect background information,
coordinate departments and agencres, conduct assessments, classify wetlands and develop
management strategies. The City wil/ a/so cooperate with WMOs to imp/ement the plan.
Public comment. Tom Dimond commented that the objective of the Wetland Management Plan is
the protection and restoratio� of wetlands. Collecting information, coordinating among
departments, etc. are steps to accomplish the objective F{e would like this policy to be re-worded
to express this point more clearly.
Staff comment. Mr. Dimond is correct in noting that the primary purpose of the plan is to manage
�
0 5- �yy
the wetlands better. This thought is covered by the phrase, "...and develop management
strategies," but it doesn't stand out very well as written. The staff agrees that a change in
� wording could better clarify the primary purpose of the plan.
In addition, staff notes again that the City is already in the process of identifying the most critical
wetland areas and developing sYeps to protect and improve them, whether through regulations or
operating procedures. The City expects to move on to a wetlands voiume and capacity study.
Staff tecommendation. Re-word Policy 2.25 to read (p.24):
Policy 2.25. Complete a Wetland Management Plan for Saint Pau/ and implement its findings.
In order to protect and restore wetlands, the Wetland Manaaement Plan will co/lect background
information, coordinate departments and agencies, conduct assessments, c/assify wetlands and
develop management strategies. The City wiii also cooperate with the watershed districts and
WMOs to rmplement the plan.
Issue 6: Recognition of groups participating in surtace water management
Public comments. The Capitol Region Watershed District believes watershed districts and
WMOs should be listed as cooperating agencies on the Implementation Matrix for Policies 2.6,
2.15, 223, and 2.25. The Tri Area Block Club would like the Implementation Matrix for Policy
2_13 to indicate that the district councils have a role in the strategy. The Tri Area Block Club
would also like their Trillium project to be specifically mentioned in Policy 2.22.
Staff response Doing a betterjob of managing stormwater in the city will be a collaborative, civic
undertaking. Recognizing the many participants and identifying their contributions is important.
Staff recommendation. Staff will add severai more check marks in the implementation matrix on
pages 29-30, and staff recommends an expansion of Policy 2.22, as follows:
Po/icy 2.22. Implement the T�out Brook-Lowe� Phalen Creek Small A�ea P/an.
The plan ca/ls fo� daylighting a stream that is cuirent/y buried in sto�mwater pipes. The st�eam
wou/d c�eate wetlands and on-site park amenities, captu�ing al/ stormwater at the end of streets
and channeling it rnto wetlands that would cleanse the water before it is discharged into the
storm sewer. The Bruce �ento Natu�e Sanctuary be%w Mounds Pa�k and the Trillium site,
located between the North End neiohborhood and I-35E are examp/es of envi�onmenta/
resYoration proiects with educationa! com�onents that can serve as examples for other parts of
the ci .
issue 7: Fiber optic cables in sewers
Policy 3.10. Explo�e using the sanitary sewer system as conduit for a fiber optic cable system
thatreaches everypropertyin the city: (Public Hearing Draft, p. 28)
The Saint Paul Broadband Advisory Committee recommended that the city consider providing
fibe� optic cab/e th�oughout the city to p�ovide £or high-capacify transmission of data and
entertainment. The Broadband Advisory Committee's report said that some cities a�e st�inging
fiber-optic cab/e through the sewers because it is much mo�e cost-effective than digging new
t�enches o� st�inging another cable system on po%s along utility easements.
� 9- i�y
This proposa/ is worth studying. From the sewer utilities'perspective, there may be �isks and
oppo�tunities Sewe� maintenance and deaning might be affeded but use� fees for cab/e could
he/p to support the sewe� system
Public comment. Kim Roden, of Comcast, is opposed to any endorsement in the Gomprehensive
Plan of a broadband infrastructure system that would give a competitive advantage to any cable
provider, including potentially the City of Saint Paul. The idea of running cable through sewer
pipes would expfoit public infrastructure to compete against cable infrastructure investments that
private companies have already made. Comcast would see this as unfair competition. Ms.
Roden believes that every community should explore its own communications needs and options,
but decisions about communications technology should be based on changing communications
technoiogy, the changing marketplace, and the judgment of subject area experts. Communities
that built their own fiber networks expose their local taxpayers to a great deal of risk. She
recommends that Policy 3.10 be deleted.
Staff resoonse. In addition to Ms. Roden's comments, the staff has been advised that the Sewer
Division is opposed to this use of the sewers and that the proposal was dropped from the final
repoR of the Broadband Advisory Committee. The staff agrees that this policy should be dropped
from the Comprehensive P1an.
Staff recommendation. Delete Policy 3.10.
cc. Anne Weber, Public Works
Phil Belfiori, DSf
Larry Zangs, DSI
Anne Hunt, Mayor's Office
Cliff Aichinger, Ramsey Washington Metro Watershed District
Bob Fossum, Capitol Region Watershed District
AN AFFIRMATIVE ACTION EQUAL OPPORTUNITY EMPLOYER
0' q-/�15�'
� � � � � /
►
� .I� F / j /I
Saint Paul Pianning Commission
City Hall Conference Center
15 Kellogg Boulevard West
Minutes August 8, 2008
A meeting of the Planning Commission of the CiTy of Saint Paul was heid Friday, August 8, 2008, at
8:30 a.m. in the Conference Center of City Hall.
Commissioners Mmes. Donnelly-Cohen, Faricy, Lu, Porter, Wencl; and
Present: Messrs. Alton, Barrera, Bellus, Commers, Goodlow, Gordon, Johnson, Kramer,
Nelson, Spaulding, and Ward.
Commissioners Mmes. *Morton, *Smitten, and Mr. *Margulies.
Absent:
*Excused
Also Present: Larry Soderholm, Planning Administrator; Joe Cotlins, Patricia Tames, Penelope
Simison, Ellen Muller, Emily Goodman, and Sonja Butler, Department of
Planning and Economic Development staff.
I. Approval of minutes'July 25, 2008.
II.
III.
MOTION: Commissinner ponnelly-Cohen tnoved approvat of the minutes of July 25, 2008.
Commissioner Kramer seconded the motion. The motion carried unanimously on a voice vote.
Chair's Announcements
Chair Alton had no announcements.
Planning Administrator's Announcements
Larry Soderholm reported on planning-related business at the City Council for last week and their
agenda for next week, and gave an update on the lawsuit filed against the City by Clear Channel
over the prohiba2iBn-a�aixs�biH�ward-e�ensions.
PI7BLIC HEAI2ING: Water Resources Manaeement Plan — from the Comprehensive
Planning Committee. (Larry Soderholm, 651/266-6575)
",°_----��____.._.____...___�,�— _. --
Chair Alton announced that the CiTy of Saint Paul Planning Commission is holding a public
hearing on the Wate; Resources Management Plan. Notice of the public heazing was published in
the Legal Ledger on July 24, 2008, and was mailed to the cityv✓ide Early Notification System lisf
of recipients and other interested parties. '
��-����
Larry Soderholm, PED stated that this draft marks the first time that the city has a Water
Management Chapter in the Comprehensive Plan. The chapter is unusual in that the technical
requirements have already been met and approved by the Metropolitan Council, so the purpose of
the document is to make water policy that akeady exists more understandable to the public and
better connected to other Comp Plan chapters. Mr. Soderholm noted that the Water Chapter is
longer than the other drafr chapters, so the staff is going to edit it down before bringing it back to
the Commission for final action. Mr. Soderholm expressed thanks to George Johnson, who is an
environmental scientist and the chair of the task force, and Yung-Kang Lu, who has a background
in environmental policq and was an active member. Mr. Soderholm noted that the Commission
has received written statements from the Tri-Area Block Club, which represents the
neighborhood adjoining the Tri3lium parkland site, the Capitol Regional Watershed District,,and
Tom Dimond. Mr. Soderholm conc]uded by summarizing the major strategies of the chapter.
Commissioner Johnson echoed Mr. Soderholm's praise for the task force and thanked Yung-
Kang Lu for chairing the meetings that he couldn't attend: He also thanked City staff, including
Planning Aide Andrew Jacobson, and the interested citizens who came to many of the task force
meetings even though they were not members.
Chair Alton read the rules of procedure for the public hearing.
The following people spoke.
Mark Doneux, Administrator for the Capitol Region Watershed District. 1410 Energy Park
Drive. Mr. I?oneux thanked the City for induding the CRWD in this process, which helped
them to understand the Ciry's perspective. All the efforts to improve water qualiTy and to
reduce the risk of flooding should be recognized. The CRWD had three sugg�stions and ,
recommendations for the draft. i) Volume control for surface runoff: the City should adopt a
volume control standards citywide and include a standard for developments of less than one
acre, down to 10,000 square feet. 2) City operations that affect water, particularly the
sanding and satting of streets: the impacts of a variety of City operations and "house keeping
practices" should be evaluated to reduce non-point source pollution. 3) Cooperative efforts:
the City and watershed districts need to collaborate, but they need the help and support of
other participants as well. Public education is emphasized in the plan, but it will take
concerted action to implement the recommendations. Partnerships are always icnportant since
water is continuously moving across jurisdictional lines. Mr. Doneux said the Commission
has these comments 3n a letter.
2. Tom Dimond, 2119 Skyway Drive, Saint Paul, MN. Mr. Dimond encouzaged the Planning
Commission to make the policies in the plan stronger regarding tfie protection and restoration
of both shorelands and wetlands. For shorelands, the plan currently says the City should wait
to enact new shoreland management regulations until the DNR orders the City to do so. Mr.
Dimond beiieves the City should be"more proactive and adopt mode] ordinance standards
now, just to catch up with what most other communities in Minnesota have already done. For
wetlands, the plan says what steps should be taken, but it doesn't clearly state that the City's
policy is to increase the acreage and quality of wetlands in the city. The plan should also give
a more complete explanation of why wetlands are productive and valgabie; they provide food
and shelter for, plants, fish, birds, and other species, some of which are endangered. The
Mississippi River Flyway is the largest flyway for migratory birds in North America. Too
a y- iyy
many people today ]ook at wetlands as under-utilized land. Mr. Dimond said the
Coramission has his comments in written form in his letter.
MOTION: Cammissioner SpauLding moved to close the public hearing, and lerrve the record
open for wrinen testimony submitted by nnon on Monday, August II, 2008, and to refer the
matte� back to the Comprehensive Planning Committee for review and recommendation.
Commissioner Ward seconded the raotion. The motian carried unanimously on a voice vote.
V. Zoning Committee
OLD BUSINESS
#08-047-384 Steven Tusa — Determination that a temporary mold making and repair shop is
similar to a home occupation. 1072 Wilson Avenue between Frank and Earl.
(Patricia James, 6S1/266-6639)
Commissioner Kramer reported ihat the Zoning Committee laid this case over to September 25,
2008 meeting.
NEW BUSINESS
#08-I 14-A08 T-Mobile (1551 Pavne) — Conditiona] Use Permit for a cellular telephone antenna
on a freestanding monopole. 1551 Payne Avenue, SW corner at Hoyt.
(Sarah Zorn, 651/266-65�0)
MOTIOl\': Commissioner Kracner moved the Zondng'Committee's recommendation to approve
the conditional use permat with conditions. The motion carried unanimously on a voice vote.
#08-I 14-733 T-Mobile (1906 Stillwater) — Conditional Use Permit for a cellular telephone
antenna on a freestanding monopole with modification of required setback; 85 ft. required, 65 ft.
proposed. 1906 Stillwater Avenue between Algonquin and HazeL (Sarah Zorn, 651/266-6570)
1VIOTION: Comrnissioner Kramer moved the Z'oning Committee's recommendatzon to agprove
the conditianal use permif with conditions. The motion carried unttni�nously on a voice vote.
#08-107-826 SteQhen Law — Establishment.of nonconforming use status as a duplex. 451 Jayne
Street between Conway and Wilson. (PatriciaJames, 651/266-6639)
Commisszoner Kramer reported that the Zoning Commiftee laid this case over to August 14,
200� meeting.
Commissioner Faricy mentioned that there was discussion at the Zoning Committee meeting
regarding monopoles that are going up ail over the city. She recommended that the Planning
Commission study monopole locations to see if there are places where they should not go. New
znonopoles maybe located on sites that would be good for development, but once the monopole is
up, the options for development may no longer be viable.
a�-iy�f
l�egion �Vatershed District
1410 Energy Park Dr., Snite 4 St Paul, MN SSld8
Phone: (651) 644-8888 Fag: (651) 644-8894 www.capitolregionwd.org
� �f��= ����J�?�
August 6, 2008 � � '�'� _��- ; v'V�� t��
Mr. L Snderholm i � 1 �%�' �J���'�� �U'
atrY � �C �'4 � � �
Ci of St. Paul � �,� �,Q � `J
D artment ofPlanuing and Economic Development �� �� ��'`z-� � F'`�-��� �"' n �
Ci of Saint Paul 1 ��v
ty ,�, }-� . f ��..�
25 W. Fourth Street, Suite 1400 1 �
St. Paul, MN 55102 f ��,��� �^-' �'� Z���j . ��9
�� � � '� � • �-E-�
( � CJ�� A � P - � k". � t�1, �'
RE: Water Chapter of St. PauPs DRAFT Comprehensive Plan�, 1 �� �'-� �;-
�': �� ��'�� �t'`�1.�� �If1 � ' '� <
Deaz Mr. Soderholm: �`
����Cti
`' v �, ��,,U���, ���`� r�-�--�-�_-
The City of St. Paul has made great progress on water resource management in the past couple of ye�s. The
successful implementation of our Rules, the cooperative Arlington-Pascal Stormwater Improvement Project,
adoption of a Local Surface Water Management Plan, and the luriug of a dedicated water resource
professional are things the City can be proud of. Building on these successes the City is now in the process
of drafting its Comprehensive Plan for the next decade and for the first time the Plan will include a Water
Chapter. The Board of Managers has thoroughiy reviewed the Water Chapter of the City's Comprehensive
Plan and the DistricYs detailed comments are included in the enclosed memorandum. Capitol Region
Watershed District (CRWD) has previously indicated 3 suggested additions to the Water Chapter of the
Comp. Plan in a letter dated Apri122, 2008. The Boazd of Managers of the CRWD would like to reiterate
what we believe to be the most significant suggesrions on the draft plan. They are as follow:
1. The City should adopt a supportive position on volume control as a desired method of stormwater
treatment.
a. The City should revise their stormwater ordinance to include a volume reduction standard.
This would apply to all sites greater than 10,000 sq. ft. and to all areas of the City. (Policy
-2: Y�i and �
2. ��-v 2 • ��j
2. Over the next 10 years the City should review all of the City's day to day operations and look for
ways to reduce its impact on water quality/resources. This would also achieve the City's goal of
sustainability.
a. For example: lawn mowing, h�ee removal, street sweeping, catch basin cleaning, vehicle
washing, street sanding/salting, sidewalk sweeping and others. These activiries will protect
and increas�the longevity of City infrastructure.
A theme of cooperative efforts, studies and projects should be emphasized tkuoughout the pian.
Partnerships on water related issues will result in large improvemenYs in an effective and efficient
way. There are many examples of this that the City and CRW'D can point to as an indication of its
benefit for all parties. ., ., . ,.,. The implementation table at the end
o the chapter shoul ist WMOs as a cooperating ag cy for policies,2:6; �15, 2.2 v, and-�2§.
Polrc�e=� 2.') �' 2.��1-,���� Z.v3
"Our mission is to protect, manage, and improve the water resources of the Capitot Region Watershed District. "
D 9-���
soa�hoi�
Apzi122, 2008
Page 2
The Capitol Region Watershed District would ask that you consider incorporating these comments into the
Comprehensive Plan to the greatest extent possible. We look forwazd to worldng with the City of St. Paul to
bring about improved water quality thmugh the City's updated Comprehensive Plan update and our own 2
Generation Watershed Management Plan. Please feel free to contact me or my staff if you have any
questions.
_ � - ��1
•.�- . . . - �-�
cc: St. Paul Planning Commission
W:\08 Orgs-Citiu-Agencies�St. Pwl\Water Comp PIan�St Paul Water Comp Plan Brd letter OS-06A8.doc
"Our mission is to protect, manage, and improve the water resources af the Capitol Region Watershed District. "
Q9- /y�!
Tom Dimond
2119 Skyway Drive
Saint Paul, MN 55119
August 8, 2008
Comprehensive Plan suggested changes and additions.
Water Resources Management Plan Page 22
2.20 Preserve and restore native shorelines to improve water quality
For other water bodies, the DNR has the authority to require local adoption of model shoreland
standazds by ordinance. The City will adopt model shoreland standards without waiting for a
DNR directive requiring adoption.
Saint Paul should adopt shoreland standards by ordinance rather than wait to be required
Wetiands Page 24
Wetlands areas aze among the most productive on earth. Wetlands store and filter water and
replenish aquifers. Wetlancls provide food and shelter for plants, fish, birds and other species.
Saint Paul's wetlands are valued stopping points on the Mississippi River Flyway which is the
lazgest.flyway for migratory birds in North America. Wetlands are home to many rare and
endangered species including Minnesota's State Flower the Lady Slipper.
Saint Paul recognizes the need to treat wetlands as a valued resource. Saint Paul has a City wide
no-net-loss wetland policy which provides for a two-to—one replacement ratio. In the Critical
Area the City will protect existing wetlands and encourage restoration of degraded wetlands. The
long range policy of Saint Paul is to increase the acreage and quality of wetlands.
It is important to mention the value of wetlands for plants and animals. The long range policy
should increase the acreage and quality of wetlands.
2.25 Complete a Wetland Management Plan for Saint Paul and implement its findings.
The objectives of the Wetland Management Plan are to protect existing wetlands, encourage
restoration of degraded wetlands, increasing the acreage and quality of wetlands. The pian will
collect background information, coordinate departments and agencies, conduct assessments, map
and classify wetlands, map wetlands that have been fiiled or degraded and develop management
strategies. The City wi11 cooperate with WMOs to develop and 'unplement the plan. The
management plan should identify what if any legislative authority is needed to ensure successful
implementarion of the plan.
0 y- ���r
The objective of the wetland management plan is the protection and restoration of wetlands.
CoZlecting information, coordination of departments, etc are steps to accomplish the objective.
Parks and Recreation Plan Page 13
3.10 Pursue opportunities and partnerships to acquire land specifically for open space and natural
resource-protection, especially:
e. Bluffs and wetlands in the Critical Area. Saint Paul and Ramsey County have been working on
acquisition of bluffs for 30yeazs. Update the bluff acquisition map and develop a plan to speed
up acquisition of bluffs. In con}unction with the Wetland Management Plan identify what
wetlands in the Critical Area should be acquired for open space and natural resource protection.
Bluff and wetland protection are called for in the Critical Area. Bluff acquisition has been
ongoing for 30 years.
Parks Pian Page 13
3.13 Develop comprehensive, consistent, citywide policies for managing vegetation, wildlife and
habitat throughout the City, in a sustainable manner that enhances the environment and protects
native species, based on best management practices.
Vegetation, habitat and wildlife management plans should be based on enhancement of the
environment and protection of native species.
Parks Plan Page 26
Trails Map
Show proposed bridge and trail over Hwy 61 connecting Henry Pazk and the Sam Morgan Trail
to Pig's Eye Lake through the regional park and connecting with the riverfront trail at tha new
Fish Hatchery Bridge.
Show the proposed reconnection of the Mounds Park pavilion trail to the riverfront with the new
Fish Hatchery Bridge.
Show proposed riverfront pazk area and trail head that can be provided when the final section of
Shepard/Warner Rd is moved back from the river with construction of the new Fish Hatchery
Bridge. Improvements at Chestnut are a good example of amenities that could be provide when
the road is moved back.
Show completed and proposed sections of trail azound Hoiman Field. Show proposed park plans
for Holman Fieid located at the old terminal parking lot and float plane harbor.
The Highwood small azea plan calls for development of a trail system on unused road right of
way. Along with implementing the Highwood trai] system other unused right of way in Saint
Paul should be considered for trails. �
The river is largely inaccessible from Eastside neighborhoods: Neighborhoods that are only a
blockfrom the river and regional parks currently have to travel miles to access parks that are
just across the street (Hwy 61) and railroad. If you drive to the river from the Eastside there is
a 9- i�`f
nowhere you can park. The only parking is at Lampert Landing in Lower Town. The only access
to the river is the Fish Hatchery Bridge that is scheduled for replacement. The replacement of
the Fish Hatchery Bridge affords many open space and trail opportunities including pulling the
road back from the river as has been done along the other stretches of the road when they were
reconstructed. Design should incorporate Grand Rounds design amenities.
Canoe ramps and pazking should be provided at Pig's Eye Lake and the former float plane
hazbor.
The Parks Plan should address boat ramps and fzshing piers. A canoe ramp should be provided
at Pig's Eye Lake at the north end of Red Rock road. A canoe ramp is proposed for the park at
the former float plane harbor at Holman FieZd.
6�-iy�
August 3, 200$
To: Planning Commission c/o Larry Soderholm
From: Tri Area Block Club c/o 1111 Abell Street, St. Pau1, 55117
Re: Water Resources Management Plan Puhiic Hearing on August 8, 2008
The members of the 14-square block Tri Area Block Club, located in St. Paul's North End
Neighborhood, wish to submit comment on the Water Resources Management Plan chapter of
the draft St. Paul Comprehensive Plan. For many years now, ��e have actively promoted policy
and projects that will improve and benefit the environment in our community. We appreciate the
recognition on page 22, section 2.22 of the importance of the implementation of the Trout
Brook/Lower Phalen Creek Plan.
When completed, this greenway would serve a critical role in the infiltration process and reduce
impairment to the Mississippi River. The Trillium project, a grassroots effort initiated by our
members, is the middle segment of the proposed greenway. Of particulaz relevance to page 20,
section 2.16, are plans for that site which include a daylighted brook, native vegetation, and a
series of wetlands through which stormwater runoff from the neighborhood will fiiter, creating a
natural cieansing system prior to entering the river. As an environmental learning preserve, this
site will also provide an educational component to the public as per page I5, section 2.2. The
Trout Brook/Lower Phalen Creek plan and the Trillium project would contribute greatly toward
achieving Strategy 2 of the Water Resources Management Plan. Should the Planning
Commission and staff concur, we feel it would be appropriate to also specify the Trillium pro}ect
in section 2.22.
Growth and density have resulted in a loss of natural areas and have impacted those sensitive
areas that remain. We feel that it is imperative that this issue be addressed and extend our
appreciation to the task force members and staff who contributed toward this .document.
One final addition to our cominent. On page 30, the Implementation Matrix section, policy item
2.13: Site plan review, the district councils should also be included as having a role in this
strategy.
Thank you for the opportunity to comment on this plan.
0 4- /y�f
�
RFQ.75EY 009R1iY
Y!¢ityxfM1�,yp$�yn8
OvWaeyd�h
O@ af the Co�mty 37an�er
BavidJ ?v�s. Crnmn• hisvaekr
? W Cant Flat�
i5 ic'edIieikggBaiieccmi
e
SE PauL 3iN SSlb?
Tr1: 651-?66360Q
Fac:651•256-�`i39
�n�1.iYnrdrn�rTm.izotvey� nTM�w
n
Memorandum
Date:
To:
From:
Re:
August 13, 2008
Larry Soderholm, Planner
Janet Guthrie, Senior Policy Analyst
2008 Water resources Plan for City of Saint Paul
Ramsey County respectfully submits the fo(lowing comments from staff in Environmental Health
in regards to the City of Saint Paul's Water Resources Management Plan, under the Education
section:
The current language indicates that drugs should be disposed of in the garbage, not down the
toiletldrain. That is correct, although not complete. We would suggest consideration be given to
including the following information as a footnote to that sentence:
The currently preferred method to dispose of unwanted medications from a household is to:
1. Render the material unpalatable (through the addition of water and/or salt);
2. Place it in its original container with personal information redacted or otherwise removed;
3. Place that inside a zipper lock plastic bag; and
4. Place that into the trash as close to the scheduled pickup time as practicable.
I understand that these comments are being submitted a few days after your posted deadline; it is
our hope that you still have the capacity to include them in your review process.
Thank you, Larry.