5.9 Summary

The following tables summarize the proposed implementation action items and their relationship to the problems and issues identified in Section 3.0 above, the metrics by which the District will be evaluating progress toward resolving those issues and problems, the estimated District cost of implementing these actions, and anticipated implementation schedule.

 

Problem or Issue

Actions in Implementation Plan

Degree of Improvement

Water Quality

Two lakes in the subwatershed have been designated as Impaired Waters on the State's 303(d) list due to an excess of nutrients.  The District is preparing Total Maximum Daily Load (TMDL) studies, including plans to reduce phosphorus loads into the lakes, for Parley and Wasserman Lakes

  • The draft TMDLs identify potential improvement projects that have been incorporated into this Plan.
  • Continue monitoring the lakes to assess progress. 

Implementation of all the actions in the phosphorus load reduction plans for the lakes would theoretically reduce in-lake P concentrations, improve water clarity, and meet District goals and state and federal water quality standards.

 

Other lakes in the subwatershed do not meet the total phosphorus concentration goals established in the HHPLS.  No or limited data is available for some lakes.

  • A series of improvements projects including detention ponding, wetland and stream restorations intended to work together to reduce phosphorus load conveyed between lakes so that all progress toward meeting the water quality goals.
  • Obtain baseline data for lakes where no data is available.

Implementation of all the actions in the phosphorus load reduction plans for the lakes would theoretically reduce in-lake P concentrations, improve water clarity, and meet District goals for water quality.

 

Phosphorus and sediment loads in Six Mile Creek increase from upstream to downstream, and the creek and its subwatershed are a significant source of phosphorus load to Halsteds Bay.

  • A series of improvements projects including detention ponding, wetland and stream restorations intended to work together to reduce phosphorus load conveyed between lakes so that all progress toward meeting the water quality goals.
  • Proposed treatment of Six Mile Creek prior to its discharge into Halsteds Bay

 

Implementation of all the actions in the phosphorus load reduction plans for the lakes would theoretically reduce in-lake P concentrations, improve water clarity, and meet District goals for water quality.

 

Development, redevelopment, and reconstruction in the subwatershed will increase nutrient and TSS loads from the watershed as well as increasing the volume of stormwater runoff, potentially further degrading water quality.

  • Rules will be amended to require more stringent pollutant load reduction on new development and redevelopment, including adding a volume management requirement.
  • Cooperatively construct regional infiltration improvements to mitigate impact of new runoff from development.

 

  • Would depend on ability of developers to incorporate adequate BMPs on their projects and properly maintain them to sustain removal efficiencies.
  • Depends on ability to develop cooperative or collaborative improvements.

Water Quantity

Drainage is conveyed through the subwatershed through several streams and channels to lakes and wetlands, which outlet to or an in-line with Six Mile Creek.  The Upper Watershed Stream Assessment identified eight erosion locations on the creek.   The HHPLS predicted that development between 2000 and 2020 would increase average flow in the creek

A stream restoration projects to stabilize areas of a reach with numerous erosion problems, and a project to construct spot repairs.

Completion of projects would repair existing erosion and stabilize the creek where it is most at risk for future erosion.

The HHPLS idenitified a number of locations that are predicted to overtop during the 100 year event.

LGUs directed to evaluate these locations as part of their local water management planning.

Completed as LGUs complete their local plans.

Development is predicted to increase the volume of stormwater runoff from the subwatershed, increasing nutrient and TSS loads conveyed downstream. 

  • Rules will be amended to require more stringent pollutant load reduction on new development and redevelopment, including adding a volume management requirement.
  • Cooperatively construct regional infiltration improvements to mitigate impact of new runoff from development.
  • Would depend on ability of developers to incorporate adequate BMPs on their projects and properly maintain them to sustain removal efficiencies.
  • Depends on ability to develop cooperative or collaborative improvements.
 

The HHPLS identified several locations where for both existing and future conditions, higher velocities than desired may result in erosion at outlets or culverts.  

LGUs directed to evaluate these locations as part of their local water management planning.

Completed as LGUs complete their local plans.

Several landlocked basins are present in the subwatershed.  Within these landlocked basins, any future development or redevelopment should minimize creation of new stormwater volumes.

Cities are prohibited from adding outlets to landlocked basins, and must provide for adequate storage and volume control.

 

Completed as LGUs complete their local plans.

 

Wetlands

The subwatershed includes numerous wetlands with high to exceptional vegetative diversity, fish and wildlife habitat and aesthetic values that need to be protected.

  • Key Conservation Areas identified that include high-value wetlands.  Some of these areas are identified as District priorities for continued implementation of the Land Conservation Program, and thus the District would proactively look for opportunities to conserve these resources. The Capital Improvement Program includes funds for Land Conservation Activities.   In all key areas, LGUs are required to include in their local plans strategies for conserving these values.
  • Rules will be amended to establish management standards based on management classification for impacts to wetlands from development and redevelopment.
  • Ongoing effort that is dependant on property owner willingness to pursue conservation, District budget and staff capacity, and LGU plan completion.
  • Implementation of revised rules would help minimize future impacts to the highest-value wetlands while still providing a measure of protection to those that provide mainly downstream resource protection.
 

Degraded wetlands with high to moderate restoration potential should be considered for protection and restoration.

  • Several wetland restorations are identified as part of the lake TMDL implementation plans and are included in the CIP.
  • Wetlands identified as being of high to moderate wetland potential would be managed according to a Manage 1 wetland classification if they have been assessed as a Manage 2 or 3.   This would minimize further degradation that might make future restoration more difficult or costly.

An initial effort that identifies for restoration those wetlands that would result in improvement to water quality in the lakes.   This would begin to mitigate wetland losses from past development and help to increase the quantity and quality of wetlands present.

Ecological Integrity

Most of the subwatershed is characterized by large open areas of forest, grasslands, and wetlands punctuated by low density development.  Intensive uses are concentrated along the US Highway 7 corridor and in the cities of Victoria and St. Bonifacius.  The Carver Park Reserve dominates the subwatershed, and includes large areas designated as Regionally Significant Ecological Areas and high value native plant communities.  Wetlands with high ecological value are present and those wetlands and associated upland areas should be conserved to preserve their values, create larger areas of ecological value, and connect existing resources.

 

Key Conservation Areas identified that include high-value wetlands.  Some of these areas are identified as District priorities for continued implementation of the Land Conservation Program, and thus the District would proactively look for opportunities to conserve these resources. The Capital Improvement Program includes funds for Land Conservation Activities.   In all key areas, LGUs are required to include in their local plans strategies for conserving these values.

Ongoing effort that is dependant on property owner willingness to pursue conservation, District budget and staff capacity, and LGU plan completion.

The fisheries are regularly surveyed and actively managed by the DNR and Three Rivers Park District.

  • Continue to work cooperatively with the DNR and Three Rivers on fisheries issues.
  • Support the fisheries through the improvement of water quality.

Depends on response of natural community to habitat improvement.

Eurasian water milfoil is present in most of the lakes.

  • Support the DNR in its management efforts. 
  • Evaluate milfoil management as part of internal load management diagnostic and feasibility study.

Depends on the extent of infestation.  If control of milfoil and other invasive aquatic vegetation will help achieve internal phosphorus load reduction goals, then a significant improvement can be had through chemical or other control.  If control would not benefit lake water quality, then there would be no improvement.

No aquatic plant survey data is available for many of these lakes.

Conduct aquatic plant surveys as part of internal load reduction project feasibility studies and include aquatic vegetation management as part of projects where it would improve water quality

Completion of these surveys would fill this data gap.

Macroinvertebrate communities are limited by the type of habitat available and its character as primarily a wetland stream.

 

Stream restoration project to stabilize streambanks and improve habitat

Depends on response of natural community to habitat improvement.

Corridor connections between Key Conservation Areas need to be preserved, enhanced, and restored.

Key Conservation Areas identified that include this corridor.  Some of these areas are identified as District priorities for continued implementation of the Land Conservation Program, and thus the District would proactively look for opportunities to conserve these resources. The Capital Improvement Program includes funds for Land Conservation Activities.   In all key areas, LGUs are required to include in their local plans strategies for conserving these values.

Ongoing effort that is dependant on property owner willingness to pursue conservation, District budget and staff capacity, and LGU plan completion.

Groundwater

Most of the major wetlands in the subwatershed were identified in the FAW as discharge or combination recharge-discharge wetlands.  As development occurs it will be critical to maintain runoff and infiltration rates to help maintain hydrology to these wetlands.

 

  • Amend rules to require infiltration or abstraction of the first one inch of rainfall on new permitted development and redevelopment.
  • Identify a network of surficial aquifer monitoring wells across the watershed, monitor groundwater levels and quality.
  • Promote Better Site Design (Low Impact Development) principles for new development that mimic predevelopment hydrologic regime.

 

Infiltration on site will assist in preventing further modification of surficial groundwater recharge and help to maintain wetland hydrologic regimes.

There are a number of areas in the subwatershed that are very highly or highly sensitive to aquifer impacts.

  • Amend rules to require pretreatment of stormwater discharged to wetlands or infiltration areas in the areas of high aquifer sensitivity.
  • Establish a new District rule that requires an additional level of analysis and review of permitted development and redevelopment where there is a potential for development to adversely impact groundwater connected to a surface water feature.

Will help minimize future impacts to groundwater and provide for proactive management rather than reactive

Wellhead Protection Areas and associated Drinking Water Sensitivity Management Areas have been identified for the cities of St. Bonifacius and Minnetrista within this subwatershed. 

 

  • Stormwater and groundwater management within those areas will be coordinated with wellhead protection plans.
  • Will help minimize future impacts to drinking water and provide for proactive management rather than reactive
 

Groundwater hydrology is an important component in the base flow for area streams.  Protecting existing groundwater flow regimes must remain a priority.

  • Amend rules to require infiltration or abstraction of the first one inch of rainfall on new permitted development and redevelopment.
  • Identify a network of surficial aquifer monitoring wells across the watershed, monitor groundwater levels and quality.
  • Identify baseflow in Six Mile Creek and monitor for trends.
  • Infiltration on site will assist in preventing further modification of surficial groundwater recharge and help to maintain wetland hydrologic regimes.
  • Implementation of monitoring network will fill data gap and allow for identification of trends
  • Identification of baseflow will fill  data gap, allow for identification of trends, and improve understanding of hydrology and hydraulics of Six Mile Creek
 

Objective

Metric

Existing

Desired

Location

Water Quality

Phosphorus Loading (lbs annually)

498

(Ultimate)

245

Pierson Lake

Phosphorus Loading (lbs annually)

1,144

(Ultimate)

395

Wasserman Lake

Phosphorus Loading (lbs annually)

268

(Ultimate)

142

Steiger Lake

Phosphorus Loading (lbs annually)

121

(Ultimate)

100

Zumbra Lake

Phosphorus Loading (lbs annually)

187

(Ultimate)

105

Stone Lake

Phosphorus Loading (lbs annually)

1,081

(Ultimate)

580

Auburn East

Phosphorus Loading (lbs annually)

778

(Ultimate)

401

Auburn West

Phosphorus Loading (lbs annually)

1,015

(Ultimate)

794

Lunsten Lake

Phosphorus Loading (lbs annually)

3,023

(Ultimate)

1,684

Parley Lake

Water Quantity

Volume Reduction (Acre-feet)

 

1,084

Watershed-wide

1.5 year discharge (cfs)

23.4

23.4

Watershed-wide

100 year discharge (cfs)

97.7

97.7

Watershed-wide

Ecologic Integrity

Index of Biotic Integrity

N/A

Above MPCA impairment threshold

Six Mile Creek Reach 15

N/A

Above MPCA impairment threshold

Six Mile Creek Reach 14

 

 6.3

(F-IBI)

Above MPCA impairment threshold

Six Mile Creek Reach 13

N/A

Above MPCA impairment threshold

Six Mile Creek Reach 12

 

5.97-6.21

 (F-IBI)

Above MPCA impairment threshold

Six Mile Creek Reach 11

 N/A

Above MPCA impairment threshold

Six Mile Creek Reach 10

 

N/A

Above MPCA impairment threshold

Six Mile Creek Reach 9

6.21-6.59

 (F-IBI)

Above MPCA impairment threshold

Six Mile Creek Reach 8

 

N/A

Above MPCA impairment threshold

Six Mile Creek Reach 7

 6.41

(F-IBI)

Above MPCA impairment threshold

Six Mile Creek Reach 6

N/A

Above MPCA impairment threshold

Six Mile Creek Reach 5

5.5

(F-IBI)

Above MPCA impairment threshold

Six Mile Creek Reach 4

N/A

Above MPCA impairment threshold

Six Mile Creek Reach 3

N/A

Above MPCA impairment threshold

Six Mile Creek Reach 2

6.29

(F-IBI)

Above MPCA impairment threshold

Six Mile Creek Reach 1

Stream Visual Assessment Protocol

N/A

5.0 or 1+ existing

Six Mile Creek Reach 15

N/A

5.0 or 1+ existing

Six Mile Creek Reach 14

N/A

5.0 or 1+ existing

Six Mile Creek Reach 13

N/A

5.0 or 1+ existing

Six Mile Creek Reach 12

N/A

5.0 or 1+ existing

Six Mile Creek Reach 11

N/A

5.0 or 1+ existing

Six Mile Creek Reach 10

N/A

5.0 or 1+ existing

Six Mile Creek Reach 9

N/A

5.0 or 1+ existing

Six Mile Creek Reach 8

N/A

5.0 or 1+ existing

Six Mile Creek Reach 7

N/A

5.0 or 1+ existing

Six Mile Creek Reach 6

N/A

5.0 or 1+ existing

Six Mile Creek Reach 5

N/A

5.0 or 1+ existing

Six Mile Creek Reach 4

N/A

5.0 or 1+ existing

Six Mile Creek Reach 3

N/A

5.0 or 1+ existing

Six Mile Creek Reach 2

N/A

5.0 or 1+ existing

Six Mile Creek Reach 1

Key Conservation Areas conserved (acres)

 

788

Watershed-wide

Wetlands

Wetland Acreage

6,098.8

6,098.8 or greater

Watershed-wide

332.0

332.0 or greater

Preserve

1,175.0

1,175.0 or greater

Manage 1

494.2

494.2 or greater

Manage 2

2,466.6

2,466.6 or greater

Manage 3

Item

Description

Estimated Cost

Schedule

Problems Addressed

MCWD Capital Projects

1

Internal load reduction: Wasserman Lake

$211,700

 

2015

3.1.1, 3.1.3, 3.1.4

2

Wasserman Phase I culvert/stream/wetland restoration

$721,300

2008

3.1.1, 3.1.3, 3.1.4, 3.3.2, 3.4.1, 3.4.6

3

Wasserman: stream/wetland restoration

$687,500

2010

3.1.1, 3.1.3,3.1.4

4

Steiger Lake pond

$805,600

2012

3,1,2 3.1.3, 3.1.4

5

Turbid/Lunsten Hwy 5 wetland restoration

$463,300

 

2012

3.1.1, 3.1.3, 3.1.4, 3.3.2, 3.4.1, 3.4.6

6

Turbid/Lunsten: Laketown Rd wetland restoration

$200,800

2011

3.1.1, 3.1.3, 3.1.4, 3.3.2, 3.4.1, 3.4.6

7

Parley: tributary wetland restoration

$547,600

2008

3.1.1, 3.1.3, 3.1.4, 3.2.1, 3.2.3, 3.4.1, 3.4.6

8

Internal load reduction: Parley Lake

$231,600

 

2013

3.1.1, 3.1.3, 3.1.4

9

Internal load reduction: Auburn East

$187,300

2014

 

10

Spot repairs to eroded sites on Six Mile Creek

$60,900

2015

3.1.23,3.1.3, 3.1.4, 3.2.1, 3.2.3, 3.4.1, 3.4.6

11

Regional infiltration

$788,600

2011

3.1.1, 3.1.2, 3.1.3, 3.1.4, 3.2.3, 3.2.5, 3.3.1, 3.4.1, 3.5.1, 3.5.4

$689,200

2014

$590,700

2014

$1,434,000

2016

MCWD Data Acquisition/Study

1

Develop infiltration/filtration strategies appropriate to wellhead protection areas and areas of groundwater sensitivity

Part of watershed-wide study

2008

3.1.1, 3.1.2, 3.1.3, 3.1.4, 3.2.1, 3.2.2, 3.2.3, 3.2.4, 3.2.5, 3.3.1, 3.3.2, 3.4.1, 3.4.6, 3.5.1

2

Identify keystone, umbrella, and indicator species, evaluate habitat, and develop conservation strategies

Part of watershed-wide study

2010 and ongoing

3.3.1, 3.4.1, 3.4.2, 3.4.4, 3.4.5, 3.4.6

3

Identify feedlot and animal waste management locations and develop plan for implementing agricultural BMPs

Part of watershed-wide effort

2008 and ongoing

3.1.1, 3.1.2, 3.1.3

MCWD Land Conservation Program

1

Undertake land conservation efforts in accordance with Figure 19

$8,985,000

Part of ongoing watershed-wide program

3.1.1, 3.1.2, 3.3.1, 3.3.2, 3.4.1, 3.4.6, 3.5.1

MCWD Regulatory Program

1

Amend District Rules to increase stormwater management requirements for new development and redevelopment

Part of watershed-wide effort

2007-2009

3.1.1, 3.1.2, 3.1.3, 3.1.4, 3.2.1, 3.3.1, 3.3.2, 3.4.1, 3.4.3, 3.4.5, 3.4.6

2

Amend District Rules to require abstraction of 1? of rainfall on permitted development and redevelopment

Part of watershed-wide effort

2007-2009

3.1.1, 3.1.2, 3.1.3, 3.1.4, 3.2.1, 3.2.2, 3.2.3, 3.2.4, 3.2.5, 3.3.1, 3.3.2, 3.4.1, 3.4.3, 3.4.5, 3.4.6

3

Amend District Rules to adopt wetland management rules based on wetland management classification

Part of watershed-wide effort

2007-2009

3.3.1, 3.3.2, 3.4.1, 3.4.6, 3.5.1

MCWD Hydrodata Program

1

Monitor Six Mile Creek in accordance with Hydrodata Program

Part of watershed-wide hydrologic data program

Part of ongoing watershed-wide program

3.1.1, 3.1.2, 3.1.3, 3.14, 3.2.1, 3.2.3,

2

Monitor macroinvertebrates in Six Mile Creek every five years

Part of watershed-wide hydrologic data program

2009, 2013

3.4.1, 3.4.5

3

Identify base level flow in Six Mile Creek

Part of watershed-wide study

Part of ongoing watershed-wide program

3.1.1, 3.1.2, 3.1.3, 3.1.4, 3.2.1, 3.2.3, 3.4.5, 3.5.1

4

Monitor lakes in accordance with Hydrodata Program

Part of watershed-wide hydrologic data program

Part of ongoing watershed-wide program

3.1.1, 3.1.2

5

Identify shallow wells to monitor groundwater levels

Part of watershed-wide study

2008 and ongoing

3.2.1, 3.3.1, 3.3.2, 3.4.1, 3.4.6, 3.5.1, 3.5.2

MCWD Education/Communication Program

1

Provide targeted education materials to key stakeholder groups to meet objectives of plan

Part of watershed-wide education program

Part of ongoing watershed-wide program

All

2

Provide educational opportunities for LGU staff, developers, elected and appointed officials and other interested parties

Part of watershed-wide education program

Part of ongoing watershed-wide program

All

3

Develop and distribute model ordinances and design standards that incorporate low impact design principles

Part of watershed-wide education program

Part of ongoing watershed-wide program

3.1.1, 3.1.3, 3.1.4, 3.2.1, 3.2.3, 3.4.1, 3.4.6

4

Develop a small grant program to provide financial assistance to property owners desiring to implement BMPs on their property or to install demonstration projects on public property

Part of watershed-wide program

2008 and ongoing

3.1.1, 3.1.2, 3.1.3, 3.1.4, 3.2.1, 3.2.2, 3.2.3, 3.2.4, 3.2.5, 3.3.1, 3.3.2, 3.4.1, 3.4.3, 3.4.5, 3.4.6

MCWD Operations and Maintenance

1

Inspect Six Mile Creek erosion-prone areas at least annually

Part of watershed-wide program

Part of ongoing watershed-wide program

3.1.1, 3.1.2, 3.1.3, 3.1.4, 3.2.1, 3.2.3, 3.2.4, 3.2.5, 3.2.6

2

Monitor high vegetative-diversity wetlands for exotic species

Part of watershed-wide program

Part of ongoing watershed-wide program

3.3.1, 3.3.2, 3.4.1, 3.4.6, 3.5.1

3

Inspect and maintain improvements as set forth in cooperative agreements

Incorporate into life-cycle cost of project

Part of ongoing watershed-wide program

3.1.2, 3.1.3, 3.2.1, 3.3.1, 3.3.2, 3.4.5, 3.4.6

Collaborative Projects

1

Work in partnership with Three Rivers Park District to develop and implement lake aquatic management plans for Auburn West, Lunsten, Stone, and Steiger Lakes

$10,000

2009 and later

3.1.2, 3.1.3, 3.1.4, 3.4.2, 3.4.2, 3.4.4, 3.4.6

2

Work in partnership with Three Rivers Park District to evaluate and implement strategies for operating outlet control structures in the Carver Park Reserve to maximize storage capacity and manage flows

Staff time

Ongong

3.1.1, 3.1.2, 3.1.3, 3.1.4, 3.2.1, 3.2.2, 3.2.3, 3.2.4, 3.4.5