2018-03-26 EC Agenda PacketAGENDA
GOLDEN VALLEY ENVIRONMENTAL COMMISSION
March 26, 2018, Monday @ 6:30pm
Council Conference Room (across from Council Chambers)
Golden Valley City Hall, 7800 Golden Valley Rd
1.Call to Order
2.Approval of Regular Meeting Minutes of February 26, 2018 (5 min)
3.Solid Waste Discussion – Marc Nevinski (20 min)
4.2018 Work Plan Priorities (15 min)
5.2040 Comprehensive Plan update - Review and discuss draft water resources
chapter (45 min)
6.Program/Project Updates (10 min)
7.Council Updates (5 min)
8.Other Business
9.Adjourn
G:\Environmental Commission\Agendas\2018\3-March\02-26-18 EC Minutes.doc
GOLDEN VALLEY ENVIRONMENTAL COMMISSION
Regular Meeting, Minutes
February 26, 2018
Commissioners Present: Lynn Gitelis, Dawn Hill, Larry Johnson, Joseph Ramlet, and
Debra Yahle
Staff Present: Eric Eckman, Development and Assets Coordinator; Claire Huisman,
Administrative Assistant
Also Present: Council Member Larry Fonnest
Absent: Commissioners Tracy Anderson, Tonia Galonska and Jim Stremel
Call to Order
Chair Hill called the meeting to order at 6:32 pm.
Approval of Regular Meeting Minutes
MOVED by Gitelis, SECONDED by Yahle, and the motion carried unanimously to
approve the minutes of the November 27, 2017 regular meeting.
2018 Environmental Commission Budget Ideas
The Commission discussed event topics, event locations, and potential partners. After
discussion, the group favored the topic of Sustainable Yards and Gardens, with an
emphasis on reducing chemicals (pesticides, herbicides, fertilizers, chlorides) and other
inputs. The classroom style educational event will be held at the new Brookview
Community Center and a hands-on demonstration or tour may follow outside
(depending on status of construction work).
The Commission also discussed General Mills continued efforts to develop pollinator
habitat on its campus, converting turf grass to native plantings and pollinator gardens.
The Commission asked staff to engage with General Mills to learn more about their
efforts and to see if there is an opportunity to partner at this year’s event or in the future.
2018 Work Plan Priorities
The Commission briefly discussed the remaining tasks on the 2017 Work Plan which
include:
• Removing barriers for vertical greenhouses/urban farming
• Creating a broad pollinator policy for the City
• Assisting in the preparation of the 2019 recycling contract
The Commission agreed to carryover these items in the draft 2018 Work Plan.
In addition, new ideas for the work plan emerged and include:
• Continue working on GreenStep Cities Step 4 metrics to address climate-related
impacts, improve the environment, and reduce energy and costs
• Become involved in the City’s discussion on organized solid waste collection
GreenStep Cities – Step 3 Recognition & Program Staff Assessment
The City has achieved Step 3 status in the program and will be recognized for its efforts
at the June 2018 League of MN Cities Conference to be held in St. Cloud. The program
staff assessment is on file.
Minutes of the Environmental Commission
February 26, 2018
Page 2 of 3
G:\Environmental Commission\Agendas\2018\3-March\02-26-18 EC Minutes.doc
GreenStep Cities – Step 4 - Stormwater
Eckman presented the next core topic, Stormwater, for advancement to Step 4. The
measurement value for Stormwater is derived from the Blue Star Award Program
assessment. City staff completed the online assessment and received a score of 63%
which qualifies the city to earn the Blue Star Award thus satisfying the GreenStep Cities
requirements for the core topic, Stormwater in Step 4.
Eckman went through the questions on the assessment with the Commission to identify
and discuss areas where the City can possibly make improvements to provide
community benefit while achieving Step 5 in the GreenStep Cities program.
MOVED by Gitelis, SECONDED by Ramlet and the motion carried unanimously to
approve the entry for Step 4 Stormwater into the GreenStep Cities website.
Program/Project Updates
The complete Program/Project Update is on file.
There was a question about the recycling information provided in the update. Staff will
provide more detail in the recycling update for the next meeting.
Council member Fonnest gave an update on the Blue Line LRT Extension. He stated
that the Blue Line Extension is not included in the federal budget which only includes
the LRT lines that have state funding and no apparent barriers. Golden Valley joined
with other cities along the Blue Line to form a lobbying group. The group went to
Washington to talk with congressional delegation and others at the Department of
Transportation about the importance of the extension of the Blue Line LRT. Governor
Dayton has stated that the Southwest LRT will come before the Blue Line Extension.
There is no definite date for the build out of the Blue Line LRT but Met Council is
planning that it will be operational in 2023. Golden Valley and its partner cities are
committed to pushing this forward and making sure everything is ready.
Other Business
Council member Fonnest reminded the group of the joint meeting being held tomorrow
night at Brookview at 6p and also the upcoming events at Brookview:
• Mid-century modern architecture speaker on Saturday, March 3rd
• State of the County presentation on Tuesday, April 10th
Fonnest also mentioned that the Council’s top legislative priorities for 2018 include the
underground pedestrian tunnel from Perpich Center for Arts Education to the north
under Highway 55 and the DeCola Ponds Flood Mitigation bonding bill.
Joe Ramlet spoke about attending a Legislative preview which was put on by a local
non-profit called Environmental Initiative. Topics of conversation at the preview
included: wastewater treatment; funding for public transportation may be lost; citizen
commissions don’t get enough credit for the work that they do; keeping up with
technology; putting more local leadership into certain areas; and rural versus urban
Minutes of the Environmental Commission
February 26, 2018
Page 3 of 3
G:\Environmental Commission\Agendas\2018\3-March\02-26-18 EC Minutes.doc
issues. He also stated that the School Board is looking into separating the position of
School Trust Lands Director from the DNR and make it an independent position.
Adjourn
MOVED by Gitelis, SECONDED by Yahle, and the motion carried to adjourn the
meeting at 8:38 pm.
Claire Huisman
Administrative Assistant
G:\Environmental Commission\Memos
Date: March 21, 2018
To: Environmental Commission
From: Eric Eckman, Development and Assets Coordinator
Subject: 2018 Draft Work Plan Priorities
Based on discussion at the February commission meeting and the priorities listed in the
Resilience and Sustainability Plan and Natural Resources Management Plan, below is the draft
work plan for 2018.
Draft 2018 Work Plan
1. Continue working on GreenStep Cities Step 4 metrics to address climate-related impacts,
improve the environment, and reduce energy consumption and costs.
a. If the City is successful in its application for a MN GreenCorps Member for 2018-
2019, work with this member to complete GreenStep Cities actions related to
Waste Reduction, Recycling, and Composting/Organics management.
2. Become involved in the City’s discussion on solid waste collection
3. Assist in the preparation of the curbside recycling contract for 2019
4. Utilize its $3,500 budget to host an educational workshop on Sustainable Yards and
Gardens, with an emphasis on reducing chemicals (pesticides, herbicides, fertilizers,
chlorides) and other inputs
5. Create a City-wide pollinator policy
6. Removing barriers for producing local food (Vertical Greenhouses/Urban Farming)
7. Continue to assist in implementing the Natural Resources Management Plan
G:\Environmental Commission\Memos
Date: March 21, 2018
To: Environmental Commission
From: Eric Eckman, Development and Assets Coordinator
Subject: 2040 Comprehensive Plan - Water Resources Chapter
The Environmental Commission requested the opportunity to review and comment on the draft
Water Resources chapter of the 2040 Comprehensive Plan.
To prepare for the Water Resources discussion, the following items are attached:
1.Water Resources Chapter – draft dated March 20, 2018
2.Appendix – Surface Water
3.Appendix – Sanitary Sewer
4.Appendix – Water Supply
Prior to the meeting, staff requests that Commission members review the Water Resources
chapter and any appendix items they are interested in. Any comments generated at the meeting
will be forwarded to staff working on the plan.
Water Resources Chapter
DRAFT updated March 20, 2018
OUTLINE
Introduction
Key Points
History
Existing Conditions & Future Demands
• Surface Water
o Key Points
o Resource Inventory and Assessment
o Water Quality
o Stormwater Management
o Groundwater Management
o Water Quantity and Flood Risk
o Wetland Management
o Shoreland Management
o Erosion and Sediment Control
o Opportunities
• Water Supply
o Key Points
o Water Storage and Transmission
o Water Consumption
o Unmetered Water Use
o Emergency Preparedness
• Wastewater
o Key Points
o System Conditions
o Inflow and Infiltration
o Future Demands
o Restaurant Fats, Oils, and Grease
o Operations and Maintenance
Policy Plan
Implementation Plan
• Summary of Implementation Actions
2
INTRODUCTION
The City of Golden Valley contains a rich stock of water resources that contribute to the community’s character,
health and quality of life. Preservation, conservation and enhancement of these resources are critical to the
community. The Water Resources Chapter includes a set of coordinated policies and strategies for managing and
improving the City’s water supply, wastewater, and surface water systems, which are vital resources that must be
sustained for future generations. The City’s work is influenced by the Metropolitan Council’s 2040 Water Resources
Policy Plan, which moves beyond simply the management of these resources in order to meet regulatory
requirements. Both the City and Metropolitan Council take a proactive planning approach to water resource
management, reflecting the value that the community places on natural resources.
The City’s past water resource successes include:
• Construction of numerous flood control and flood storage projects that have helped preserve life and
property, reduce flood levels, and prevent costly flood damages
• Implementation of projects and best management practices that helped protect and improve water quality
throughout the City
o Removal of Wirth Lake from the state’s impaired water list for excess nutrients
o Improved water quality within Bassett Creek with a measured decrease in phosphorus, nitrates,
sediment from 2000-2016 and an increase in biological indicators (fish and insects) from 1980s-2016
o Protected water quality in Twin Lake which continues to meet state and watershed standards
o Establishment of 13 conservation easements and 32 native vegetation buffers totaling 53 acres
• Creation of two wetland banks certified by the Board of Water and Soil Resources
• Receipt of Blue Star Award for excellence in stormwater management
• Reduction in inflow and infiltration (I/I) by 28 percent, inspection of 54 percent of properties, and compliance
by 44 percent of properties since I/I program inception 10 years ago
The City will continue to build upon these past successes to improve the quality and effectiveness of water resource
planning and management through 2040 and beyond.
KEY POINTS
• Continual water quality improvements to local water bodies and groundwater as well as preservation of
wetlands and natural areas is essential.
• There are a multitude of ways to improve the quality and reduce the volume of stormwater runoff, including
the addition of native plants and rain gardens, reducing the use of chemicals, and limiting impervious surface.
• It is important to involve and educate the public on water resource related issues, particularly for stormwater
management.
• The City still experiences flooding and must continue to address flood risk in a variety of ways.
• Protection of the City’s drinking water supply from pollutants, ensuring access to an adequate supply of
drinking water, and decreasing water consumption are vital to the City’s health and prosperity.
• It is time to make significant investments in aging sanitary sewer, water, and stormwater infrastructure in order
to maintain the integrity and function of the water resources system.
HISTORY
With its proximity to the Mississippi River, this area has a long history of abundant water resources. These resources
began to be significantly affected by human settlement in the early to mid 1900s. During this time, development was
still limited and sporadic. In the 1950s, the population grew rapidly with post-war suburbanization. The Village of
Golden Valley was involved in water planning, but it was not until the 1960s and 1970s that significant government
resolution and local management of water resources was introduced. Much of the City of Golden Valley’s
infrastructure for water resources was installed prior to 1970. Planning, regulation, and oversight have continued to
increase since then. The City works with other agencies to perform this work, including the Bassett Creek Watershed
Management Commission (BCWMC), Metropolitan Council Environmental Services (MCES), Joint Water Commission
(JWC), Minnesota Pollution Control Agency (MPCA), Department of Natural Resources (DNR), and several others. As
state and federal laws have changed over the years, the City’s role in water resource management has evolved.
3
EXISTING CONDITIONS & FUTURE DEMANDS
Surface Water
Key Points
• Although many water quality improvements have been made, there are still a number of impairments that
affect the use and enjoyment of the water bodies in Golden Valley. One of the ways to help improve water
quality is to incorporate green infrastructure techniques and practices such as planting trees and native
vegetation, green roofs, stormwater capture and reuse, and rain gardens.
• Many storm sewer pipes are aging, undersized, or constructed of materials such as corrugated metal and are
reaching the end of their useful design life.
• Although the City has completed a number of flood control projects and floodplain management actions,
flooding and flood risk continues to be an important and ongoing issue for the City.
The primary waterway within Golden Valley is Bassett Creek, which runs through many neighborhoods and parks in
the City. The creek has a large watershed encompassing more than 40 square miles within the cities of Crystal, Golden
Valley, Medicine Lake, Minneapolis, Minnetonka, New Hope, Plymouth, Robbinsdale, and St. Louis Park. The Bassett
Creek watershed includes the main branch of Bassett Creek, which originates at the outlet of Medicine Lake, and the
Sweeney Lake branch of Bassett Creek, which flows through Sweeney Lake, and joins the main stem within Theodore
Wirth Park. Figure 5.1 shows the abundance of surface water resources in the community.
As a result of the City’s water management efforts, some of the large recreational lakes, ponds, wetlands, creeks,
wooded areas, and parks have been preserved from development and other pressures. Part of the City’s ongoing
water management efforts include developing and implementing a Surface Water Management Plan (SWMP). The Plan
impacts land use planning and development within the City. The entire Plan is included in the appendix of this
Chapter. The purpose of the SWMP is to provide a complete and detailed guide and reference for the City in
protecting and managing water resources within the City, including stormwater. The Plan assists the City with policy
decisions, water resource management, implementation priorities, regulatory program references, and capital
improvement budgeting to address water resource issues. It is consistent with the guidance from the Metropolitan
Council, BCWMC, and Minnehaha Creek Watershed District (MCWD).
Bassett Creek Photo Credit: BCWMC
4
Figure 5.1: Surface Water Resources
5
Resource Inventory and Assessment
The SWMP provides technical information, maps, and tables that describe the surface and subsurface conditions of
the City. This includes information regarding climate and precipitation, topography, watersheds and drainage patterns,
land use, soils, geology and groundwater resources, surface waters, wetlands and natural resources, water quality,
water quantity and flooding, fisheries and aquatic habitat, recreational and scenic areas, and potential pollutant
sources. There is also information about the City’s stormwater management system, including an inventory of the
major and minor sub-watersheds and stormwater management infrastructure. Based on this inventory, an assessment
of issues and opportunities was performed. Identified issues include:
• Water quality: including stormwater runoff water quality, MPCA impaired waters, total maximum daily load
studies, waterbody classification and water quality goals, water quality BMP maintenance, shoreland
management, and other water quality issues.
• Water quantity and flood risk reduction: including floodplain management, rate and volume control,
hydrologic and hydraulic modeling, and identifying areas of
localized flooding and flood risk
• Wetland management: including wetland and shoreland
buffers, aquatic invasive species, and wetland classification
and inventory
• Groundwater management: including infiltration,
groundwater sustainability, and wellhead protection
• Erosion and sediment control: including Bassett Creek
erosion issues, construction site management, and
implementing best management practices
• Interagency issues: include maintenance of infrastructure
and parks not owned by the City
Water Quality Issues
Lakes, ponds, streams, and wetlands in the city of Golden Valley are important community assets. The
City recognizes the importance of water quality in its water bodies and has taken steps to protect and improve
these resources. These steps include adopting water quality management policies, collecting water quality
data, reviewing projects for conformance with water quality performance standards, and implementing
water quality improvement projects. The quality of surface water is compromised by pollutants that are typical of
urbanized areas. The City utilizes programs and the enforcement of regulations to limit pollutant loading. Pollutant
loading from developed areas may have significant negative impacts on water quality and ecological function of water
resources. For lakes, ponds, and wetlands, phosphorus and chloride are
pollutants of concern. Within the City, non-point source runoff,
especially stormwater runoff, is a major source of pollutant loading.
The City works to limit pollutant loading from stormwater runoff
through implementing its project review and permitting program,
appropriate operation and maintenance of its stormwater management
system, as well as capital projects designed to reduce the amounts of
stormwater generated (e.g., low-impact development) and/or remove
pollutants from stormwater. The City aims to achieve pollutant load
reductions as required by the state or watershed management
organizations as well as BCWMC and state water quality standards in
City lakes and streams to preserve beneficial uses.
Most stormwater in Golden Valley eventually flows into Basset Creek,
which is an impaired water, and does not meet water quality standards for chloride, fish and insect bio-assessments,
and fecal coliform (bacteria). Increased precipitation and freeze/thaw cycles may make it more difficult to maintain
stormwater practices that help reduce pollution and maintain the health of surface water. More freeze/thaw cycles
may lead to an increase in the amount of salt/deicer that is applied to the roads, which may deteriorate stormwater
facilities and the quality of the water. The primary concern in Golden Valley is the health of surface water such as
Basset Creek, which may degrade as heavy precipitation events and freeze/thaw cycles increase.
What is non-point source runoff?
Pollution sources are separated into
two categories: point source and non-
point source. Point sources of pollution
are identifiable localized sources of
pollution such as industrial discharge
and sewage effluent. Non-point source
pollution comes from unidentifiable,
general sources like fertilizer or
pesticides in urban and agricultural
runoff.
What are Impaired Waters?
A body of water is considered “impaired” if
it fails to meet one or more water quality
standards. Minnesota water quality
standards protect lakes, rivers, streams, and
wetlands. Monitoring suggests that about
40% of Minnesota's lakes and streams are
impaired, which is comparable to
impairment rates in other states.
6
The City implements best management practices (BMPs) to reduce stormwater impacts on surface water. These
practices include cleaning ponds, stormwater pipes, catch basins, outlets, sump catch basins, and manholes. The City
sweeps streets in spring, summer, and fall, and continues to use innovative approaches to reduce and better target the
application of chloride in winter while still taking public safety into account. Redevelopment is the primary opportunity
to make improvements to water quality treatment as well as to volume and rate control, filtration, infiltration, and
reuse.
Pollutant concentrations exceeding applicable state water quality standards may impair a waterbody’s beneficial use(s)
and can result in a its inclusion on the MPCA’s 303(d) Impaired Waters List. For impaired water bodies, the MPCA
requires a total maximum daily load (TMDL) study to be
completed to identify the sources of the impairment and
strategies to restore water quality. The City works with the
BCWMC and MCWD to address impairments located
within their respective jurisdictions. Impaired waters located
within or downstream of Golden Valley include:
• Sweeney Lake
• Wirth Lake
• Bassett Creek (Main Stem)
• Medicine Lake
• Minnehaha Creek
• Lake Hiawatha
Enhanced water quality can be achieved by:
• Protecting and enhancing fish and wildlife habitat
• Maintaining and enhancing the integrity and ecological function of aquatic resources and shoreland areas
• Minimizing pollutant loading from stormwater runoff through non-point source pollution reduction and
treatment
• Complying with all applicable stormwater regulations established by the Environmental Protection Agency
(EPA), Minnesota Pollution Control Agency (MPCA), Hennepin County, BCWMC, MCWD, and Metropolitan
Council
• Minimize the volume of stormwater runoff entering Bassett Creek
Stormwater Management
Aging, damaged, or undersized infrastructure may impair the function of the City’s stormwater system. The City’s
infrastructure renewal program coordinates utility improvements with road rehabilitation to minimize disturbance and
cost, prioritizing areas of the City where improvements are most needed to provide the City’s intended services. The
City considers the condition and function of stormwater infrastructure in prioritizing areas for renewal. The City’s
stormwater and water resource management program includes several components, including:
• Implementation of the City’s National Pollutant
Discharge Elimination System (NPDES) Municipal
Stormwater (MS4) Permit and Stormwater Pollution
Prevention Plan (SWPPP)
• Specific tasks requested or required by BCWMC
and MCWD
• Inspection, operation, and maintenance of the City’s
stormwater management system
• Project review and permitting
• Education and public involvement
• Studies and capital projects
Implementation occurs through capital improvement
projects, the Infrastructure Renewal Program (IRP), various
studies, and ongoing programs specifically listed in the
appendix of this Chapter. Stormwater pond with native buffer
Students from the SEA School collect water samples
7
Groundwater Management
The increased population in the Twin Cities metropolitan area has put increased pressure on groundwater quantity
and quality. It is crucial that the quantity and quality of groundwater resources be protected for future generations.
This can be done in a variety of ways. The City will cooperate with efforts of BCWMC, MCWD and others to educate
the general public regarding the importance of implementing BMPs to protect groundwater quality and quantity. Also,
the City will cooperate with St. Louis Park, Robbinsdale, Plymouth, and Minnetonka regarding wellhead protection
programs and activities. Lastly, the City will aim to promote groundwater recharge, increase the groundwater base
flow of Bassett Creek, and work to establish more uniform local policies and official controls for groundwater
resources. Figure 5.2 illustrates the relationship between surface water and groundwater in Golden Valley. The
Minnesota Department of Health (MDH) is responsible for the protection of groundwater quality and aims to prevent
contaminants from entering the recharge zones of public water supply wells through its wellhead protection program.
This includes the development of wellhead protection plans (WHPPs) and guidance to limit potential for groundwater
contamination. Wellhead protection efforts may restrict or prevent the use of certain stormwater BMPs within these
areas to prevent possibly contaminated stormwater from reaching groundwater supplies.
Water Quantity and Flood Risk
Floodplains are important ecological
features, as they are the primary
interface between the aquatic and
terrestrial habitats. Floodplains tend to
be seasonal wetlands and areas that are
protected from development and
encroachment, as they allow a safe
place for seasonal flooding and
protects homes, businesses, and
infrastructure. Floodplains are based on
the elevation of water that is expected
to occur during certain storm events. From a regulatory standpoint, the floodplain is defined as the elevation of water
caused by a precipitation event that has a 1 percent chance of being equaled or exceeded in any given year. This
floodplain has been identified on Figure 5.3.
Past urban development within the City and higher
precipitation amounts have increased the rate and
volume of stormwater runoff generated by precipitation,
which has increased the risk of flooding. To address
areas of significant flooding along Bassett Creek, the
City, BCWMC, and other state and federal agencies
cooperated to construct the BCWMC Flood Control
Project. Construction of the Flood Control Project and
continued flood risk reduction practices have addressed
the most significant flooding issues along Bassett Creek,
though flooding issues still exist. Ongoing flood control
tasks include:
• Maintaining and repairing the Flood Control
Project system
• Managing development and redevelopment
throughout the watershed to minimize the risk
of flooding
• Identifying and implementing additional projects to reduce flood risk along the Bassett Creek trunk system
• Flood-proofing or voluntary acquisition of homes that are remaining in the floodplain
• Regulating stormwater runoff discharges and volumes to minimize flood risk, flood damages, and the future
costs of stormwater management systems
Flooding can limit street access temporarily in residential neighborhoods
Highway 55 Flood Control Structure
8
Figure 5.2: Surface Water Interaction with Groundwater
9
Figure 5.3: Floodplain
10
In 2017, the BCWMC adopted a new flood elevation model, which is used to help guide the design and review of
projects and development. The City will continue to use this model and other data to evaluate specific areas of flood
risk and evaluate options to address these risks.
It is important that the City minimize the risk of flooding along Bassett Creek, its tributaries, and other flood prone
areas in order to protect human life, property, and surface water systems that may be damaged by flood events by:
• Maintaining the City’s stormwater system to consistently provide the intended level of service and protection
• Implementing strategies to manage the impact of future increased precipitation and changing climate patterns
on City stormwater infrastructure and planning
Wetland Management
Prior to development, much of the land within the city of Golden Valley was wetland. Many wetland areas
were drained or filled as the city developed (prior to the establishment of regulations protecting
wetlands). Although Golden Valley is almost completely developed, numerous wetlands remain across the
city. Wetland and natural resource inventories have been completed for Golden Valley. The City is committed to
preserving and enhancing the quality of wetlands as well as natural areas adjacent to wetlands. The specific
management techniques utilized are based on a variety of factors. An inventory, assessment of needs, and
management practices are detailed in the City’s SWMP and the Natural Resources Management Plan (NRMP).
Erosion and Sediment Control
The BCWMC and its member cities have identified the extent and severity of stream bank erosion along
most of the Bassett Creek trunk system, including the portion of Bassett Creek passing through the city.
The City’s original inventory was completed in 2003 and it has been updated annually since then. To address stream
erosion issues, the BCWMC has identified and implemented capital projects to restore streambank areas since the
initial stream erosion inventory was performed. Future projects to restore remaining stream erosion issues are
included in the BCWMC capital improvement program and the City’s implementation program. Stormwater
Management Permits are issued by the City in order to utilize best practices and monitor construction projects on
private property. The City is committed to minimizing erosion and sedimentation for all of the water resources in the
community. Soil protection and sedimentation controls will be utilized to maintain public health, safety, and welfare.
Opportunities
Major opportunities for the City to address these issues are summarized at the end of this section and include
cooperative efforts with WMOs, partnerships with adjacent cities, redevelopment opportunities, and coordination
with other City programs, including the City’s Infrastructure Renewal Program (IRP). As a fully developed city, there
are limited opportunities and resources to implement capital improvements to address water quality, water quantity,
or natural resource issues. To maximize the effectiveness of its water resource management program, Golden Valley
seeks to leverage the following opportunities:
• Partnerships – The City cooperates with the BCWMC, MCWD, Hennepin County, Minneapolis Parks and
Recreation Board, and state agencies to carryout water resource activities and projects designed to achieve
common goals. The City also partners with neighboring cities to address intercommunity stormwater
management issues.
• Redevelopment – Opportunities for updating and upgrading the City storm drainage system will exist
primarily in redevelopment activities. As private and public properties redevelop, the City will implement the
policies and regulatory controls at its disposal to perform improvements to the stormwater system.
• Infrastructure Renewal Program – Through this program, the City evaluates and prioritizes infrastructure
(including stormwater infrastructure) for rehabilitation and replacement. Activities performed through this
program provide opportunities to address surface water issues by improving stormwater conveyance capacity,
retrofitting water quality improvements, and implementing other best management practices.
• Coordination with other City/WMO programs – Coordinating stormwater and surface water management
activities with other City programs (e.g., park improvements) presents an opportunity to increase operational
efficiency, reduce costs, and limit the frequency and duration of disruptions to City services.
11
Crews respond to a water main break in Robbinsdale
Water Supply
Key Points
• All Golden Valley drinking water comes from the Mississippi River through pipes owned by Minneapolis,
whereas most cities use groundwater as their source of drinking water.
• The majority of Golden Valley watermain was installed in the late 50s and early 60s and is reaching the end of
its useful design life.
• Golden Valley is working to limit residential water usage in the summer months to conserve this valuable
resource.
• Golden Valley has installed emergency backup water wells and has established procedures for emergencies.
Water Storage and Transmission
From the years of early settlement in Golden Valley, drinking water was supplied to the population via private wells on
individual properties. Starting in the early 1960s, Golden Valley’s drinking water has come from the Mississippi River
and is treated and conveyed by the City of Minneapolis. Since the mid-1960s, Golden Valley has been a member of the
Joint Water Commission (JWC), a partnership that includes the cities of Crystal and New Hope. These three cities
jointly own and operate the water system that stores and transmits potable drinking water throughout the three-city
service area. The JWC currently purchases Minneapolis potable water under a 20-year agreement signed in 2004,
which replaced a previous agreement signed in 1963. As the supplier, Minneapolis must deliver treated water that
meets federal Primary Drinking Water Standards.
Figures 5.4 and 5.5 show the City’s water supply system in terms of location, size, material, and ownership. The Joint
Water Commission owns three wells, which could be used in the event of an emergency to provide back-up drinking
water. The JWC system consists of three elevated storage tanks and five underground reservoirs, three in Crystal and
two in Golden Valley. In addition to the water reservoirs, the JWC owns and maintains 16 miles of pipe that are 16-inch
in diameter or larger, eight miles of which are located in Golden Valley. In 2016, the JWC performed a system wide
study on all of the Prestressed Concrete Cylinder Pipe (PCCP) that makes up the JWC distribution system. The
results of the study found that the majority of
the PCCP in the JWC system is in good
condition in relation to the age of the pipe.
No part of the PCCP system is in need of
immediate replacement. However, PCCP will
still be proactively replaced on an
opportunity basis as street projects allow.
The City owns and maintains the smaller
diameter (less than 16-inch) watermains. The
City faces a continual need to operate,
maintain, and invest in its water supply and
distribution system. The major vulnerability is
the age and condition of the underground
infrastructure within the City, as well as the
water pipes coming into the City as part of
the Joint Water Commission system. Less than five percent of the City’s 128 miles of watermain (less than 16-inch
diameter) has been repaired or replaced. The City has seen an increase in the amount and costs of maintenance (pipe
breaks, deterioration, sink holes) over the past 20 years. Approximately 73 percent of the water system is nearing the
end of its useful life. The majority of the City of Golden Valley’s water distribution system was installed in the late 50s
and early 60s and consists of cast iron pipe which is brittle and prone to breaking. These mains are reaching the end of
their design life as more and more watermain breaks are occurring each year. The average cost to repair or replace
one mile of pipe is $1.4 million. Much of the system needs to be replaced or rehabilitated. Increased precipitation and
freeze/thaw cycles have the potential to stress and damage infrastructure systems like pipes (stormwater, sanitary
sewers, water), roads, and bridges. This may result in increased maintenance costs, structural damage to public
infrastructure, damage to private properties, disruption of services, and inconveniences to residents.
12
Figure 5.4: Water Supply System by Ownership and Size
13
Figure 5.5: Water Supply System by Material
14
The new challenge for the JWC and the City of Golden
Valley is to develop a comprehensive strategy for the repair
and replacement strategy the water system. The challenge
will be to balance repair with replacement given that the
majority of the pipes are reaching the end of their service
life. It is not feasible to replace the majority of the water
system at once. Prioritizing replacement will be the leading
challenge.
The City is implementing the Infrastructure Renewal
Program (IRP) to systematically identify and prioritize
replacement and rehabilitation of the underground public
utilities including watermain, storm sewer, sanitary sewer,
and streets. The program will transition from the utility
improvements made with the Pavement Management
Program (PMP). The IRP involves breaking the City into 40
different areas to go through infrastructure rehabilitation or
replacement in the first year and pavement rehabilitation in
the second year of each of the 40 neighborhoods. The City
has recently adopted and will continue to develop funding
mechanisms. It utilizes a systematic approach to prioritize
replacement across the City in a cost-effective manner.
Water Consumption
The water supply system is
designed to meet current and
expected future water consumption
of Golden Valley residents. Over
the last 10 years, Golden Valley’s
population has been fairly
consistent and water demand has
shown a slight decline (see Table
5.1). Reductions in water use during
this time appears to be due to low
flow fixtures, precipitation, and
conservation. Historical annual
water sales data is reported in
three customer categories:
residential, commercial and
industrial (see Table 5.2). Over the
last 10 years, residential water
consumption has averaged 62
percent of water sold.
Table 5.1: Golden Valley Water Demand
Year Population Water Service
Connections
Total Water
Sold (MG)
Average
Day
Water
Demand
(MGD)
2007 20,900 7,059 1,040 2.84
2008 20,317 7,139 1,028 2.82
2009 20,508 7,150 1,006 2.76
2010 20,371 7,143 887 2.43
2011 20,595 7,144 934 2.56
2012 20,773 7,139 1,008 2.76
2013 20,845 7,141 918 2.52
2014 20,866 7,149 807 2.21
2015 20,571 7,148 787 2.16
2016 20,367 7,157 768 2.10
Water main installation in Golden Valley
15
Table 5.2: Golden Valley Water Sales
Year Residential
(gallons)
Commercial
(gallons)
Industrial
(gallons) Total
2007 654,717,115 270,786,223 115,165,662 1,040,669,000
2008 627,803,000 310,768,000 89,363,000 1,027,934,000
2009 636,446,000 287,738,000 82,695,000 1,006,879,000
2010 547,476,000 267,388,000 73,016,000 887,880,000
2011 554,757,000 308,845,000 71,171,000 934,773,000
2012 632,683,000 298,408,000 78,479,000 1,009,570,000
2013 556,132,000 285,431,000 77,389,000 918,952,000
2014 516,707,000 216,239,000 74,741,000 807,687,000
2015 499,155,000 213,268,000 74,716,000 787,139,000
2016 486,605,000 210,336,000 71,776,000 768,717,000
Total Water
Sold (gallons) 5,712,481,115 2,669,207,223 808,511,662 9,190,200,000
Percentage 62% 29% 9%
The City is challenged with reducing the per capita residential water consumption in a manner that minimizes financial
impacts and creates appropriate incentives for commercial and multi-family residential customers to reduce water
consumption through water-saving irrigation systems and landscaping. Per capita water use is determined by dividing
total daily water use (including residential, commercial, and industrial categories) by the total service area population
and is expressed as gallons per capita per day (GPCPD). Total residential per capita water use has averaged 75
GPCPD over the last 10 years (see Table 9.3). Residential per capita water consumption is calculated by dividing the
average residential daily water demand by the total population. For Golden Valley, this falls within the range normally
expected for residential water use and is about average for the Twin Cities metropolitan area.
Table 5.3: Golden Valley Per Capita Water Use
Year Population Total Water
Sold (gallons)
Residential
Water Sold
(gallons)
Residential
GPCPD
Total
GPCPD
2007 20,900 1,040,669,000 654,717,115 85.8 136.4
2008 20,317 1,027,934,000 627,803,000 84.6 138.6
2009 20,508 1,006,879,000 636,446,000 85.0 134.5
2010 20,371 887,880,000 547,476,000 73.6 119.4
2011 20,595 934,773,000 554,757,000 73.8 124.4
2012 20,773 1,009,570,000 632,683,000 83.4 133.2
2013 20,845 918,952,000 556,132,000 73.1 120.8
2014 20,866 807,687,000 516,707,000 67.8 106.1
2015 21,571 787,139,000 499,155,000 63.4 100.0
2016 21,367 768,717,000 486,605,000 62.4 98.6
Average 75.3 121.2
16
Unmetered Water Use
As in all water systems, some of the water the JWC purchases from Minneapolis is never sold to water system
customers. The difference between the water produced and the water sold is referred to as unmetered water. It can
result from many factors, including unidentified leaks in the storage and distribution system, water main breaks,
periodic fire hydrant flushing, fire-fighting and training, unmetered hockey rink flooding, municipal pool uses, storage
tank maintenance, unauthorized use, unmetered services, and inaccurate meters. Golden Valley’s unmetered water
use is estimated by comparing the average annual water purchased from the City of Minneapolis with the average
annual metered consumption of Golden Valley customers. From 2012 to 2016, unmetered water use has ranged from
nine to 12 percent of the total water purchased from Minneapolis. The JWC’s goal is to maintain unmetered water use
at or below nine percent of Minneapolis water purchases. Unmetered water use below 10 percent is considered
acceptable for normal system leakage, unbilled water uses, and meter inaccuracies. Planned meter replacements and
regular calibration, leak detection surveys, and maintenance programs will improve measurement of water use and
help identify if there is a water loss problem. In 2012, the JWC purchased and installed new intake meters for the
Golden Valley reservoirs. The JWC also works with the City of Minneapolis to calibrate water supply meters regularly.
Future plans call for effluent meters at the Golden Valley reservoirs to more accurately measure water leaving the
reservoir site and entering the distribution system.
Future Water Consumption
Water use projections in Table 5.4 are based on the following assumptions:
• continued stable or slightly increasing population in accordance with the Metropolitan Council’s projections
• reduced per capita water consumption due to enhanced water conservation efforts
• a maximum day to average day water demand ratio of 1.85 (based on statistics from 2012-2016)
• adequacy of the existing water supply for meeting projected water demands through 2017 and beyond
Reducing residential and commercial water consumption provides several benefits. It reduces reliance on vulnerable
resources, it reduces the amount of water that must be purchased, and it directly reduces the cost of water service.
The City of Golden Valley and the JWC have established the following water conservation objectives:
• Limit per capita residential demand to 70 gallons per capita per day (GPCD), which is the Twin Cities metro
median
• Limit peak daily demand to less than 1.85 times average daily demand
• Limit total peak daily JWC purchases from Minneapolis to less than 11.4 million gallons per day (MGD)
• Limit unaccounted-for water to less than nine percent
Table 5.4: Golden Valley Water Use Projections
Year Projected
Population
Per Capita
Residential
Use (GPCD)
Average Day
Use (MG)
Maximum
Day Use
(MG)
Annual
Water Use
(MGal)
2018 21,200
75 1.59 2.94 580
2019 21,250 74 1.57 2.90 573
2020 21,300 73 1.55 2.87 566
2021 21,400 72 1.54 2.85 562
2022 21,500 71 1.53 2.83 558
2023 21,600 70 1.51 2.79 551
2024 21,700 70 1.52 2.81 555
2025 21,800 70 1.53 2.83 558
2026 21,900 70 1.53 2.83 558
2027 21,900 70 1.53 2.83 558
17
Reducing excessive discretionary summer residential water demand is a primary objective. Residential demands
comprise 62 percent of total water use. The JWC’s 10-year goal will be to maintain residential per capita use at 70
GPCD. Reducing excessive discretionary summer commercial water demand is also a primary objective, particularly
water use related to commercial landscape irrigation. The JWC’s goal is to reduce commercial peak water demands
through public education and other programs.
Emergency Preparedness
The JWC and the City of Golden Valley have policies and procedures in place in the event of a water emergency.
Emergency situations include drought, flood, tornado, or contamination of the Mississippi River. The JWC has installed
three emergency wells that draw water from the Prairie du
Chien/Jordan aquifer. Infrastructure was put in place in preparation
for a fourth well in Golden Valley if future needs warrant the
additional well. If the JWC were to experience an interruption in the
Minneapolis water supply, or any distribution lines to the Crystal or
Golden Valley reservoir, it would rely upon the emergency wells,
which were installed in 2014. The emergency wells provide flows that
meet the average day demand. Prior to 2014, the JWC could only rely
on 31.5 million gallons of operating storage within the Crystal and
Golden Valley reservoirs. There were two instances, one in 2013 and
one in 2014 where service was interrupted due to a watermain break
on the 36-inch distribution line that runs through Robbinsdale to the
Crystal reservoir. That watermain has since been replaced, but as a
result of the two large breaks and as part of that project, emergency
procedures were fine-tuned to prepare for large disruptions to the
system. The JWC has also installed backup generators at the Crystal
and Golden Valley pump houses to ensure power is available for the
pumps to distribute water into the system in the event of a power
outage. The emergency backup wells and interconnections with
neighboring Cities greatly reduce the risk of a water shortage during a
potential emergency situation.
The water tower is a focal point of the
community
18
Wastewater
Key Points
• The City will continue the Inflow and Infiltration (I/I) reduction program to meet population growth forecasts,
maintain capacity in the sanitary sewer system, and prevent system overflows.
• The majority of Golden Valley sanitary sewer was installed in the late 50s and early 60s and is reaching the
end of its useful design life.
• Increased frequency in maintenance is required in order to better understand the system and prioritize for the
Infrastructure Renewal Program (IRP).
• The Hwy 55 Lift Station is currently located within the floodplain, which causes operational and environmental
issues.
• Fats, oils, and grease (FOG) from restaurant operations can coagulate within the sanitary sewer system and
clogs pipes, causing maintenance problems and even sewer backups.
System Conditions and Needs
The Golden Valley sanitary sewer collection system is part of the overall Minneapolis-St. Paul regional wastewater
collection and treatment system program, which is managed and operated by the Metropolitan Council Environmental
Services (MCES). The MCES is required under state and federal requirements to insure all wastewater throughout the
Twin Cities Metropolitan area does not leave their interceptors and is properly treated before discharge to local
receiving streams. Treatment of wastewater is provided by the MCES at the Metro Plant in St. Paul. MCES collection
interceptors extend through the community east to west (Bassett Creek interceptor) and north to south (St. Louis
Park interceptor) to collect and transport a large portion of the City wastewater. The average daily flow from Golden
Valley to the MCES system is approximately 2.35 million gallons per day (MGD). The local sanitary collection system is
jointly owned under private ownership and by the City of Golden Valley. Wastewater is collected in over 113 miles of
City-owned sewer pipe ranging from eight inches to 36 inches in diameter. Figures 5.6 and 5.7 illustrate the location,
size, material, and ownership of pipes in the sanitary sewer system.
Much of the City of Golden Valley’s wastewater system was installed prior to 1970. Over 86 percent of the wastewater
infrastructure is over 50 years old with more than half of that total more than 60 years old. An inventory of pipe based
on the material and age of the pipe is shown in the appendix of this Chapter. The infrastructure is reaching the end of
its typical useful life. Through various studies, scans, flow monitoring, and emergency repairs, it is apparent that the
wastewater infrastructure needs repair and rehabilitation. As the wastewater system ages, the pipes and structures
crack and break, allowing groundwater to enter the system. Groundwater is clean water and does not need to be
treated at a wastewater plant. This inflow and infiltration (I/I) takes precious wastewater flow space and results in
extra fees to the residents of Golden Valley. Years
of maintenance and clear water from I/I entering
the collection system will reduce the overall service
life of the existing infrastructure. Regular
maintenance has been performed, including pipe
lining, asset scanning for condition status, but not
enough to keep up with the aging system. To
continue to provide sufficient wastewater capacity
to the residents, a dedicated push to repair and
rehabilitate the wastewater must be done. A
programmed lining project can increase the life
span of older pipes as well as reduce the amount of
I/I entering the wastewater system. Without
continued maintenance and renewal, costs to the
City will increase. Increased costs are due to emergency repairs, surcharge fees, and collapsing infrastructure resulting
from cracks and breaks in the system. Infrastructure renewal is required in order to maintain the integrity and function
of the system.
The City’s system contains almost 70 miles of pipe classified as Vitrified Sewer Pipe (VSP) or Vitrified Clay Pipe
(VCP). Aging VCP is commonly associated with I/I problems due to the number of pipe joints in the system. The
number of joints also adds to its susceptibility to root intrusion. The majority of VCP pipe was installed in Golden
What is I/I?
Inflow and Infiltration (I/I) is the excess flow of clear water into
the City's sanitary sewer system.
• Inflow is when clear water from illegal connections of sump
pumps, downspouts, and foundation drains is channeled
directly into sanitary sewer pipes.
• Infiltration is when groundwater seeps into sewer pipes via
cracks or leaky joints.
Because the sanitary sewer system was not designed to handle
this excess clear water, it becomes overloaded during times of
high groundwater or heavy rainfall. This can cause basement
flooding or bypassing of raw wastewater to local streams and
lakes.
19
Sanitary sewer main failure requires
maintenance
Valley prior to the mid 1970s. When streets are reconstructed through
the Pavement Management Program (PMP), a review of all utilities is
conducted. The program includes a voluntary program of sewer lateral
inspections on private property. The City has developed a successful
rehabilitation program for its aging infrastructure using relining or pipe
replacement techniques through sanitary sewer closed-circuit
television inspection (CCTV) and evaluation of older sewer pipe in the
public right of way, much of which is VCP sewer. However, significant
portions of the City had streets reconstructed prior to implementation
of this practice. Therefore, these areas have significant rehabilitation
needs in the public and private systems that will be addressed with the
IRP.
The Highway 55 lift station is one of three lift stations in the city. This
crucial component of the system will be prioritized for evaluation and
reconstruction because it currently sits in the floodplain. During large
rain events, it becomes necessary to place sand bags around the
station. If not reconstructed out of the floodplain, the Highway 55 lift
station will have a negative environmental impact should a flood event
cause the station to backup or overflow. It is located in a very visible
location near Sweeney Lake, Theodore Wirth Regional Park, and the
Sweeney Lake branch of Bassett Creek. The City plans to address
that as soon as financially possible. In the meantime, the City will
install a grinder pump in the station to reduce the issues caused by flushable wipes and other materials.
There are an estimated 147 miles of private service lines, which exceeds the City sewer system by 35 miles, making up
approximately 55 percent of the total sewer system. The portion of the system on private property is similar to the
City’s system with significant amounts of VCP materials. The voluntary sewer lateral inspection and repair program as
well as the mandatory point of sale program address these issues on private property.
Inflow and Infiltration
It is the City’s goal to reduce I/I to a manageable level to maintain and reserve wastewater capacity within Golden
Valley for future development and reduce operation and maintenance costs each year. The City of Golden Valley, like
the many communities in the metropolitan area, has spent considerable time and energy managing I/I within their
sanitary sewer collection system. The MCES has implemented a surcharge program, which is designed to encourage
metropolitan communities to reduce inflow entering their interceptors in order to preserve wastewater capacity for
daily domestic dry weather demand flows from municipalities they serve around the Twin Cities metro area. Prior to
2003, the Golden Valley sanitary collection system had a history of measuring high peak wastewater flow rates during
rainfall events. As a result of the MCES Surcharge Program, peak wastewater flow rates above MCES allowances were
identified during rainfall events in September and October of 2005. After further studies were conducted, the City
committed to an I/I abatement program to manage and reduce their wastewater contributions to the MCES
interceptors.
Over the past 12 years, the City has taken an aggressive approach to reducing the impact of I/I on its collection system.
It has been successful in reducing peak wastewater flow discharges during rainfall events. The City implemented a
private property inspection program that consists of two parts, a voluntary program through PMP and a mandatory
program through property sales (point of sale). It has been successful. Prior to the program during in 2003, permanent
flow meters operated by the MCES recorded peak wastewater flow rates exceeding 19 million gallons per day (mgd). A
typical dry weather day would record only three mgd on average. In 2014, a similar event with high levels of
precipitation in the spring recorded less than half the peak wastewater flow rate at the same MCES flow meter
location. In addition to these efforts, a sewer lining project has been implemented along Laurel Avenue to reduce
potential I/I and maintain pipe capacity along the I-394 corridor. The City has been successful in locating and repairing
illegal connections to the wastewater conveyance system, such as foundation drains or basement sump discharging to
the sanitary sewer. The City will remain committed to I/I reduction as it makes the transition to the IRP.
20
Figure 5.6: Sanitary Sewer System by Ownership
21
Figure 5.7: Sanitary Sewer System by Material
22
Future Demands
The City is committed to providing adequate capacity within the system to ensure that overflows do not occur. Future
development may require the City to evaluate the need for their main collection pipes to be upsized. Due to increased
growth and changes in development, certain stretches of wastewater piping may be found to be undersized.
Undersized pipes can cause backups in high flow events which result in costly repairs to individual residents,
businesses, and the City. A hydraulic flow simulation model is an effective tool to determine if future development will
affect pipe capacity. In order to determine future wastewater flow projections, properties anticipated to have
changing land use were adjusted in the model to account for increases or decreases in overall wastewater flow rates
due to the anticipated change in land use through the year 2040. The results of the model indicate that the system will
be capable of conveying average daily flows (ADFs) without any capacity issues. However, there are a few areas along
the Hwy 55 and I-394 corridors to monitor and assess as development proposals are received. The positive results
from aggressive I/I reduction have reduced capacity issues in the sanitary system. Even though tasks and projects have
reduced I/I in the system, I/I still exists. Continual work will improve life of residents of Golden Valley by maintaining
water quality with the reduction of wastewater overflows and backups, lowering wastewater costs to each resident,
and improve the local economy by promoting future growth and development.
Restaurant Fats, Oils, and Grease
Restaurant grease has also become an issue in some areas of the system. Maintenance activities have already been
increased in known problem areas. Golden Valley cleans the problem areas in the spring and fall and spot checks and
flushes problematic manholes on a weekly and monthly schedule. With increased development in certain areas of the
City, restaurant grease has been a growing problem, requiring more time and attention from Maintenance staff. There
have been some efforts to modify ordinances and policies regarding the installation, maintenance, and inspection of
grease traps. In 2015, an ordinance was adopted to require all Food Service Facilities (FSFs) that produce fats, oils and
grease to install grease collection devices. This should be monitored and promoted to reduce the amount of grease in
the system.
Operations and Maintenance
The operations and maintenance plan serves as a guide to operate, monitor, maintain, and rehabilitate the City’s
sanitary sewer system. In order to reduce claims against the City, comply with local and regional standards, and reduce
costs, the City plans on:
• Rehabilitating system components
• Implementing programs to periodically evaluate system conditions
• Develop or expand maintenance programs to be more proactive
• Establishing policies and ordinances to protect the City’s sewer infrastructure
• Continually assessing equipment and staffing needs of the City
The City Public Works staff has grown over the years as
infrastructure additions have warranted additional staff
and equipment. Staff has divided the City into three
sewer service districts to manage maintenance activities
in the system. The City aggressively inspects and/or
cleans 1/3 of the City each year (about 40 miles of sewer),
in addition to the areas needing emergency cleaning. High
pressure sewer jetting is method of cleaning sewer
pipes using pressurized water. The City has televising
equipment as part of its jetting equipment. The equipment
is best used to inspect sewers as they are cleaned to help
ensure that all debris have been removed.
Maintenance staff indicates that a significant portion of
its time and budget is used in areas constructed of VCP.
This is a result of root intrusion, cracked and broken
pipe, poor joints and poor seals between pipes in this
type of pipe. This is not unique to the City of Golden Valley and is typical of VCP throughout the metro area. Many
Sanitary sewer jetting
23
communities have lined or replaced VCP sewer to eliminate the high maintenance needs often associated with these
types of sewers. The City has undertaken projects to line the VCP sewers, through the PMP as well as other sewer
rehabilitation projects, but to reduce the strain and work for the sewer maintenance staff, a more aggressive lining
program will be considered with IRP.
Currently, staffing levels for public works utility staff seem appropriate for the existing maintenance schedule.
However, it will be challenging to accomplish the goals outlined through 2040 in addition to regular maintenance
duties at current staffing levels.
Proper monitoring and maintenance of the existing system is an important factor in the long-term viability of the
system. Maintaining the system extends the life of the system and decreases the likelihood of sewer backups. Sewer
backups often lead to property damage claims against the City. This results in increased costs to the City to pay those
claims with associated increases in insurance premiums. The League of Minnesota Cities Insurance Trust (LMCIT)
provides insurance coverage for the City to protect against claims resulting from sewer backups and other claims that
may result from problems related to the City’s utility services. LMCIT also provides no-fault insurance for private
sewer connection to owners whose sewers cause damage to the City’s municipal system. LMCIT have noted increased
claims in specific areas of sewer systems throughout the state. VCP sewers have higher than normal claims. Because
of the high percentage of VCP pipe comprising the sewer system in Golden Valley, those portions of the system
should be more closely evaluated for replacement or lining to negate the concerns of root intrusion and to continue
the maintenance schedule suggested by LMCIT.
The IRP will create a program for total system cleaning, televising and rehabilitation to ensure the system lasts and to
reduce potential expenses from collapsed/broken sewers or other backups that result from deferred maintenance.
The City intends to establish a televising program to televise all sewers. This would establish a “base line” televising
database for all sewers in the community. The televising records, currently stored separately, will soon be digitally
attached to City GIS to provide a tool available to maintenance and engineering personnel.
An increase in inspections and maintenance of the existing sewer lines will be critical as the City moves towards the
implementation of the IRP. This inspection and maintenance information will be used to help prioritize areas of
concern that will require immediate replacement.
24
POLICY PLAN
The Policy Plan for this Chapter includes a set of long-term goals and objectives that will be fulfilled through specific
actions and policy decisions. The Policy Plan is a long-range document that expresses the values of the community and
establishes a vision. It provides direction and guidance for the future of the City in terms of policymaking,
improvements, programs, investments, priorities, and work plans. It can be utilized for decision-making purposes by
elected officials, commissions, boards, staff, and other interested members of the community. The Policy Plan is
updated every 10 years based on new data and community feedback as required by Minnesota law.
Creating a comprehensive plan in today’s uncertain and rapidly evolving world requires preparing for a new climate
and weather reality, advancing technologies, and shifting social structures. Golden Valley has already taken several
steps to improve its water resources. Golden Valley has identified the importance of building on its previous efforts to
become more resilient.
Goal 1: Sustain and Improve Water Quality
The quality of water resources is vital to the health, safety, and prosperity of current and future members of the
community.
Objectives
1. Sustain a healthy drinking water supply
1.1 Continue to purchase water from the City of Minneapolis in partnership with the Joint Water
Commission (JWC), which has provided a safe and reliable source of drinking water for several
decades
1.2 Implement best management practices (BMPs) to protect groundwater quality
2. Improve quality of surface water
2.1 Achieve BCMWC and MPCA water quality standards in City lakes and streams to preserve beneficial
uses
2.2 Achieve pollutant load reductions as required by the state or watershed management organizations
2.3 Minimize hydrologic alterations to Bassett Creek
2.4 Minimize erosion and sedimentation to protect the city’s water resources
2.5 Implement soil protection and sedimentation controls whenever necessary to maintain
public health, safety, and welfare
3. Improve quality and reduce quantity of stormwater runoff
3.1 Minimize pollutant loading from storm water runoff through non-point source reduction and treatment
3.2 Minimize the rate and volume of storm water runoff entering Bassett Creek
3.3 Comply with all applicable storm water regulations established by the Federal Government, the State
of Minnesota, Hennepin County, the BCWMC, the MCWD, and the Metropolitan Council
25
Goal 2: Maintain and Rehabilitate Infrastructure
Infrastructure renewal must be addressed in order to maintain the integrity and function of essential services for
future generations.
Objectives
1. Conduct proactive maintenance and rehabilitation on critical services to improve functionality and
effectiveness
1.1 Develop or expand programs to help ensure proactive maintenance of the sewer system
1.2 Continually evaluate the condition of infrastructure and system performance
1.3 Continue to reduce the inflow and infiltration of clear water into sanitary sewer system
1.4 Continue to explore and incorporate new and emerging technologies to construct, rehabilitate,
maintain and manage public assets and infrastructure in an efficient, cost effective manner
2. Ensure that new infrastructure is built to be resilient
2.1 Integrate multi-benefit green infrastructure into public capital projects
2.2 Consider emerging climate patterns when designing stormwater infrastructure
2.3 Design infrastructure to minimize environmental and public health impacts
2.4 Develop strategies to fund infrastructure renewal
2.5 Include life cycle costs (e.g. operations and maintenance, resource consumption, disposal) when
planning projects and selecting construction materials
Goal 3: Protect and Enhance Aquatic Resources
Aquatic resources and their ecological benefits are an integral part of the environment.
Objectives
1. Preserve and enhance the quantity and quality of wetlands
1. 1 Develop wetland performance standards
1.2 Continue to require wetland delineation with development proposals and require developers to
maximize buffer zones around wetlands where possible
1.3 Continue to develop wetland banking credits within the wetland bank as opportunities arise
1.4 Coordinate with other agencies, as necessary, that are also involved in the protection of wetlands
2. Protect and restore natural areas, including fish and wildlife habitats
26
2.1 Support the goals and policies of the City’s Natural Resources Management Plan and reference this
plan when reviewing development proposals
2.2 Utilize an adaptive management approach to protection, preservation, and enhancement of natural
areas
2.3 Increase the amount of native vegetation cover including pollinator habitat
3. Maintain and enhance the integrity and ecological function of shoreland areas
4.1 Continue to enforce shoreland zoning regulations
4.2 Support the voluntary development and maintenance of buffers of native and naturally existing
shoreline vegetation on non-city property
4.3 Encourage landowners to protect non-disturbed shoreland areas and restore disturbed shorelines and
streambanks located on private property to their natural state where feasible
Goal 4: Reduce the Risk and Impact of Floods
It is imperative that flood risk be reduce in order to protect lives, homes, businesses, and infrastructures from flood
damage.
Objectives
1. Minimize the risk of flooding along Bassett Creek, its tributaries, and other flood prone areas
1.1 Manage development and redevelopment throughout the watershed to minimize the risk of flooding
1.2 Maintain and repair the Flood Control Project system
1.3 Regulate stormwater runoff discharges and volumes to minimize flood risk, flood damages, and the
future costs of stormwater management systems
1.4 Identify and implement additional projects to reduce flood risk along the Bassett Creek trunk system
1.5 Conduct flood proofing on homes remaining in the floodplain as feasible
1.6 Allow only those land uses in the BCWMC-established floodplain that will not be damaged by
floodwaters or increase flooding
1.7 Discourage development where the sole access to the site is through the established 100-year
floodplain
Goal 5: Ensure Capacity of Systems Meet Future Needs
In order to provide essential services for future generations, the City must plan for changes and needs in the future.
Objectives
1. Research future needs of the community and assess the condition of all critical services to determine capacity
deficiencies
27
1.1 Ensure that land use decisions reflect the opportunities and limitations of existing or planned
infrastructure
1.2 Utilize future growth forecasts in population, households, and employment to ensure adequate system
capacity
1.3 Work with the JWC to construct emergency well if deemed necessary to meet community needs
Goal 6: Balance Water Usage and Conservation
The City must reduce water consumption in a manner that minimizes financial impact.
Objectives
1. Reduce water consumption in the community
1.1 Limit per capita residential demand for water and
1.2 Limit peak daily demand for water and total peak daily purchases of water from Minneapolis
1.3 Limit unaccounted-for water in the system
1.4 Manage active and ongoing water meter replacement repair and testing programs
1.5 Avoid unnecessary water consumption associated with excessive hydrant flushing
1.6 Maintain an active water conservation public education program
1.7 Consider new water pricing schemes that could reduce water consumption
Goal 7: Involve and Educate the Public in Water Resource Management
It is important that the community is enabled with knowledge and tools to improve the environment.
Objectives
1. Increase public awareness of individual property owner’s impacts on water quality
1.1 Maintain the Golden Valley Environmental Commission to educate residents, raise awareness about
environmental responsibility, and create a sense of collaboration in the spirit of making and keeping
Golden Valley an environmentally healthy city
1.2 Use demonstration projects as a means of educating the public on water resource issues and
opportunities
1.3 Assist other agencies in the development and distribution of educational materials
2. Build community capacity to implement stormwater best management practices at a local level
2.1 Utilize volunteer groups to the greatest extent possible for public service projects
2.2 Maintain a public education program to develop and distribute educational materials on stormwater
issues through a variety of media
28
2.3 Perform outreach activities that inform the community about the impacts of stormwater discharges on
water bodies and best practices to promote watershed health
2.4 Work with other agencies to develop an education program for schools in the city
While the City strives to meet its water resource goals and incorporate volume control and green infrastructure
practices, it has identified several limitations and restrictions which must be considered:
• Clay soils and compressible organic soils
• High groundwater table
• Presence of contaminated or debris impacted soils
• Location of industrial facilities and vehicle fueling
• Avoiding inflow and infiltration of clear water into sanitary sewer system
Although these barriers may limit the number and location of green infrastructure projects and strategies, the City will
continue to look for opportunities to implement these important water resource practices.
29
IMPLEMENTATION PLAN
The Implementation Plan for this Chapter includes a set of specific actions to accomplish the goals and objectives set
forth in the Policy Plan. It differs from the Policy Plan in that it provides the opportunity to easily measure progress
and note tangible outcomes from each task. Each task provides an approximate cost estimate for the work and notes a
timeframe in which the specific action should take place. Tasks are prioritized based on financial feasibility, staff
capacity, importance or urgency for action, and other factors. The Implementation Plan is updated every 5 years (mid-
cycle of the 10 year Policy Plan) based on progress and new opportunities.
Sustain and Improve Water Quality
The quality of water resources is vital to the health, safety, and prosperity of current and future members of the
community.
Implementation Strategies:
• Support water quality monitoring efforts performed by other agencies and organizations
• Cooperate with neighboring cities regarding wellhead protection programs and activities
• Share groundwater elevation data with the BCWMC when available
• Continue requiring infiltration practices be implemented in accordance with federal, state, and watershed
guidelines
• Implement improvement projects identified in the BCWMC’s capital improvement program based on
feasibility, prioritization, and available funding
• Prioritize projects that are most effective at achieving water quality goals, including non-structural BMPs
and education
• Implement BMPs that reduce phosphorus loading to receiving water within the MCWD by two (2) pounds
per year and report progress to the MCWD
Maintain and Rehabilitate Infrastructure
Infrastructure renewal must be addressed in order to maintain the integrity and function of essential services for
future generations.
Implementation Strategies:
• Transition to the Infrastructure Renewal Program. Establish maintenance districts within the city for
implementation of maintenance, preservation, and rehabilitation projects
• Provide long-term and sustainable funding for rehabilitation and maintenance staff, equipment, and related
resources to allow restoration and improvement of aged or worn infrastructure
• Address infrastructure funding in the City’s legislative priorities in order to encourage the state legislature
to provide stable, long-term funding for capital improvements and maintenance
• Continue to reduce the inflow and infiltration of clear water into sanitary sewer system through a variety of
programs and redevelopment opportunities
• Research ways that emerging technologies can reduce life cycle costs in water system construction,
rehabilitation, maintenance, and management.
Protect and Enhance Aquatic Resources
Aquatic resources and their ecological benefits are an integral part of the environment.
Implementation Strategies:
• Update shoreland management zoning regulations to be consistent with state requirements
• Implement Stormwater Management Plan and Natural Resource Management Plan. Implement the plans,
monitor progress, and report on success. Ensure the implementation plan is adaptive, flexible, and adequately
funded.
30
• Develop wetland performance standards and develop wetland banking credits within the wetland bank as
opportunities arise. Require developers to maximize buffer zones around wetlands where possible.
• Increase the amount of native vegetation buffers that include pollinator habitat
• Encourage landowners to protect non-disturbed shoreland areas and restore disturbed shorelines and
streambanks located on private property to their natural state where feasible
Reduce the Risk and Impact of Floods
It is imperative that flood risk be reduce in order to protect lives, homes, businesses, and infrastructures from flood
damage.
Implementation Strategies:
• Evaluate known and potential flood issues identified in these areas and pursue opportunities to minimize
flood risk through capital improvement projects, structural flood proofing, and/or voluntary acquisition of at-
risk structures.
• Continue to implement floodplain management zoning regulations and maintain consistency with BCWMC
and MCWD floodplain management policies
• Design new municipal stormwater facilities based on Atlas 14 precipitation data, conveying no less than the
10-year, 24-hour rainfall event (i.e., the event with a 10 percent chance of occurring in any year)
• Perform routine inspection, maintenance, and repair of BCWMC Flood Control Project (FCP) features
located within the city and will formally notify the BCWMC of any maintenance and repair action on any FCP
feature
• Implement damage reduction and flood-proofing projects
• Obtain property land dedication and easements for stormwater ponds and drainage systems with new
development in order to provide permanent protection
Ensure Capacity of Systems Meet Future Needs
In order to provide essential services for future generations, the City must plan for changes and needs in the future.
Implementation Strategies:
• Continue to incorporate infrastructure considerations with land use decisions
• Monitor accuracy of growth forecasts in order to determine whether population growth could exceed
infrastructure capacity in the future
• Work with the JWC to monitor water supply needs. It may become necessary to construct emergency in
Golden Valley in the future in order to meet community needs.
Balance Water Usage and Conservation
The City must reduce water consumption in a manner that minimizes financial impact.
Implementation strategies:
• Continue the meter maintenance program to continue improving billing accuracy and efficiency and to track
water losses.
• Monitor unmetered water use by annually reviewing water billings and compare with Minneapolis metered
water delivery volumes
• Maintain a program of water reduction measures for emergencies. Include voluntary and mandatory
requirements.
• Research options for tiered water pricing to reduce water demand. Seasonal rates or surcharges that
increase the cost for excess water use during the summer peak usage season could also be implemented.
• Adopt an ordinance governing installation and operation of commercial landscape irrigation systems.
Establish minimum design standards, link approvals for system designs to overall development approvals, focus
on reducing peak summer demands, minimize the wasting of water, and reduce overall landscape water
consumption.
31
• Educate and inform the public on water conservation. Including how to sprinkle lawns more efficiently in
order to reduce peak water demand in the summer months.
Involve and Educate the Public in Water Resource Management
It is important that the community is enabled with knowledge and tools to improve the environment.
Implementation strategies:
• Continue to conduct an annual public meeting on stormwater to discuss the Storm Water Pollution
Prevention Program (SWPPP) and inform the public about stormwater impacts.
• Develop a volunteer program. Work with community leaders from every neighborhood. Once established,
this group can conduct localized outreach and education to the public, encourage volunteerism, and
coordinate within their neighborhoods.
• Develop education materials about stormwater management techniques, particularly on reducing the use of
chemicals that have potentially negative impacts on natural resources and human health
• Cooperate with efforts of the other agencies that educate the general public regarding the importance of
implementing BMPs to protect groundwater quality and quantity
Summary of Implementation Actions
Strategy Estimated Cost Timeframe Ongoing
Sustain and Improve Water Quality
Support water quality monitoring efforts $ X
Cooperate with neighboring cities
regarding wellhead protection programs
and activities
$ X
Share groundwater elevation data with the
BCWMC $ X
Continue requiring stormwater runoff
infiltration practices be implemented $ X
Implement improvement projects
identified in the BCWMC’s capital
improvement program
$$$ 0-20 years
Prioritize projects that are most effective
at achieving water quality goals $$ 0-20 years
Implement BMPs that reduce phosphorus
loading to receiving water within the
MCWD
$$$ 0-20 years
Maintain and Rehabilitate Infrastructure
Transition to the Infrastructure Renewal
Program $$$ 0-20 years
Provide long-term and sustainable funding
for rehabilitation and maintenance $$$ X
Address infrastructure funding in the
City’s legislative priorities $ 0-5 years
Continue to reduce the inflow and
infiltration of clear water into sanitary
sewer system
$$$ 0-10 years
Research ways that emerging technologies
can reduce life cycle costs $ 0-5 years
32
Protect and Enhance Aquatic Resources
Update shoreland management zoning
regulations $ 0-5 years
Implement Stormwater Management Plan
and Natural Resource Management Plan $$$ X
Develop wetland performance standards $ 0-5 years
Increase the amount of native vegetation
buffers that include pollinator habitat $$ X
Encourage landowners to protect non-
disturbed shoreland areas $ X
Reduce the Risk and Impact of Floods
Evaluate known and potential flood issues $ X
Continue to implement floodplain
management zoning regulations $ X
Design new municipal stormwater facilities
based on Atlas 14 precipitation data $ X
Perform routine inspection, maintenance,
and repair of BCWMC Flood Control
Project (FCP) features
$$$ X
Implement damage reduction and flood-
proofing projects $$$ X
Obtain property land dedication and
easements for flood storage $ X
Ensure Capacity of Systems Meet Future Needs
Continue to incorporate infrastructure
considerations with land use decisions $ 0-20 years X
Monitor accuracy of growth forecasts $ 0-20 years X
Work with the JWC to monitor water
supply needs $ 0-20 years X
Balance Water Usage and Conservation
Continue the meter maintenance program $$$ X
Monitor unmetered water use $$ X
Maintain a program of water reduction
measures for emergencies $ X
Research options for tiered water pricing
to reduce water demand $ 5-10 years
Adopt an ordinance governing installation
and operation of commercial landscape
irrigation systems
$ 5-10 years
Educate and inform public on water
conservation $ 0-5 years
Involve and Educate the Public in Water Resource Management
Continue volunteer programs $ X
Develop education materials about
stormwater management techniques $ 0-5 years
Cooperate with efforts of the other
agencies that educate the general public $ X
2018 Sanitary Sewer Collection System
Comprehensive Plan
Golden Valley Comprehensive Plan
Golden Valley, Minnesota
GOLDV 139902 November 27, 2017
Engineers | Architects | Planners | Scientists
Short Elliott Hendrickson Inc., 3535 Vadnais Center Drive, St. Paul, MN 55110-5196
SEH is 100% employee-owned | sehinc.com | 651.490.2000 | 800.325.2055 | 888.908.8166 fax
November 27, 2017 RE: Golden Valley Comprehensive Plan
2018 Sanitary Sewer Collection System
Comprehensive Plan
Golden Valley, Minnesota
SEH No. GOLDV 139902 4.00
Mr. Jeff Oliver, PE
City Engineer
City of Golden Valley
7800 Golden Valley Road
Golden Valley, MN 55427
Dear Jeff:
Please find enclosed our final copy of the City of Golden Valley Sanitary Sewer Collection System
Comprehensive Plan for 2018 as required by the Metropolitan Council. As you know, the City’s
Comprehensive Plan is the part of a long-range planning document for future development of Golden
Valley and the regional metropolitan area. This document updates the previous Golden Valley Sanitary
Sewer Comprehensive Plan, so the City can complete the wastewater section of their Metropolitan
Council 2040 comprehensive plan update.
Our staff developed this plan based on conversations with your staff, our knowledge of the system and
information from the previous comprehensive plan. In addition, we used the following information: the
City’s GIS database, current and future land use plans, water records and I/I data to update and model
the City’s current sanitary sewer collection system. The existing sanitary sewer model software
(InfoSWMM), product licensed by Innovyze, was again used and updated to determine design capacity in
the existing collection system and any changes needed to handle future development.
If you have any questions relating to this document, please contact me by email at kvannote@sehinc.com
or at 651.490.2144.
Sincerely,
Kirby Van Note, PE
Project Manager
dmk
s:\fj\g\goldv\139902\4-prelim-dsgn-rpts\comprehensive plan\sanitary sewer comprehensive plan.docx
2018 Sanitary Sewer Collection System Comprehensive Plan
Golden Valley Comprehensive Plan
Golden Valley, Minnesota
SEH No. GOLDV 139902
November 27, 2017
I hereby certify that this report was prepared by me or under my direct supervision, and
that I am a duly Licensed Professional Engineer under the laws of the State of
Minnesota.
Kirby Van Note, PE
Date: November 27, 2017 License No.: 16241
Reviewed By: Emily Steinweg Date: November 27, 2017
Short Elliott Hendrickson Inc.
3535 Vadnais Center Drive
St. Paul, MN 55110-5196
651.490.2000
Distribution
No. of Copies Sent to
___ Jeff Oliver, PE
City Engineer
City of Golden Valley
7800 Golden Valley Road
Golden Valley, MN 55427
___ R.J. Kakach, E.I.T.
Utility Engineer
City of Golden Valley
7800 Golden Valley Road
Golden Valley, MN 55427
___ Joe Hansen
Utilities Supervisor
City of Golden Valley
7800 Golden Valley Road
Golden Valley, MN 55427
___ Emily Steinweg
Short Elliott Hendrickson Inc.
3535 Vadnais Center Drive
St. Paul, MN 55110
2018 SANITARY SEWER COLLECTION SYSTEM COMPREHENSIVE PLAN GOLDV 139902
ES-1
Executive Summary
The Golden Valley sanitary sewer collection system is part of the overall Minneapolis-Saint Paul Regional
wastewater collection and treatment system program managed and operated by the Metropolitan Council
Environmental Services (MCES). In addition to the interceptor collection system owned by the MCES, the local
sanitary collection system is jointly owned under private ownership and the City of Golden Valley. The MCES is
required under state and federal requirements to insure all wastewater throughout the Twin Cities Metropolitan
area does not leave their interceptors and is properly treated before discharge to local receiving streams.
In order to ensure the capacity of their interceptors, the MCES adopted a surcharge program to make sure all
communities were properly maintaining their sanitary sewer collection systems and managing peak discharges
caused by inflow and infiltration (I/I) in their sanitary sewer collection systems. Prior to 2003, the Golden Valley
sanitary collection system had a history of measuring high peak wastewater flow rates during rainfall events. As a
result of the MCES Surcharge Program, peak wastewater flow rates above MCES allowances were identified
during rainfall events in September and October of 2005 resulting in the city of Golden Valley committing to an I/I
abatement program to manage and reduce their wastewater contributions to the MCES interceptors.
The City of Golden Valley established two goals to effectively manage their wastewater and sanitary sewer
collection system. They are consistent with the goals and objectives of the MCES and are as follows:
Goal 1 - Provide adequate capacity to insure wastewater collected for treatment does not leave the
Golden Valley sanitary collection system causing a Sanitary Sewer Overflow (SSO).
Goal 2 – Reduce I/I to a manageable level to maintain and reserve wastewater capacity within Golden
Valley for future development and reduce operation and maintenance each year.
Over the past ten years, the City of Golden Valley have taken an aggressive approach to reducing the impact of
I/I to their collection system. Following a preliminary assessment through flow monitoring, the city implemented a
private property inspection program. The inspection program consisted of two parts, a voluntary program through
the City’s street reconstruction program and a mandatory program through property sales (Point of Sale). The
private property inspection program, in conjunction with the City’s ongoing sanitary sewer rehabilitation efforts,
has reduced peak wastewater flow events caused by I/I across the City. Prior to the program during the spring of
2003, permanent flow meters operated by the MCES recorded peak wastewater flow rates exceeding 19 million
gallons per day (mgd). A typical dry weather day would record only 3 mgd on average. In 2014 after eight years of
the program, a similar event in the spring recorded less than half the peak wastewater flow rate at the same
MCES flow meter location.
Although the inspection program has been very successful, due to the structure of the program, many of the
private properties addressed have been more focused on the eastern side of the Golden Valley where more of
the street reconstruction programs have been completed over the past eight years. City efforts continue to reduce
the negative impact on the system resulting from I/I. The program has been successful in locating and repairing
illegal connections to the wastewater conveyance system. Illegal connections include foundation drains or
basement sump discharging to the sanitary sewer. As of fall 2016, the City has repaired 310 illegal sump and/or
foundation drains throughout the City.
The previous sanitary sewer model developed over ten years ago has been an effective tool for city staff to help
with the decision making process as a result of future redevelopment projects throughout the city. The existing
model identified a number of areas where pipe capacity has been an issue due to existing I/I and redevelopment
in western areas of the city. Future development opportunities in critical areas where pipe capacity could
potentially be an issue especially along the Hwy 55 and I-394 corridors can be evaluated to determine how and if
Executive Summary (continued)
2018 SANITARY SEWER COLLECTION SYSTEM COMPREHENSIVE PLAN GOLDV 139902
ES-2
land use changes will impact existing sanitary sewer infrastructure. The success of the I/I program has been
reflected in an updated sanitary sewer model by adjusting peak wastewater flow rates and allowing more reserve
pipe capacity for potential development.
Much of the City of Golden Valley’s wastewater infrastructure was installed prior to 1970. Over eighty-six (86)
percent of the wastewater infrastructure is over fifty (50) years old with more than half of that total more than sixty
(60) years old. The infrastructure is reaching the end of its typical useful life. It is time to push for infrastructure
renewal to maintain the integrity and function of the system. Years of maintenance and clear water from I/I
entering the collection system will reduce the overall service life of the existing infrastructure. As the wastewater
system ages, the pipes and structures underground crack and break, allowing ground water to enter the system.
Groundwater is clean water and does not need to be treated at a wastewater plant. This I/I takes precious
wastewater flow space and results in extra fees to the residents of Golden Valley. A programmed lining project
can increase the life span of older pipes as well as reduce the amount of I/I entering the wastewater system.
Without continued maintenance and renewal, costs to the City will increase, from emergency repairs, to
surcharge fees to worst case scenarios like collapsing infrastructure resulting from cracks and breaks in the
system.
Through the work of various studies, scans, flow monitoring and emergency repairs, it is apparent the wastewater
infrastructure needs repairs and rehabilitation. Regular maintenance has been performed, including cleaning and
televising, pipe lining and asset scanning for condition status, but it is not enough to keep up with the aging
system. To continue to provide sufficient wastewater capacity to the residents, a dedicated effort to repair and
rehabilitate the wastewater infrastructure is highly recommended. In addition to the work completed on private
property, the City of Golden Valley has upgraded the sanitary sewer collection system during many street
reconstruction projects. In addition, a sewer lining project has been implemented along Laurel Avenue to reduce
potential I/I in a high groundwater area and maintain pipe capacity along the I-394 corridor. Work is still needed
on lift station repair and rehabilitation. One lift station in particular, at Highway 55, is strongly recommended to be
prioritized for evaluation and reconstruction. The lift station currently sits in the flood plain, and has been impacted
by flood waters in the past which included City staff needing to place sand bags around the station during a large
rain event. The Highway 55 station, if not reconstructed out of the flood plain, will have a negative environmental
impact should a flood event cause the station to backup or overflow. Located near multiple ponds, Sweeney Lake,
Theodore Worth Regional Park and the Sweeney Lake branch of Bassett Creek, it is in a very visible location
should any issues occur. City staff knows this station in particular needs to be reconstructed and plan to address
that as soon as fiscally possible. In the meantime, it is recommended to install a grinder pump in the station, to
reduce the issues caused by flushable wipes and other materials.
Future development in the core industrial and commercial areas may require the City to evaluate the need for
their main collection pipes to be upsized. Due to increased growth and changes in development, certain stretches
of wastewater piping may be found to be undersized and impact the City’s goals for their infrastructure.
Undersized pipes can cause backups in high flow events which result in costly repairs to individual residents and
businesses as well as the City as a whole. The sanitary sewer model is an effective tool to determine if future
development will impact pipe capacity resulting in undersized pipes and the potential to limit future Golden Valley
growth.
Continual work will improve life of residents of Golden Valley by maintaining water quality with the reduction of
wastewater overflows and backups, lowering wastewater costs to each resident, and improve the local economy
by promoting future growth and development.
SEH is a registered trademark of Short Elliott Hendrickson Inc.
2018 SANITARY SEWER COLLECTION SYSTEM COMPREHENSIVE PLAN GOLDV 139902
i
Contents
Letter of Transmittal
Certification Page
Distribution
Executive Summary
Table of Contents
1 Introduction ................................................................. 1
2 System Inventory and Analysis ................................... 1
2.1 Existing Sanitary Sewer Collection System Gravity System ................... 1
2.2 Lift Stations ............................................................................................. 4
2.3 System Analysis ..................................................................................... 9
3 Comprehensive Plan with System Needs ................ 10
3.1 Population Trends ................................................................................ 10
3.2 Future Land Use ................................................................................... 10
3.3 Sanitary Sewer Design Criteria............................................................. 10
3.4 Future System Needs ........................................................................... 13
4 Operation and Maintenance Plan ............................. 14
4.1 Existing Public Works Utility Maintenance Division .............................. 14
4.2 System Needs ...................................................................................... 15
4.3 Recommended Maintenance Program ................................................. 16
4.4 Inflow and Infiltration ............................................................................. 20
5 Capital Improvement Plan ........................................ 25
5.1 Sewers ................................................................................................. 25
5.2 Lift Stations ........................................................................................... 28
5.3 Ten Year Plan Summary ...................................................................... 30
List of Tables
Table 1 – Sanitary Sewer Gravity Main by Year of Installation (feet) ......................... 2
Table 2 – Lift Station Capacities ................................................................................. 6
Table 3 – Lift Station Detention Time Calculations ..................................................... 6
Table 4 – Lift Station Electrical Review ...................................................................... 8
Table 5 – Lift Station Acceptability Rating .................................................................. 9
Table 6 – Population, Household and Employment Forecast ................................... 10
Contents (continued)
2018 SANITARY SEWER COLLECTION SYSTEM COMPREHENSIVE PLAN GOLDV 139902
ii
Table 7 – Peak Flow Factor ..................................................................................... 12
Table 8 – Wastewater Flow Projections ................................................................... 12
Table 9 – Gravity Sewer Maintenance Summary ..................................................... 18
Table 10 – Sewer Summary ..................................................................................... 27
List of Figures
Figure 1 – Pipe Material
Figure 2 – Sanitary Sewer Pipe Diameters
Figure 3 – Sanitary Lift Stations
Figure 4 – Proposed 2040 Land Use
Figure 5 – 2013 Temporary Flow Meter Locations
Figure 6 – d/D Pipe Capacities at Max Flow
Figure 7 – I&I Status Map
Figure 8 – Sanitary Sewer – Sealed Manholes – Lined Main
List of Appendices
Appendix A – 2007 Lift Station Inspection Report
Appendix B – Pavement Management Capital Improvement Plan
Appendix C – City Ordinances
Appendix D – 2016 Meter Analysis
Appendix E – Water and Sanitary Sewer CIP
GOLDV 139902
Page 1
2018 Sanitary Sewer Collection System
Comprehensive Plan
Golden Valley Comprehensive Plan
Prepared for the City of Golden Valley
1 Introduction
The City of Golden Valley is a mature suburb in the Minneapolis/St. Paul metropolitan area
having a population of 20,371 people in the year 2010 based on the 2010 census supplied by the
United States Census Bureau. The Metropolitan Council forecasts that by the year 2040 the City
will have a population of approximately 22,900 people.
The following sanitary sewer collection system plan is part of an overall Comprehensive Plan
update for the City which provides the technical documentation to support the long range sanitary
sewer collection system planning efforts.
Sanitary sewage is collected in over 113 miles of City owned and maintained sewer pipe ranging
in sizes from 8-inches to 36-inches in diameter. There are three (3) sewage lift stations which
serve small isolated areas. To evaluate the collection system, the City was divided into sanitary
sewer drainage districts for this study. The boundaries of the districts are correlated with those
defined in the Inflow/Infiltration Study completed in 2005.
Treatment of wastewater is provided by the Metropolitan Council Environmental Services (MCES)
at the Metro Plant in St. Paul. MCES collection interceptors extend through the community east
to west (MCES Bassett Creek interceptor) and north to south (MCES St. Louis Park interceptor)
to collect and transport a large portion of the City wastewater. The average daily flow from
Golden Valley to the Metropolitan Council Environmental Services (MCES) system is
approximately 2.35 million gallons per day (MGD).
2 System Inventory and Analysis
2.1 Existing Sanitary Sewer Collection System Gravity System
The existing City gravity sewer system is an aged system of approximately 113 miles of pipe
ranging in size from 8-in. to 36-in. diameter. Portions of the sewer were installed more than
50 years ago, with over 70 percent of the system installed prior to 1966. An inventory of pipe
based on the material and age of the pipe is shown in Table 1. Maps of the sewer size and
material are attached at the end of the report as Figures 1 and 2.
2018 SANITARY SEWER COLLECTION SYSTEM COMPREHENSIVE PLAN GOLDV 139902 2 Table 1 – Sanitary Sewer Gravity Main by Year of Installation (feet) Material Size (inch) 1951-1955 1956-1960 1961-1965 1966-1970 1971-1975 1976-1980 1981-1985 1986-1990 1991-1995 1996-2000 2001-2005 2006-2010 2011-2015 Unknown Grand Total (feet) Grand Total (miles) CIP 4 74.10 498.42 301.92 874.44 0.17 6 300.81 49.98 350.79 0.07 8 5250.18 21318.84 3861.46 416.99 268.59 176.37 324.93 229.70 323.61 190.03 32360.69 6.13 9 226.95 947.50 62.37 56.03 1292.86 0.24 10 1497.53 5511.11 1528.38 200.65 189.93 8927.61 1.69 12 3205.81 2120.03 5325.84 1.01 16 1819.65 1819.65 0.34 CIP Total 12300.93 29897.49 5452.20 547.12 767.01 176.37 575.56 229.70 323.61 681.89 50951.88 9.65 CIPP CIP 8 1044.00 1127.25 2171.25 0.41 CIPP CIP Total 1044.00 1127.25 2171.25 0.41 CIPP DIP 10 215.02 215.02 0.04 CIPP DIP Total 215.02 215.02 0.04 CIPP RCP 12 2587.10 2587.10 0.49 CIPP RCP Total 2587.10 2587.10 0.49 CIPP VSP 9 1232.34 24732.15 17419.37 43383.85 8.22 10 208.99 208.99 0.04 CIPP VSP Total 1232.34 24732.15 17628.36 43592.84 8.26 DIP 4 248.29 248.29 0.05 6 310.48 46.50 356.98 0.07 8 252.90 221.26 691.17 394.65 528.51 1329.78 113.90 3308.68 1454.01 1151.81 833.06 614.27 68.86 1698.06 12660.94 2.40 9 60.90 31.27 92.16 0.02 10 245.68 23.63 476.16 533.40 675.85 134.07 1381.93 3470.71 0.66 12 300.84 278.85 1196.44 395.97 2172.10 0.41 15 108.68 108.68 0.02 16 650.64 426.04 1076.68 0.20 20 385.90 385.90 0.07 DIP Total 252.90 466.93 691.17 728.76 1004.68 1329.78 895.58 5044.68 2544.81 1198.32 2029.50 748.35 129.76 3507.23 20572.44 3.90 HDPE 10 474.70 474.70 0.09 HDPE Total 474.70 474.70 0.09 LJP 16 1049.09 1049.09 0.20 24 200.40 438.49 638.89 0.12 LJP Total 200.40 1487.58 1687.97 0.32
2018 SANITARY SEWER COLLECTION SYSTEM COMPREHENSIVE PLAN GOLDV 139902 3 Material Size (inch) 1951-1955 1956-1960 1961-1965 1966-1970 1971-1975 1976-1980 1981-1985 1986-1990 1991-1995 1996-2000 2001-2005 2006-2010 2011-2015 Unknown Grand Total (feet) Grand Total (miles) PVC 2 490.49 610.76 1101.25 0.21 4 255.91 255.91 0.05 8 823.00 1533.87 455.84 1049.78 2519.92 378.07 369.40 803.92 13141.90 2381.62 2001.58 550.83 4859.84 30869.56 5.85 9 239.55 688.34 302.67 1230.56 0.23 10 1154.78 1154.78 0.22 10 92.84 92.84 0.02 10 288.79 168.93 14.36 574.49 1046.57 0.20 12 742.07 394.97 1137.04 0.22 PVC Total 1111.78 1773.42 1144.17 1305.70 3936.47 378.07 369.40 803.92 14374.46 3006.75 2576.08 550.83 5557.48 36888.52 6.99 RCP 9 676.63 676.63 0.13 12 4863.69 25304.72 1296.07 916.43 347.53 354.83 1722.92 34806.18 6.59 15 3941.12 7005.59 786.79 58.83 11792.34 2.23 18 3023.07 3023.07 0.57 21 7145.47 423.12 7568.59 1.43 24 8476.74 255.91 294.79 229.46 574.74 9831.65 1.86 RCP Total 8804.81 50955.59 1296.07 255.91 1703.23 642.32 652.57 354.83 3033.13 67698.45 12.82 VCP 6 1033.24 1033.24 0.20 8 2621.49 502.41 344.34 263.40 3731.63 0.71 9 145.42 1376.96 52.17 937.22 1270.80 3782.57 0.72 10 208.46 208.46 0.04 30 17.32 17.32 0.00 VCP Total 145.42 1376.96 52.17 2621.49 502.41 344.34 937.22 2793.22 8773.23 1.66 VSP 6 187.94 464.47 652.42 0.12 8 18.41 3883.71 175.31 614.05 1091.19 4551.92 338.92 169.35 251.84 248.36 11343.06 2.15 9 76368.21 188995.10 43747.58 20457.65 7772.93 99.34 303.62 325.52 856.30 829.18 703.57 3890.70 344349.68 65.22 10 226.31 484.16 710.47 0.13 12 2245.79 2245.79 0.43 VSP Total 76386.62 195538.85 43922.89 21536.16 8864.12 5135.42 642.54 494.87 856.30 1081.02 703.57 4139.06 359301.42 68.05 Grand Total (feet) 99202.86 281496.83 51414.50 24212.13 11941.51 13199.52 2351.61 8104.19 4220.74 16720.22 7923.20 31118.81 23296.71 19712.01 594914.83 112.67 Grand Total (miles) 18.79 53.31 9.74 4.59 2.26 2.50 0.45 1.53 0.80 3.17 1.50 5.89 4.41 3.73 112.67 Abbreviations in Pipe Table: CIP – Cast Iron Pipe CIPP – Cured-in-Place-Pipe DIP – Ductile Iron Pipe HDPE – High Density Polyethylene LJP – Lock Joint Pipe PVC – Polyvinyl Chloride RCP – Reinforced Concrete Pipe VCP – Vitrified Clay Pipe VSP – Vitrified Sewer Pipe
2018 SANITARY SEWER COLLECTION SYSTEM COMPREHENSIVE PLAN GOLDV 139902
Page 4
The system contains almost 70 miles of pipe classified as Vitrified Sewer Pipe (VSP) or Vitrified
Clay Pipe (VCP). Aging VCP is commonly associated with I/I problems due to the number of pipe
joints in the system. The number of joints also adds to its susceptibility to root intrusion. The
majority of VCP pipe was installed in Golden Valley prior to the mid 1970’s. The City has
developed a Pavement Management Program (PMP), which includes a review of all utilities
during the process of updating the City’s streets. The program includes an inspection of the
sanitary sewer collection system in the public right of way and a voluntary program of sewer
lateral inspections on private property. Through sanitary sewer closed-circuit television inspection
(CCTV) and evaluation of older sewer pipe in the public right of way, much of which is VCP
sewer, the City has developed a successful rehabilitation program for its aging infrastructure
using relining or pipe replacement techniques. However, significant portions of the City had
streets reconstructed prior to implementation of the sanitary sewer as part of the PMP. Therefore,
these areas have significant rehabilitation needs in the public and private systems.
The portion of the sanitary sewer collection system on private property is similar to the public
VCP sewer mains, in that there is a significant number of sanitary sewer laterals using VCP
materials with the potential to experience similar maintenance problems and contribute I/I. There
are an estimated 147 miles of private service lines, which exceeds the City sewer system by
35 miles, making up approximately 55% of the total sewer system. Thus, the City has adopted a
voluntary sewer lateral inspection and repair program as part of the pavement management
program and a mandatory point of sale program to address these issues on private property as
well.
2.2 Lift Stations
The City of Golden Valley’s wastewater sanitary sewer system contains three sewage lift stations
(Schaper, Highway 55 and Woodstock). Figure 3 displays the location of each station throughout
the City. Table 2 identifies the capacity of each station and Table 3 the total detention time, from
the last inspection, performed in 2007.
The capacity and physical condition at each station was inspected for the prior comprehensive
plan. The purpose of the inspections was to identify deficiencies of each station and to establish
a priority for improvements to the stations. Appendix A contains the results of the previous
inspections for each lift station.
SEH analyzed the condition of each station and made improvement recommendations for each
station. Proposed improvements were divided into six categories:
· Hydraulic Capacity - The criteria used for determining adequate hydraulic capacity is
compliance with the Minnesota Pollution Control Agency’s capacity requirements as
published in the Ten States Standards which are recommended standards for
wastewater facilities established by the Great Lakes-Upper Mississippi River Board of
State and Provincial Public Health and Environmental Managers. The information of
primary importance is the detention time in the individual stations wet well and the
average number of starts per hour of operations for each pump.
· Pumping Capacity - Adequacy of pumping capacity was based on whether the station is
able to pump the peak instantaneous flow with the largest pump out of service. The lift
stations ability to reliably handle the range of average daily flow rates to peak flow rates
are also considered in the sewer system hydraulic model.
· Physical Condition - The physical condition of each station is a subjective analysis by
SEH based upon a visual observation of the concrete, steel components, piping and
2018 SANITARY SEWER COLLECTION SYSTEM COMPREHENSIVE PLAN GOLDV 139902
Page 5
valves. The suitability of the station location is a review of the stations accessibility and
aesthetics.
· Electrical Issues - The electrical condition of the pumps was reviewed by observing the
amperage draw of the pumps and the physical condition of the electrical components of
the station.
· Instrumentation/Control - Instrumentation control review consisted of identifying
whether the station alarms are being transmitted to the central control facility.
· Potential for Sewer Back-up - The potential for sewer backups include two items: (1)
whether the stations contain either a standby generator or a receptacle for plugging to a
standby generator and, (2) whether the wet well and influent sewer contain adequate
storage capacity to allow a response by the sewer utility staff in the event of a power
outage. A retention time of one hour is assumed to be adequate and a retention time of
less than one-half hour is unsatisfactory.
All lift stations have recommended improvements of varying degrees that should be included in
future planning. The City has made small improvements throughout the years and continues to
anticipate future needs. The Highway 55 station is recommended for major repair, to reconstruct
the station out of the floodplain.
2.2.1 Station Hydraulic Capacity
The criteria for determining the adequacy of the hydraulic capacity is in conformance with the Ten
States Standards which the Minnesota Pollution Control Agency has adopted as the state’s
guidelines. The information of primary importance is the detention time in the individual stations
wet well and the average number of starts per hour of operations for each pump. Lift station wet
well capacities are presented in Table 2 and detention times at each lift station are presented in
Table 3.
2018 SANITARY SEWER COLLECTION SYSTEM COMPREHENSIVE PLAN GOLDV 139902
Page 6
Table 2 – Lift Station Capacities
Station
Name
Avg. Daily
W/W
Flow1
(mgd)
Max.
Daily
W/W
Flow1
(mgd)
Peak
Hourly
W/W
Flow1
(mgd)
Firm
Pump
Capacity
(mgd)
Pump Starts per
total run period
(Max. April,
2007)
(day)
Wet Well
Volume
(gal)
Wet Well
DT
(min)
Ten States
Standards
Requirement
(30 Min Max)
(min)
Schaper 0.006 0.01 0.02 0.05 43 658 18 30
Highway
55 0.039 0.054 0.114 0.504 344 3226 9 30
Woodstock 0.011 0.015 0.027 0.216 71 1305 7 30
1- Flows obtained from 2008 InfoSWMM hydraulic model
Table 3 – Lift Station Detention Time Calculations
Station
Name
Average
Max Daily
Flow Rate
(mgd)
Wet Well Sewer Line
Total
Detention
Time
(hr)
Depth
(ft)
Surface
Area
(ft2)
Floor to
Influent
Sewer
Invert
(ft)
Volume
(gal)
Detention
Time
(hr)
Surface
Area
(ft2)
Length
(ft)
Volume
(gal)
Detention
Time
(hr)
Schaper 0.009 11.00 12.57 5.60 493.00 1.31 12.6/
1961 240 627/
8,2101 1.7/21.91 24.9
Highway
55 0.054 15.50 75.00 11.75 3226.00 1.43 0.555 107 436 0.19 1.6
Woodstock 0.015 15.20 28.27 10.14 1305.00 2.09 0.349 25 65 0.1 2.2
1- Adjacent emergency storage vault with valve that must be opened manually for maximum storage and detention time
2.2.2 Safety
Safety issues affect both the permanent constructed facility and operational procedures.
Construction items address ladders, fall protection devices, presence of safety harnesses, safety
grating, railings, the need to access subsurface structures during operation, and whether service
vehicles and operating personnel can remain off the public streets during maintenance activities.
The operational procedures which the City employs do not necessarily require construction of
permanent facilities, but may include use of portable equipment.
2.2.3 Potential for Sewer Back-up
The evaluation of the potential for sewer back-ups include three items: one is a review of the
history of problems at the station, two is whether the stations contain standby power capability
(either a generator or a receptacle for plugging to a standby generator) and three, whether the
volume of the wet well plus the influent sewer contains adequate storage capacity to allow the
sewer utility staff time to connect an emergency generator before wastewater would back-up into
houses and/or buildings, in the event of a power outage. A detention time of one hour for the wet
well plus gravity sewer is considered excellent. A detention time of 50 to 60 minutes is
2018 SANITARY SEWER COLLECTION SYSTEM COMPREHENSIVE PLAN GOLDV 139902
Page 7
considered good, time of 40 to 50 minutes considered average, 30 to 40 minutes undesirable,
and less than 30 minutes unacceptable. The previously presented Table 3 shows the calculated
detention time for each station.
2.2.4 Pump Review and Capacity
Pump review is a review of pump capacity, pump age, maintenance record, and amperage draw.
Pump capacity is a determination of whether the station has capacity to pump the peak hourly
flow with the largest pump out of service.
Pumps are typically designed to operate for a period of fifteen (15) years. Any pumps older than
15 years are subject to failure due to age. Maintenance review is a summarization by the City
staff of the amount of maintenance required on each pump. Amperage draw is a comparison of
the measured draw to theoretical draw required for the particular motor.
2.2.5 Wet Well Physical Condition
The station physical condition evaluation addresses the physical condition of each station’s
concrete, hatches and miscellaneous metals. Steps into wet wells are considered unacceptable
because they can become rusty and are not capable of being retrofitted with full restraints.
2.2.6 Valve Vault or Dry Well, Physical Conditions
The physical condition of the valve vault addresses the condition of the concrete, the steps,
access into the station, piping and valves and the overall cleanliness of the structure.
The physical condition of the dry well addresses the condition of the steel access tube and
chamber, the ladder, access into the station, piping and valves, and the overall cleanliness of the
structure.
2.2.7 Electrical Components
The electrical review evaluates the adequacy of the electrical service to each station, the
adequacy of standby power, and the condition and accessibility of the pump control panel.
Adequacy of electrical service considers the number of power outages and whether operation of
the pumps causes dimming of lights in neighborhood. An unacceptable rating (rating of 5) is
given to any station which requires an operator to enter a below ground structure to operate the
pumps.
2.2.8 Instrumentation/Control/SCADA
For this parameter, each station was reviewed against the following criteria:
· Whether the station has alarms for station high and low levels
· Whether back-up pump controllers exist
· Whether SCADA transmits to the central control station
2018 SANITARY SEWER COLLECTION SYSTEM COMPREHENSIVE PLAN GOLDV 139902
Page 8
Electrical data collected during the last lift station inspection is presented in Table 4 below:
Table 4 – Lift Station Electrical Review
Lift
Station
Voltage/
Phase
Type of
Control
Pump
Controller
Back-up
Controller
Inrush Current
Pump 1 Pump 2 Phase A Phase B Phase C Phase A Phase B Phase C Schaper 230/1 Transducer
Systems
Control
Technology
Floats 5.7 A — — 13.2 A — —
Hwy 55 230/3 Transducer
Automatic
Pump
Control
Floats 22 A 22 A 20.5 A 19 A 17.5 A 18 A
Woodstock 230/1 Transducer
TLC
Controls,
Inc.
Floats 20.5 — — 25 A — —
2.2.9 Suitability of Location
The suitability of location addresses
· Each station’s service area, maintenance accessibility, aesthetics, visibility and proximity
to adjacent homes
· Potential for damage by the public
· Position within right-of-ways, easements or City owned property.
Accessibility from a public street is considered very important. The potential for public damage is
a consideration of whether the station is susceptible to being struck by an automobile or to
vandalism.
A private driveway to the stations is deemed important to allow operation and maintenance staff
to function without being threatened by passing traffic.
For the visibility to neighbors and proximity to homes criteria, it is assumed that a lift station
detracts from value or desirability of an adjacent home, and aesthetic treatment at the lift station
mitigates this detriment.
2.2.10 Acceptability Ratings
Table 5 ranks the condition of each station against the nine general parameters, based. The
detailed review for each of the 3 stations is contained in Appendix A.
2018 SANITARY SEWER COLLECTION SYSTEM COMPREHENSIVE PLAN GOLDV 139902
Page 9
Table 5 – Lift Station Acceptability Rating
Station
Name
Hydraulic
Capacity Safety Potential
Backup Pump
Station
Condition
Electrical Instrumentation/
Control Location Total
Average
Acceptability
Points Wet
Well
Valve
Well
Shaper 3 4 2 4 1 3 2 3 3 25 2.78
Highway 55 4 3 3 4 3 2 2 3 5 27 3.22
Woodstock 3 3 2 3* 3 3 2 3 2 24 2.67
Keynote - Acceptability Rating = 1 to 5
1 = Excellent
2 = Better than Average
3 = Average
4 = Below Average
5 = Unacceptable
*Woodstock pump ages could not be verified.
2.3 System Analysis
2.3.1 Sewer System Modeling
In order to provide the City of Golden Valley and the MCES with existing and future planning
information, the existing sewer system was evaluated using a hydraulic flow simulation model,
MWH Soft InfoSWMM. This model was used to route sewer flows through the developed sewer
structure of pipes, manholes, and lift stations. The model calculates various hydraulic parameters
during normal flow, surcharge, backflow, flooding and pumping conditions.
The City’s existing GIS sewer structure data, as-built information from the City’s sewer
construction plan sheets, lift station information and lift station inspections were compiled into a
GIS database to configure the model. The model was then used to evaluate current and future
sewer capacities and required system improvements.
For the purpose of the analysis, parcel acres were multiplied by the sanitary load rate per the
assigned land use and then assigned to manholes located closest to parcel center that were
considered likely to receive those flows. Sanitary land use loading rates were initially used to
determine base flow rates throughout the City. Once the loading rates were assigned, overall flow
volumes from each sewer district were calibrated against historical metered data, and loading
rates were modified so that flow from each district mirrored actual flow data. The model was
overall calibrated to the total volume of sanitary water as measured by MCES and averaged over
the past three years, totaling 2.3 MGD.
In order to determine future wastewater flow projections, properties anticipated to have changing
land use were adjusted in the model to account for increases or decreases in overall wastewater
flow rates due to the anticipated change in land use over the next 20 years. Figure 4 presents the
City’s proposed land use for 2040. The changes were used to adjust sewer flows in future model
flow scenarios. Flow rate determinations are discussed in Section 3.0 Comprehensive Plan with
System Needs.
2018 SANITARY SEWER COLLECTION SYSTEM COMPREHENSIVE PLAN GOLDV 139902
Page 10
Flows measured by the individual temporary meters installed for the 2005 Inflow/Infiltration Study
together with permanent MCES meters measuring flows into and out of Golden Valley were used
to calibrate the model. The wastewater flow data from the original portable flow meters used
during the Inflow/Infiltration Study and installed throughout the City were the basis for the sub-
sewershed or district flow discharge points. The locations of these temporary meters are shown
on Figure 5.
3 Comprehensive Plan with System Needs
3.1 Population Trends
The population of the City of Golden Valley is projected to increase 7-8% over the next 20 years.
Population and household trends are shown in Table 6. Metropolitan Council projects Golden
Valley population of 22,900 by the year 2040. The most significant change in Golden Valley’s
population will be the result of increased density from changing land use.
Table 6 – Population, Household and Employment Forecast
Year Population Households Employment
2020 21,300 9,300 36,000
2030 22,000 9,600 37,500
2040 22,900 9,800 38,900
Source: 2040 THRIVE MSP Water Resources Policy Plan. Produced by the Metropolitan
Council
3.2 Future Land Use
The information contained in this Comprehensive Sewer Plan Update is based on the ultimate
land uses which are anticipated to occur at full development. The Ultimate Land Use Map is
contained in Figure 4.
3.3 Sanitary Sewer Design Criteria
3.3.1 Flow Rates
Anticipated wastewater flows from the various sub districts were determined by applying flow
rates based on land use in each area. Actual metered water usage was used to calibrate the flow
to MCES metered flow from Golden Valley. Flows from future areas anticipated to undergo
redevelopment were assigned based on the current land use plan and preliminary development
plans available from the City.
3.3.1.1 Residential Flow Rates
An average of water records used for this study revealed an average water usage (averaging use
from 2010-2016) of 275 gallons per residential unit based on a Met Council projection of
8,816 residential units in the year 2010 and 9,300 residential units in the year 2020. The MCES
metered wastewater flow from the City of Golden Valley averaged 2.35 MGD in 2010, which
averages 260 gallons per residential unit averaging the residential unit growth suggested by
MCES from 2010-2020 or 114 gallons per resident per day based on the projected population
2018 SANITARY SEWER COLLECTION SYSTEM COMPREHENSIVE PLAN GOLDV 139902
Page 11
rate from 2010-2020, for years 2010-2016. This does not account for commercial, industrial, or
institutional property flows.
The metered wastewater flow is greater than the water sales, which is typical among metro area
communities. MCES staff believes this difference is primarily due to the difference in accuracy
between the individual home water meters and the MCES wastewater meters. It can also be
explained by the amount of additional clear water which could be entering the sanitary sewer
system through groundwater infiltration.
Future flows were calculated using the land use method with the calibrated loading rates per land
use from the existing land use. Loading rates were calibrated using metered data from winter
months. The same loading rates were then applied to the future land use, to determine future
system flows. Densities for different residential types varied from 450 gallons per day per acre to
1,800 gallons per day per acre.
3.3.1.2 Non-Residential Flow Rates
Generally, Golden Valley’s non-residential land use is made up of commercial and industrial
users that do not contribute disproportionately to the sewer system in comparison to residential
users. The City separates sewer flows from non-sewered water use for major users. The
separated information for industries was used for this study.
Model calibrations to assess existing land use loading rates resulted in an industry rate of
1,100 Gallons per Acre per Day (GAD) used to estimate flows from other undeveloped properties
within the City where future land use is shown to be commercial or industrial. 5 GAD was used
for parks and open spaces (noted as Active) and 800 GAD was used for institutional, commercial
and office space.
3.3.2 Peak Flow Factors
The sanitary sewage conveyance system must be capable of handling the anticipated peak
flows. These peak flow rates can be expressed as a variable ratio applied to the average flow
rates. This variable ratio, called the peak flow factor, generally decreases with increasing average
flow rates. The peak flow factors applied in this study were individually created for each
sewershed and are shown below in the Peak Flow Factor Table 7. These values were obtained
by comparing dry weather flows to peak flows from the largest, metered storm event from
July 2013. A unit hydrograph of the storm event was created and different peaking factors were
assigned to each sewershed so that the discharge from each sewershed matched the metered
discharge of each sewershed. Peaking factors were again compared to the largest metered
storm event of 2014, which occurred April 2014.
2018 SANITARY SEWER COLLECTION SYSTEM COMPREHENSIVE PLAN GOLDV 139902
Page 12
Table 7 – Peak Flow Factor
Flow Meter District Peak Flow Rate (gpm, July 2013) Peaking Factor
FM-01 5650 7.7
FM-02 112 0.5
FM-03 323 1.4
FM-04 1592 0.95
FM-04A 147 0.8
FM-04B 49 0.7
FM-05 799 0.3
FM-06 197 0.65
FM-06A -- 0.65
FM-07 485 1.4
FM-07A -- 1.4
FM-08 755 0.85
FM-08A 38 0.85
FM-08B 101 0.65
The design average flow for Golden Valley is 2.35 MGD and the correlated peak flow exiting the
City (metered at M117) is approximately 10 MGD, on par with the peak metered flow from the
July 2013 and April 2014 storm events, including flow from neighboring communities.
3.3.3 Design Flows
The sewer design flows were developed based on metered data from the City of Golden Valley
and MCES. The current average daily flow, averaged from MCES flow data over the past three
years, from the City is 2.35 MGD. This flow was matched in the model by adjusting peaking
factors from each sewershed discussed in Section 3.3.2.
To determine ultimate flow rates in the year 2040, calibrated loading rates for each land use type
were input into the model for future development and land use conditions. Additional future flows
based on future land use resulted in an average flow of 2.9 MGD for the City under fully
developed conditions in the year 2040. Flow rates calculated by the land use method in the
modeling scenarios were compared to MCES flow projects for the City, shown below.
Table 8 – Wastewater Flow Projections
Year Flow Projection (MGD)
2010 (Actual) 2.35
2020 2.38
2030 2.37
2040 2.37
2018 SANITARY SEWER COLLECTION SYSTEM COMPREHENSIVE PLAN GOLDV 139902
Page 13
3.4 Future System Needs
The results of the InfoSWMM model indicate that the system should be capable of conveying
ADFs without any capacity issues. Figure 6 represents pipe capacities for the peak wet weather
flows. The hydraulic condition of the sewer system under future flow conditions is discussed in
the following section.
The Golden Valley sewer system was evaluated under the peak hourly flow rate that mimicked
the largest storm event that was recorded in the past few years and resulted in surcharge
assessments, in April 2014. The peak discharge at M117 recorded by MCES was approximately
10 MGD during that event. The future conditions assessment of the system was analyzed using
those peak flow factors and the flow rates generated from new land use designations anticipated
by the City through the year 2040. The additional flow anticipated from redevelopment were
modeled under the same storm/peak factor assumptions as the modeled storm.
These flow conditions do not take into account any additional flows from future anticipated
development within St. Louis Park. Metered flows were used as contributions from neighboring
communities. Since the last Comprehensive Plan, MCES has constructed a lift station to reroute
flow upstream of meter station M120, in St. Louis Park. Flows are rerouted during peak flow
conditions to the MCES interceptor to the north, running along Highway 55. The new lift station
was implemented to take the high peak flows away from the Tyrol Hills area of Golden Valley.
Another condition assumed by the model is that the sewer lines are in perfectly maintained
condition, free of defects and debris, which is not always the case.
The assessment for future sewer system capacities and needs were evaluated using flow rates
generated from land use requirements anticipated by the City through the year 2040. The land
use flow rates were calibrated using existing land use and MCES metered flows and were used
in the future land use model scenario, for 2040.
Peaking factors were assigned to the individual sewersheds and cumulative flows to determine
the anticipated peak flows in lateral and trunk facilities. Peak flows were compared to existing
pipe capacity to determine the suitability of the existing system for conveying future flows.
Figure 6 illustrates used pipe capacities when the system is conveying the MCES peak metered
flow for the City of Golden Valley at 10 MGD. The outlet on the east side of the City (owned by
MCES) does exhibit some pipe capacity issues, shown on the figure. During 2014, the MCES
allowable peak hourly flow rate for the City of Golden Valley was 7.96 MGD. The surcharge storm
was used in modeling and analysis to analyze a more intense storm, with higher flow volumes in
the sanitary system. The previous areas know for flow capacity issues no longer exist, due to the
work of the I/I reduction, private property inspections and overall decreased water use by the
City.
One small area with capacity issues is located at Golden Valley Road between Bassett Creek
Drive and Bonnie Lane. In this location, a 12-inch segment connects to a 36-inch segment, only
0.3-feet above the invert of the 36-inch segment. The 12-inch segment does back up due to
higher flows in the 36-inch segment. A similar situation occurs at Sweeney Lake and Hidden
Lakes Parkway where an 8-inch segment connects to a 36-inch segment at the manhole invert,
causing backup into the 8-inch segment.
The area of Bassett Creek, between Legend Drive and Noble Avenue North also shows capacity
restrictions. This is a section where a City gravity line discharges into an MCES gravity line.
2018 SANITARY SEWER COLLECTION SYSTEM COMPREHENSIVE PLAN GOLDV 139902
Page 14
The City has aggressively been working to reduce I/I, with regular pipe rehabilitation and wye
connection projects and private property inspections. MCES, with Brown and Caldwell, undertook
an I/I study project, to determine if reduced wastewater flows could be attributed to I/I mitigation
projects performed by various cities in the metro area, including Golden Valley. The study began
in 2004 with data collection and I/I mitigation documentation. The study results shows that
Golden Valley had a 24% total flow reduction and a 28% I/I flow reduction. The previous work
performed and results of the study are provided in Appendix D.
The positive results of the work Golden Valley has done on public and private infrastructure are
apparent in the model, showing reduced capacity issues in the sanitary system. The tasks and
projects the City has undertaken to reduce I/I in the system has been proven as working and is
strongly recommended to continue. Persistent work will continue lowering costs to the City from
backups and surcharge events. The City is still liable to maintain and rehabilitate the sewer
system. Proactive work will reduce emergencies in the future. I/I still exists in the system, and the
City of Golden Valley and MCES are paying to treat clean water. More work can and is
recommended to be done to continue efforts to remove I/I from the system to allow for more
capacity and growth.
The individual sub-sewer districts each have a peaking factor applied to regular flow to account
for the excess I/I entering the sanitary sewer system. Areas that have higher factors show more
of an increase of flow in the system during storm events. Those areas should be targeted for the
next phase of rehabilitation.
4 Operation and Maintenance Plan
The purpose of an operation and maintenance plan is to serve as a guide to operate, monitor,
maintain, and rehabilitate the City’s Sanitary Sewer system.
Primary goals of the plan include reducing claims against the City related to sewer backups and
continued compliance with local and regional standards for wastewater, including the control of
inflow and infiltration (I/I) to the system. Specific recommendations in this plan include
· Rehabilitating system components with concerns related to safety and welfare of City
residents and employees
· Rehabilitating system components to improve system effectiveness
· Implementing programs to periodically evaluate system condition
· Develop or expand maintenance programs to help ensure periodic maintenance of the
sewer system
· Establishing policies and ordinances to protect the City’s sewer infrastructure
· Determining equipment and staffing needs of the City
4.1 Existing Public Works Utility Maintenance Division
Golden Valley Public Works has developed over the years as infrastructure additions warranted
additional staff and equipment. Public Works staff, management staff and the elected officials of
the community have worked together to develop an efficient staff that is cross-trained in various
other aspects of duties assigned to all of Public W orks.
2018 SANITARY SEWER COLLECTION SYSTEM COMPREHENSIVE PLAN GOLDV 139902
Page 15
4.1.1 Sewer Maintenance Districts
City Maintenance staff has divided the City into three sewer service districts to manage
maintenance activities in the system. The City aggressively inspects and/or cleans 40 miles of
sewer each year, equating to inspecting/cleaning one third (1/3) of the City each year, in addition
to the areas needing emergency cleaning.
4.1.2 Sewer Maintenance Equipment
The City has equipment typical of most communities the size of Golden Valley. The list of
equipment specific to sewer maintenance includes:
· Jetter Truck
· Vactor Truck
· Closed-Circuit Television (CCTV) Truck
· Service Lateral Camera
· Service Lateral Cleaning Equipment
· Hydraulic Pump (750-1000 GPM)
· Trailer Mounted Generator
The City has sufficient sewer maintenance equipment to maintain its municipal sewer system.
There may be times when additional needs require contracting for services. Maintaining the
current equipment mix, in combination with proper maintenance and rotation of equipment in/out
of service, will likely serve the community in an efficient manner for many years.
The City does have televising equipment as part of its jetting equipment. The equipment is best
used to inspect sewers as they are cleaned to help ensure that all debris have been removed.
4.1.3 City Maintenance Staff
The public works utility staff includes one utilities supervisor, two utility crew leaders, and eight
staff positions. This staff is cross-trained to assist in other areas of public works. Areas of water
system maintenance, snow plowing, and disaster clean-up occasionally require that utility staff
perform duties outside the area of sewer maintenance. Staffing levels for public works utility staff
seem appropriate.
The City should evaluate the prioritization process and assign a higher level of importance to the
maintenance of the sewer system. The current staff level combined with the current prioritization
process creates a situation that makes it extremely challenging to accomplish the goals outlined
in this report, in addition to regular maintenance duties.
4.2 System Needs
4.2.1 Gravity Sewer
Utility maintenance staff indicates that a significant portion of its time and budget is used in areas
constructed of VCP. This is a result of root intrusion, cracked and broken pipe, poor joints and
poor seals between pipes in this type of pipe. This is not unique to the City of Golden Valley and
is typical of VCP throughout the metro area. Many communities have lined or replaced VCP
sewer to eliminate the high maintenance needs often associated with these types of sewers. The
City has undertaken projects to line the VCP sewers, through the Pavement Management
2018 SANITARY SEWER COLLECTION SYSTEM COMPREHENSIVE PLAN GOLDV 139902
Page 16
Program (PMP) as well as other sewer rehabilitation projects, but to reduce the strain and work
for the sewer maintenance staff, a more aggressive lining program should be considered.
Maintenance in the sewer system typically involves cleaning the sewer using a combination of
jetter and vactor trucks to remove debris from the sewer pipes. Root intrusion in joints of the pipe
requires cutting and removal to remove obstructions in the pipe and allow flow of the sewage
through the system. Once roots begin to enter sewers, it is very difficult to eliminate the recurring
growth. The simple cutting of roots often promotes additional growth. Unmanaged root growth
can also cause the VCP pipe to crack, impacting the integrity of the pipe. Cracked pipes allow
groundwater and soil into the sewer system, which can cause road collapses and sewer
blockages. The continued efforts to cut roots in the VCP portions of the system annually results in
other portions of the City’s sewer system having a lower priority for maintenance.
The League of Minnesota Cities Insurance Trust (LMCIT) provides insurance coverage for the
City to protect against claims resulting from sewer backups and other claims that may result from
problems related to the City’s utility services. LMCIT also provides no-fault insurance for private
sewer connection to owners whose sewers cause damage to the City’s municipal system. LMCIT
have noted increased claims in specific areas of sewer systems throughout the state. One item of
note is VCP sewers having higher than normal claims. They have suggested a cleaning of VCP
sewer pipes every three years. Golden Valley has a practice of televising all Pavement
Management Program (PMP) areas and rehabilitating all sub-standard sewers in conjunction with
its PMP each year. This equates to approximately one to two miles of lined pipe and an additional
two to five miles of televised pipe per year. The City is currently planning for a full reconstruct of
all areas to be complete by 2023, pending no issues with water mains and sanitary sewers.
Restaurant grease has also become an issue in some areas of the system. Maintenance
activities have already been increased in known problem areas. Golden Valley cleans the
problem areas in the spring and fall and spot checks and flushes problematic manholes on a
weekly and monthly schedule. With increased development in certain areas of the City,
restaurant grease has been a growing problem, requiring more time and attention from
Maintenance staff. There have been some efforts to modify ordinances and policies regarding the
installation, maintenance, and inspection of grease traps. In 2015, an ordinance was adopted to
require all Food Service Facilities (FSFs) that produce fats, oils and grease to install grease
collection devices. This should be monitored and promoted to reduce the amount of grease in the
system. The ordinance is attached as Appendix C.
4.3 Recommended Maintenance Program
Because of the high percentage of VCP pipe comprising the sewer system in Golden Valley,
those portions of the system should be more closely evaluated for replacement or lining to negate
the concerns of root intrusion and to continue the maintenance schedule suggested by LMCIT.
Proper monitoring and maintenance of the existing system is an important factor in the long-term
viability of the system. Maintaining the system extends the life of the system and decreases the
likelihood of sewer backups. Sewer backups often lead to property damage claims against the
City. This results in increased costs to the City to pay those claims with associated increases in
insurance premiums. It is recommended to create a program for total system cleaning, televising
and rehabilitation to ensure the system lasts and to reduce potential expenses from
collapsed/broken sewers or other backups that result from deferred maintenance. Documentation
of condition of VCP gravity segments is recommended to be prioritized first, due to the known
2018 SANITARY SEWER COLLECTION SYSTEM COMPREHENSIVE PLAN GOLDV 139902
Page 17
issues of VCP, but it also is recommended for a full system condition baseline and regular
maintenance program.
4.3.1 System Cleaning
Cleaning practices vary from city to city depending on available budgets and the condition of the
sewer system. Practices range from annual cleaning of all sewers to inconsistent cleaning of
known problem areas. Many communities have set goals of cleaning all of its system at least
once every five years.
For reasons mentioned above, LMCIT recommends that cities clean VCP sewers every three
years, or more often when conditions require it, to minimize sewer backups. Similarly, they
recommend that other sewer systems, that are not VCP, be cleaned every five to seven years.
Establishing a jetting plan to clean approximately 37 miles per year in perpetuity in the City of
Golden Valley meets the recommendations and practices of the LMCIT and other communities.
Setting a goal of 37 miles per year allows a combination of lines requiring annual cleaning; VCP
on a three-year rotation; and all other on a five-year rotation. The City currently cleans the entire
sewer system every three years, approximately 38 miles per year, plus additional trouble areas.
The current program addresses the needs of the sewer system that are VCP and those areas
that are documented problem areas. The production rate per year is primarily controlled by two
factors:
1. Number of Staff and Outside Influences including
a. Emergency Sewer Needs
b. Emergency Water Needs
c. Natural Disaster – Cleanup efforts
2. Options to increase the amount of sewers cleaned would include:
a. Increase Sewer Maintenance Staff
b. Double Shift Current Staff
c. Contract Services
4.3.1.1 System Cleaning Costs
Cleaning costs are estimated at $2,500 per mile when contracted. A program to clean 37 miles
per year results in a contract cost of $92,500 per year. The actual cost to the City may be
different depending on the amount of work accomplished with City forces versus private
contractors.
4.3.2 System Televising
It is recommended that Golden Valley establish a televising program to televise all sewers. This
would establish a “base line” televising database for all sewers in the community. The televising
records, currently stored separately, will soon be digitally attached to City GIS to provide a tool
available to maintenance and engineering personnel.
The City has already established a practice of televising sewers in areas where street
rehabilitation or reconstruction is scheduled to occur. This allows the City to be efficient with
2018 SANITARY SEWER COLLECTION SYSTEM COMPREHENSIVE PLAN GOLDV 139902
Page 18
infrastructure management and to avoid situations that require removing portions of a newly
constructed street.
Contracts for new sewer construction should include the televising of the new sewer. A copy of
the televising should be provided to the City at the end of the project. Televising provides
baseline information for the sewer and validates service locations.
4.3.2.1 System Televising Costs
The most efficient means to do this would be to develop a televising program that coincides with
the cleaning program described above. A long term recommendation is that the City televise the
entire system every 10 years. Currently, the City televises two to five miles per year, largely
during the PMP work. A 10-year schedule equates to 12 miles per year. Televising costs are
estimated at $4,000 per mile. A program to televise 12 miles per year results in a contract cost of
$48,000 per year.
4.3.2.2 Televising Schedule
Beginning as soon as fiscally possible the City should:
· Schedule the digital televising of 12 miles of sanitary to coincide with cleaning activities in
a manner with a goal of completing the televising of all sewers in a 10-year period
· Televise sewers in streets slated for rehabilitation or reconstruction
· Schedule repeat televising as necessary in high risk areas
· Require digital televising of all new sewer pipe installation
· Develop ongoing televising program - 10 year cycle
Table 9 – Gravity Sewer Maintenance Summary
Activity Quantity Cost Frequency
Cleaning &
Jetting
37 miles $92,500/year Annually
Televising 12 miles $48,000/year Annually1
1 Ten year program. Future costs after ten years will depend on condition of the system.
4.3.3 Equipment
The general feeling is that the City has developed an equipment inventory and replacement plan
that satisfies the needs of the community. Additional needs are often more efficiently contracted
rather than owning specialized equipment. Examples of items often contracted for include
televising and the jetting and cleaning of larger sewer lines. As stated earlier, the City has
purchased a sewer lateral camera which is available for emergency inspections and flow
metering equipment to continue investigating high peak hour flows in areas identified during the
I/I Study. The City has a new sewer jet truck in the CIP for 2018 as well to continue to provide
sanitary pipe maintenance at a reasonable cost to the City.
2018 SANITARY SEWER COLLECTION SYSTEM COMPREHENSIVE PLAN GOLDV 139902
Page 19
4.3.4 Lift Station Access Procedures
The City should maintain written maintenance procedures for accessing the lift stations. The
procedures should include the following items:
· Maintain barriers or grating whenever structures are open - either temporary or
permanent
· Never enter a subsurface structure without a partner present
· Follow confined space requirements
· Check for applicable gases with appropriate meter
· Operate appropriate ventilation, either portable or permanent
· Maintain required light levels
· Make sure temporary lighting is intrinsically safe
· Make sure temporary ladders meet safety codes and are properly secured
· Use fall protection and safety harnesses
· Carry an electronic communication device such as a radio
4.3.5 Lift Station Maintenance
It is important that the City maintain an active preventive maintenance program for each station.
The program should consist of two parts: actions performed on a twice weekly basis and actions
performed annually. A SCADA system would provide more complete recording with less City staff
time. However, the City Utilities staff documents lift station condition and maintenance needs.
With the City’s significant GIS database and the current detail in lift station maintenance it is
recommended that the City consider implementation of a GIS compatible maintenance record
system.
The following maintenance tasks should be performed and recorded twice weekly:
· Visual site inspection.
· Visual inspection of wet well.
· Observe pump operation cycle.
· Record pump run times.
· Monitor system alarms.
· Inspect auxiliary equipment in dry well such as sump pump, dehumidifier, etc.
· Clean collection basket at Highway 55 Lift Station
Once per year each pump should receive a field and shop inspection, by a pump engineer, which
covers the following items:
· Check electrical condition of insulation on power cable.
· Check for function of control panel and any loose or faulty electrical connections.
· Check voltage supply between all phases on the line side of the electrical control panel
with pump off.
· Check amperage draw on all phases of the pump motor.
· Check voltage between all phases on the load side of the pump motor starter. Check
control power.
· Check condition and operation of motor thermal protectors.
2018 SANITARY SEWER COLLECTION SYSTEM COMPREHENSIVE PLAN GOLDV 139902
Page 20
· Remove submersible pumps from lift station for physical inspection.
· Check condition of upper shaft seals and inspect condition of oil.
· Check condition and operation of moisture sensors.
· Check lower shaft seals and inspect condition of oil.
· Change oil.
· Check whether impeller is loose or worn.
· Check all impeller wear rings.
· Check for noisy upper and lower bearings.
· Check damaged or cut pump cable.
· Clean, reset and check operation of the pump alternator and level sensors.
· Check for correct shaft rotation.
· Reinstall pump and check for leakage at the discharge connection.
· Observe one operating cycle.
· Prepare inspection report.
4.3.6 Lift Station Improvements
The previous Table 5 contains acceptability ratings for each sewage lift station in the City.
4.4 Inflow and Infiltration
The Golden Valley sanitary sewer collection system is part of the overall Minneapolis-Saint Paul
Regional wastewater collection and treatment system program managed and operated by the
Metropolitan Council Environmental Services (MCES). In addition to the interceptor collection
system owned by the MCES, the local sanitary collection system is jointly owned under private
ownership and the City of Golden Valley. The MCES is required under state and federal
requirements to insure all wastewater throughout the Twin Cities Metropolitan area does not
leave their interceptors and is properly treated before discharge to local receiving streams.
The City of Golden Valley previously established two goals to effectively manage their
wastewater and sanitary sewer collection system. They are consistent with the goals and
objectives of the MCES and are as follows:
Goal 1 - Provide adequate capacity to insure wastewater collected for treatment does not
leave the Golden Valley sanitary collection system causing a Sanitary Sewer Overflow
(SSO).
Goal 2 – Reduce I/I to a manageable level to maintain and reserve wastewater capacity
within Golden Valley for future development and reduce operation and maintenance each
year.
4.4.1 Background Information
The City of Golden Valley, like the many communities in the metropolitan area, has spent
considerable time and energy managing inflow and infiltration (I/I) within their sanitary sewer
collection system. The Met Council (MCES) has implemented a surcharge program which is
designed to encourage metropolitan communities to reduce inflow entering their interceptors in
order to preserve wastewater capacity for daily domestic dry weather demand flows from
2018 SANITARY SEWER COLLECTION SYSTEM COMPREHENSIVE PLAN GOLDV 139902
Page 21
municipalities they serve around the Twin Cities metro area. Prior to 2003, the Golden Valley
sanitary collection system had a history of measuring high peak wastewater flow rates during
rainfall events. As a result of the MCES Surcharge Program, peak wastewater flow rates above
MCES allowances were identified during rainfall events in September and October of 2005
resulting in the City of Golden Valley committing to an I/I abatement program to manage and
reduce their wastewater contributions to the MCES interceptors.
In 2005, the City of Golden Valley took the first step in their I/I program by completing an
Inflow/Infiltration Study to isolate the source of the inflow within the City and determine the
methods needed to identify and remove specific sources of inflow. The initial study included the
following tasks:
· Reviewed past Sanitary Sewer Evaluation Survey (SSES) work and maintenance work
completed by the City during the past 10 years
· Evaluated MCES flow rates and all calculations used to determine the volume of I/I
generated in Golden Valley
· Reviewed the City's sanitary lift station pumping records
· Implemented a flow monitoring program to determine if possible which areas have a
higher potential for I/I entering the collection system
· Installed a recording rain gauge to monitor rainfall intensity and daily storm events locally
· Installed monitoring wells or piezometers to monitor groundwater elevations around the
City
· Reviewed the existing building inspection and compliance program
· Reviewed and evaluate the City's current sump drainage collection system
· Performed a sump pump inspection program in the Manor area neighborhood of the City
· Updated the geographic information system (GIS) database with additional attribute
information for the City's sanitary sewer collection system
· Evaluated the flow monitoring data to establish a priority for future SSES activities and
quantifying potential I/I impacts within the Golden Valley sanitary sewer collection system
· Developed an I/I abatement plan to cost-effectively eliminate I/I from the City's
wastewater collection system
Following recommendations of the study, the City initiated the second step in the program which
included performing the following tasks some of which are still ongoing:
· The City has continued its cleaning and CCTV program with an emphasis on Districts 9,
10, 13, 16, and 17. Monitor the piezometer and conduct CCTV during periods of higher
groundwater or after significant rainfall events
· Met with the City of Robbinsdale to redevelop a plan to address I/I from District 19
· Developed and implemented a strategy for performing private property inspections as
part of their pavement management program. Implemented a point of sale inspection
requirement for any property transfers within the City.
· Developed financing options for the City and/or residents
· Continued with the sump drainage collection system program
· Met with MCES staff to update the St Louis Park and the Bassett Creek Interceptors.
Worked with MCES staff to implement interceptor rehabilitation on the Bassett Creek
Interceptor.
2018 SANITARY SEWER COLLECTION SYSTEM COMPREHENSIVE PLAN GOLDV 139902
Page 22
· Reviewed MCES flow monitoring results to determine if there are any significant trends
during peak hour flows or I/I since MCES surcharges will be based on data collected from
future rainfall events
· Continue to maintain records and document all I/I investigation and sewer rehabilitation
expenses in the event of an MCES surcharge in the future
· Developed a long term flow monitoring program to measure and track the success of
future sewer rehabilitation measures
· Implemented a sewer ordinance revision which strengthens the enforcement of removing
clear water (I/I) out of the sanitary sewer system and eliminated existing or future
connections to the City’s sanitary sewer collection system
For the past eleven years, Golden Valley’s private property inspection program, in addition to the
efforts to rehabilitation sanitary mains and manholes, has been successful in reducing peak
wastewater flow discharges during rainfall events. Golden Valley has taken an aggressive
approach to reducing the impact of I/I to their collection system. Prior to the beginning of the
MCES Surcharge Program, permanent flow meters operated by the MCES recorded peak
wastewater flow rates exceeding 19 million gallons per day (mgd) from the Golden Valley
sanitary sewer collection system. A typical dry weather day from the City of Golden would record
only 3 mgd on average. In 2014, after eight years of the program, a similar event in the spring
recorded less than half the peak wastewater flow rate at the same MCES flow meter location.
Although the inspection program has been very successful, due to the structure of the program,
many of the private properties addressed have been more focused on the eastern side of Golden
Valley where more of the street reconstruction programs have been completed over the past ten
years. City efforts continue to reduce the negative impacts on the system resulting from I/I. The
program has been successful in locating and repairing illegal connections to the wastewater
conveyance system. Illegal connections include foundation drains or basement sump discharging
to the sanitary sewer. As of fall 2016, the City has repaired 310 illegal sump and/or foundation
drains throughout the City. Figure 7 presents a map of the City with corrected connections as a
result of the private property program.
In addition to the work on the private sewer laterals, city staff continues to perform maintenance
and inspection on the sanitary sewer mains in the public right of way including sewer CCTV,
electro scan testing and pipe lining to reduce I/I in critical areas of the City under high
groundwater conditions and/or structural defects with the potential for future maintenance and I/I
issues.
4.4.2 Overall Sanitary Sewer Program Policy
The City of Golden Valley has adopted policies, procedures and strategies as a support to local
sewer ordinances. Operation and maintenance procedures and the adoption of new sewer
ordinance requirements through revisions dating back to August 2008 has enable the city to
improve their sanitary sewer infrastructure and reduce I/I contributions, both on the public and
private side of the system. The City’s policies serve as a guide to operate, monitor, maintain, and
rehabilitate the City of Golden Valley sanitary sewer system. These procedures are necessary to
prevent sewer backups into homes and businesses, and the natural environment. It also provides
continued compliance with local and regional standards for wastewater, including the control of
inflow and infiltration (I/I) to the system. Maintenance also protects and extends the life of the
City’s sanitary sewer system.
2018 SANITARY SEWER COLLECTION SYSTEM COMPREHENSIVE PLAN GOLDV 139902
Page 23
4.4.2.1 Subsurface Sewage Treatment (SSTS)
Very few properties have subsurface sewage treatment devices in the City (less than 5). The City
requires that properties be connected into the public sanitary sewer system in order to become I/I
complaint, at time of sale.
4.4.2.2 Local Sanitary Sewer Ordinances
Golden Valley’s current City Ordinance Section 3.30 (Appendix C) identifies the rules and
regulations relating to the City’s municipal sanitary sewer system. Subdivision 3 - Unlawful
Discharge prohibits any clear water discharges to the sanitary sewer system including any roof
surface, sump pump, footing tile or drains, swimming pool, any other natural precipitation or
groundwater, cooling water or industrial process into the sanitary sewer system or be allowed to
infiltrate into the sanitary sewer system as a result of defective plumbing or a defective lateral
sewer service. Any property owner applying for a plumbing permit is required to have an
inspection of the structure’s sump pump, footing or foundation drain discharge for compliance
with the City’s sanitary sewer system ordinance. The ordinance also requires a connection and
inspection permit and the licensing of all contractors used for installation of any new sanitary
sewer connections as a method to reduce the potential for illegal connections.
Section 3.30, Subdivision 9 of current City ordinances and policies indicate that the property
owner is responsible for the sewer service line between the mainline in the street and building or
home and is defined in the ordinance as follows:
Subdivision 9. Ownership of a Sewer Service Lateral
The property owner shall own and be responsible for the maintenance of the sanitary sewer
service lateral between the sanitary sewer main within the street and the building being
served, including the connection to the main.
This is consistent with many other communities. The City has experienced some problems
related to owner maintenance of sewer services. Most notably are sewer backups that occur
because of debris left in mainline sewers after service cleaning. The City already requires
property owners or their contractors to notify the City when maintenance is performed on
services. The compliance with this is law and difficult to enforce. Options to address this issue
include:
· Require permits for sewer service maintenance activities
· Require private maintenance companies to obtain a City license renewed on a regular
basis
Permitting each service maintenance activity would be an added administrative activity that could
become laborious. The City should consider developing a licensing program that requires
maintenance companies to obtain a City license that is renewed periodically. Conditions of the
permit should be notification of sewer maintenance staff of all activities on private and public
sewers prior to performing the maintenance activity. Failure to comply would result in revoking of
the license or prevent renewal in the future.
The City of Golden Valley continues to promote voluntary disconnection of existing foundation
drains, sump pumps, roof leaders and service lateral defects from the City’s sanitary sewer
collection system through their annual pavement management program (PMP). Other methods
supporting the ordinance used by the city to promote the reduction of I/I includes installation of
2018 SANITARY SEWER COLLECTION SYSTEM COMPREHENSIVE PLAN GOLDV 139902
Page 24
drainage pipe behind the street curb to allow individual property homeowners to connect their
sump pump discharge pipes, funding assistance to make repairs and a public program to
encourage voluntary compliance.
The City’s current sewer ordinance also includes under Section 3.31 – Certificate of Inflow and
Infiltration Compliance specific language requiring any existing buildings or structures to meet the
same requirements under Section 3.30 of the City Ordinance when there is a transfer of property
for sale (Appendix C). The point of sale (POS) program is designed to provide beneficial removal
of I/I by focusing on private property sources, which based on the initial I/I investigation was the
largest source of clear water entering the sanitary sewer system. Section 3.31 of the ordinance
addresses existing properties before the sale or transfer of the property and requires each to
obtain a certificate of compliance with the I/I ordinance or provide the means through escrow that
any work required to obtain compliance with the ordinance will be completed. The ordinance
provides the City legal authority to inspect all properties either by city personnel or a third party
acceptable to all parties.
4.4.2.3 Potential Sanitary Ordinance Revisions
The reduction of peak hourly rates during rainfall events measured by MCES at Meter Station
M117 and Long Term Flow Monitoring (LTFM) network established over ten years ago has
shown that the Golden Valley I/I program has been successful. But with the success of any
program, there are always ways to make improvements. Based on the LTFM results, the
northwest and southwest areas of the Golden Valley sanitary sewer collection system still
contribute the highest peak rates during any significant rain event. Potential changes discussed
have been some modifications to the point of sale (POS) program and changing the effective life
of the certificate of compliance. Any changes to the sewer ordinance will need to be implemented
consistent with the goals and objectives of other City programs including ongoing infrastructure
operation and maintenance activities.
4.4.3 Current and Future Measures to Mitigate I/I
The City of Golden Valley employs full time utility maintenance personnel to perform daily
operation and maintenance on their sanitary sewer collection system. Contractors are used only
as needed to perform the work outside regular maintenance activities to maintain the collection
system. The City of Golden Valley performs routine cleaning and closed-circuit television (CCTV)
inspection and performs all of the private property inspections required under the I/I program with
in-house city staff. The City has also used Electro Scan technology to isolate potential defects
and quantify I/I in a number of pipe sections around the city. The City, as part of the Infrastructure
Renewal Program, has targeted high potential I/I pipe segments for past and future lining
projects. Figure 8 presents the work completed through City’s on-going lining program and the
Pavement Management Program.
As part of a routine public maintenance program, the City of Golden Valley performs manhole
inspection, sewer cleaning and CCTV inspection to evaluate their entire sanitary sewer collection
system. Over the past ten years of the inspection program, the following issues have been found:
· Minor pipe sags through the pipe.
· Pipe cracks, roots, and poor joints in sections.
· Root blockages, debris and joint failure in isolated sections of the pipe.
· Manhole casting rings are deteriorated and in need of repair.
2018 SANITARY SEWER COLLECTION SYSTEM COMPREHENSIVE PLAN GOLDV 139902
Page 25
Sewer rehabilitation in past years has included the following remedial measures which includes
manhole replacement/rebuild to reduce the potential for I/I entering the sanitary sewer collection
system.
· Sealing between manhole castings and the manhole structures at manhole locations
outside of the bituminous pavement.
· Raising the existing manhole casting to provide access.
· Sewer lining in sewer sections with multiple poor and deteriorating pipe joints.
· Manhole cover “open pick hole” replacement
The City of Golden Valley plans to continue their current operation and maintenance program on
the sanitary sewer collection system with the goal of providing an effective and efficient piping
network and reduce the potential of I/I entering the MCES interceptor system. I/I direct sanitary
sewer connection sources from foundation drains, sump pits/pumps and roof leaders will not be
allowed by ordinance from future development, transfer of property or upgrades to the existing
plumbing structures. In addition, the City will continue their public education program to
discourage these types of connections from existing Golden Valley properties.
5 Capital Improvement Plan
The purpose of a capital improvement plan is to serve as a guide to monitor, maintain, and
rehabilitate the City’s sanitary sewer system. Primary goals of the plan include the renewal of
aging infrastructure, reduction of claims against the City related to sewer backups and continued
compliance with local and regional standards for wastewater, including the control of inflow and
infiltration (I/I) to the system. Specific recommendations in this plan include:
· rehabilitation and renewal of system components to maintain the safety, health, and
welfare for City residents, businesses and employees;
· rehabilitation of system components to improve system effectiveness;
· implementation of programs to periodically evaluate system condition;
· development or expansion of maintenance programs to ensure periodic maintenance of
the sewer system;
· continued protection of the natural environment;
· establishing policies and ordinances to protect the City’s sewer infrastructure; and
· equipment and staffing needs of the City.
5.1 Sewers
Rehabilitation of sewers in disrepair improves flow through the sewers and reduces maintenance
expenditures on the system. The proper maintenance and rehabilitation of existing sewers and I/I
reduction extends the life of the sewer, reduces City liability and reduces costly reconstruction of
the system. The current system is aged and deteriorating. Continual renewal is needed to
maintain the level of system function and to provide a safe and functional sewer system for the
residents. The work that has been done on the system has proven its worth and must continue
due to its positive impact on the system and environment.
2018 SANITARY SEWER COLLECTION SYSTEM COMPREHENSIVE PLAN GOLDV 139902
Page 26
5.1.1 VCP Sewers
It is recommended that the City continue to rehabilitate VCP sewers with pavement management
programs and implement a more aggressive rehabilitation program. As shown in Table 1, the
majority of sewers were installed over 30 years ago and are reaching the need for rehabilitation.
Most VCP sewers can be successfully rehabilitated through in-place lining. This process installs a
liner inside the pipe. Excavations are seldom necessary. The liner typically provides some
increase in structural strength of the pipe. More importantly, the liner seals joints and removes
points of access for roots and I/I. The installation of a liner typically does not affect the flow
through the sewer or reduce the capacity of the pipe.
Some areas may not be suitable for lining. Pipes with sags that limit flow through the pipe or
areas that are in extreme disrepair may require spot repairs including excavation and
replacement. Larger areas that are unsuitable for lining would require reconstruction. These
areas will be identified and quantified through the televising program.
It is recommended that televising be concentrated in VCP areas for the first three years to
develop a prioritization for the rehabilitation program. This program could conceivably begin the
year after the first areas are televised. The program may be reduced for the first years as the City
televises areas and develop prioritizations. Once a prioritization is developed, the City may
complete larger portions of the program annually to accelerate the rehabilitation program.
5.1.1.1 VCP Sewer Rehabilitation Cost
The City continues to invest in the repair and replacement of the sanitary sewer collection system
through its PMP. Because a large percentage of the collection system contains VCP pipe and a
significant amount of this pipe experiences significant root intrusion, an additional rehabilitation
program may be needed to address this issue. A budgetary number of $200,000 per mile was
used to estimate the cost of lining VCP sewers.
Much of the City has or will be addressed through the pavement management program (PMP).
Below are examples of the timeframe the City can expect based on annual expenditures for the
rehabilitation:
· $600,000 rehabilitates 3 miles per year (20+ year program)
· $1,200,000 rehabilitates 6 miles per year (12+ year program)
· $1,800,000 rehabilitates 9 miles per year (8+ year program)
Under current practices, the cost of rehabilitation would be borne by the City. Maintenance and
rehabilitation of existing sewers typically cannot be assessed. Possible funding sources include
sewer enterprise funds, franchise fees and rate increases to all users of the system.
Reconstruction of sewers often results in costs that approach 5-6 times the cost of lining. As most
sewers are over 30 years old, more funding for rehabilitation will result in lowered costs to the
City resulting from emergency repairs, backups and other resulting issues. In addition to current
funding, the City is continually investigating other funding opportunities for infrastructure
rehabilitation.
The City is currently conducting relining operations in conjunction with the Pavement
Management Program (PMP). Future zones that will be televised and reconstructed if required
are identified on the Pavement Management Capital Improvement Plan, located in Appendix B.
The City is currently prioritizing the reconstruction in accordance with available funds.
2018 SANITARY SEWER COLLECTION SYSTEM COMPREHENSIVE PLAN GOLDV 139902
Page 27
The City should televise and inspect areas scheduled for rehabilitation prior to contracting for the
work. This will identify areas that may need reconstruction, spot repairs, or manhole
rehabilitation.
5.1.2 VCP Sewer Services
The City has experienced root problems with sewer services similar to those occurring in the
sewer mains. The property owner owns sewer services from the building to the sewer main and is
typically responsible for the maintenance and rehabilitation of its service. The cost to line services
would exceed the cost of lining mainline sewers. Options for rehabilitation include lining or
excavation.
The sanitary sewer work during the PMP program was developed out of construction feasibility
and need to reduce I/I but also can include VCP mainline sewer rehabilitation. VCP services can
be repaired at the same time as street PMP programmed construction. The result will be a
rehabilitated system that reduces maintenance costs for both the City and property owners. The
City will benefit from the rehabilitation of sewer services through reduction of I/I and the
minimization of root cuttings from service maintenance that end up in the mainline sewer, often
creating additional maintenance needs for the City or, in some cases, sewer backups.
Current discussions are occurring to change the POS program and changing service condition
assessment frequency. It is recommended to follow through with this change in inspection
frequency to clarify ordinance regulations.
5.1.2.1 VCP Sewer Service Rehabilitation Cost
The cost of rehabilitating service lines will exceed the cost of mainline rehabilitation. The
anticipated cost to line sewer services is estimated at $90 per lineal foot for service lines.
The property owner owns the sewer service line from the house to, and including, the wye
location on the main. Likewise, the maintenance of the services is typically the responsibility of
the property owner. The City has worked with local and state officials to develop a method to help
property owners deal with the cost of rehabilitating their sanitary sewer laterals. To date, only
limited funds are available to property owners to deal with this cost.
Table 10 – Sewer Summary
Activity Quantity Cost Frequency
VCP Mainline Sewer
Rehabilitation 6 miles $1.2 mil/year Annually1
VCP Service
Rehabilitation
4,4802
services
$7,000 per
service As Required3
1 12-year rehabilitation program.
2 Estimated remaining number of services per MCES Meter Review and Analysis
technical memorandum
3 Property Owner cost unless subsidized by City.
2018 SANITARY SEWER COLLECTION SYSTEM COMPREHENSIVE PLAN GOLDV 139902
Page 28
5.1.3 Estimated Cost of Trunk Facilities
The City has constructed the necessary trunk facilities to serve the community. The remaining
undeveloped land in the community will be served with sanitary sewer from existing mains. The
City typically installs the necessary sanitary sewer pipes to serve the development area. The cost
of this is typically paid for by the developer through special assessments without expense to the
City.
5.2 Lift Stations
The adequacy of each station was evaluated during the last comprehensive plan update against
the following nine (9) parameters:
· Station Hydraulic Capacity
· Safety
· Potential for Sewer Back-up
· Pump Review and Capacity
· Wet Well Physical Condition
· Valve Vault or Dry Well, Physical Condition
· Electrical Components
· Instrumentation/Control Issues
· Suitability of Location
The criteria by which each of these parameters was evaluated as discussed in Section 2.
An acceptability rating scale of 1 to 5 was established for the evaluation criteria listed above for
each of the three (3) stations. A rating of 1 is excellent; a rating of 2 is good meaning the station
is better than the average lift station in the metropolitan area; a rating of 3 means it is similar to
an average station in the metropolitan area; a rating of 4 indicates this parameter is below
average, and a rating of 5 is unacceptable and the condition should be corrected in the near
future. It must be understood that rating scores are subjective and different individuals would
likely give different scores for any given parameter. Also, no universal standard exists. However,
since the goal of the rating system is to establish a sense of relative need rather than concise
determinations, the evaluations are deemed suitable for this study.
5.2.1 LIFT STATION IMPROVEMENTS
Table 5 contains acceptability ratings for each sewage lift station in the City. All the stations have
an overall rating of better than the industry average. Individual parameters in each of the stations
contain a range of moderate to unacceptable ratings. Such deficiencies can most likely be
corrected individually at each station. The decision of which to pursue depends upon the severity
of the individual deficiencies.
No major repairs are recommended at this time, outside of regular maintenance and inspection
activities. For future planning the Highway 55 lift station is located in the floodplain and should be
relocated or flood-proofed in the next 5-10 years to remove issues caused by flooding events.
2018 SANITARY SEWER COLLECTION SYSTEM COMPREHENSIVE PLAN GOLDV 139902
Page 29
5.2.1.1 Schaper Lift Station
The following items are rated below average for the Schaper Lift Station and should be corrected
within the next 3 to 5 years:
· Provide security from public damage
· Install a concrete valve vault to contain the station’s valves, install access hatch on the
structure
· Add safety railing around wet well or provide safety grating on wet well
The following items which are rated average for the Schaper Lift Station will likely require
correction within the next 6 to 10 years:
· Replace the piping and valves
· Replace 2” discharge line with minimum 4”, per 10 States Standard
Any parameters which received a rating of above average quality are not listed as requiring
improvement during the next 10 years in the capital improvement plan.
5.2.1.2 Highway 55 Lift Station
The following items which are rated unacceptable for the Highway 55 Lift Station should be
addressed within the next two years:
· Replace collection basket that requires multiple cleanings per week with another solution
· Install grinder pump to reduce issues caused by ragging
· Install LED lights
· Lift station is located in flood plain and needs relocation
The following items are rated below average for the Highway 55 Lift Station and should be
corrected within the next 3 to 5 years:
· Provide safety grating on wet well
The following items which are rated average for the Highway 55 Lift Station will likely require
correction within the next 6 to 10 years:
· Increase access area to valve and pump location
· Install generator for lift station
Any parameters which received a rating of above average quality are not listed as requiring
improvement during the next 10 years in the capital improvement plan.
5.2.1.3 Woodstock Lift Station
The following items are rated below average for the Woodstock Lift Station and should be
corrected within the next 3 to 5 years:
· Provide safety grating on wet well
· Replace the piping and valves
The following items which are rated average for the Woodstock Lift Station will likely require
correction within the next 6 to 10 years:
· Provide drive-up service access
· Replace pumps (one of two has been replaced)
2018 SANITARY SEWER COLLECTION SYSTEM COMPREHENSIVE PLAN GOLDV 139902
Page 30
· Replace 2” discharge line with minimum 4”, per 10 States Standard
Any parameters which received a rating of above average quality are not listed as requiring
improvement during the next 10 years in the capital improvement plan.
5.3 Ten Year Plan Summary
A summary of the costs related to the proposed capital improvements plan (CIP) for the Golden
Valley water and sanitary sewer budget can be found on the City of Golden Valley website. The
costs are based on the existing program requirements currently implemented and proposed
activities to address future capital improvements including aging infrastructure, lift station
improvements and inflow/infiltration reduction.
Future CIP planning should consider the following items for continued I/I abatement and
renewal/rehabilitation of the gravity sanitary system:
· Gravity sanitary sewer lining
· Service connection repairs
· Private property inspection, including voluntary and Point-of-Sale
· Operation and Maintenance, including sewer cleaning and televising
· Lift station improvements, included relocation of the Highway 55 Lift Station
dmk
Figures
Figure 1 – Pipe Material
Figure 2 – Sanitary Sewer Pipe Diameters
Figure 3 – Sanitary Lift Stations
Figure 4 – Proposed 2040 Land Use
Figure 5 – 2013 Temporary Flow Meter Locations
Figure 6 – d/D Pipe Capacities at Max Flow
Figure 7 – I&I Status Map
Figure 8 – Sanitary Sewer – Sealed Manholes – Lined Main
EXISTING SANITARY SEWER NETWORKPipe Material
2040 Comprehensive Plan
Figure1
Legend
Sanitary Pipe Material
UNKNOWN
Cast Iron Pipe
Cured-in-Place Cast Iron Pipe
Cured-in-Place Ductile Iron Pipe
Cured-in-Place Reinforced Concrete Pipe
Cured-in-Place Vitrified Clay Pipe
Ductile Iron Pipe
High Density Polyethylene
Inner Circle Pipe
Lock Joint Pipe
Prestressed Concrete Cylinder Pipe
Polyvinyl Chloride
Reinforced Concrete Pipe
Vitrified Clay Pipe
Vitrified Sewer Pipe
Sanitary Manhole
0 1,850 3,700925Feet
Path: S:\FJ\G\Goldv\139902\5-final-dsgn\50-final-dsgn\90-GIS\MXDs\MXDs for Report\Pipe Material_8.5x11.mxdO
Map by: ELSProjection: Source: SEH, City of Golden Valley, Hennepin County
This map is neither a legally recorded map nor a survey map and is not intended to be used as one. This map isa compilation of records, information, and data gathered from various sources listed on this map and is to beused for reference purposes only. SEH does not warrant that the Geographic Information System (GIS) Dataused to prepare this map are error free, and SEH does not represent that the GIS Data can be used fornavigational, tracking, or any other purpose requiring exacting measurement of distance or direction or precisionin the depiction of geographic features. The user of this map acknowledges that SEH shall not be liable for anydamages which arise out of the user's access or use of data provided.
Project: GOLDV 139902Print Date: 10/3/2017
SANITARY SEWERPIPE DIAMETERS
2040 Comprehensive Plan
Figure2
Legend
Pipe Diameter (inch)
6
8
9
10
12
15
16
18
20
21
24
27
30
32
36
41
42
Sanitary Manhole
0 1,850 3,700925Feet
Path: S:\FJ\G\Goldv\139902\5-final-dsgn\50-final-dsgn\90-GIS\MXDs\MXDs for Report\Pipe Size_8.5x11.mxdO
Map by: ELSProjection: Source: SEH, City of Golden Valley, Hennepin County
This map is neither a legally recorded map nor a survey map and is not intended to be used as one. This map isa compilation of records, information, and data gathered from various sources listed on this map and is to beused for reference purposes only. SEH does not warrant that the Geographic Information System (GIS) Dataused to prepare this map are error free, and SEH does not represent that the GIS Data can be used fornavigational, tracking, or any other purpose requiring exacting measurement of distance or direction or precisionin the depiction of geographic features. The user of this map acknowledges that SEH shall not be liable for anydamages which arise out of the user's access or use of data provided.
Project: GOLDV 139902Print Date: 8/29/2017
?
?
?
SANITARY LIFT STATIONS
2040 Comprehensive Plan
Figure3
Legend
?Sanitary Lift Station
Sanitary Manhole
Pipe Type
City Forcemain
City Gravity
MCES Forcemain
MCES Gravity
0 1,850 3,700925Feet
Path: S:\FJ\G\Goldv\139902\5-final-dsgn\50-final-dsgn\90-GIS\MXDs\MXDs for Report\LiftStation_8.5x11.mxdO
Map by: ELSProjection: Source: SEH, City of Golden Valley, Hennepin County
This map is neither a legally recorded map nor a survey map and is not intended to be used as one. This map isa compilation of records, information, and data gathered from various sources listed on this map and is to beused for reference purposes only. SEH does not warrant that the Geographic Information System (GIS) Dataused to prepare this map are error free, and SEH does not represent that the GIS Data can be used fornavigational, tracking, or any other purpose requiring exacting measurement of distance or direction or precisionin the depiction of geographic features. The user of this map acknowledges that SEH shall not be liable for anydamages which arise out of the user's access or use of data provided.
Project: GOLDV 139902Print Date: 8/29/2017
U n io n P acific Railroad
Canadian Pacific Railroad B
u
rlin
gto
n
N
o
rt
h
e
r
n
Sant
aFeRailroadCanadianPacificRailroadC anadianP acificR ailroadC anadia n P a c i f i c R ailroad
U nion Pacific R a i l r o a d
456766
456770
456766
456740
456740
4567156
4567102
§¨¦394
§¨¦394
Æÿ55
Æÿ55
Æÿ100
Æÿ100
£¤169
£¤169
C I T Y O F N E W H O P E C I T Y O F C R Y S T A L
C I T Y O F R O B B I N S D A L E
CITY OF MINNEAPOLISC I T Y O F S T . L O U I S P A R K CITY OF MINNEAPOLISCITY OFST. LOUIS PARKCITY OF ROBBINSDALECITY OF CRYSTAL
CITY OF ST. LOUIS PARKCITY OF CRYSTALC I T Y O F N E W H O P E
CITY OF PLYMOUTHCITY OF MINNEAPOLISC I T Y O FST. L O U I S P A R KCITY OFPLYMOUTH34th Ave N
Medicine Lake Rd
BroggerCir Knoll St Lilac Dr NLilac Dr NThotland Rd
Mendelssohn AveWinnetka Ave NSunnyridgeCir
Western Ave (WaterfordDr)Independence Ave NHillsboro Ave NZealandAve
N
Aquila Ave NOrkla DrWisconsin Ave N23rd Ave N
KalternLn
Wynnwood Rd
25th Ave N
Bies DrJonellen Ln
Sumter Ave NRhodeIslandAveNPatsy Ln Valders Ave NWinnetka Ave NDuluth St Florida Ave NSandburg Rd HeritageCirKentley Ave
Wynnwood Rd
Kenneth Way
Unity Ave NB a s s e ttC r e e k D rQuailAveNScott Ave NLilac Dr NLowry Ter
33rd Ave N
Noble Ave NCross LnQuail Ave NScott Ave NRegent Ave NToledo Ave NIndiana Ave N(BridgewaterRd)(WaterfordCt)(Hid
d
e
nLnkesPkwy)Meadow Ln NFrance Ave NTopel Rd
Unity Ave NPhoenix St
Parkview TerWelcomeAveNWelcomeC i r
W e l c o
meAveNXeniaAveNZ
a
n
e
Av
e
NLindsay St
St Croix Ave N
St Croix Ave N
Yosemite Ave NWolfberryLnBrunswick Ave NCounty Rd 102Westmore Way
Green Valley Rd
Louisiana Ave NKelly DrMaryland Ave NOlympia St
Winsdale St
Winnetka Ave NYukon CtWesleyDr Wesley Dr
Plymouth Ave N
10th Ave N
Kelly DrVarner CirPennsylvania Ave NFaribault StQuebec Ave NRhode Island Ave NPhoenix St
Knoll St
County Rd 156Jersey Ave NCountryClubDr
P h o e n ix S tDouglas DrGeorgia Ave NCou
n
ty
R
d40
Hampshire Ave NWestch esterCirJersey Ave NGardenParkQuebe
c
Av
e
SWinnetka Ave NDecatur Ave NWally St
Ensign Ave N7th Ave N
Golden Va ll e y Rd Decatur Ave N10th Ave N
Natchez Ave NXerxes Ave N (Mpls)Olson Memorial Hwy
Cutacross Rd
Olson Memorial Hwy
Earl St Gettysburg Ave NFlag Ave NGettysburg Ave NFlag Ave NHampshire
LnJersey Ave NFloridaAveNEdgewoodAve NDouglas DrDuluth Ln
Scott Ave N
Drake Rd
Lowry Ter Kyle Ave NQuail Ave NPerry Ave NNoble Ave NCulver Rd
Dawnview Ter
Dona Ln
Noble Ave NScottAveNGl
e
ndenTer
Culver R d
Marie Ln W
Hampton Rd
RegentAveNPerryAveNLilac Dr N27th Ave N
Merribee Dr Kyle Ave NHampton RdOrchard Ave NMarie Ln E
Lee Ave NKyle Ave NDresde
n
L
n
Kew
anee W
ay
26th Ave N
Me
ri
d
i
a
n
D
r
P
a
r
k
v
i
e
w
B
l
v
d Terrace LnManor DrMcNair DrByrd Ave N
B
a
s
s
ettCreekDrMaryHillsDrZenith Ave NVista DrXerxes Ave NYork Ave NS t M a rg are t D rZephyr PlXerxes Ave NXerxes Ave N (Mpls)(SkylineDr)Spruce TrKyle PlWe s t b r o o k R d Noble Ave Frontage RdCircleDownOrchard Ave NPerryAveNWindsorWayWestbend RdUnity Ave NG reenview
LnRegent Ave NSorell Ave
Frontenac Ave Quail Ave NSt Croix Ave N
Winsdale St StCroixCirAngelo DrUnity Ave NAlfred Rd Spring Valley RdN
o
b
l
e
DrMajor DrAdeline LnAngelo DrAngelo DrWills PlToledo Ave NOttawa Ave NKillarney DrZane Ave NWoodstock A v e Woodstock Ave
Loring LnYosemiteAveN
Turners Crossroad NWestchesterCirN
F
r
ontageRdFlorida Ave NHampshire Ave NPlymouth Ave N
Idaho Ave NOlympia StHampshire Ave NArcher Ave NKelly DrPennsylvania Ave NDuluth St Xylon Ave NWisconsin Ave NSumter Ave NBoone Ave NWinsdale St
Meadow Ln N
DahlbergD r
Woodstock Ave
Poplar Dr Meadow Ln NChatelain Te r
Natchez Ave NEdgewood Ave NK i n g s t o n C i r
Glenwood Ave
Country Club DrValdersAveNOrkla DrElgin PlDecaturAveN
Indiana Ave NRoanoke CirWestern Ave Western Ave
Harold Ave
Loring Ln
WestwoodDrNArdmoreDrWinsdale St
Knoll St
Oak Grove CirDuluth St Zane Ave NDouglas Dr27th Ave N
Bonni
e
Ln
Medicine Lake Rd
Madison Ave W
Nevada Ave NLouisiana Ave NCounty Rd 70
ValdersAve NValders Ave N23rd Ave N Rhode IslandAve NCounty Rd 156Medicine Lake Rd
Mendelssohn Ave NHillsboro Ave NIndependence Ave NWinsdale St
Olympia St
Naper St
St Cr o i x Ave N June Ave NLegend DrLegendLn
General Mills BlvdBoone Ave NSunnyridge LnGlenwood Ave
Janalyn CirJanalyn CirGlencrest Rd Meadow Ln SWayzata BlvdWestwood Dr SWestwoodLn
StrawberryLnOttawa Ave NOttawa Ave SNatchez Ave S Tyrol Crest
SussexRdJune Ave SWayzata Blvd
FairlawnWayNatchez Ave SOttawa Ave SPrincetonAve SDouglas Ave
Circle DownTurners Crossroad SGolden Hills Dr
Laurel AveLaurel Ave
Hampshire Ave SDakota Ave SBrunswick Ave SKing Hill RdGlenwood Ave
Colonial Dr
Medicine Lake Rd
FloridaAveSAlley
Market StMarket St
Louisiana Ave SLaurel AvePennsylvania Ave SRhode Island Ave SSumter Ave S Winnetka Ave SUtah Ave SGregory Rd
Hanley RdVermontAve SWi
sc
o
ns
i
n
Ave SGeneral Mills BlvdHanley RdRidgeway Rd Winnetka Ave SLaurel Ave QubecAve S County Rd 102Nevada Ave SColonial RdLouisianaAveSKentucky Ave SJersey Ave SHeathbrookeCir
G le n w o o d P k w y
(Carriage Path)Xenia Ave SFlorida CtLilacD
r
NOlson Memorial Hwy
Schaper Rd
Lilac Dr NG old en V alley R dLilac Dr N(WoodlandTrail)(Wat.Dr)
BassettCreek Ln
(NobleDr)France Ave S (Mpls)N Frontage Rd
S Frontage Rd Olson Mem HwyAdair Ave NAdair Ave NWestbrookRd
34th Ave N
Mendelssohn Ave NAlley-Unimproved--Unimproved-
-Unimproved-
Wayzata Blvd
Wayzata BlvdBoone Ave NG o ld e n
V a lle y D rSchullerCirN F r o n t a g e R d
S F r o n t a g e R d
Rhode IslandAve N Pennsylvania Ave SAlley
Alley
(Private)AlleyAlleyLilac Dr NXerxes Ave N (Mpls)Harold Ave WestwoodDr
N
Ardmore DrT
h
e
o
d
o
r
e
Wirt
h
P
k
w
y
Tyrol Tr(Mendelssohn Ln)(WesleyCommonsDr)AlleyS Frontage RdAlley
AlpinePassBren
n
e
r
PassDou g la s Ave
QuentinAveSTyrol TrailTyro
l
T r a ilSunset Ridge
Westw
oodDrS
RavineTrTyrol
Trai
l
J analyn C irMadd
usLn
MeadowLnS
AvondaleRdBurntsideDr S u nnyridgeLnBru
n
swickAveNBrookviewPkwySLeberLn
C loverleafDrCloverLnCl
overleaf D
r TheodoreWirthPkwyBeverly Ave
B u rn tsideDrSpringValleyRdT
oledoAveN
Duluth
St
GoldenValle y R dSpringValleyCirCo u n t y Rd 66
(Island Dr)(IslandDr)GoldenValley
Rd
TheodoreWirthPkwyW irth P k w y
W
ay
z
a
t
a
Blvd
G le n w o o d PkwyPlymouth Ave N (Mpl s)ZenithAveNCrest
vi
ewA
ve
By r d A v e N
Hwy 55
Glenwood Ave
Bassett CreekDrLegend DrLeeAveNLeeAveNMajorAveNLeeAveNE l m daleRd
Adell A veM in n a qua Dr M innaquaD r
ToledoAveNOrdwayMa rkayRidge Orchard Ave NN o r m a n d y P l
CherokeePlQuailAveNRegentAveNTr ito n DrT r ito n D rL o w r y T er
3
3rd
AveN
SandburgLn LamplighterL
n
BrookridgeAveNValeCrestRdWinfieldAveCounty Rd 66
P
ark
Place
Blv
d
(SLP)I-394SF r o n tage R d (SLP )Xeni
aAveSCounty Rd 70
L ilacD rNLilacDrNLilacD
r
NConstanceDrWConstanceDrESandburg Rd
S Frontage Rd
N Frontage Rd N Frontage RdOlsonMemorialHwy
S F r o n ta g e R d
O ls o n M e m o r ia lH w y
OlsonMemorialHwy Valleywo
odCirYosemite CirLawn TerR
adisson Rd
Turnp ike
RdA
lle
y
AlleyTu rn pikeR
d Col
on
ial
Dr
GlenwoodAve
BrunswickAve NMeanderRd
MeanderRdIdahoAveNHaroldAve
Wayzata Blv d
I-394SFrontageRd
I-394 S Fron t a g e R d
WayzataBlvd
Edgewo
odAveSIdahoAveNCortlawnCirWCortlawn Cir S
CortlawnCirN
Dawnv i e wTerCounty Rd 70
EdgewoodAveSK in g CreekRdKentu
ckyAveNLouisianaAveNMarylandAve SRhodeIslandAveSRidgewayRdEwald T e rWestern Ter
FieldD r Brookview Pk w y N Harold Ave
HalfMoonDr
RidgewayRdB e tty CrockerDr
G oldenValleyR d(B a s sett Creek
Blvd)Lewis Rd
10th Ave N
EllisLnPlym outhAveN Plymouth Ave N
Faribault St
OrklaDrCastleCt Winnetka Heights D rKelly
Dr
Maryland
A
v
eNHampshire Pl
Olympia St
Oregon Ave NQuebecAveNValdersAveNOrklaDrKnoll S tWisconsin
AveNWinsdaleSt
Mandan
AveNCounty Rd 102AquilaAveNAquila
AveNZealandAveNJulianne Ter J u lia nneTerPatsy Ln
WisconsinAveNAquilaAveNWestbend Rd
WinnetkaHeightsDr
ZealandAveNOrklaDrValdersCtValdersAve NWinnetkaHeights Dr
A q uilaAveNZealandAveNS cottAveNRose
ManorDuluthSt
Duluth St CavellAveNEnsignAveNEl g in Pl
23r d Ave N
Medle y L n
(Medley Rd)
(Medley C ir)H illsboroAveN(English Cir
)(MayfairR
d)(Kin
g
sV a l l ey Rd)(K ings
V
al
leyRdE)(KingsValle
yRd W )
(S
tr
o
d
e
n
C
ir)(Tamarin Tr )
(Mar
qui
sRd)WheelerBlvdSki Hill
R
d MajorCirLeeAveNMajorAveNRhodeIslandAveNG o ld e n V alleyR d
G o ld e n V a lle y R dG olden V alleyR d
Hwy100H
w
y
1
0
0Hwy100Hwy100Hwy100Hwy100
H w y 3 9 4
Hwy 394 Hwy 394
Hwy 394 Hwy 394ColoradoAve NHwy169Hwy169Hwy169Hwy169Hwy169Colorado Ave SGoldenHills DrPaisleyLnPaisleyLn
I-394NFrontageRd I -3 9 4 N Frontage Rd
WayzataBlvd
I-394SFrontag e R d
York
AveNValeryRdW
asatchLn
Hwy 55
Hwy 55
H w y 5 5
O l s o n M e m o r i a l H w yHwy 55
H w y 5 5
County Rd 40
County Rd 40 Glenwood A v e
CountyR d 4 0
CountyRd40
GoldenValley R d
C o u nty Rd 66ManchesterDr
County Rd 156OregonAveS24th Ave N
LilacDrNRoanokeRdLouisianaAveN
Turnpike RdLilacLoop (Sunnyridge Ln)WisconsinAveN
GettysburgCt(Laurel Pt)
(Laure lCurv)M
edi
c
i
neLakeBranchIkePond
Colonial Pond
Ottawa Pond
Glen-woodPond
EgretPond
DuluthNorthPondLilacPond
DuluthPond
St.CroixPond
Chicago Pond
LilacPond
Pond CTurners PondGlen 1 Pond
DuckPond
Loop EPond
Loop FPond Sweeney LakeWirth LakeTwin LakeB a s s et t C ree k
Hampshire Pond
DecolaPond A
NorthRicePond
West RingPond
Cortlawn Pond
DecolaPonds B & C
Westwood Lake
SchaperPond
SouthRicePond
East RingPond Bassett CreekDecolaPondE
DecolaPond F
BreckPond
NatchezPond
MinnaquaPond
WirthPond
Toledo/AngeloPond
HoneywellPond
StrawberryPond
DecolaPond D
Ba
s
s
ett Cr
e
e
k
BassettC
r
e
e
k
Basset
t
Cr
eekBassettC r e e k
BassettC reekSweeney L akeBranchSweeney Lake BranchNW LoopPondBoone Avenue PondMain Stem
Pond B
Pond C
Bassett Creek NatureArea Pond
Medicine Lake
BrookviewPond A
Hidden LakesPond 1
Pond 2A
Pond 2B
Pond 3
Schaper BallfieldPond
Pond O
Pond J
Spirit of Hope Church Pond
GoldenRidgePond
Golden Meadows Pond
SoccerFieldPond
WestPond
201GeneralMillsPond
HaroldPond
Medicine Lake Road Pond
Xenia MitigationPond
10th AvePond
SpringPond
Briar-woodPond
LaurelHills Pond
JFB NWPond
LogisPond
BrownieLake
BirchPond
MinnaquaWetland
GrimesPondBassett CreekPark Pond
SweeneyLakeBranchPond M
Pond F
Pond DP
ond E
BrookviewGolf Course
LionsPark
WesleyPark
Sochacki Park
SchaperPark
ScheidParkHampshirePark
MedleyPark
Briarwood
Laurel Avenue Greenbelt
Glenview TerracePark
North TyrolPark
Western AvenueMarsh
Nature
Area
GeartyPark
Sandburg AthleticFacility
NatchezPark
ValleyView ParkPennsylvaniaWoods
BassettCreekNature Area
WildwoodPark
IsaacsonPark
SouthTyrol Park
SeemanPark
AdelineNature Area
YosemitePark
StockmanPark
Golden OaksPark
St CroixPark
LakeviewPark
SweeneyPark
Perpich CenterBall Fields
Ronald B. Davis Community Center
Brookview Park
Westwood HillsNature Center (SLP)
(MPRB)
Theodore WirthRegional Park
Eloise Butler WildflowerGarden and Bird Sanctuary
Wirth LakeBeach
Golden RidgeNature Area
General Mills NaturePreserve
General Mills ResearchNature Area
BooneOpenSpace
GoldenHills Pond
MadisonPond
SouthTyrolPond
LibraryHill
IdahoWetland
GeorgiaOpen Space
ArdmoreNorth&SouthPonds
JanalynPond
MeadowPond
S p a c e
Plymouth
O p e nAvenue
OrklaOpenSpace
PicnicPavilion
Chalet
SochackiPark (Three Rivers Park Dist.)
Bassett Valley Open Space
ByrdBluffOpenSpace
→
FishingDock
PaisleyPark
XeniaOpenSpace
DahlbergOpenSpace
Minnaqua Greenbelt
(TRPD)
(Mpls Park & Rec Board)
City of Golden Valley, Engineering7800 Golden Valley RoadGolden Valley, MN 55427-4588763-593-8030www.goldenvalleymn.gov
2040Future Land Use Plan
0 820 1,640 2,460 3,280410Feet
I
Print Date: 10/3/2017Sources:-Hennepin County Surveyors Office for Property Lines (2017) -City of Golden Valley for all other layers.
Proposed Land Use Categories
Residential
Low Intensity (less than 5 units per acre)
Moderate Intensity (up to 8 units per acre)
Medium Intensity (up to 20 units per acre)
High Intensity (20 or more units per acre)
Mixed Use
Flexible Use
Commercial
Office
Retail/Service
Industrial
Light Industrial
Industrial
Open Space
Active Use
Passive Use
Institutional
Assembly
Civic
Medical
Right-of-Way
Railroad
Right-of-Way (public and private)
Road Centerline
Water
Open Water
Creek
!!!!Drainage Way
Ditch
DRAFT
?
?
?k
k
k
k
k
k
k
k
k
k
k
k
k
k
FM8
FM7
FM6 FM5
FM4
FM3
FM2
FM1
FM8B
FM8A
FM5A
FM4BFM4A
26thandFrance
2013 TEMPORARYFLOW METER LOCATIONS
2040 Comprehensive Plan
Figure5
Legend
k 2013 Flow Meter Locations
Sanitary Manhole
Sanitary Pipe
?Sanitary Lift Station
0 1,850 3,700925Feet
Path: S:\FJ\G\Goldv\139902\5-final-dsgn\50-final-dsgn\90-GIS\MXDs\MXDs for Report\Temporary Flow Meters_8.5x11.mxdO
Map by: ELSProjection: Source: SEH, City of Golden Valley, Hennepin County
This map is neither a legally recorded map nor a survey map and is not intended to be used as one. This map isa compilation of records, information, and data gathered from various sources listed on this map and is to beused for reference purposes only. SEH does not warrant that the Geographic Information System (GIS) Dataused to prepare this map are error free, and SEH does not represent that the GIS Data can be used fornavigational, tracking, or any other purpose requiring exacting measurement of distance or direction or precisionin the depiction of geographic features. The user of this map acknowledges that SEH shall not be liable for anydamages which arise out of the user's access or use of data provided.
Project: GOLDV 139902Print Date: 8/29/2017
?
?
?
d/D PIPE CAPACITIESAT MAX FLOW
2040 Comprehensive Plan
Figure6
Legend
Sanitary Manhole
?Sanitary Lift Station
Sanitary Forcemain
Depth over Diameter
0.00 - 0.60
0.60 - 0.80
0.80 - 1.00
0 1,850 3,700925Feet
Path: S:\FJ\G\Goldv\139902\5-final-dsgn\50-final-dsgn\90-GIS\MXDs\MXDs for Report\d.D_MaxFlow.mxdO
Map by: ELSProjection: Source: SEH, City of Golden Valley, Hennepin County
This map is neither a legally recorded map nor a survey map and is not intended to be used as one. This map isa compilation of records, information, and data gathered from various sources listed on this map and is to beused for reference purposes only. SEH does not warrant that the Geographic Information System (GIS) Dataused to prepare this map are error free, and SEH does not represent that the GIS Data can be used fornavigational, tracking, or any other purpose requiring exacting measurement of distance or direction or precisionin the depiction of geographic features. The user of this map acknowledges that SEH shall not be liable for anydamages which arise out of the user's access or use of data provided.
Project: GOLDV 139902Print Date: 8/29/2017
!!!
!!!!!
!!!!
!!!!
!
!
!
!
!!!!!!!!!!!!!
!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
!!!!
!!!!
!!!
!!!!
!
!
!!!
!!!
!!!!!!!!!!!!!
!
!
!!!!!
!
!
!
!
!
!!!!
!!!!!!
!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
!
!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
!
!
!!!!!!!
!!!!!!!!!!
!!!!!!
!!!
!
!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!Breck School
SandburgLearning Center
Perpich Center for Arts Education
MNDOT District Office & State Highway Patrol
NobleElementarySchool
CalvaryLutheranChurch
Speak theWord Church
10th AvenueCold Storage
School ofEngineeringand Arts
GovernmentCenter &Fire Station #1
MeadowbrookElementarySchool
King of GraceLutheranChurchand School
Churchof St.MargaretMary
Good ShepherdCatholic Church&Good ShepherdSchool
GoldenValleyLutheranChurch
Spirit ofHopeChurch
Oak Grove Church
HennepinCounty SheriffCommunications
Hennepin CountyLibrary
Fire Station#3
Valley Community Presbyterian Church
ChristianLifeCenter
UnityChristChurch
RedeemerReformedChurch
FireStation#2
Valley of PeaceLutheran Church
Kingdom Hall of Jehovah's Witnesses
Golden ValleyCemetery
Golden ValleyHistoricalSociety
BrookviewCommunity Center& Golf Shop
Breck IceArena
WaterReservoir
U.S.Post Office
Loveworks Academy forVisual & Performing Arts
C I T Y O F N E W H O P E C I T Y O F C R Y S T A L
C I T Y O F R O B B I N S D A L E
CITY OF MINNEAPOLISC I T Y O F S T . L O U I S P A R K CITY OF MINNEAPOLISCITY OFST. LOUIS PARKCITY OF ROBBINSDALECITY OF CRYSTAL
CITY OF ST. LOUIS PARKCITY OF CRYSTALC I T Y O F N E W H O P E
CITY OF PLYMOUTHCITY OF MINNEAPOLISC I T Y O FST. L O U I S P A R KCITY OFPLYMOUTH34th Ave N
Medicine Lake Rd
BroggerCir Knoll St Lilac Dr NLilac Dr NThotland Rd
Mendelssohn AveWinnetka Ave NSunnyridgeCir
Western Ave (WaterfordDr)Independence Ave NHillsboro Ave NZealandAve
N
Aquila Ave NOrkla DrWisconsin Ave N23rd Ave N
KalternLn
Wynnwood Rd
25th Ave N
Bies DrJonellen Ln
Sumter Ave NRhodeIslandAveNPatsy Ln Valders Ave NWinnetka Ave NDuluth St Florida Ave NSandburg Rd HeritageCirKentley Ave
Wynnwood Rd
Kenneth Way
Unity Ave NB a s s e ttC r e e k D rQuailAveNScott Ave NLilac Dr NLowry Ter
33rd Ave N
Noble Ave NCross LnQuail Ave NScott Ave NRegent Ave NToledo Ave NIndiana Ave N(BridgewaterRd)(WaterfordCt)(Hid
d
e
nLnkesPkwy)Meadow Ln NFrance Ave NTopel Rd
Unity Ave NPhoenix St
Parkview TerWelcomeAveNWelcomeC ir
W e l c o
meAveNXeniaAveNZ
a
n
e
Av
e
NLindsay St
St Croix Ave N
St Croix Ave N
Yosemite Ave NWolfberryLnBrunswick Ave NCounty Rd 102Westmore Way
Green Valley Rd
Louisiana Ave NKelly DrMaryland Ave NOlympia St
Winsdale St
Winnetka Ave NYukon CtWesleyDr Wesley Dr
Plymouth Ave N
10th Ave N
Kelly DrVarner CirPennsylvania Ave NFaribault StQuebec Ave NRhode Island Ave NPhoenix St
Knoll St
County Rd 156Jersey Ave NCountryClubDr
P h o e n ix S tDouglas DrGeorgia Ave NCou
n
ty
R
d40
Hampshire Ave NWestch esterCirJersey Ave NGardenParkQuebe
c
Av
e
SWinnetka Ave NDecatur Ave NWally St
Ensign Ave N7th Ave N
Golden Va l l e y Rd Decatur Ave N10th Ave N
Natchez Ave NXerxes Ave N (Mpls)Olson Memorial Hwy
Cutacross Rd
Olson Memorial Hwy
Earl St Gettysburg Ave NFlag Ave NGettysburg Ave NFlag Ave NHampshire
LnJersey Ave NFloridaAveNEdgewoodAve NDouglas DrDuluth Ln
Scott Ave N
Drake Rd
Lowry Ter Kyle Ave NQuail Ave NPerry Ave NNoble Ave NCulver Rd
Dawnview Ter
Dona Ln
Noble Ave NScottAveNGl
e
ndenTer
Culver R d
Marie Ln W
Hampton Rd
RegentAveNPerryAveNLilac Dr N27th Ave N
Merribee Dr Kyle Ave NHampton RdOrchard Ave NMarie Ln E
Lee Ave NKyle Ave NDresde
n
L
n
Ke
w
anee W
ay
26th Ave N
Me
ri
d
i
a
n
D
r
P
a
r
k
v
i
e
w
B
l
v
d Terrace LnManor DrMcNair DrByrd Ave N
B
a
s
s
ettCreekDrMaryHillsDrZenith Ave NVista DrXerxes Ave NYork Ave NS t M arg a re t D rZephyr PlXerxes Ave NXerxes Ave N (Mpls)(SkylineDr)Spruce TrKyle PlW e s t b r o o k R d Noble Ave Frontage RdCircleDownOrchard Ave NPerryAveNWindsorWayWestbend R dUnity Ave NG reenview
LnRegent Ave NSorell Ave
Frontenac Ave Quail Ave NSt Croix Ave N
Winsdale St StCroixCirAngelo DrUnity Ave NAlfred Rd Spring Valley RdN
o
b
l
e
DrMajor DrAdeline LnAngelo DrAngelo DrWills PlToledo Ave NOttawa Ave NKillarney DrZane Ave NWoodstoc k A v e Woodstock Ave
Loring LnYosemiteAveN
Turners Crossroad NWestchesterCirN
F
r
ontageRdFlorida Ave NHampshire Ave NPlymouth Ave N
Idaho Ave NOlympia StHampshire Ave NArcher Ave NKelly DrPennsylvania Ave NDuluth St Xylon Ave NWisconsin Ave NSumter Ave NBoone Ave NWinsdale St
Meadow Ln N
DahlbergD r
Woodstock Ave
Poplar Dr Meadow Ln NChatelain T e r
Natchez Ave NEdgewood Ave NK i n g s t o n C i r
Glenwood Ave
Country Club DrValdersAveNOrkla DrElgin PlDecaturAveN
Indiana Ave NRoanoke CirWestern Ave Western Ave
Harold Ave
Loring Ln
WestwoodDrNArdmoreDrWinsdale St
Knoll St
Oak Grove CirDuluth St Zane Ave NDouglas Dr27th Ave N
Bonni
e
Ln
Medicine Lake Rd
Madison Ave W
Nevada Ave NLouisiana Ave NCounty Rd 70
ValdersAve NValders Ave N23rd Ave N Rhode Island Ave NCounty Rd 156Medicine Lake Rd
Mendelssohn Ave NHillsboro Ave NIndependence Ave NWinsdale St
Olympia St
Naper St
S t C r o i x Av e N June Ave NLegend DrLegendLn
General Mills BlvdBoone Ave NSunnyridge LnGlenwood Ave
Janalyn CirJanalyn CirGlencrest Rd Meadow Ln SWayzata BlvdWestwood Dr SWestwoodLn
StrawberryLnOttawa Ave NOttawa Ave SNatchez Ave S Tyrol Crest
SussexRdJune Ave SWayzata Blvd
FairlawnWayNatchez Ave SOttawa Ave SPrincetonAve SDouglas Ave
Circle DownTurners Crossroad SGolden Hills Dr
Laurel AveLaurel Ave
Hampshire Ave SDakota Ave SBrunswick Ave SKing Hill RdGlenwood Ave
Colonial Dr
Medicine Lake Rd
FloridaAveSAlley
Market StMarket St
Louisiana Ave SLaurel AvePennsylvania Ave SRhode Island Ave SSumter Ave S Winnetka Ave SUtah Ave SGregory Rd
Hanley RdVermontAve SWi
sc
ons
i
n
Ave SGeneral Mills BlvdHanley RdRidgeway Rd Winnetka Ave SLaurel Ave QubecA ve S County Rd 102Nevada Ave SColonial RdLouisianaAveSKentucky Ave SJersey Ave SHeathbrookeCir
G len w o o d P k w y
(Carriage Path)Xenia Ave SFlorida CtLilac
D
r
NOlson Memorial Hwy
Schaper Rd
Lilac Dr NG o lden V alley R d
Lilac Dr N(WoodlandTrail)(Wat.Dr)
BassettCreek Ln
(NobleDr)France Ave S (Mpls)N Frontage Rd
S Frontage Rd Olson Mem HwyAdair Ave NAdair Ave NWestbrookRd
34th Ave N
Mendelssohn Ave NAlley-Unimproved--Unimproved-
-Unimproved-
Wayzata Blvd
Wayzata BlvdBoone Ave NG o ld e n
V a lle y D rSchullerCirN F r o n t a g e R d
S F r o n t a g e R d
Rhode IslandAve N Pennsylvania Ave SAlley
Alley
(Private)AlleyAlleyLilac Dr NXerxes Ave N (Mpls)Harold Ave WestwoodDr
N
Ardmore DrT
h
e
o
d
o
r
e
Wirt
h
P
k
wy
Tyrol Tr(Mendelssohn Ln)(WesleyCommonsDr)AlleyS Frontage RdAlley
AlpinePassBren
n
e
r
PassDou g la s Ave
QuentinAveSTyrol TrailTyr
o
l
T r a ilSunset Ridge
Westw
oodDrS
RavineTrTyrol
Trai
l
J analyn C irMadd
usLn
MeadowLnS
AvondaleRdBurntsideDr S u nnyridgeLnBru
n
swickAveNBrookviewPkwySLeberLn
C loverleafDrCloverLnCl
overleaf D
r TheodoreWirthPkwyBeverly Ave
B u rn tsideDrSpringValleyRdT
oledoAveN
Duluth
St
GoldenValley R dSpringValleyCirC o u n t y Rd 66
(Island Dr)(IslandDr)GoldenValley
Rd
TheodoreWirthPkwyW irth P kw yW
ay
z
a
t
a
Blvd
G le n w o o d P kwyPlymouth Ave N (Mp l s )ZenithAveNCrest
vi
ewA
ve
By r d A v e N
Hwy 55
Glenwood Ave
Bassett CreekDrLegend DrLeeAveNLeeAveNMajorAveNLeeAveNE l m daleRd
Adell A veM in n a q ua Dr M innaquaD r
ToledoAveNOrdwayM a rkayRidge Orchard Ave NN o r m a n d y P l
CherokeePlQuailAveNRegentAveNTr ito n DrT r ito n D rL o w r y Te r
3
3rd
AveN
SandburgLn LamplighterL
n
BrookridgeAveNValeCrestRdWinfieldAveCounty Rd 66
P
ark
Place
Blv
d
(SLP)I-394SFr o n ta ge R d (SL P )Xeni
aAveSCounty Rd 70
L ilacDrNLilacDrNLilacD
r
NConstanceDrWConstanceDrESandburg Rd
S Frontage Rd
N Frontage Rd N Frontage RdOlsonMemorialHwy
S F r o n t a g e R d
O ls o n M e m o r ia lH w y
OlsonMemorialHwy Valleywo
odCirYosemite CirLawn TerRadisson Rd
Turnpike
RdA
lle
y
AlleyTu r n pikeRd Col
on
ial
Dr
GlenwoodAve
BrunswickAve NM eanderRd
MeanderRdIdahoAveNHaroldAve
Wayzata Blv d
I-394SFrontageRd
I-394 S Fron t a g e R d
WayzataBlvd
Edgewo
odAveSIdahoAveNCortlawnCirWCortlawn Cir S
CortlawnCirN
Dawnv i e wTerCounty Rd 70
EdgewoodAveSK in g CreekRdKentu
ckyAveNLouisianaAveNMarylandAve SRhodeIslandAveSRidgewayRdEwald T e rWestern Ter
FieldD r Brookview Pk w y N Harold Ave
HalfMoonDr
RidgewayRdB e t ty CrockerDr
G oldenValleyR d(B a s sett Creek
Blvd)Lewis Rd
10thAve N
EllisLnPlym outhAveN Plymouth Ave N
Faribault St
OrklaDrCastleCt Winnetka Heights D rKelly
Dr
Maryland
A
v
eNHampshire Pl
Olympia St
Oregon Ave NQuebecAveNValdersAveNOrklaDrKnoll S tWisconsin
AveNWinsdaleSt
Mandan
AveNCounty Rd 102AquilaAveNAquila
AveNZealandAveNJulianne Ter Ju lia nneTerPatsy Ln
WisconsinAveNAquilaAveNWestbend Rd
WinnetkaHeightsDr
ZealandAveNOrklaDrValdersCtValdersAve NWinnetkaHeights Dr
A q uilaAveNZealandAveNS cottAveNRose
ManorDuluthSt
Duluth St CavellAveNEnsignAveNEl g in Pl
23 r d Ave N
Medle y L n
(Medley Rd)
(Medley C ir)H illsboroAveN(English Cir
)(MayfairR
d)(Kin
g
sV a l l ey Rd)(K ings
V
al
leyRdE)(KingsVall
e
yRd W )
(
S
tr
o
d
e
n
C
ir)(Tama rin Tr )
(Mar
qui
sRd)WheelerBlvdSki Hill
R
d MajorCirLeeAveNMajorAveNRhodeIslandAveNG o ld en V alleyR d
G o ld e n V a lle y R dG olden V alleyR d
Hwy100H
w
y
1
0
0Hwy100Hwy100Hwy100Hwy100
H w y 3 9 4
Hwy 394 Hwy 394
Hwy 394 Hwy 394ColoradoAve NHwy169Hwy169Hwy169Hwy169Hwy169Colorado Ave SGoldenHills DrPaisleyLnPaisleyLn
I-394NFrontageRd I -3 9 4 N Frontage Rd
WayzataBlvd
I-394SFrontag e R d
York
AveNValeryRdW
asatchLn
H w y 5 5
Hwy 55
H w y 5 5
O l s o n M e m o r i a l H w yHwy 55
H w y 5 5
County Rd 40
County Rd 40 Glenwood A v e
CountyR d 4 0
CountyRd40
GoldenValley R d
C o u nty Rd 66ManchesterDr
County Rd 156OregonAveS24th Av e N
LilacDrNRoanokeRdLouisianaAveN
Turnpi ke RdLilacLoop (Sunnyridge Ln)WisconsinAveN
GettysburgCt(Laurel Pt)
(Laure lCurv)14161520
1515
1507
1500
1407
1307
1301
201
300
308
316
320
324
400
408
428
234
214
206
4007
4008
4013901
2000
2040
2080
2100
2150
220039302565
2575
1365130513201
33513551350
13019210912013051301
7504751275207528130013257612762476327704771277207728130013017812782013005
8
4
5
5
8
2
5
5
8
0
5
1
3
1
9 1325133453055355 1335
6105
6100
9143
9141
9145
960 4
7
6
0
4
7
4
0
4
7
2
0
4
7
1
0 47004711
3239
1300 Hidden Lakes Pkwy
5121730
8401
201761076507435
1300
820
8501
8301
1286
230
261
831816
4000
631 Ottawa1041
1316411741114101 401514451439143514291309131113151317
1509
1307
152214111319400713041
3
0
81
312132013244121
1410
1521
1515
1439
14251415140 61414
1512
1508
15001450
1420
1416
1400
1370
1340
1545
1407
1401
1323
1440
1
4
1
010151001915
901
817
801
709
800
708
700641
717
817 901
333
301
209
201
117
109
101
25100
108
116
200
210
216
316320
400
404
416
420 425411
405401325
321
315
313
901
921
931
1001
79157935811510
20 15
11 10
6250900
800
8900
312
700
5960
5500 Wayzata Blvd57055635
5601
5610
45104005501
57471525
1335
5901
6051
60016015111
131
151
205250101-2091-31
1
3
0
5
1
3
1
5
1326
132013181300
1250
5335
504512311201
1141
1131
1121
43254335
131543104330440044104440
4450
44354415433543254315432043304
3
4
04
3
5
0440044204417440143494343
432144104420443045104345433 64324431243104315432543354345441544254435444545151320
4500450145204525453545454555
4530
1529
1505
1445
45154 520141513451340
1410
1420
1430
1440
1500
1510
1520
1530
4600
1345
1405
1415
1425
1435
1445
1505
1515
1519
1535
46301550
1540
1530
1520
1510
1450
1430
142014001423
1435
1445
1505
1525
1535
1545
1549
1450
1510
1520
1530
1540
48001545
15351525
1515
517 609 617
500 23230874307710242
7407
7405
7403 73277325
7329
7315
7309
7303
225
1917
2001
20052009
601
516
510
416
408
314
300
212
204
108
616
700
800825500
520529
501
421448
510
520450045124524460046124624
1406
1412
1418
1424
1430
1335
1341
1401
1407
1524
1512
8030
1501
1515
2230
2220
2200
2160
2140
2120
2100
8 3 4 0
8310834019358305833583551500
1516
1532
1540
75517601
1541
1525
1515
1501
1508
1516
1540
1548
2530
2560
2590
2600
2610
26202615
2605
2585
2545
2505
2425
2415
2405
124
130
146
210
220
230
240
300
316
320
2230
88458905
2225
604
614
4 7 0 04720609
601
551
501
433
417
109
101
111
117
4125
4135
4140 4120 125
105
120
40104020
4025 4015
39404012402081801840821181718151813181038110813081508170821080918101222022002150214081402001202120412125214521552205222522201532
1540
77597805
1541
1533
1525
1517
1509
7800
1545
1525
1445
1435
2365
2345
2325
23052400
2360
2340
2320
5790
5770
22055785
57755755
1104
1108
1140
1200
1224 711071307210723013008460 8440
8420
2115
609613617621625629633637621611601
5411
5301523110
4620
35
25
15
5
4700
80
30
18
47365
15
2585258535184085308510845084308415843585058515853585558601807080002400-1 0 24019010
23318341 Mendelssohn Ln
2425-31
2412-26 2430-362440-6225102500
9405
1515
1445
1435
1425
1415
1401
1345
1435
1425
1415
14011337
13251320 2230
582523002330236024002420244025002540258026002610
1910
1119
1136
1220
1200
1120
1102
5600 5510
12155905 / 59552005
2015
2105
2125
4627
4617
4605
4515 4501
341339
335
331
327
323
317
311 310
516524532540548
534 52215211520151215101
5111
4050
4690
469684358425841584051635
1625
1600
160416081612161616201624
161524602500
252025402
5352545855525402555
8945234023302320
8910
741074151375135513251318133813351317131813151333133666001900
1860
1850
1840
1830
1820
1810
1800
1805
1815
1825
1835
1845
1855
1720
8200809081008140816081808135 1437
1536
1528 20202000810042204004221
421542054127412141174113315
30341124124420080008010801680248032217319
455
505
605
675
705
775
805
1409
1405
1401
1325
1321
1317
13091309
1313
1317
1321
1325
1401
1405
2520
88092545
252525052445242524302440250025208955 24352505673313106834682468086748673867436801680968256837144614501445
1435
1425
1415
530053305350
1408
1420
1428
1438
2366580654065256585666566956530656066306237105
115
125
135
2021
2001
1941
1921
1901 1910
1920
1940
2000
2020
2040
7445
7405
7355
4231424122412200222022404005395539414050
2360
2 9 4 0
2942
2944
132013101865
19051900
1860
1850
1840
1830
1820
1810
532153315349
5201
5350
772478307732 76007650
410405
409
413411R.I.
7840
7540
120
100
50
2015
45
75
105
205
245
7605
7541
7521 574057015635562556155605550055305550560056105620505
445
9145
1529
1525
1521
1517
1513
1509
1505
15011500
1512
1514
1516
1520 23052300850785112380852185202385851023652325850585408520693569517001702370531320692069346950700470247054141014301815
1825
1835
1845
1855
1905
512550315025501550051640
6800119
125
3300 Lilac
Wayzata Blvd
209
215
221
231
301
309
319
329
210
220
230
230
210
150
130
90
50 30
50
110
130
150
210
230
250
5804
5806
5808
701
9171000836083008200101510011025
1110
1130
1629
1625
1621
1617
1613
1609
16011601
1605
1609
1613
1617
1621
1625
2485
25052540
2500
2490
2460
2430
8350
2390
2370
2350
2330
2305
2325
14407055703570197001693169256738674268006808682468486845500049204930494049414927491349071807
1511
1501490 11659
1520
825
675
7701
648
716
732
814820
830
950
1030
1040
1060
1041
150
130
110 115
135
155
215
235280260240
220
200
180
1294
1296
1298 1299
1297
1295
1293
1291
1289 1288
1290
1292 80267900
1636163693451636
1628
9200
1815
1817
9345
17201800
1804
1808
1812 25508040802024257979800580158045232081008040802080002315683368176801674567376900142169051525
6909
14056716673067251510
1525 1535
1605
1629
1649
1634
1624
1614
1604
1550
493152495311400
408
501
421
409
327
319
315
209
201
117
109
4
433
890189098913891789258933439415891289208928410 89457320
6045740920132016
2012
2004
1916
1908
1904
9250 9200
1905
7529133613377613762976377705771377217729132578137821132014066621653365256517143565006528660066206601653965256515493749451401
1415
1431
1445
1449
1455
4901
1
5
3
8153014601448
1444
520516512
508
5004200
509
517
525
529
42054237
524
5166432
6501
66816701
5105305406839545
537
525
68206827
6830
6805340
110
12021252115211089452130
2150
2200
8945
9000
2117
7601
1435
1425
1417
1409
14011400
1408
1416
1424
1432
1438
1446
1500
632063166312630014356300631663266400640864241506153664391420
1410
1400
1425
1415
1401
5145
5020504051005124515514481545
6401
6500
6490644564556475649565156535656566156655667466301031
1039
1101
1109
1117
1123
1201
1211
1223
1140
1148
1200
1210
1220
1030
1034
1038
1100
2145842584458455846584852200846084508430
1447
1425
1409
78001400
1408
1420
1430
1440
7840
1508
1520
1536
7845
1600160565186534661066201610
1616
1620
64156405630563256400
5025
1440
1430
1422
1416
1410
1400
1335
1433
1441
1449
1444
1346
1500
225
245
305
325
345
365
400
350
340
320
300
240
220
200
1294
1296
1298
11 2 011101160
9200
9400
9211
9303
1200800080081106
5640 5620
1107
22102135214521552165220522452240846584452145
132513151316
1334
1402
1404
1420
1430
1440
1500
15067315
1515
1445
1670 652065306540
1701
1675
1655
1645
67006724673067386746680015201515
1501
1449
1445
1437
1435
1425
1415
1345
1380
1400
1416
1426
56305700469285
287
205
5625
407
401
305
425555545
925
965 110110411031102110011001
1005
1012
1008
1004 1005
1031
1221
1209
1419
1425
1437 807080008001807181018131816182018209821519401356744514201430144015001520153074451 3 1 0
66201300
1310
132018201840185018601886160518907105712571557205176017811785 1436
240
244
280
308
400
408
416
509
409
401
309
213
201
117
105
15
44094333
43134309430142634243 411516
9
17
101 100
8
504512 516520528532536600529 535 541
4101411542014211
52351542234301
511505
401
208
310
410041084116421242244300430843163012252212172132092052012287700
6125
224216212208204100 109
117
201
209
301
309
501
817801709700
716
800
808 816 824 832
10451031808
816
820
1009
1001
9201000102010301100112240124022410241121017
824
800
708
640
44004414450045084520
4606
4409450545154527454146014609450145114521
4530
508
400451145214541
4641
4633
4617 4616
4624
4632
46404646
603
515
501
405408
416
508
518
201
209
309
317
409 400
316
308
300
208
200
108
100 101
104
108
109
120
116
209
217
315 4540452045104500210
200
115
100
4505132446258470947174817
124
116
108
100
4901
5000
5010
5020
5030
5031
5011
5001
5010
50015410
810
516508500424525
535 616 632 624 616
608
1430
600
2125
549
601
605
522152115201511151015020510051205200521052205230530053105320540054105420721
701
621
500
416 541
53552551750950152215211520151215111
5100
512052005212221
115
2540
104
112
200
208
220
310
400
410417401
301243
235
227
316
300
301
221224
300301
225224
300
320
330
336
400
316
322
328
336
437
43342734132131133234043094301430843124164264 3 6 4 1 6
431743094303535
521
505420
529
537
541
521517513
501
536
532528524
512506
500
412142242174213420541354113449401410860041164124420042124212421630025042154125245240
4016
312
303
220
1835
203
207
221
204200
211
205
185
215 221
219
201165
145
12
41154240
4270
222
200
166
124
112
100
24
20
8
4300
101
115
127
209
219212
200
130
120
100101
115
125
139
209212
200
122
114
100
4600
119
131
201
215212
200
124
112
4620
22
64612460045201
15
45014535460146154625204846Glenwood
123 Ottawa
3017159
5301
5317540554155423
5
53005400
5430
200Lilac
4969
4959 4725482549014949
4979
52215231420
412
305 315 335
455515525529516501
505
517
533
540
532
524
5301
415
355
325
300 310 320 330
400
422
440
502 6504200
41504300-4500
4600
470047084950
610
650
9001305910
4721
600
604
810800
4841
4821
901
4
8
0
04
8
2
04
8
4
04900
4920
924
900
920
930
940
920921931
941
930
940
14
18 22 2679451523 25 790710
20
30
400800980178021333741
814
800
730
700
620
600
524
516
500
420 425
501
525
615
701
731
801
825 824
800
724
700
614
524
500
424
4004017950300
216
100
36
3027
29
31
43
36
40
135
45
33
2524
38
150
200
210
222
300
310
322
675
615
505 500
640
420
700
8100
855
832
901 900
7925
8085
11201114110811001 03 0 1101
81011015
1005
8401
8421
8441
88058905 5057860-8040
7901
82008224
600
8845
8811
1795
1785
1775
400
424 GMB
325
339
345
347
424421
400
408
416
424
432
440
8815
4238951433
9031901091009300
8950
89009000
9147
9326
9400
8 3 5 0 115012006153
622-50 656-766806207108008509009100
9105
905
201
835
701
730
742
925
801
745
605 600
750
800
830
8806
8804-40
8511
8100
825084598400
8200
8240749-8619458043
81098125
81458175
5418
8121
4016445 6415640764016400
410
6443
420
6427
6421
6412
6424
440
435
425
415
6810
420
410
350
6447
64536461
6489 649866576677669745068006
81068206837
43064956481
6475
6473
646964386444
645064586466
6478
6484
6490
6494 650167456809682369096817680768506 8 4 0 6 8 3 0
6820681568256 8 3 568457101704070205015215457055720572257245522510685568606921693170017025714671567182720072187236732473307040
69007031
7045
7215
7151
7201
7111
70356930
540
555 550
693170017021
7100
7031
70307028
71207140720072207240
7345
550
530
520
510
7330501
511
521
531
541
7450-627430-42742174757505
7500
550
7812
7700-52
7650
73407420410
424
440
2520
2436
7501-337601-55
7
3
3
5
7345
74017350
7340
73257310 7310730074257445746573307340735073607400
7410
7420
74507440
74007500
205
155
135
125
115
70007040110
120
130
150
200
245 2406935
232 230
220200
150
130
120
110
69406900
101
121
125
131
221
225
220
200
130
122
114 682068386900691069456941692969256905300
10068406820680965006530330
325315
240
310
320
245
235
2052016573
130
120
110
80
45
85
115
125
135
200
140
120
110
4055
105
115
125
145
205
63306324632065206500644864106454650565256545663367012156741661066206630670667166736
715900
850
905
6660 6620
64806440 6400 6300
7800
7700 61126800
6920
69256955
6944
901
801 Louisiana
6901
705
7200
850
2458
2476
700071007400701750
710
840
1040
755075007630
1033
915
843
815
743
723
611600
642
716
732
820
840
914
10301023
911
843
801
743733
723
643
623
400
420
500
7700521
501
421
7721
7701
200
77007740225
775178017751 20
50770077807800
7
801
120
220
7800
7801
420
500
520515
417
401784 0225
145
105
7811
7810
7811 7470
7490
7500
750125
65
105
7600 75117501250
310
330
350
420440460
500
4807621401
421
501
521 520
501
521
700
421
7400
265
235
205
11257485746570
90
110
130
150
170 175
155
135
115
95
75 90
110
130
150
174
190
210
230 235
215
195
175
155
135
115
95 70
110
130
150
170 175
155
135
115
75
270
250 255
235
215
155
133
115
55
35
250
234
210
150
132
110
50
30
255
235
215
155
135
115
55
51522514535
6510
145
130
120
110
105
115110
100
66707701
830
730
7800
7700
7600
7650G.V. Rd
2564
2400
605
7575
7501
7520
7001
6300
6051
62102301009
210
160
140
120105
125
145
205
225
245
305
325
345
365360
340
322
300
240
220
200
140
120
61016145
125
145
205
140
120
100
75
5526
112
205
125117
109
25
15 6140 6100 6030
50
115124
208
209
200
210
309220
216
217
211
165
115
31
6010 59105924
26
116
124
204
316324238
211217
219
227
235
245
241
230
220
225
215
2092402502602705845581557455705560555455535 55255520553655405600562056305700479
489
501
511 565521
580058305850574157215717571557145726573043945944957295735450
510
520
5740424
434
440444
500
520
5801
297
435
445
517
525612581562506507406120-346140-586180-906160-786102-12
6100
5900
573856305612621
1120
1115
1101
5601
235
1
1
3
0114012001220
1230
11141100104010301020101010071015102310311037104310491101110711151149
1145114111371131112511201
1
2
4 121580158025810181158125124012801286128412821291129912938515852585351295
1297
1289
1278
1288
1290
1292
1300130083301300
13101315
1305
8 5 4 0 1301130113091315
1320133013421346
9000
130013001300
6320
6400
6420
1140
1115
1105
6 73 9
6 7 3 1 6535 1111630063066316633664006424643665006508652266206431
1136
1126 641964056319
63066432
6
5
0
4
6
5
1
4
6
6
1
8
6
6
2
0
1037
1031
1005671210101030104011001125
1205122712311229
112111111205
1117
1101
1039
1020
1030
1038
1042
1108
1116
1124
1200
1210
12281227
1211
1201
1125
1115
11091101
1037
1025
1023
1015
1006
1012
1016
1020
1028
7635
1100
11041108
1112
11241200
1210
122477011213
1209
1115
11111109
1105
1101
77051035
1027
1021
1017
1013
1009
1005
10011000
1006
1008
1012
1016
1020
10241028
1034
7711
1100
11041108
1112
1200
1210
1218
77297801
1219
1211
1203
1201
1119
1109
1105
78011035
1031
1025
1021
1017
1013
1009
10017820
1004
10081012
1016
1020
1024
7310740074207440
6509651566016621670967176721673167411200
1170 6 2 0 0
6 2 1 2
6161
6 0 0 5
1
1
0
9
1
1
0
0
1
1
1
4
1
2
5
0
92510005735
6020
6
0
9
4
6
0
9
2 5527560556255645554056005620564056605505552556055615562556555705
1101
1105
1109
1113
1117
1121 1125 1129
11321114
1110
1135
1255
1240
1300
6 0 0 0
6 1 0 0
1300
102510305341532153 015221
1030 102110201031
1041 10405131511150511030
1040
1100
1120
1130
1140
1200
1230
1242
510411001101110052001100530053205340 1
3
3
0
12301200
1140
1130
1120
1231
1201
1141
1131
11211120
1130
1140
1200
1413
1524
1520
1516
1512
1508
1504
8640
1320133513258541
1315
1319
1325
1401
1405
1409
1415
1 3 3 0
14211426
14161412
1340
1354
1361
1 4 1 9
2016
2012
2008
2004
1916
1912
1908
1904
1900 9400
1905
1909
1913
1917 8345192084508500852085402105204120312021201120011921192019402000202020302040205022502220220021402130800021052135 643565096525653166056625664167092501
2505
2515
2527 2530
2520
1230
1325
1315
1305
1301
124551101240
1300
1310
1320
13401325
1317
1311
1301
1241
1231
1221
1201
1141
1131
11211120
1130
1140
1200
1220
1230
1300
1320
1340
13601355
1335
1315
1305
1231
1221
1201
1141
1131
11211120
1130
1140
1200
1220
1240
1300
1336
1 4 8 01490
1475
1415
1810
911791139109
18101705
1625
1461
2205
181151294
9
1
0
2045Bruns.
1 4 9 5149933653355
3 345
3 315
3 307
2542
3 3013300
3 312
3 320
3 330
3 338334 891109114910791119115911991339137910391419145
1455
1495
1 4 9 41498
1435
1455
1745
1629
1434
2117-25
2101-32206-82100-142105-152112-182105-232129-352137-92136-82140-22 1 0 0 -6
2108-26
2105-152101-32205-172
2
0
1-3
2
2
0
0
-
2 2200-62141-32 2 0 9 -1 52218-322229-312214-16
2209-112205-72 2 0 1 -3 2201-32205-72209-11
2213-5
2206-122210-2228
2114-202113-192101-112311-17
2300-18
13211325
1319
1313
13071306
1312
1318
13241321
1315
13091314
1320
13321329
13201330 14198015802514301341 134813381327
1333
1339
1412
1406
1400
1342
1336
1330 1401
1413
1425
1439
7901
7900
1500
1413
1407
14011400
1406
1412
1418
1424
1401
1407
1413
1417
1425
1431
1336
8135
8134
1523
1529
1535
8001
1701
1720
7950
1536
1530
1524
1518
1512
1506 1513
1519
1525
1531
1539
1545
7900
1611
1821
1811
1801
1721
1711
1701
1621
1820
8210
8201
818381638133
8113
8106
8104
8102
8100
81208
1
4
0
816081318161819182011740
1760
1810
1830
1850
1870
1890
1721
1741
1761
1811
1831
1851
1871
8001
8220
1870
8231
184583158335835583658405186583208340836084008410842583158345835583658405854085408530851084451865185518451620 83258335834516408400835083408330832083101701
1721
174118258320834083508360840084208450
83258335834583558365840584108430 8420844585258545182518151745
1725
8445
1619162315201504
1500 1501
1505
1509
1515
1517
1521
1529
1537
8600
1505
1509
1515
1517
1521
1525
1529
1533
1537
1533
1504
1510
1516
1520
1524
1528
1532
15361536
1532
14201 40114238641
1325
1401
1405
1409
1308
1312
1316
1320
1324
1400
1404
14081408
1400
1328
1324
1320
1316
1312
13081304
1308
1312
1316
1324
1400
1404
1408
1313
1317
1325
1401
1405
1409
9405 1412 1409 1412 1413 1412 1413
1526
1530
1529
1521
1517
1513
150115011500
1504
1508
1512
1516
1524
15329405
1529
1521
1513
1517
1505
9450
1504
1508
1512
1516
1520
1524
1528
1532
1601
1605
1609
1613
1617
1621
1633
1625
1629
16371633
1637
1629
1633
1600
1604
1612
1614
1616
1620
1624
1628
1632
9200
1604
1608
1612
1616
1620
1624
1630
1600
1604
1608
1612
1616
1620
1624
1628
1632
1625
1621
1617
1613
1609
1605
16019450
1604
1608
1612
1616
1622
1624
1816
938518211817
1813
1809
1805
1801
1721
1717
1713
1709
1705
17011700
1704
1712
1716
1720
1800
1804
1808
1812
18161820
2005
2009
2013
2016
2008
2004
1916
1912
1904
1902
9350 9300
19051913
1915
1909
1917
2005
2009
2013
2017 9185
2012
2008
2004
2000
1916
19121908
1904
9150 1901
1905
19091913
1917
2001
2005
2009
2013
2017 2016 8805
2130
2140
2150216022208815
2225
2205
2155
2145
8810
2130
2150
2210
900190159025
9000
2145
2233
2255
224022052145
8920884088608815882588458875904090309020901890369050892590259035904583502245220521652155214521252110212021402150216022102240 2140
2215
22358405 2 2 4 0
83658401843584558475
2050
2030 2010 2000
1950
1940
8400
193519552005202520352045
2000
1940856086001935195522052225225522502200216021402120204020202000200520252045212521452165220522237 9 2 579552255822522502255
20418071810119008216820481908160813081009315
2500-809101
2405242525102430
85308540
2 4 2 5
2405238523652355233523252301 236023402320230023002320235023702380240024302315
2335
2345 2360
2340
2320 2315
2335
2355
2365
88158845
23202340
2360
2380239 02400
2420
2440
2510253087552525
2435
24252420
2450
25012465253084458465850585352550257525458805241588302400241589302420237589252300893023008830230123452365238524058101815924002380236023402315233523552375240023902370235023302335235523758300
2425
2
4
4
5 2405
2445
2345
2365
2385
2405
2435
2465
2 4 9 5
2505
2545
8401 2585 8239
25008140810024452440248024858025
248024502440232079802337
23258229
801580458105813581552300834023058250820081808140810080408020800023002409
2145
240024458101813981798181
752114097514752414001301
7501
7501
1541
1533
1517
1509
7500
7501
1433
14251424
1432
1440
7701
1541
1517
1509
7700
1447
1421
1401
1420
1440
7759
7740
1508
1516
1425
1415
1401
1345132513151310132013401400
1410
1420
1430
1440
1510
15307205
13321400
141614301440150015107345740115251515150514451435
6540651413091335651565256545662113096712672413356717672370547024700469506934692013091335692170577037701970016951693569211505690869166938700870207030683768256809674767436733674268006812682468346840153668376717143515056720673067251535140565086520653266101535630763196331640164251436140064326424641864086400632864116405632563131336
1536
66211680 63126332641064226404
70
7740 6430644065006510653565271625
1619
1615
16071640
1650
68246830684218651855184518251815180517451725174018001810178917841782177617727080711071307150721072307250724572257205714571257105706516017100712071307140713571257115155171107120713072001715
1701
1601 16561666167617021710
1720
1730
1800
1720
17501745
1775
1815
1845
1879
1885
1895
1788
1792
1796
1820
18001801
183118501820
18001640
1618
1550
1510
1601
1571
7310734015501560163515701569
1559
74001550
1560 17511610
1601
7850 1552 1552 1552 1551
1559
1565
1601
1611
1621
1701
1711
1721
1801
1811
75011820
1810
1800
1720
1710
1700
1620
1610
1600
1566
1560
1551
1559
1565
1601
1611
1621
1701
1711
1721
1801
1811
76011820
1810
1800
1720
1710
1700
1620
1610
1600
1566
1560
1551
1559
1565
1601
1611
1621
1701
1711
1721
1801
1811
18211820
1810
1800
1720
1710
1700
1620
1566
1560
1551
1559
1565
1611
1621
1701
1711
1721
1801
1811
18211820
1720
1710
1700
1620
1610
1600
1560 19851900
1940
1935
1925
72007100712078402120
2140
21422200
2202
19001920194020002020204020412021200119411921190119001920194020002020204120212001194119211901190019201940200020202040202120011941192176001900
1920
1940
2000
2020
2041
2905
2065
2035
20152005
1965 1945
1925
7310 72101920
1940
2000
2020
2040
2060
2080
2100
2120
2140
2155
2145
2135
21257350
7400
74502120
2140
2200
2220
735074007450755176017751 75007520754076007620764077007720774078007810783178357851785322402400-25682300
1 General Mills Blvd
2500
2550 7825230025516325633964092508
2502
2417
355-385
360-390
300-330
305-335
2429
2501
2511
2531
1305
1315
1310
1316
1324
5
7
3
5
5
7
2
5
1800
1816
1830
1840
4
8
3
9
1825
48464
9
0
049
20494049601900
1920
2260505 55 0 5 0
404
2 4 0 5
2 3 5 5
2285
5100
2115
2157
2201
2225
510151255130
5
3
1
9
2300-202301-11
2220 2209
2201
21212205220021652160 39316845
229171473921100 220522014000395 02560
2540
2520
2500
2460
2440
2420
240051252750
2740
2720
2700
2 6 8 0
2 6 7 0
2 6 6 0
2 6 5 0
2 6 0 0 2 6 0 5
2 6 2 5
2 6 5 5
2 6 7 5 283643004320
2912
2924
2936
29404401
2937
2925
2913
29012900
2912
382138313900385038403 8 3 0
3 8 2 0
3810
38002195218521453 7 0 0
1501571513255615560555451415
14051395
13851375
5 9 2 0 584058205800574057321420
5700 55301520
1500
1434
5630 5610
1503
1525
1605
5555
160055401530162616201614160856015615563156451620
1516
1610
1530
5825
1500
1450
1430 1435
1437
1511
1515
1533
1601
1625
1425591959291650
1640
1630
1620
1370
1610
1600
1580157115611450
1500
1600
1400
316 15511541
1601 160915401619
1629
16396045142815001510
1520
15301531
1521
1511
1501
1441
1431
1421
612161451710 602060056015603560556050
1920
1928
60331931
1921
6000
1860
1880
1910
1920
5925
6155
1930
18011745
1900
6140
6150
6120
603060406 050
17006055 602560506020600059505920590059255955600560205940593059205800 1725
5650
5851
5801
5605-95
5725 18752005 20555750
1950
1970
1124
6000
2000
2010
2020
2040
5910
2125
59306000602060502150602760055945591521551935
2130
2100-06
2040
2020
2010
2000
1950 1945
2005
2025
2041
2101
2115
2129
2145
21552150
2210
2230
2300
2310
2320
610161256155
2305233523652385 6130
2255
2301
2315
2380 6125 6105
22006020600059205900590159056015602560556050602060005950590059015955600560352420
2410
603060205 9 4 0 5900240524152425243524452401
2415
611061206130614061502400
2422
242524156117 6107
2435 2430
2440
2450 6015
60256055
6127
2455
24652465
2455
2445
2435
2410
2420
2430
2510
2550
2520 2525
2545
2565 256025406050604060306020600025352565256025402520251024502430
2425245525052525254525652530
2500
2460
2430240023902360233023002260
2230
220056705660563022052225
2255
2305232 523452365240524252445
2515
254525755635256056305600 5570258025402500248024402400239023602330
2300
2260
2230
22002205555556055625564556755705572557352225
2235
2305
2325
2345
2365
2405
2415
2425
2505
2535
2565
2595
2605
2625
2420
2440
2500
215521602200
53205310524852245330534052115217522553075311531753231644
1524
1600
1630
1800
1644
1825
4
9
4
5
5000
5000 4920 49004901492150015011
5061
5101
5111
502050105000496049304920491216011640
1811
1815
1819
18231840 183618321824
1820
1816
1812
1808
18041617
1701
1801
1807
1813
1817
1821
1790
1821
1735
5218530053085318532817001823
18251827 1
8
3
1 184118511871 19312375-972327-492351-732531-45
2515-292547-61
2425-392401-172520-22
2512-18
2500-10
2436-48
2424-34 25852545250524852465244524254880484048004780474047002 4 4 02480250025402580
4 9 0 024452485250525452585258025402500
2 4 9 0
2 4 6 0
2 4 3 0
4 9 5 0
5 0 0 0
2 4 4 5
2 4 7 5
2 4 9 5
2 5 0 5
2 5 4 5
2 5 8 52580
2 5 4 0
2 5 0 0
2 4 8 0
2 4 6 0
2 4 4 0
2 4 2 0 4501451145214601460045164508450045034509452346034609460846114640 4620 4610 2441
2516
2508
2500
4444
2450
2420 2421
2441
2461
2505
2521
2555 2560
2540
2500
2480
2460
2440431143214331242024002360234042404241
2321
2341
2361
24012400
2360
2340
4330
43012250
22402234
2201
2231
2241
2261
2305
2325
2345
2365
24214605
461546254645
21402230Spruce
2300Noble
221021602150220521552145486548954905492522442144
2160
2200
2224 4855
2203
2163
2151
2141 2142
2154
2164
4825 4805
2157
2143 2148216022004800
4810
4820
4840
494549352111
2105
890
825
6826902104
2110
2130
2150
2170
2200
214142212330
2370
2201
2157
2143 497550054735
2257
2243
2237
22232201215721432412-22
2 9 4 1
2 9 3 7
2 9 2 5
2 9 1 3
45002900
2 9 1 2
2 9 2 4
2 9 3 6
2 9 4 0
2 9 4 2
29444601
2945
33853374
3328332051503311
3321
3329
3333
3345
3355
333633443352214020012011
2101
7900792079407960
2107
2115
2110
2104
2100
2030 25293
5
1
6
3
5
1
2
3
5
0
8230723112317 3502230135242 3 1 2
2 3 2 22330
2215
5
3
1
7
59271933
60352120
2122
1930
2522
232225536327
6 4 2 06422
6408
4015
4035
4025
40103026301630002946294229402936
1 4 4 0
1 4 6 51455
14051401
1735
1410
2310
23162322
23052309
2315 311531252300
2310
2316
2320
2330
2301
133813201333131563207103
7105
7150
1724
14305719
1725
1622 1627 475047005005502551052600505051102660505551252670515027753
439
3
431
3
425
3
4172540 3
22
4
3
21
2
3
21
0
3
20
0
3
12
6
3
11
6
3
10
6
3100
2502
56331365
1355
6002-12
6134-48
6030-446066-80
6150-646182-966046-606014-281500 Skyline Dr1541
15114900486048504800
8 5 4 2 4750475148014821485149014905491549251445
9201 910891049100
1301
201500
1566
1051 69096839
68296809
1020
4800
9195525553755355607
860
870
888
2468
6960
69457107
71007140
7160
2520
7155
2525244524011210
1180
574857686533
653765396541
654311701180119011301140 2461
2501
2521
254126015320531053155325310031013145
3139
3125
2360
6840 6830
2350
1435
1375
1 4 2 01430
520
25
1020
45209106910211501100844384378421840583938385837983658357834183252937294129432945300130173025140091129116
42114201912817508300
651-697747
820
840850854858
9201
9280
9290
2490
A
B 4925487548802132
2120 2117
2131 2132
2120
2110
2100 4920
2912
2924
2936
29402941
2 9 3 7
2 9 2 5
2 9 1 3
29012900
2 9 1 2
2 9 2 4
2 9 3 6
2 9 4 0 4825484549354965502232013251
3261
3271
3281
50073248
3244
3240
24312437250125152523253125373801 3701
2 3 1 0240424082412 3
411
3034
3005
3025
2940
2920
3050
3030
2945
2935
2925
29052900291529101
3
0
5
1765
1525
424142511
3
0
1
1
3
0
9
91619165
1745538053609120912446304520
2080
2040
2000 4400 4320 4250424042244210412041104100536053
2
0
5
3
0
0
2805
5305 28852820
2800 2805 284147154747480148153241
3245
324952255300
5240 3301
33213335335533655332
3350
3240
25082514252025012507251325192525253525433513
3
32
8
3
32
0
3
30
0
486049004930
4940
2223
2400-10
512651
1051
202224
2200
2160
2144
2010191019201921
193153055
3
1
52015212521052045202520352209214520162030204021002120 2000
2011
2141
2145
2 1 4 9
2150 2101
5000
2021
2001
1951
1941 49554945492549204936494449604980497549552107
2117
2131 213521362121
21352134
2120
2110
4840 2035
2055 2075261026202630264026502 7 0 1
2 7 1 127212731
2 7 4 1
2 8 1 14317 2835432120912107
4875 4835
4840
4835
4720
4730
4740
210321
0
7
2
0
7
0
20502030
2018
2000
1960
47054715472521004530
1945
431519101905191519251935194519401930192045154510213021352120461045401875
1920
1940
4325
307
4505
4500
452545201930
1920
19101915
1925
19352040 2081
2101 2100 4005 4001
40004225
3915
2130
4020
4040
4030
2301
2311
2300
2340
4021
404141014121
4141
4201
4221
4240 2201
2211
2221
2211
2149
2135
2121
3000
3014
3036
3048
3100
3114
3124
3134
300130253037
2401
2421
2441
31013100
3120
3138
5051
3100
3114
3124
3140 3129
3125
3115
3101
3146
3142
3138
3124
3100 492049103100 3101
3115
3125
3139
2901291329252912290029012913292529372941294329453001301330253026301630002944294229402936292429122900490149214931494130304948494449404930492049002945
2937
2925
2913
29012900
3035
3015
3001
2943
2 9 3 3
2 9 1 5
29015038
2 9 1 2
2924
2936
2940
3000
30142955
5205522552455255
3055
303030505325
30703035305529503005306553853015290553205360538029005047532553655385
5400
53804827490149074915492749374947500150155027503750405030502050104950493049204910490048604830480047605035504527752685273527452755
2765
5100
4740 2745
2725
2705
5005
2665
5000
1912
1304
91222675
2685
2725
2735
2745 2755 4950492049102 7 0 0
268026702640262026002 6 0 5262 52655267526954900 48204810480047504751480148514861490149054915
496049352770 2790277027502710270047254755480148112670
2640262026002600
2610
2620
2630
2640
26502651
26412631262126112601260026102620263026402650265126412631262126114500260026202630264026502651264126312621261146004620 2 8 1 0
2 8 0 0
2 7 3 0
2 7 2 0
2 7 1 0
2 7 0 02701271527412801281528354421282028162736271627002701270027202711273127302740274128052810
2 8 2 545212835
281728012 7 3 1
2721270127002 7 2 0
2 7 3 028002820 2924
2936
2940
4421
4501
2 9 4 5
2941
2937
2925
2913
29012900291229242936304931013 1 1 5
3 1 2 5
3 1 3 53134
3124311431003048303630243000
45003025452030243039310731003114312031253135312631353125311531013025301746003000301630263100311431203126 3202
3230
32383235
32253 2 1 5
3 2 0 1320032183230322532153201320032163230323532253215320132003216322846203300 3300
3310
3314
3320
3326
3332
3338
3342
3346
33504401
3 3 4 5
3 3 4 1
3 3 3 7
3 3 3 3
3 3 2 9
3 3 2 5
3 3 1 7
3 3 0 7
4420
3
3
0
0
3 3 1 2
3 3 2 0332 4332 8
3 3 3 23336
3 3 4 0
3 3 4 4
3 3 4 8
3 3 2 3
3 3 2 7
3 3 3 1
3 3 3 5
3 3 3 9
3 3 4 3
4 5 0 1
3 3 1 6
3 3 2 2
3 3 2 6
3 3 3 0
3 3 3 4
3 3 3 8
4 5 0 3
3 3 4 0
3 3 3 6
3 3 3 2
3 3 2 8
3 3 2 4
3 3 1 6
3 3 1 2
3 3 0 8
4 6 1 0 3 3 0 1
3 3 0 93313
3 3 1 7
3 3 2 33327
3 3 3 1
3 3 3 5
3 3 3 9
3 3 4 33344
33213 3413339
3335
3327
4700
48013320
3312
3300 48014800481050013350495049204911490549104850484548154820 4807479147474790
4740475048064811481248214831485049104901491549204701
3249
3241
3235
47004720
3210
3220
3240
3250
3260
3245472132703260
3270
4927
4911484548314807481048204
8
4
0
494032
503201
3211
3230
3220
3206
5042
3231
3221
3211
51205140
3210
3220
32323231
3221
3211
52205240530053305340
3218
3230
3240
3244 3245
324951393250
3340
5301
3360
5315 33603368337633843390339813501300
1310
1504
1523
1525
15271521
1421
1415 39019
17
106 FranceAve S113
209
301
315
401
419
501
515
603
1109
1101
1001
909
721
701
615
501 Wirth
425
421406
417
401
325
321
309
3910
3901
220
212
210
208
4004
4005
400939024011
3920845 Meadow
700Meadow
1450
1420
1430
1370
1400
1410
1440
510
6115
7445
22123910
2225
2301
2323
38
0
139003811
1521
1531
1617
1631
1633
16351639
164518281832183818161814
1 8 1 2
1808
1800
1701
1707
1711
171517171725
1801
1 8 2 11831300130093015302330291850
1717
1721
1 7 2 5
1 8 1 1182118251831181018161806
1815
1825
18291830
1843 1849310931153121184419111915
1917
1931
193319351949
30163022302631003110190419
1
41918192219261930 193823012308231623242332234023502400240824122416242824382450246024952505247024802490250025112510
2515
2525
2565
2555240824002412241624202424243024342500250825202 5 2 82560
2413242124273
407
3
339
3
331
24052409241524192423
2412241624202428243825002513
2531
33373341340134053407250225062512251825242530242024262430243425002508251625243721
240124092413241724212429243725012509251725212225
22301
9
1
5
1
9
2
5
1
9
2
9
1
9
3
3
1937
2200
3
2
2
1
3
2
1
1
3
2
0
1
3
1
2
1
3
1
1
5
3231
3223
3221
3217
2300
2303
2309
2317
2321
2329
2343
3
4
3
0
3
4
2
0
3
4
1
0
3
4
0
0
3
3
1
2
3
3
0
2
3
3
0
0
2401
2512
2522
2534 31253133320132279129912591211425
13601405
1490674767256806683568252400 Sandburg Lane
23002335
23017145712571302305
2325
2355
23652455710171357177
2420
1800
1480
1 4 7 01460
1460
1615
1611
915791539149
212514701485
1 4 5 0
1710
1635
1 7 4 017601755
1400
1535 1530
13101300135013401760
9225
2260
1 4 1 51425
1315131919194210 132013309050 5901752-82
1775
1705
1630
1500
1715
1 4 7 51485
701
7930
1 4 3 51445
135913558202-42 423142215160 13491345132513295430
5701
8102-42
1755
1480
13901380
6206251420
13851395
1425
1405
6325
1600
1620
623
1415 1339133530
9393
1730
1350
300
310
320
330
340
535
525 515
5901
1725
1785
1750
1740
1730
1630
1710
1540
1600
1540
1520
1770175017301710166016401620160015501530
1460
1440
1475
1505
1525
1545
1605
1625
1525
1485
1465
1445
1405
101
109
9191
174517351725
1780176017401720
91309120911091008012-80668105950623
13751369
7808
1 3 6 5
13701360
1 3 6 1
4220251 42303370
3354 5303 53305302
5227470749621943
5403
20182027
20172320
6402
133513176967089210
9240
9200 9110
9140
401
300
200
101
115
100
100
7804
200
500
1521
8200
8305 1610
1856
7720
7730
7710
7708
710
9300
9305
1513517802
52051268105128845227
6523681061326135
6105
515
509505
277275
271
935
403 42391425
59005980 250570157435745765735745755725237
720
730
6102
6122
6082
6072415
1000
900
904
1715
9000 8900 8810
9001404
1423
143160926062
1501
6925
41274000 (lift sta)
5000(lift sta)
635 (lift sta)
1815
1520
86369145
9201
8300 West Franklin Ave, SLP 12501141257523017100
7101
7401
7600
7100 690011012400 Sandburg Lane
21305850
910
5218
4120
2
1
9
0
1805900
3300
5011901
1500
200
151032752600 Unity Ave N1241
1251
1221
731
1425
4310
8325
2500
2486
2414
80342649450
225
25302540
2560
30861966114
6192
6194
6138
312431
4
23125
6132
4280 42944282-42864266-4272810 2291425
1050 870 Louisiana Ave S220
259
3115
2351
60476005
721
23892359-71
23502352-68
23912373-85
23432345-872500
2450 2454
705 Pennsylvania Ave S
7425 Laurel Ave
9131
1507
1133
1605
2017
205
6414
5000
6305
49512600 Unity Ave N9201
530
7700
17
9
1
407 66151546300240
901
40308525
3130
51079457599 160563057300
770
9595
3114
203
145
2278835
212
201
1700Noble
425042601121
553055205510830
A
B
C D
EF
750
8010
7465-95
5075WayzataBlvd
1511Utica Ave S
1601Utica Ave S
15
2315
2 3 4
242 340157306075
110
225
6
0
9
0
6
0
8
8
6
0
4
0
6
0
7
0
6080
A
B
C
D
E
1800
1750Major
160116207460-90
9
10
1
3
5
1813
611
14
8
16
17
712
15
4
2
Document Path: I:\Engineering\Inflow and Infiltration\Access Database\GIS files\Current_Insp_Status.mxd
City of Golden Valley7800 Golden Valley RoadGolden Valley, MN 55427-4588763-593-8030www.goldenvalleymn.gov
INFLOW AND INFILTRATIONINSPECTION STATUS
Note:Due to issues with geocoding or matching PIDs from theI/I Database to the Hennepin County parcel layer, properties withcommon interests (condo, co-op’s, etc) and properties with more than one service lateral, may not be shown correctly on this map.
Date: 11/16/2016Sources:- I & I Access Database- Hennepin County Surveyors Office for Property Lines (2016).- City of Golden Valley for all other layers.
600 0 600 1,200 1,800300Feet I
Parcel Data - As of 9/7/2016
No Inspection Data
Compliant
Non-Compliant
Further Investigation Needed
Unable to Inspect
Compliant, Illegal Sump or FoundationCorrected
I & I Meter Districts
Sewer District, Number Labeled
U n io n P acific Railroad
Canadian Pacific Railroad B
u
rlin
g
to
n
N
o
rt
h
e
r
n
Sant
aFeRailroadCanadianPacificRailroadC anadianP acificR ailroadC anadia n P a c i f i c R ailroad
U nion Pacific R a i l r o a d
456766
456770
456766
456740
456740
4567156
4567102
§¨¦394
§¨¦394
Æÿ55
Æÿ55
Æÿ100
Æÿ100
£¤169
£¤169
C I T Y O F N E W H O P E C I T Y O F C R Y S T A L
C I T Y O F R O B B I N S D A L E
CITY OF MINNEAPOLISC I T Y O F S T . L O U I S P A R K CITY OF MINNEAPOLISCITY OFST. LOUIS PARKCITY OF ROBBINSDALECITY OF CRYSTAL
CITY OF CRYSTALC I T Y O F N E W H O P E
CITY OF PLYMOUTHCITY OF MINNEAPOLISC I T Y O FST. L O U I S P A R KCITY OFPLYMOUTH33
35 25 24 23
22
21
19
36
42
43
75
14
97
87
88
47
69
7071
72
74
76
77
78
79
80
81
93
9582
83 18
17
16
15
13
12
11
10
1A
776
9
8
7
6
5
4
3
1
2
40
58
44
45
57
55
54
53
50
49
48
89
73
86
29
27
26
46
39
38
37
34
41
52
51
56
94
92
90
91
98
96
99
32
279
350
435
777
694
307
325
317
329
330 332331
334333
308
306
304
305
316
315314
313
311310
318
319
418
384
387
389
390
388
385
386
321322
323
324
369
371
368
370367
320
326
327
328
398
399
400
401
395
396
397
346
345
344
343
342
303
302
301
362
337
336
335
338
339
340
341
361
360
359
291
290
289
288
287
286
285
284
280
292
347
348
349
300
299
298
283
281293
278
277
274
275
273
272
271
270
276
484
485
486
487 488
492
493
494
495
489
490
491
537
500
501
502
503
504
507
506
512
513
514
516
357
366
356
309
539
511
510
518 519
520
521
523
522
380379378
391
392 393
775
426
427 428 429 430 419 417
411
415416432431
424425
420421
447 446 441
440
439
438
445
444449
448 437
436442443
434 433
408
44A
557
556
555 554
553
312
558 559 560
550
551
552
566
564 561 563562
774 773 772
771
246
247
115
116
665
666
668
355
354
353
352
351 372 373
375 376
363
364
365
374
294
295
296
297
358383382381
35A
770
768
28A
30A
27B 27A
475
474
466
478
394
567 568 569
423
422
406405
50A
410
414
413
412
480
481
482
483
535
534
536
538
533
473471
470
468
469
467
456
458
457
455
459
460
461
462
464
465
529
528
527
526
530
525
498 524
496
497
499509
508
515
166165
164100
479477
476
260
256
255
248
261
249
258
114
269
268
267
266
265
540
25A541
542
543544
545
549
548
547
546
755
754
763
766
767
769
669
663
675 674
683
684
698
453
472
454
452
451450
96A
74A
241240
242
243
244
245
250
251
252
253 254
264257 263
262
141
142143144145146
147104109110
168
161
162
163 167
101102
103
105
107
108 122
123124
119121
118
752
679
695
700
696
693 692 691 689 687 686
681
680
678 676
670671672
685
757
758
682
703
702
176
125
126
127
129132
133
759
207
206
205
204
203
208
209
228
113
154
152153
151
150
149
148
106
131
212 134
172 171 170 169
173
174
175
130
738
737
736
735
734724
579810
809
58
2
851
828
714
578
784
785
726 725
219
236
233
718
706
762
761
764 756
765
760
697
117
690
753 673
688
699
210
199
223
624 623
622
795806
807
791
198 197 196 195 194
190
157
189 140177
178
179
180
202
158
159
160 136156
155211 135
137
138
139
222
572 571 570576
849
850581848
845
844
843
583
846
847
814
813
811865
727
728
729
730
731
732
723
722
721
719
717
2485
2484
2056
2072
2054
2076
2075
2074
2063
20622061
2057
2058
2055
20602059
1580
2066
2067
2068
2050
3077
3079
3080
1994
590A1668
1667
1672
61 1665165 71656 1663
2156
2002
1975
766A 1977
1959
1794
1795
1716A
1195A
1673A
2258A
1297A 1296A
1305A 2819A
2599A
2017A
1799A
1036A1039A
1209A
2892A
1141A
1129A
1122A
Auto 2 Auto 3
3184
709
710
712
713
715716
889
890
891
892 860
883
587
884
885
886
859
861
862
875
874
873
588
876
854
871
853
852
585
805
804
584
863 864
812
826827
857
856
855
858
744
224225226 220
188186185184
183182181
216
217
218
234 235 237
239238
590
589
586
577 575 574 573
644
743
740
635
636637638639
641
642643645
615616 591625
596
597
593
601
602
603
825
824
823
821
820
818
816
815
842
750751
962
961
960
959
958 604
988
980
987
936
934
933
932
931
937
938 939 940
941
942
943
945
946 944 599
819909
923 924921922
914915
916
917
918 919 920 911 822
925 926 927
913912
598
928
600
929
901
902
841
840
839
838
837
836
835
834
832594
904
906 905
907
908
833831817829
830893868
867888866595
614
878592 879
880
881
887
882877
869
870
954 953 952
951
708 707
720
704
705
711
646 640651
649
621 620
991
975
618
900895605894653652647
661
627
629
630
632633634
947
950949
612
606
609
607
608
610
611
631
628
997 998 996 995
654655656
657
659
658
994
999
992
976 977
978
981
982
957
956
955
903
983
984
985
660
648
662
3160
3175
3174
3151
3041
3042
3044
31583157
3183B
31563155
3154
3152
3153
3051
3052305330543088
3087
3078
30833082
3074
3075
3076
3145 31
4
2
31433144
3147
3139
3138
3137 3136
3148 3149
3150
3067
27
3
2
27312691
2730
2783
2786
2726
2725 2636
2724
2723
2722 2721
2720
2718
2690
2729
26892719
2688
2708 2707 2706
2700 2699 2697
269326922694
2695
2698
2727 2658
2656
111516851686168716881689
1619
1598
1599
1607
1606
16051603
1602
1600
1604
1253
1918
1865
1864
1863
2293
2292
2101
22822281
2253
2162
2161
2159 2160
2082
2651
2652 1875
2635
3011 2628
2627
2214
1601
2598 1456
2015 2014 2013 2012 2011
2499
2498
955A
2488 2489
1874
2286
2288
2287
2291
2289
22902218
21361254
2137
2092
2093
2094
2135
2134
3056
30653064
3063
3106
3092
3094
2811
275A
245B
2617
677A
3095
3141
2794
2792
3109 3110
C127
3107
3161
772A
3119
3118
3117
31153114
26742675
1035
3049
487A
28
3
7
2782
2781
2733
3057
3058
3059
3060
2123
2132
2131
2130
2128
2129
2124
2125
21002099
2097
2102 2103
2104
2105
2098
2126
3060A
2081 2080
2083
2084
2087 2086 2085
2222
2221
2217
2219
2220
2229
2230
2231
2232
2233
2234
223622352212
2213
2215
2533
2216
1430
3022
1432
14333027
3026
3025
3024
3023
3028
30293035
30303031
2182
2752 3032
22522753 3033
2178
1442
1441
1440
1439
1438
1443
293429312933 3020
3018 3019
3016
3015
3017 3014
3012
313A
571A 333A
1884 1885
1886
1887
1888
1889
1883
1882
18811880 1891
1890
1892
1893
1597
2095 2096
18941876
18781879
1866
1267
1252
1251
1250
1242
684A
685A
686A
690A
689A
688A
680A
683A679A681A
1117
1112
1113
1114
1270
1269
1268
1271
1272
1273
1274
1266
1264
1265
1258
1931 1932
1903 1904
1905 1906
1907
1917
1916
1915
1926
1925
1924
1923
1786
1928
1927
1792
1787
1790
1789
1791
1785 1788
2583
25812582
2210
2569
2566
2564
2560
2570
2573
115A2568
2571116A
2549
2550
2552
1221
1870
1871
1872
1873
1247
2247 2254
2244 2245 2246
2243
2250
2251
2249
2248
2646
2647
2522
2641
26422643
26442519
26332634
2548
2629
2563
2565
268A
267A
266A
2559
672A
678A
2556
2310
23112312
2313
2314
2315
2316
1724
1725
1775 2487
2486
1960 1961
1476 2016 2017
2018
2000
2516
1984
2019
2304 2303
2273
2283
2285
2284
1064
2152 2153
2154
1141
2024
2027
20232025
2026 2029
2028
2020 1625
2021
1623
1624
25532554
1226
2558
351A
682A
3177
3176
3179
1966
1965
1249
2567 2540
2537
2557
2512 2513 2514 2205
25151754
2520 2521
249724962495
2091
1446 2490 2491
2493
2494
1234
2079
2078
2077
23071929 2306 2305 1340
1339
1930 2070 2071 2069
1338
2275
2300
22991793 768A2555
1645
1646 30552133
2114 2115 2111
3111
3112
2127
1618 1612 1611
2954
2955
2203
2202
2201
2200
2199
2206
2207
2223
2225
2224
2226 2227
2228
2209
2211 14
3
7
21131436142914521453
1435
14341427
1426
1336
1425
1424
2022
1423
1422
1218
1444
1900
1901
1899
1898
1897
1896
1895
1922
1921
1920
1912
1911
1910
1909
1908
1919
1914
1913
2619
12611259
1262
1263
1255
1260
1256
1257
14541455
1448
1451
2930667A
2813
2814
2773
2774
2717 2716
2715
2714 2713
2807
1808
2709
2710
27112712
2704
2703
2687 2686268526842683
2696
2682
2681
2680 2204
2702
2701
1702
1701
1704
1706
1707
1700
1708
1715
1714
1713
1237
1710
1709
1228
1644
1643 1642
1614 1610
1615 1609
16081622
1621
1620
1628
1627
1626
17841341
1778
1777
1753
1752
1751
1750
1761
1760
1758
1757
1755
1756
1762
1763
1733
1732
1731
1729
1730
1902
3038
471A
455A
3037
166A
1562
2051 1582
20522053
2294
2295
2296
1943
2158
1946
2147
2145
2144
2143
2142
2141
2148
2960
2961
2964 2981
2962
2965
2966
2967 2968
2969
29712977
2648
676A
675A
1616
670A
669A
668A671A
674A
673A 666A
240A
1869
243A
245A
262A
124A
107A
118A
117A
1370
703A 312231211180
1184
28181186 1188
1189 1178
110411911190
1160
1159
1158
1157
1156
1155
1154
1153
1152
1151
1118
1119
1120
1100
1106
1320
1323
1324
1326
1322
1309
1308
1307
1121
12831284
1217118311811182
1406 1407 1408
1410 142126591411 1412
14151414 1416 1417
1418
1419 1420 1102
14051810 1404 1103
14031413 1402 1401 1400 1101
1398
1397
1389
1388
1387
1396
1395
1394
1393
1372
1371
1383
1382
1325
1380
1381
1391
1352 1353 1354 1355
1334
1333
1332
1331
1329
1328
1327
1321
1330
1362
1361
1360
1359
1346
1358
1351
1363 1350
1349
1347
297629742975
2978
2995
2979
29802986
2985 2993
299429822984
2996
2987
2992
1348
2150
2149
2956 3006
2957
2958
2959 3010
3009
3008
3007
1313
1312
1311
1314
1315
1316
1317
1319
1318 1150
15861575
1588
1466
1581
1579
1574
1576
813A282628282827 2991
2990
2997
30013002
30
0
5
3004
3105
205A
3093
2840
2839
809A
811A
2819
2820
2822282117802823
2825
2788
2876
2791
2875
2534
2784
2785
1676
1677
16781679
2754
2755
2756 2757
2758
1824 1823
1781 1782
1783
2005
2007 2008710C2808
2004
19881987
1990
1991
1992
1993
1995
1973
1974
1976
1529
1969
1971
1972
1957
1958
1779
25742575
2576
2580
2578 2577 1691
13792088 2089
2090
2186
1840
263226312645
2623
2625
2624
1491
2613
2605 2604 2579
1519 2608 2817 2607 2606 1682
1531
2621 2610
2597 25961986
1485
2038
2039
2040 2041
2042 2043
2045
2046
1979
20322033
203128471831
2846
31782035 2034 2036
1490
1996
1997
1998
2845 2531
2532 1174
2535
1499 2538 2539
25102511 2509
2508
2507
25062505
2504
25032502
2501
250019702298
2760
1985
1457
1111
1366 1367
1368
136913651364 1356
1357
1345
134413421343
1445
1450
1449 1447
1720
2795
2796
27751945
27762777
2778
1947
2779
2780
1578
1179 1187
1177 1194
1193
1192
1164
1163
1162
1161
1116
1105
1107
1108
1109
1110
2518 1282 1281
2492
124512481246 1244
1243
1233 1232 1231 1230
1235
1227 12252551
1224
1240
1241
1238
1239
1236 1229
1220
1219
1459 1458
1743
1744
1745
1746
1747
1749
20092010
19812728
1968 1967
1956
1698
1955
1954
1963
1962
1718
1944
1942
1941
1939
1938
1933 1934 1935 13371936
1335
1937
1951
1950
1949
1697
1811 1098
1809
1806
18071409
1185
1804
1802
2561
25622572
2073
1859
1860
1861
18621399
2146 2277 1982
1629
2278
2271
2280
2272
1392 1373
2242
2255
2241
22401587
2653
1952
2654
1953
2640
2269
2616
2615
2614
2547
2270
2527
2526
2525
25242528
2268
2541
3050
2523
2279
2759
2761 2762 3099
2766
2765
3068
2750
2749 1493
1839
2769
2770
27712772
1487
2666 2663
26642665
1488
26682672
2673 2671
2669
1489
2676
1690
1675
1680
1674
1681
167018561857
1833
1832
1845
1858
1844
1843 1842
1841
1854
1853
1852 1855
1851
1850
1826
1825
1639
1634
2536
1695
1948
1964
2308
2309
1577
2649
1723
1722 1721
1694
1636
1703
1641
1705
1717
1716
1712
1711
1773
1772
1771
1726
1735 1748 1765
1767
1770
1768
1769
1766
1764
1737
1736
1734
2620
1742
2187 218821922191
2190
2189
2196
2197
2198
2194
2193
3039
1197
3182
3040
29
5
2
27872879
2902
2874
2903
2904
2905
2195
3091
3098
3090
3089
3097
1662
16611664
1653
1838
1837
1836
1835
1834 2935
732A
732B
710B
2630
713A
588A
588B
889A
876A
863A
804A
710A
3062
1557
1558
1559
1560
1542
1541
1540
1543
1544
1508 22971527 1528
1530
1518151715221523
1520
1521
1525
1524 1510
15111512
1526
1515
1514
1513
15093046
3045 1495
1494
3048 1498
3047
1492 1503 2650 1504
28
6
9 28711506
2850
2849
1673
1669 1652
1655 1650
28361648 1647 3108
2151
20012626
2003
2953
188A3113
30863085 3084
226A
3081
2806
1796
1797
1277
2302
2262 2261
1692
1693
1696
1633
1632
1631
1630
1640
1637
16381635
1390
3104
3103
3102
1583
3101
31001816
1822
1821
1805 1819
1820
1818
1099
1817
1812
1803
1813
1814
2854 285328562857
743A
742A
2868
2873
2867
2866 2238 2797 2798
2799
2805
2804 2803
2802
2801
28002237
2747
2884
1095
2258
2744
2745
2746
2739
2740
2741
751A
988A
901A
894B
1077
1086
2885
1076 1074
1075 1070
1094
1069
1072
1071
1082
1073
3061
1173 1168 1169
1175 1176
1170
1149
1148
1145
1146
1147
1301
1300 1298
1297 1296
1295 1294
1306
1305
1304
2809
1303
1302
1203
1204
1207
1206
1205
1386 704A1385 138413751374
1376
1310
1566
1565
156415731556
1563
1545
1568
1569
1570 156715711572
1507
1480
1481
1482
148314861484
2851
2742
27362256
2737
2738
2257
2661
26601654
1827
1828
1829
1830
1815
1776
1774
2260 2259 1479
2263
2264
2265
2266
2267
2274
762A
2638
2639
2138 2611
2612
2592
2593 2594
2830 2829
2831 2599
2832
2600
2044
19801475
1978
2155
2157
1999
2139
2140
1123
2106
2107
1651
2239
2949
2950
1799
1800
2517
1801
2946
2164
2947 29482622
2940
29392743
2938
1516
2937 2936
2163
2892
2893
2894
2895
2896
2897
28992898
2900
619A
2890 28893180 2888
2887
2883
2882
28812880
2909
2908
2906
2907
2595
2590
2591
290128642863
28622860
28591275
2861
1276
2852
2677
2678
3183
629A
2789
2944
1084
1083
1067
1063 1062
1066
1068
1043
1044
1045
1046
1047
1050
1051
1058
1057
10561053
1054
1055
1006 1028 1029 1030 1031 1032
1033
28771007
10082841
1005
1004
28421036
10371038
10391040
1022
1021102010191017
1018
1003
1002
1001
1016
1015
1014101310121011
1010
1132
1133
1469
1468
14701474
1135
1134
1137
106510921093108110801079107810881089
2878
1096
1212
1211
1210
14781463
1464
1465
14721471
1462
1461
2667
120912131208
1216
1215
1214
1553 15521535
1551
154915481547 1550
1554
1555
1561
1546
1536 1537
1538
1539
1477
1023
1000 991C
991A991B
1024 1025A
2941
1144
1143
1142
1140 1139 1138
1136 763A
764A
765A
761A 758A
760A
759A
757A
1128
1127
1126
1129
1130
1124
1125
11221131
2003D
3010B
3010A
2003C
2003B
2003A
2072A
3049A
2690A
1894A
1966A1874A
3110A
2967A
2231A
1245A
1117A
1920A 1246A2243A
2242A
2027A
1625A
2307A
2090A
2114B
2114A
2114C
2115A
2080A
2954A2954B
2954C
2226A
1242A
1749A
2054A
2055A
2122A
2158A
1374A 3009A2825A
1676A
1677A
2759A
2005A
2186A
2045A
1444A
1179A
2279A 2145A
1320A
2500A
701
3043
3096
3066 31403116
2734 303427513013
14282618
114A
2064
2963
297029732972298329
8
82121
29
8
9
2998
2999 3003
30
0
0
28382006
2609
284828
4
4
2185
2670
29
5
1
28
7
0 287216492790
28
6
5
1299
2301
894A2637 21222304A
2113A
2257A2894A
459A
9" VSP59
60
6362 64 65
2003E 2891
City of G old en Va lley, Eng inee ring7800 Go lden Valley R oadGolden Valle y, MN 554 27-458 8763-593 -8030www.golde nvalle ymn .go v
Sanitary Sewer
0 800 1,600 2,400 3,200400Feet
I
Print Date: 1/30/2017Sources:-Hennepin County Surveyors Office for Property Lines (2017) -City of Golden Valley for all other layers.
Sewer Manhole
No Drop
!.Inside
!R Outside
!(Both
!Sealed Manhole
Sewer Main
?City Gravity
?City Forcemain
?MCES Gravity
?MCES Forcemain
?Other City Main
?Private Sewer
?Private Forcemain
Lined Main
Appendix A
2007 Lift Station Inspection Report
Inspection Report
Schaper – Lift Station
Description:
The Schaper Lift Station is a submersible pump station which contains piping within the wet well
with the inlet valve located below grade outside the wet well. The valve stem extends to a valve
box located adjacent to the wet well. The wet well manhole is 4 ft. diameter and 11 ft. deep. The
concrete in and around the wet well is in good condition. The steps have been removed from
within the wet well. The metal access hatch to the wet well is in good condition with a holding
mechanism for the hatch. The wet well houses two Hydromatic submersible pumps that were
installed in 2006. The rails and chains for pump removal are in good condition. The wet well has
a ventilation gooseneck. There was minimal scum in the wet well.
The wet well is directly connected to a storage vault by a 6-inch ductile iron pipe (DIP) with a
valve. The valve is closed during normal operation and opened for emergency storage. The
pumps discharge via a flexible hose to a 2” diameter PVC pipe. There was an excessive amount
of discharge hose wrapped around the pump rail support system.
The operator stated that this lift station was experiencing plugging with medical debris. During
power out there is no system down alarm until power resumes.
Capacity:
Drawdown Test
• Pump #1: 36 gpm, 51,840 gpd
• Pump #2: 39 gpm, 56,160 gpd
• Measured Influent Flow: 1.54 gpm
Pump Run Times (hr)/Starts (wet weather, April 2007)
Pump Average Max Day Min Day
#1 2.5 3 .7
#2 1.6 2.5 0.6
Pump Flow Rate (gpd)
Pump Average Max Day Min Month
#1 5,400 6,480 1,512
#2 3,744 5,850 1,404
Process:
Condition
• No safety grating in wet well
• The 2-inch receiving force main is considered sub-standard. The Ten State Standards
guidelines require a 4-inch or greater diameter force main.
Electrical:
Service: 460V / 1Ø
Pump Currents:
Pump Full Load Inrush
#1 3 5.7
#2 3 13.2
Control System:
• Four floats (Pumps Off, Lead Pump On, Lag Pump On, High Level Alarm) with Systems
Control Technology pump controller.
Control System Modifications:
• Add fifth float (Low Water Cutoff) for additional pump protection in case of low water level.
• Use control relays to add backup pumping scheme in case of pump controller failure.
• Add relay to send alarm at power failure prior to power returning to the system. There is
already a battery in place for this.
• Add SCADA to the system.
Inspection Report – Hwy. 55
Highway 55 - Lift Station
Description:
Highway 55 Lift Station Lift Station is a wet well/dry well pump station which contains the
pumps, piping and valves within a dry valve vault. The wet well is 75 square feet (10’x7.5’) and
15.5 feet deep. The concrete in and around the wet well is in good condition. The steps into the
pump and valve vault are in good condition. The access hatch to the wet well is in good condition
with extension rails. The dry vault houses two Chicago Pump Flush Kleen long shaft pumps with
U.S. Electrical motors. The pumps were rebuilt last year and bearings were replaced on the long
shafts. The piping and valves are 6-inch ductile iron pipe (DIP) and are in good condition. There
was minimal scum in the wet well.
The wet well is cleaned at least one time per month and pumps have been getting clogged with
clinic debris. During power out there is no system down alarm until power resumes.
Capacity:
Drawdown Test
• Pump #1: 213 gpm, 306,720 gpd
• Pump #2: 168 gpm, 241,920 gpd
• Measured Influent Flow: 28 gpm
Pump Run Times (hr)/Starts (wet weather, April 2007)
Pump Average Max Day Min Month
#1 1.6 3 .9
#2 1.7 5 .8
Pump Flow Rate (gpd)
Pump Average Max Day Min Month
#1 20,448 38,340 11,502
#2 17,136 50,400 8,064
Process:
Condition
• No safety grating in wet well
Electrical:
Service: 230V / 3 Ø
Pump Currents:
Pump Average (A)
#1 21.5
#2 18.2
Control System:
• Four floats (Pumps Off, Lead Pump On, Lag Pump On, High Level Alarm) with Systems
Control Technology pump controller.
Control System Modifications:
• Add fifth float (Low Water Cutoff) for additional pump protection in case of low water level.
• Use control relays to add backup pumping scheme in case of pump controller failure.
• Add relay to send alarm at power failure prior to power returning to the system
• Add SCADA to the system.
Inspection Report – Woodstock
Woodstock – Lift Station
Description:
The Woodstock Lift Station is a submersible pump station which contains piping within the wet
well with the inlet valve located outside the wet well in a valve manhole. The wet well manhole
is 6 ft. diameter and 15.2 ft. deep. The concrete in and around the wet well is in good condition.
There are no steps within the wet well. The metal access hatch to the wet well is steel and in
good condition with a holding mechanism for the hatch. The wet well houses two Peabody
Barnes submersible pumps. The rails and chains for pump removal are in good condition. The
wet well has a ventilation gooseneck. There was a small amount of scum in the wet well, but
concentrated around the north pump because the floats were all hung in this one location. The
piping and valves are 4 in. diameter ductile iron pipe (DIP) and are in moderate condition. The
check valve was replaced in 2006.
The operator did not report any problems with this station except no alarm until power resumes.
During power out there is no system down alarm until power resumes.
Capacity:
Drawdown Test
• Pump #1: 272 gpm 391,680 gpd
• Pump #2: 238 gpm, 342,720 gpd
• Measured Influent Flow: 28 gpm
Pump Run Times (hr)/Starts (wet weather, April 2007)
Pump Average Max Day Min Month
#1 0.9 1.5 0.6
#2 0.9 1.5 0.6
Pump Flow Rate (gpd)
Pump Average Max Day Min Month
#1 14,688 24,480 9,792
#2 14,688 24,480 9,792
Process:
Condition
• No safety grating in wet well
• The 2-inch discharge line is considered sub-standard. The Ten State Standards guidelines
require a 4-inch or greater diameter discharge line.
Electrical:
Service: 460V / 1Ø
Pump Currents:
Pump Full Load Inrush
#1 1.4 20.5
#2 1.4 25
Control System:
• Four floats (Pumps Off, Lead Pump On, Lag Pump On, High Level Alarm) with Systems
Control Technology pump controller.
Control System Modifications:
• Add fifth float (Low Water Cutoff) for additional pump protection in case of low water level.
• Use control relays to add backup pumping scheme in case of pump controller failure.
• Add relay to send alarm at power failure prior to power returning to the system
• Add SCADA to the system.
Appendix B
Pavement Management Capital Improvement Plan
!!!
!!!!
!!!!!!!
!!!!!!!!!!!
!
!!!!!!
!!!!!!!!!!
!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
!
!!!
!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
!
!
!
!!!
!!
!
!
!!!!!!!!
!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
!
!!!!!!
!!!!!!!!!!!!
!!!
!!!!!!!
!!!!!!!!!!U n io n P acific Railroad
Canadian Pacific Railroad B
u
rlin
g
to
n
N
o
rt
h
e
r
n
Sant
aFeRailroadCanadianPacificRailroadC anadianP acificR ailroadC anadia n P a c i f i c R ailroad
U nion Pacific R a i l r o a d
C I T Y O F N E W H O P E C I T Y O F C R Y S T A L
C I T Y O F R O B B I N S D A L E
CITY OF MINNEAPOLISC I T Y O F S T . L O U I S P A R K CITY OF MINNEAPOLISCITY OFST. LOUIS PARKCITY OF ROBBINSDALECITY OF CRYSTAL
CITY OF ST. LOUIS PARKCITY OF CRYSTALC I T Y O F N E W H O P E
CITY OF PLYMOUTHCITY OF MINNEAPOLISC I T Y O FST. L O U I S P A R KCITY OFPLYMOUTH34th Ave N
Medicine Lake Rd
BroggerCir Knoll St Lilac Dr NLilac Dr NThotland Rd
Mendelssohn AveWinnetka Ave NSunnyridgeCir
Western Ave (WaterfordDr)Independence Ave NHillsboro Ave NZealandAve
N
Aquila Ave NOrkla DrWisconsin Ave N23rd Ave N
KalternLn
Wynnwood Rd
25th Ave N
Bies DrJonellen Ln
Sumter Ave NRhodeIslandAveNPatsy Ln Valders Ave NWinnetka Ave NDuluth St Florida Ave NSandburg Rd HeritageCirKentley Ave
Wynnwood Rd
Kenneth Way
Unity Ave NB a s s e ttC r e e k D rQuailAveNScott Ave NLilac Dr NLowry Ter
33rd Ave N
Noble Ave NCross LnQuail Ave NScott Ave NRegent Ave NToledo Ave NIndiana Ave N(BridgewaterRd)(WaterfordCt)(Hid
d
e
nLnkesPkwy)Meadow Ln NFrance Ave NTopel Rd
Unity Ave NPhoenix St
Parkview TerWelcomeAveNWelcomeC ir
W e l c o
meAveNXeniaAveNZ
a
n
e
Av
e
NLindsay St
St Croix Ave N
St Croix Ave N
Yosemite Ave NWolfberryLnBrunswick Ave NCounty Rd 102Westmore Way
Green Valley Rd
Louisiana Ave NKelly DrMaryland Ave NOlympia St
Winsdale St
Winnetka Ave NYukon CtWesleyDr Wesley Dr
Plymouth Ave N
10th Ave N
Kelly DrVarner CirPennsylvania Ave NFaribault StQuebec Ave NRhode Island Ave NPhoenix St
Knoll St
County Rd 156Jersey Ave NCountryClubDr
P h o e n ix S tDouglas DrGeorgia Ave NCou
n
ty
R
d40
Hampshire Ave NWestch esterCirJersey Ave NGardenParkQuebe
c
Av
e
SWinnetka Ave NDecatur Ave NWally St
Ensign Ave N7th Ave N
Golden Valle y Rd Decatur Ave N10th Ave N
Natchez Ave NXerxes Ave N (Mpls)Olson Memorial Hwy
Cutacross Rd
Olson Memorial Hwy
Earl St Gettysburg Ave NFlag Ave NGettysburg Ave NFlag Ave NHampshire
LnJersey Ave NFloridaAveNEdgewoodAve NDouglas DrDuluth Ln
Scott Ave N
Drake Rd
Lowry Ter Kyle Ave NQuail Ave NPerry Ave NNoble Ave NCulver Rd
Dawnview Ter
Dona Ln
Noble Ave NScottAveNGl
e
ndenTer
Culver R d
Marie Ln W
Hampton Rd
RegentAveNPerryAveNLilac Dr N27th Ave N
Merribee Dr Kyle Ave NHampton RdOrchard Ave NMarie Ln E
Lee Ave NKyle Ave NDresde
n
L
n
Kewanee W
ay
26th Ave N
Me
ri
d
i
a
n
D
r
P
a
r
k
v
i
e
w
B
l
v
d Terrace LnManor DrMcNair DrByrd Ave N
B
a
s
s
ettCreekDrMaryHillsDrZenith Ave NVista DrXerxes Ave NYork Ave NS t M a rg aret D rZephyr PlXerxes Ave NXerxes Ave N (Mpls)(SkylineDr)Spruce TrKyle PlW e s t b r o o k R d Noble Ave Frontage RdCircleDownOrchard Ave NPerryAveNWindsorWayWestbend R dUnity Ave NG reenview
LnRegent Ave NSorell Ave
Frontenac Ave Quail Ave NSt Croix Ave N
Winsdale St StCroixCirAngelo DrUnity Ave NAlfred Rd Spring Valley RdN
o
b
l
e
DrMajor DrAdeline LnAngelo DrAngelo DrWills PlToledo Ave NOttawa Ave NKillarney DrZane Ave NWoodstoc k A v e Woodstock Ave
Loring LnYosemiteAveN
Turners Crossroad NWestchesterCirN
F
r
ontageRdFlorida Ave NHampshire Ave NPlymouth Ave N
Idaho Ave NOlympia StHampshire Ave NArcher Ave NKelly DrPennsylvania Ave NDuluth St Xylon Ave NWisconsin Ave NSumter Ave NBoone Ave NWinsdale St
Meadow Ln N
DahlbergD r
Woodstock Ave
Poplar Dr Meadow Ln NChatelain T e r
Natchez Ave NEdgewood Ave NK i n g s t o n C i r
Glenwood Ave
Country Club DrValdersAveNOrkla DrElgin PlDecaturAveN
Indiana Ave NRoanoke CirWestern Ave Western Ave
Harold Ave
Loring Ln
WestwoodDrNArdmoreDrWinsdale St
Knoll St
Oak Grove CirDuluth St Zane Ave NDouglas Dr27th Ave N
Bonni
e
Ln
Medicine Lake Rd
Madison Ave W
Nevada Ave NLouisiana Ave NCounty Rd 70
ValdersAve NValders Ave N23rd Ave N Rhode IslandAve NCounty Rd 156Medicine Lake Rd
Mendelssohn Ave NHillsboro Ave NIndependence Ave NWinsdale St
Olympia St
Naper St
St C ro ix Ave N June Ave NLegend DrLegendLn
General Mills BlvdBoone Ave NSunnyridge LnGlenwood Ave
Janalyn CirJanalyn CirGlencrest Rd Meadow Ln SWayzata BlvdWestwood Dr SWestwoodLn
StrawberryLnOttawa Ave NOttawa Ave SNatchez Ave S Tyrol Crest
SussexRdJune Ave SWayzata Blvd
FairlawnWayNatchez Ave SOttawa Ave SPrincetonAve SDouglas Ave
Circle DownTurners Crossroad SGolden Hills Dr
Laurel AveLaurel Ave
Hampshire Ave SDakota Ave SBrunswick Ave SKing Hill RdGlenwood Ave
Colonial Dr
Medicine Lake Rd
FloridaAveSAlley
Market StMarket St
Louisiana Ave SLaurel AvePennsylvania Ave SRhode Island Ave SSumter Ave S Winnetka Ave SUtah Ave SGregory Rd
Hanley RdVermontAve SWi
sc
o
ns
i
n
Ave SGeneral Mills BlvdHanley RdRidgeway Rd Winnetka Ave SLaurel Ave QubecAve S County Rd 102Nevada Ave SColonial RdLouisianaAveSKentucky Ave SJersey Ave SHeathbrookeCir
G le n w o o d P k w y
(Carriage Path)Xenia Ave SFlorida CtLilacD
r
NOlson Memorial Hwy
Schaper Rd
Lilac Dr NG o ld en V alley R dLilac Dr N(WoodlandTrail)(Wat.Dr)
BassettCreek Ln
(NobleDr)France Ave S (Mpls)N Frontage Rd
S Frontage Rd Olson Mem HwyAdair Ave NAdair Ave NWestbrookRd
34th Ave N
Mendelssohn Ave NAlley-Unimproved--U nimproved-
-Unimproved-
Wayzata Blvd
Wayzata BlvdBoone Ave NG o ld e n
V a lle y D rSchullerCirN F r o n t a g e R d
S F r o n t a g e R d
Rhode IslandAve N Pennsylvania Ave SAlley
Alley
(Private)AlleyAlleyLilac Dr NXerxes Ave N (Mpls)Harold Ave WestwoodDr
N
Ardmore DrT
h
e
o
d
o
r
e
Wirt
h
P
k
w
y
Tyrol Tr(Mendelssohn Ln)(WesleyCommonsDr)AlleyS Frontage RdAlley
AlpinePassBren
n
e
r
PassDou g la s Ave
QuentinAveSTyrol TrailTyro
l
Tr a ilSunset Ridge
Westw
oodDrS
RavineTrTyrol
Trai
l
J analyn C irMadd
usLn
MeadowLnS
AvondaleRdBurntsideDr S u nnyridgeLnBru
n
swickAveNBrookviewPkwySLeberLn
C loverleafDrCloverLnCloverleaf D
r TheodoreWirthPkwyBeverly Ave
B u rn tsideDrSpringValleyRdT
oledoAveN
Duluth
St
GoldenValle y R dSpringValleyCirC oun ty Rd 66
(Island Dr)(IslandDr)GoldenValley
Rd
TheodoreWirthPkwyW irth P kw y
W
ay
z
a
t
aBlvd
G le n w o o d P kwyPlymouthAve N (Mpls )ZenithAveNCrest
vi
ewA
ve
By r d A v e N
Hwy 55
Glenwood Ave
Bassett CreekDrLegend DrLeeAveNLeeAveNMajorAveNLeeAveNE l m daleRd
Adell A veM in n a q ua Dr M innaquaD r
ToledoAveNOrdwayM arkayRidge Orchard Ave NN o r m a n d y P l
CherokeePlQuailAveNRegentAveNTr ito n DrT r ito n D rL o w r y Ter
3
3rd
AveN
SandburgLn LamplighterL
n
BrookridgeAveNValeCrestRdWinfieldAveCounty Rd 66
P
ark
Place
Blv
d
(SLP)I-394SFr o n tage R d (SLP )Xeni
aAveSCounty Rd 70
L ilacD rNLilacDrNLilacD
r
NConstanceDrWConstanceDrESandburg Rd
S Frontage Rd
N Frontage Rd N Frontage RdOlsonMemorialHwy
S F r o n t a g e R d
O l s o n M e m o r ia lH w y
OlsonMemorialHwy Valleywo
odCirYosemite CirLawn TerRadisson Rd
Turnpike
RdA
lle
y
AlleyTu r npikeR
d Col
on
ial
Dr
GlenwoodAve
BrunswickAve NMeanderRd
MeanderRdIdahoAveNHaroldAve
Wayzata Blvd
I-394SFrontageRd
I-394 S Front a g e R d
WayzataBlvd
Edgewo
odAveSIdahoAveNCortlawnCirWCortlawn Cir S
CortlawnCirN
Dawnv i e wTerCounty Rd 70
EdgewoodAveSK in g CreekRdKentu
ckyAveNLouisianaAveNMarylandAve SRhodeIslandAveSRidgewayRdEwald T e rWestern Ter
FieldD r Brookview Pk w y N Harold Ave
HalfMoonDr
RidgewayRdB e tty CrockerDr
G oldenValleyR d(B a s sett Creek
Blvd)Lewis Rd
10th Ave N
EllisLnPlym outhAveN Plymouth Ave N
Faribault St
OrklaDrCastleCt Winnetka Heights D rKelly
Dr
Maryland
A
v
eNHampshire Pl
Olympia St
Oregon Ave NQuebecAveNValdersAveNOrklaDrKnoll S tWisconsin
AveNWinsdaleSt
Mandan
AveNCounty Rd 102AquilaAveNAquila
AveNZealandAveNJulianne Ter J u lia nneTerPatsy Ln
WisconsinAveNAquilaAveNWestbend Rd
WinnetkaHeightsDr
ZealandAveNOrklaDrValdersCtValdersAve NWinnetkaHeights Dr
A q uilaAveNZealandAveNS cottAveNRose
ManorDuluthSt
Duluth St CavellAveNEnsignAveNEl g in Pl
23 rd Ave N
Medle y L n
(Medley Rd)
(Medley C ir)H illsboroAveN(English Cir
)(MayfairR
d)(Kin
g
sV a l l e y Rd)(K ings
V
al
leyRdE)(KingsVall
e
yRd W )
(
S
tr
o
d
e
n
C
ir)(Tama rin Tr )
(Mar
qui
sRd)WheelerBlvdSki Hill
R
d MajorCirLeeAveNMajorAveNRhodeIslandAveNG o ld en V alleyR d
G o ld e n V a lle y R dG olden V alleyR d
Hwy100H
w
y
10
0Hwy100Hwy100Hwy100Hwy100
H w y 3 9 4
Hwy 394 Hwy 394
Hwy 394 Hwy 394ColoradoAve NHwy169Hwy169Hwy169Hwy169Hwy169Colorado Ave SGoldenHills DrPaisleyLnPaisleyLn
I-394NFrontageRd I -3 9 4 N Frontage Rd
WayzataBlvd
I-394SFrontag e R d
York
AveNValeryRdW
asatchLn
Hwy 55
Hwy 55
H w y 5 5
O l s o n M e m o r i a l H w yHwy 55
H w y 5 5
County Rd 40
County Rd 40 Glenwood A v e
CountyR d 4 0
CountyRd40
GoldenValley R d
C o u nty Rd 66ManchesterDr
County Rd 156OregonAveS24th Ave N
LilacDrNRoanokeRdLouisianaAveN
Turnpike RdLilacLoop (Sunnyridge Ln)WisconsinAveN
GettysburgCt(Laurel Pt)
(Laure lCurv)456766
456770
456766
456740
456740
4567156
4567102
§¨¦394
§¨¦394
Æÿ55
Æÿ55
Æÿ100
Æÿ100
£¤169
£¤169
M
edi
c
i
neLakeBranchIkePond
Colonial Pond
Ottawa Pond
Glen-woodPond
EgretPond
DuluthNorthPondLilacPond
DuluthPond
St.CroixPond
Chicago Pond
LilacPond
Pond CTurners PondGlen 1 Pond
DuckPond
Loop EPond
Loop FPond Sweeney LakeWirth LakeTwin LakeB a s s ett C re e k
Hampshire Pond
DecolaPond A
NorthRicePond
West RingPond
Cortlawn Pond
DecolaPonds B & C
Westwood Lake
SchaperPond
SouthRicePond
East RingPond Bassett CreekDecolaPondE
DecolaPond F
BreckPond
NatchezPond
MinnaquaPond
WirthPond
Toledo/AngeloPond
HoneywellPond
StrawberryPond
DecolaPond D
Bas
s
e
tt Cr
ee
k
BassettC
r
e
e
k
Basset
t
Cr
eekBassettC r e e k
BassettC reekSweeney L akeBranchSweeney Lake BranchNW LoopPondBoone Avenue PondMain Stem
Pond B
Pond C
Bassett Creek NatureArea Pond
Medicine Lake
BrookviewPond A
Hidden LakesPond 1
Pond 2A
Pond 2B
Pond 3
Schaper BallfieldPond
Pond O
Pond J
Spirit of Hope Church Pond
GoldenRidgePond
Golden Meadows Pond
SoccerFieldPond
WestPond
201GeneralMillsPond
HaroldPond
Medicine Lake Road Pond
Xenia MitigationPond
10th AvePond
SpringPond
Briar-woodPond
LaurelHills Pond
JFB NWPond
LogisPond
BrownieLake
BirchPond
MinnaquaWetland
GrimesPondBassett CreekPark Pond
SweeneyLakeBranchPond M
Pond F
Pond DP
ond E
BrookviewGolf Course
LionsPark
WesleyPark
Sochacki Park
SchaperPark
ScheidParkHampshirePark
MedleyPark
Briarwood
Laurel Avenue Greenbelt
Glenview TerracePark
North TyrolPark
Western AvenueMarsh
Nature
Area
GeartyPark
Sandburg AthleticFacility
NatchezPark
ValleyView ParkPennsylvaniaWoods
BassettCreekNature Area
WildwoodPark
IsaacsonPark
SouthTyrol Park
SeemanPark
AdelineNature Area
YosemitePark
StockmanPark
Golden OaksPark
St CroixPark
LakeviewPark
SweeneyPark
Perpich CenterBall Fields
Ronald B. Davis Community Center
Brookview Park
Westwood HillsNature Center (SLP)
(MPRB)
Theodore WirthRegional Park
Eloise Butler WildflowerGarden and Bird Sanctuary
Wirth LakeBeach
Golden RidgeNature Area
General Mills NaturePreserve
General Mills ResearchNature Area
BooneOpenSpace
GoldenHills Pond
MadisonPond
SouthTyrolPond
LibraryHill
IdahoWetland
GeorgiaOpen Space
ArdmoreNorth&SouthPonds
JanalynPond
MeadowPond
S p a c e
Plymouth
O p e nAvenue
OrklaOpenSpace
PicnicPavilion
Chalet
SochackiPark (Three Rivers Park Dist.)
Bassett Valley Open Space
ByrdBluffOpenSpace
→
FishingDock
PaisleyPark
XeniaOpenSpace
DahlbergOpenSpace
Minnaqua Greenbelt
(TRPD)
(Mpls Park & Rec Board)
City of G old en Va lley7800 Go lden Valley R oadGolden Valle y, MN 554 27-458 8763-593 -8030www.golde nvalle ymn .go v
0 800 1,600 2,400 3,200400Feet
I
Print Date: 10/4/2017Sources:-Hennepin County Surveyors Office for Property Lines (2017) -City of Golden Valley for all other layers.
Pavement ManagementCapital Improvement Plan
NOTE: THE SCHEDULE SHOWN ON THIS MAP IS A PLAN ONLY AND IS SUBJECT TO CHANGE.
Year Programmed
2017 1.11 miles local
2018 1.30 miles local
2019 1.51 miles local, 0.80 miles State Aid
2020 1.27 miles local
2021 1.33 miles local
2022 1.27 miles local
2023 1.22 miles local
Not Programed
Other Street
Appendix C
City Ordinances
3.30
Section 3.30: Rules and Regulations Relating to
Sanitary Sewer Service
The following apply only to sanitary sewer service.
Subdivision 1. Metered Water Not Discharged
If a portion of the water furnished to any premises is consumed and not directly or
indirectly discharged into the sanitary sewer system, the consumer may request a
separate water meter for the portion of the water consumed and not discharged in
the sanitary sewer. There shall be no sanitary sewer charges associated with the
water meter account for water consumed but not discharged to the sanitary sewer
system.
Subdivision 2. Deleterious Substances
Metropolitan Council Environmental Services standards shall control disposal of
types of substances discharged.
Source: Ordinance No. 351, 2nd Series
Effective Date: 10-13-06
Subdivision 3. Unlawful Discharge
Except as otherwise expressly authorized in this subdivision, no water from any roof
surface, sump pump, footing tile or drains, swimming pool, any other natural
precipitation or groundwater, cooling water or industrial process shall be discharged
into the sanitary sewer system or infiltrate into the sanitary sewer system as a
result of defective plumbing or a defective lateral sewer service. Dwellings,
buildings and structures with sump pumps or footing tiles or drains shall have a
permanently installed discharge line which shall not at any time discharge water
into the sanitary sewer system, except as provided herein. A permanent installation
shall be one which provides for year-round discharge capability to either the outside
of the dwelling, building or structure, or is connected to a city storm sewer or
draintile. It shall consist of a rigid discharge line without valving or quick
connections for altering the path of discharge or a system otherwise approved by
the City Manager or his/her designee.
A. Any person, firm or corporation having a roof surface, ground water sump
pump, footing tile or drain, swimming pool, cooling water or unpolluted
industrial process water now connected and/or discharging into the sanitary
sewer system shall disconnect or remove the same. Any disconnects
openings, or defects in the sanitary sewer system shall be closed or repaired
in an effective, workmanlike manner with the proper permits and inspected
by a representative of the City. If a City draintile or storm sewer system is
available to the property these discharges may be connected to it. If a public
system is not utilized, these discharges must be accommodated on the
owner's property.
B. Any property owner or consumer applying for a plumbing permit (excluding
permits for water heaters), variance, minor subdivision or other action from
the City shall agree to an inspection of the structure's sump pump, footing or
foundation drain discharge for compliance with this code. All inspections and
Golden Valley City Code Page 1 of 5
3.30
inspection reports must include a date-stamped video record of the complete
lateral line from the property to sewer main. All inspections must be
performed and reports completed in accordance with City standards and
specifications. In lieu of having the City inspect the property, the owner may
furnish a certificate from a licensed plumber in a form acceptable to the City,
certifying that the inside of the property owner's home, or other building(s)
on the property, is (are) is in compliance with this Chapter, that the licensed
plumber completing the certification was the individual who performed the
inspection, that he or she is licensed to perform such inspections, and that
the videotape of the lateral line is accurate. The date-stamped video record
shall be submitted to the City and reviewed and approved by the City for
assessment of compliance with this section of the Code. Requested actions
shall not be forwarded to City boards or commissions or the City Council for
review until the discharges are in full compliance with this section of City
Code.
C. Every person owning real estate to which sanitary sewer service is provided
shall allow the City or a designated representative of the City to inspect the
buildings, if any, to confirm there is no sump pump or other prohibited
discharge into the sanitary sewer system. In lieu of having the City inspect
such property, the owner may no later than thirty (30) days after mailed
written notice from the City that the property is subject to inspection, furnish
a certificate from a licensed plumber in a form acceptable to the City,
certifying that the property is in compliance with this Chapter. All inspections
and inspection reports must include a date-stamped video record of the
complete lateral line from the property to the sewer main. All inspections
must be performed and reports completed in accordance with City standards
and specifications. In lieu of having the City inspect the property, the owner
may furnish a certificate from a licensed plumber in a form acceptable to the
City, certifying that the inside of the property owner's home is in compliance
with this Chapter, that the licensed plumber completing the certification was
the individual who performed the inspection, that he or she is licensed to
perform such inspections, and that the video record of the lateral line is
accurate. The date-stamped video record shall be submitted to the City and
reviewed and approved by the City for assessment of compliance with this
section of the Code. The City may inspect or re-inspect any buildings to
confirm there is no sump pump or other prohibited discharge into the
sanitary sewer system with a valid warrant.
Source: Ordinance No. 405, 2nd Series
Effective Date: 08-29-08
D. All new structures with sumps for which a building permit is issued shall be
plumbed to the outside of the dwelling, and connected to a City draintile or
storm sewer system, if available, before a certificate of occupancy is issued
except that upon City approval discharge may be made to privately or
publicly-owned infiltration basins. A maintenance agreement with the City is
required for any such basin in the right-of-way.
Source: Ordinance No. 354, 2nd Series
Effective Date: 12-15-06
Golden Valley City Code Page 2 of 5
3.30
E. Any property with a sump pump found not in compliance with this Code but
subsequently verified as compliant shall be subject to an annual re-inspection
to confirm continued compliance. If that property is found not to be in
compliance upon re-inspection, or any person refusing to allow their property
to be re-inspected within thirty (30) days after receipt of mailed written
notice from the City, or failing to furnish a certificate certifying compliance
with this Chapter from a licensed plumber in a form acceptable to the City as
described in subdivision 3, sections (B) and (C), that property shall be
subject to a nonrefundable surcharge of five hundred ($500) dollars per
month, to be imposed on each sewer bill thereafter to that property until the
noncompliance or refusal to allow entry is corrected. All properties found
during any re-inspection to have violated this section shall be subject to a
nonrefundable monthly surcharge that is double the previously charged
surcharge. The nonrefundable surcharge for all properties which are not
single family residential shall be one thousand ($1,000) dollars per month.
F. In the event a foundation drain is connected to the sanitary sewer service it
shall not only be disconnected but the property owner shall install a sump
basket and pump properly discharged outside the structure to provide
adequate drainage from the foundation drain system.
Source: Ordinance No. 405, 2nd Series
Effective Date: 08-29-08
Subdivision 4. Winter Discharge
The City Manager or his/her designee is authorized to permit a property owner to
discharge clear water into the sanitary sewer system. Prior to issuance of the
permit the City Manager or his/her designee must verify that the criteria to issue
the permit have been satisfied. The fee for this permit shall be in an amount to be
fixed by the Council and adopted by ordinance. The permit shall authorize such
discharge only from November 15 to March 15, shall require the owner to permit an
inspection of the property on March 16 or as soon thereafter as possible to
determine that discharge into the sanitary sewer has been discontinued and shall
subject the owner to a five hundred ($500) dollar monthly non-refundable
surcharge in the event the owner refuses an inspection or has failed to discontinue
the discharge into the sanitary sewer. The non-refundable charge will commence
with the April water billing and continue until the property owner establishes
compliance with this section. A property owner is required to meet at least one (1)
of the following criteria in order to obtain a permit:
A. The freezing of the discharge from the sump pump, footing or foundation
drain is causing a dangerous condition, such as ice buildup or flooding, on
either public or private property.
B. The property owner has demonstrated that there is a danger that the sump
pump, footing or foundation drain pipes will freeze up and result in either
failure or damage to the sump pump unit or the footing or foundation drain
and cause basement flooding.
C. The water being discharged from the sump pump, footing or foundation drain
cannot be readily discharged into a city draintile or storm sewer system or
other acceptable drainage system.
Golden Valley City Code Page 3 of 5
3.30
Following ten (10) days written notice and an opportunity to be heard, the City
Manager or his/her designee may require the owners of the property to discharge
their sump pump or footing or foundation drain into the sanitary sewer from
November 15 to March 15 if the discharge is causing an icy condition on streets.
Subdivision 5. Separate Connections
A separate sewer service connection shall be provided for each building, except
where one (1) building stands at the rear of another on an interior lot and no such
separate connection is available, provided that more than one (1) service may be
connected to the sewer system through one (1) connection where a manhole is
provided and the City has specifically approved the arrangement.
Source: Ordinance No. 351, 2nd Series
Effective Date: 10-13-06
Subdivision 6. Materials
Where any pipe or other material is found in repairing a sewer service which does
not then meet the requirements of the State Building Code or current City
standards and specifications, the repaired or replaced portion of the sewer service
pipe shall comply with current City standards and codes and shall be removed and
replaced at the expense of the consumer.
Source: Ordinance No. 354, 2nd Series
Effective Date: 12-15-06
Subdivision 7. Elevation
Wherever possible, the sewer service shall be brought to the building to be served
at an elevation below the floor of the lowest level in the building. No such service
shall be laid parallel to or within three (3) feet of any bearing wall. The depth shall
be sufficient to afford protection from frost. To the extent possible, the sewer
service shall be laid at uniform grade and in straight alignment. If the service is too
low to afford gravity flow, an appropriate device shall be installed for lifting sewage
to the service.
Subdivision 8. Connections
Wherever possible, the sewer service shall be connected to the wye provided or the
stub at the lot line. If such connection cannot be used, the main may be tapped
upon the approval of the City and at the expense of the owner. All connections
must be constructed in accordance with the current City standards, be
appropriately permitted, and be inspected by the City.
Subdivision 9. Ownership of Sewer Service Lateral
The property owner shall own and be responsible for the maintenance of the
sanitary sewer service lateral between the sanitary sewer main within the street
and the building being served, including the connection to the main.
Subdivision 10. Unmetered Water Supply
The discharge of sewage into the sewer system from water sources other than the
City's water supply is prohibited without a permit from the City and shall include
metering of the water supply or discharge. The metered supply or discharge must
use meters purchased from the City.
Golden Valley City Code Page 4 of 5
3.30
Subdivision 11. Additional Rules and Regulations
The Council may, by resolution, adopt such additional rules and regulations relating
to placement, size and type of equipment as it, in its discretion, deems necessary
or desirable. Copies of such additional rules and regulations shall be kept on file in
the office of the City Manager or his/her designee, and uniformly enforced.
Source: Ordinance No. 351, 2nd Series
Effective Date: 10-13-06
Golden Valley City Code Page 5 of 5
93.31
Section 3.31: Certificate of Inflow and
Infiltration ("1&1") Compliance
Subdivision 1. Required
No person shall sell, advertise for sale, give or transact a change in title or property
ownership of real property with one (1) or more buildings or structures, without
first obtaining a certificate of 1&1 compliance from the City or complying with Subd.
5 hereof.
Source: Ordinance No. 370, 2nd Series
Effective Date: 5-25-07
Subdivision 2. Application and Fees
A. Unless the property owner already has a certificate of 1&1 compliance for a
property, the owner or owner's representative is required to apply for a
certificate and complete an inspection thereof before such property is offered
for sale, gifted or transferred, and before the owner or owner's
representative enters into any contract for deed or other transaction
changing the party responsible for the property. Even if the property owner
already has a certificate of 1&1 compliance, if it is more than one (1) year old,
a sump pump inspection is required for all properties containing sump
pumps.
Source: Ordinance No. 405, 2nd Series
Effective Date: 08-29-08
B. At the time of application, the applicant for either a certificate of 1&1
compliance or a sump pump inspection shall pay the appropriate application
fee. Such fees shall be set from time to time by the City.
Source: Ordinance No. 370, 2nd Series
Effective Date: 5-25-07
Subdivision 3. Inspection
The applicant for a certificate of 1&1 compliance or sump pump inspection is
responsible for providing an inspection of the property after making application and
payment of fees. An inspection shall be made either 1) by the City or 2) by a
licensed plumber to determine whether the property use is in accordance with City
sanitary sewer service regulations, as provided in Section 3.30 of this Chapter. The
entire property and all buildings on the property shall be made available for
inspection.
Source: Ordinance No. 405, 2nd Series
Effective Date: 08-29-08
Golden Valley City Code Page 1 of 3
S 3.31
Subdivision 4. Compliance and Expiration
A. Upon inspection, when the property use is in accordance with City sanitary
sewer services regulations, a certificate of 1&1 compliance will be issued
by the City.
Source: Ordinance No. 370, 2nd Series
Effective Date: 5-25-07
6. A Certificate of 1&1 compliance is valid to be used for the transfer of property.
C. The certificate of 1&1 compliance must be conspicuously displayed on the
premises at all times when the property is being shown for sale and the
owner is responsible for informing any potential buyers, gift recipients or
other persons to whom he or she intends to transfer title as to his receipt of
the certificate of 1&1 compliance.
D. If, within one (1) year of the issue of a certificate of 1&1 compliance, the
owner named on the certificate of 1&1 compliance does not agree to an
inspection of the structure's sump pump, footing or foundation drain
discharge, or furnish a certificate from a licensed plumber in a form
acceptable to the City as described in Section 3.30, subd. 3, sections (6) and
C), certifying that the property is in compliance with this Chapter, when
required by Section 3.30, subd. 3(6) of this Chapter, the certificate is
immediately void. Such inspections trigger the administrative sanctions found
in Section 3.30, subd. 3 of this Chapter.
Source: Ordinance No. 405, 2nd Series
Effective Date: 08-29-08
Subdivision 5. Correction Notice
If an inspection discloses that use of a property is not in accordance with City
sanitary sewer service regulations, a correction notice may be issued by the City
permitting the transfer of property, providing;
A. An agreement by the owner or owner's representative has been executed
with the City, whereby the owner or owner's representative agrees to
complete corrections to the property necessary to bring it within compliance
of the City sanitary sewer service regulations, Section 3.30 of this Chapter
within sixty (60) days of the transfer of property.
6. A security to ensure completion of any corrections to the property must be
posted with the closing agent in the form of an escrow, or with the City when
a closing agent is not involved, at the time of property transfer or closing.
The security shall be in an amount at least equal to one hundred twenty-five
percent (125%) of the retail value of the work necessary for compliance with
this Section. The escrow must be fully maintained until a certificate of 1&1
compliance is issued. A correction notice shall not be issued for more than
one hundred eighty (180) days following the first inspection of the property,
Golden Valley City Code Page 2 of 3
9 3.31
but it may be extended for additional periods up to one hundred eighty (180)
days each by the City Manager's designee.
The owner (or transferor) and any real estate agents involved in the transaction are
responsible for disclosing the correction notice to the transferee and all other
persons or entities involved in the transaction. The responsibility for repairing any
nonconformance with the sanitary sewer service regulations runs with the land and
not only rests with the owner or transferor but is also an obligation of the
transferee(s) of the property.
Source: Ordinance No. 370, 2nd Series
Effective Date: 5-25-07
Subdivision 6. Sanctions
At all times during the certification process, the owner is responsible for any
sanctions or surcharges under Section 3.30, subd. 4 of this Chapter.
Source: Ordinance No. 351, 2nd Series
Effective Date: 10-13-06
Subdivision 7. Repeated Inspection
Upon inspection, when the property use is not legal in accordance with City sanitary
sewer service regulations, the owner shall be entitled to a second inspection to be
scheduled within ninety (90) days of the original inspection. If, as a result of this
inspection, the City inspector determines (or a licensed plumber certifies and the
certified videotape is determined by the City to be compliant) that all violations of
City sanitary sewer regulations have been corrected, the City shall immediately
issue a certificate of 1&1 compliance.
Source: Ordinance No. 405, 2nd Series
Effective Date: 08-29-08
Subdivision 8. Previously Issued Certificates
Certificates of sewer regulations compliance issued under prior laws between
January 1, 2007 and May 31, 2007 shall have the same force and effect as
certificates of 1&1 compliance issued under this section 3.31. Temporary certificates
of sewer regulations compliance issued under prior laws between January I, 2007
and May 31, 2007 shall have the same force and effect as provided under prior
laws.
Source: Ordinance No. 370, 2nd Series
Effective Date: 5-25-07
Golden Valley City Code Page 3 of 3
3.32
Section 3.32: Discharge of Fats, Oils, and
Grease (FOG)
Subdivision 1. Installation
Any existing, new, renovated, or expanded Food Service Facility must install a
Grease Interceptor/Trap upon notice by the City that it has been determined that
the Fat, Oil and Grease discharge from such Food Service Facility significantly
impacts the City sewer system requiring undue additional maintenance. Upon
notification, the Food Service Facility shall have a period of time stated in the
notice, not exceeding one (1) calendar year, to install the Grease Interceptor/Trap.
Subdivision 2. Design
All Grease Interceptors/Traps must be designed and installed in accordance with
the State of Minnesota Plumbing Code (MN Rule 4715) and the Hennepin County
Environmental Health Department.
Subdivision 3. Location
All Grease Interceptors/Traps shall be located as to be readily and easily accessible
for cleaning and inspection.
Subdivision 4. Annual Maintenance Record
By April 1 of each year, Food Service Facilities with Grease Interceptors/Traps must
submit annual maintenance records to the City on a form that is provided by the
City. The City may also perform periodic inspections of Food Service Facilities to
ensure that Grease Interceptors/Traps are being properly maintained by each Food
Service Facility.
Subdivision 5. Installation and Maintenance Policy and Procedures
The City shall maintain an Installation and Maintenance Policy and Procedures
which will document specific requirements of this Section. This policy will be
available to each Food Service Facility at the City.
Subdivision 6. Additional Control Measures
The City reserves the right to require additional control measures if existing Grease
Interceptors/Traps are determined to be insufficient to protect the wastewater
collection system from interference due to the discharge of FOG from the Food
Service Facility.
Source: Ordinance No. 531, 2nd Series
Effective Date: 10-31-14
Golden Valley City Code Page 1 of 1
Appendix D
2016 Meter Analysis
Executive Summary – 2016 Meter Review and Analysis
Page 1 of 4
Metropolitan Council Environmental Services (MCES) prepared this Executive Summary for the public
works community as a supplement to the Brown and Caldwell (B&C) Meter Review and Analysis
technical memorandum (Report) received on December 8, 2016 (attached). The B&C Report used
measured rainfall data, measured wastewater flows, and a computational model to determine the
amount of flow reduction that can be attributed to inflow and infiltration (I/I) mitigation. Rainfall data
were collected from 2004 through 2015 and wastewater flow data were collected during two
monitoring periods: pre-rehabilitation from 2004 to 2007, and post-rehabilitation from 2013 to 2015.
The monitoring periods occurred before and after I/I mitigation activities were completed in many
communities in the region, including those chosen for this analysis.
The results of the analysis indicate that I/I flows were reduced at rates from 11% to 75% in the
communities selected. The rate of reduction appears to have a positive correlation with the amount of
I/I mitigation reported. A summary of the key points of the Report is included below.
Section 1: Introduction
The section describes the approach used by B&C for the meter review and analysis. Given that
wastewater flows have reduced in the region in recent years, this evaluation was completed to
determine if the reduced flows could be attributed to I/I mitigation projects. The evaluation used a
hydrological modelling software to compare wastewater flow data for the two monitoring periods. The
modeling approach used wastewater flow rates that occurred during a wide-range of rainfall events,
and therefore, increased the reliability of the model. With this modeling approach, the results could be
processed to determine a statistical once in 10-year recurrence interval of a peak flow event. The
recurrence interval is the likelihood of a given wastewater flow amount, regardless of whether the flow
was influenced by a single rainfall or the combination of many smaller rainfall events. This approach
was used to account for the effects of antecedent conditions (soil moisture, surface water elevations,
etc.) that can affect the base and peak flow associated with I/I.
Section 2: Data Evaluation
This section describes the process and data used to determine which wastewater areas (metersheds)
were used for the analysis. The data sets included hourly wastewater flow measurements recorded by
MCES for twenty communities within the metropolitan region and rainfall measurements from the
National Weather Service and the Minneapolis-St Paul (MSP) airport rain gauge. The twenty sites
were evaluated to determine which had the most complete and useful data sets for this evaluation.
These locations were also evaluated for criteria such as relative amount of I/I mitigation efforts,
presence of MCES facilities in the metershed, and completeness of data for upstream tributaries.
Using these criteria, three metersheds were chosen for analysis and one metershed was selected as
a control. The communities selected for evaluation were Shoreview, Golden Valley, Minneapolis, and
Burnsville (control). For each metershed used in the analysis, the Report identifies the I/I mitigation
activities documented, rainfall and wastewater flow data sets used, and a map of the contributing
area(s).
Section 3: Flow reduction Analysis
This section describes the technical aspects of the analysis and includes the modeling tools, inputs to
the model, calibration techniques, outputs, and the flow reduction results. The Report includes
descriptions of the calibration approach used including model output hydrographs and flow
comparison charts, as well as data gaps and the percent error of results.
Executive Summary – 2016 Meter Review and Analysis
Page 2 of 4
The measured and predicted wastewater flows were statistically compared to determine the
differences in total flow and I/I flow between the two monitoring periods. If the measured wastewater
flow was less than the model-predicted wastewater flow in the post-rehabilitation period, then there
was a reduction in flow. The I/I flow rate is the difference between the total peak flow and the base
flow. Flow reductions are presented for a 10-year recurrence interval in the table below and in chart
form on the following pages.
Section 4: Summary
This section includes a description of the results which show that there has been a decrease in I/I flow
for each community evaluated – except for the control site – as expected. The flow reductions and
contributing factors are described below;
‐ The most significant reductions occurred at M101 in Minneapolis. The flow reductions were
69% for peak flow and 75% for I/I flow. The measured flow data also indicate the sharp peaks
in flow previously exhibited during rainfall events were not as notable in the post-rehab period.
Minneapolis completed extensive private and public rehabilitation efforts between the
monitoring periods, with emphasis on disconnection of storm water inflow sources.
‐ The flow reductions for M117 in Golden Valley were 24% for peak flow and 28% for I/I flow.
Golden Valley completed private and public rehabilitation efforts between the monitoring
periods, with emphasis on sewer main and service lateral infiltration sources.
‐ The results for M048 in Shoreview indicate that the base flow was reduced by greater
percentages than the peak flow or I/I flow. The flow reductions in were Shoreview were 17%
for peak flow and 11% for I/I flow. Shoreview reported rehabilitation of public infrastructure
between the monitoring periods, with emphasis on sewer main rehabilitation.
‐ The 4% reduction in peak flows at site M501A in Burnsville is likely due to the 6% reduction in
base flow, which is consistent with the regional base flow reduction of roughly 8%. The flows
through M501A included contributions from upstream metersheds in portions of Apple Valley,
Lakeville, and Savage.
This section also includes notes on limitations of data inputs, calibration, and use of results. The
approach used assumed that changes within each community- including mitigation work during the
flow monitoring periods, growth, water conservation, and system degradation- were not considered
and are not expected to have material influence on the results.
Base
Flow
Peak
Flow I/I Flow Base
Flow
Peak
Flow I/I Flow Base
Flow
Peak
Flow I/I Flow
Shoreview
M048 1.5 3.7 2.1 1.2 3.1 1.9 24% 17%11%
Minneapolis
SW M101 13.9 155 140 12.3 47 35 11% 69%75%
Golden Valley
M117 2.3 12.9 10.9 2.2 9.8 7.8 5% 24%28%
Burnsville
M501A 7.8 17.8 9.3 7.4 17.1 9.3 6% 4%0%
Pre-Rehab (mgd) Post-Rehab (mgd) Reduction
Metershed
Results Summary
Executive Summary – 2016 Meter Review and Analysis
Page 3 of 4
Figure 1: Shoreview (M048) peak hourly flow recurrence intervals
Figure 2: Minneapolis (M101) peak hourly flow recurrence intervals
Executive Summary – 2016 Meter Review and Analysis
Page 4 of 4
Figure 3: Golden Valley (M117) peak hourly flow recurrence intervals
Figure 4: Burnsville (M501A) peak hourly flow recurrence intervals
Technical Memorandum
30 7th Street East, Suite 2500
Saint Paul, MN 55101
T: 651.298.0710
F: 651.298.1931
Prepared for: Metropolitan Council Environmental Services
Project Title: I/I Task Force Assistance
Project No.: 149008
Technical Memorandum
Subject: Meter Review and Analysis
Date: December 8, 2016
To: Jeannine Clancy, Metropolitan Council Environmental Services
Marcus Bush, Metropolitan Council Environmental Services
From: Andy Lukas, Brown and Caldwell
Copy to: Chuck Lewis, Brown and Caldwell
Prepared by:
Erica Schierholz
Reviewed by:
David Perry
MCES Meter Review and Analysis
ii
Table of Contents
List of Figures ............................................................................................................................................................ ii
List of Tables ............................................................................................................................................................. iii
List of Abbreviations ................................................................................................................................................. 1
Section 1: Introduction ............................................................................................................................................. 2
Section 2: Data Evaluation and Selection .............................................................................................................. 3
2.1 Monitoring Data ............................................................................................................................................... 3
2.2 Site Selection ................................................................................................................................................... 6
2.2.1 Site 1: M048, Shoreview ................................................................................................................... 8
2.2.2 Site 2: M101, Minneapolis Southwest ........................................................................................... 11
2.2.3 Site 3: M117, Golden Valley ........................................................................................................... 14
2.2.4 Site 4 (Control): M501A, Burnsville ................................................................................................ 17
Section 3: Flow Reduction Analysis ....................................................................................................................... 19
3.1 Modeling Tools and Calibration Parameters ............................................................................................... 19
3.2 Model Output Hydrographs ........................................................................................................................... 21
3.2.1 Site 1: M048, Shoreview ................................................................................................................. 21
3.2.2 Site 2: M101, Minneapolis Southwest ........................................................................................... 24
3.2.3 Site 3: M117, Golden Valley ........................................................................................................... 28
3.2.4 Site 4: M501A, Burnsville ............................................................................................................... 31
3.2.5 Calibration Summary ....................................................................................................................... 35
3.3 Flow Reduction Results ................................................................................................................................. 36
Section 4: Summary ............................................................................................................................................... 41
References .............................................................................................................................................................. 43
List of Figures
Figure 2-1. MCES flow monitoring sites .................................................................................................................. 5
Figure 2-2. Site 1: Shoreview M048 metershed map ............................................................................................ 9
Figure 2-3. Site 1: Shoreview M048 monitoring data .......................................................................................... 10
Figure 2-4. Site 2: Minneapolis Southwest M101 metershed map .................................................................... 12
Figure 2-5. Site 2: Minneapolis Southwest M101 monitoring data .................................................................... 13
Figure 2-6. Site 3: Golden Valley M117 metershed map .................................................................................... 15
Figure 2-7. Site 3: Golden Valley M117 monitoring data .................................................................................... 16
Figure 2-9. Site 4: Burnsville M501A monitoring data......................................................................................... 17
Figure 2-8. Site 4: Burnsville M501A metershed map......................................................................................... 18
MCES Meter Review and Analysis
iii
Figure 3-1. Model parameter input screen ........................................................................................................... 19
Figure 3-2. Site 1: M048, pre-rehab and post-rehab flow data using pre-rehab model parameters ............... 21
Figure 3-3. Site 1: M048, example of pre-rehab flow data using pre-rehab model parameters ...................... 22
Figure 3-4. Site 1: M048, example of post-rehab flow data using pre-rehab model parameters ..................... 22
Figure 3-5. Site 1: M048, pre-rehab and post-rehab flow data using post-rehab model parameters .............. 23
Figure 3-6. Site 1: M048, example of post-rehab flow data using post-rehab model parameters ................... 24
Figure 3-7. Site 2: M101, pre-rehab and post-rehab flow data using pre-rehab model parameters ............... 25
Figure 3-8. Site 2: M101, example of pre-rehab flow data using pre-rehab model parameters ...................... 26
Figure 3-9. Site 2: M101, example of post-rehab flow data using pre-rehab model parameters ..................... 26
Figure 3-10. Site 2: M101, pre-rehab and post-rehab flow data using post-rehab model parameters ........... 27
Figure 3-11. Site 2: M101, example of post-rehab flow data using post-rehab model parameters ................. 27
Figure 3-12. Site 3: M117, pre-rehab and post-rehab flow data using pre-rehab model parameters ............. 28
Figure 3-13. Site 3: M117, example of pre-rehab flow data using pre-rehab model parameters .................... 29
Figure 3-14. Site M117, example of post-rehab flow data using pre-rehab model parameters ....................... 29
Figure 3-15. Site 3: M117, pre-rehab and post-rehab flow data with post-rehab model .................................. 30
Figure 3-16. Site 3: M117, example of post-rehab flow data with post-rehab model ....................................... 31
Figure 3-17. Site 4: M501A, pre-rehab and post-rehab flow data with pre-rehab model ................................. 32
Figure 3-18. Site 4: M501A, example of pre-rehab flow data with pre-rehab model ........................................ 32
Figure 3-19. Site 4: M501A, example of post-rehab flow data with pre-rehab model ....................................... 33
Figure 3-20. Site 4: M501A, pre-rehab and post-rehab flow data with post-rehab model ................................ 34
Figure 3-21. Site 4: M501A, example of post-rehab flow data with post-rehab model ..................................... 34
Figure 3-22. Site 1: M048 pre-rehab and post-rehab peak hourly flow recurrence intervals ........................... 37
Figure 3-23. Site 2: M101 pre-rehab and post-rehab peak hourly flow recurrence intervals ........................... 38
Figure 3-24. Site 3: M117 pre-rehab and post-rehab peak hourly flow recurrence intervals ........................... 39
Figure 3-25. Site 4: M501A pre-rehab and post-rehab peak hourly flow recurrence intervals ......................... 40
List of Tables
Table 2-1. Flow Monitoring Sites ............................................................................................................................. 3
Table 2-2. Available Metershed Information .......................................................................................................... 6
Table 3-1. CAPE Modeling Parameters ................................................................................................................. 20
Table 3-2. Model Calibration Summary................................................................................................................. 35
Table 3-3. Flow Reduction Summary .................................................................................................................... 36
MCES Meter Review and Analysis
1
List of Abbreviations
BC Brown and Caldwell
CAPE Capacity Assurance Planning Environment
City City of Minneapolis
CSO combined sewer overflow
EPA U.S. Environmental Protection Agency
HSPF Hydrologic Simulation Program-Fortran
I/I inflow and infiltration
in/hr inch(es) per hour
ISURO impervious land surface runoff (HSPF runoff generation component)
LF linear foot/feet
MCES Metropolitan Council Environmental Services
mgd million gallons per day
MSP Minneapolis-St. Paul International Airport
NCDC National Climatic Data Center
NEXRAD Next Generation Weather Radar
NWS National Weather Service
PAGWO pervious land active groundwater (HSPF runoff generation component)
PIFWO pervious land interflow groundwater (HSPF runoff generation component)
post-rehab post-rehabilitation
pre-rehab pre-rehabilitation
PSURO pervious land surface runoff (HSPF runoff generation component)
RTK R: percentage of rainfall that the enters the sanitary sewer as I/I
T: time to peak flow
K: ratio of time to recession to time to peak
SWMM Storm Water Management Model
TM technical memorandum
USGS U.S. Geological Survey
MCES Meter Review and Analysis
2
Section 1: Introduction
This technical memorandum (TM) describes the Meter Review and Analysis task (Task 4) for the Metropoli-
tan Council Environmental Services (MCES) Inflow and Infiltration (I/I) Task Force Assistance project, and
summarizes the evaluation and peak flow reductions.
Task 4 of the I/I Task Force Assistance project includes gathering, reviewing, and evaluating flow and rainfall
data for several communities; determining the usefulness of the data for analysis; and evaluating flow reduc-
tion at four selected metering sites using hydrologic modeling tools.
Mitigation efforts to reduce I/I flows entering the sanitary sewer collection system continue in many commu-
nities discharging to the MCES collection system. The effectiveness of these I/I mitigation efforts can be ob-
served in the flow meter records for these areas. When comparing pre-rehabilitation (pre-rehab) and post-
rehabilitation (post-rehab) periods, a reduced wastewater flow response to rainfall can be a result of I/I miti-
gation. Quantifying the I/I flow reduction, however, is complicated by wet weather conditions, such as soil
moisture and groundwater levels, that vary between large rainfall events. These conditions that exist prior to
each rainfall event are known as antecedent conditions. Wastewater flows attributable to I/I vary based on
the intensity of wet weather, antecedent soil conditions, and the amount of the infiltration into the collection
system.
Reduction of measured flow between the pre-rehab and post-rehab periods could be evidence of flow reduc-
tion due to I/I mitigation or it could be the result of dry conditions and less rainfall. In order to determine if
the reductions in measured flow are attributable to I/I mitigation, Brown and Caldwell (BC) completed this
Meter Review and Analysis by calibrating hydrologic models to determine if wastewater flows attributable to
I/I have changed from pre-rehab to post-rehab periods. Flow frequency analyses were performed to define
flow recurrence interval curves for both pre-rehab and post-rehab periods. An evaluation of flow reduction
from pre-rehab to post-rehab periods was based on reduction in flows defined by the flow recurrence interval
curves. This approach has the advantage of comparing pre-rehab and post-rehab conditions on an equal ba-
sis for a range of wet weather event sizes, and avoids problems associated with comparing measured events
in the flow meter record not caused by equal wet weather events. Using a statistical comparison across all
simulated events provides a more sound basis for stating I/I reduction that was achieved by rehabilitation.
The following steps were taken to carry out this approach, as described in more detail in Section 2:
1. Review flow and rainfall data for 20 candidate monitoring sites for a pre-rehab period of 2004–06 and
post-rehab period of 2013–15
2. Evaluate and recommend up to four sites for modeling analysis of I/I flow reduction: three sites defined
as rehabilitation meters and one defined as a control meter
3. Calibrate pre-rehab and post-rehab hydrologic models for selected sites
4. Perform statistical analyses of modeled flows using the Log Pearson Type III flow frequency distribution
5. Analyze flow reduction at selected sites for a 10-year recurrence interval event
6. Report findings and recommendations for future action
MCES Meter Review and Analysis
3
Section 2: Data Evaluation and Selection
This section describes evaluation of data and site selection.
2.1 Monitoring Data
Monitoring data provided to BC included flow data collected by MCES and National Weather Service (NWS)
Next Generation Weather Radar (NEXRAD) rainfall data. These data are summarized below.
MCES provided 1-hour interval flow data at 20 sites for review. Data for all sites were made available for a
pre-rehab period (2004–06) and post-rehab period (2013–15). Table 2-1 lists the flow metering sites.
MCES provided 1-hour interval NWS NEXRAD rainfall data, generated for each flow meter site identified in
Table 2-1, for the same periods as the metering data. For a long-term rainfall record, BC downloaded data
for the Minneapolis-St. Paul International Airport (MSP) rain gauge from the National Climatic Data Center
(NCDC) website for the August 1948–April 2016 period. Outside of the monitoring periods, and when
NEXRAD data appeared to be questionable or were missing, rainfall data were supplemented or replaced
with data from the long-term MSP rain gauge.
The monitoring sites (listed in Table 2-1) and the MSP rain gauge are identified on Figure 2-1.
Table 2-1. Flow Monitoring Sites
Community Flow Meter Upstream Tributary Flow Me-
ters
Anoka M303 M302
M304
Blaine M216 -
Brooklyn Center M110 -
Burnsville M501A M405
M406 a
M644A
M630
Chanhassen M413 M439 a
Farmington M642 -
Golden Valley M117 M120
Mound M423 M426 a
M422
M455
Moundsview M212 -
Minneapolis SW M101
(M101A+M101B)
M121 (M122)
M127
M130 (M128, M129)
New Hope M114 -
Newport M603 -
MCES Meter Review and Analysis
4
Table 2-1. Flow Monitoring Sites
Community Flow Meter Upstream Tributary Flow Me-
ters
Plymouth M118 M119
Shoreview M048 -
M050 -
M204 M205
M219
M208
Spring Lake Park M214 -
Stillwater M606 -
West St. Paul M056 -
M058 -
a. Flow meter data not provided.
MCES Meter Review and Analysis 5 Figure 2-1. MCES flow monitoring sites
MCES Meter Review and Analysis
6
2.2 Site Selection
Flow monitoring sites were screened based on the following criteria developed by BC and MCES:
• Rehabilitation meter criteria:
- Presence of complete data record (standalone and in relation to other sites)
- Presence of quality flow data (i.e., no truncated and/or erroneous data)
- Evidence of significant I/I flow (positive rainfall-to-flow correlation)
- Visual evidence of flow reduction based on initial data evaluation
- Presence of rehabilitation work completed in metershed
- Type and cost of rehabilitation work completed (public and/or private)
- Evidence of little to no rehabilitation in upstream metersheds (if any)
- Presence of MCES infrastructure in metershed
• Control meter criteria:
- Presence of complete data record (standalone and in relation to other sites)
- Presence of quality flow data (i.e., no truncated and/or erroneous data)
- Evidence of some I/I flow (positive rainfall-to-flow correspondence)
- Demonstrated stable I/I flow response over time
- Evidence of little to no rehabilitation work completed in the metershed
- Evidence of little to no rehabilitation work completed in upstream metersheds (if any)
- Presence of MCES infrastructure in metershed
Information available for each flow metering site is provided in Table 2-2.
Table 2-2. Available Metershed Information
Community Flow Meter I/I Mitigation Efforts MCES Facilities in
Metershed Notes
Anoka M303 None 2+ miles gravity, 1+ mile force
main, two lift stations Poor correlation of rain and flow
Blaine M216 None None
Possible control site
Meter currently measures 65% of the
community’s metered flow
Brooklyn Center M110 Little to none None Variable flows
Burnsville M501A None 15+ miles gravity, 0.5 mile
force main, one lift station Possible control site
Chanhassen M413 Public work with some mi-
nor private work
3+ miles gravity, 2+ miles
force main Incomplete data
Farmington M642 Some public work None Old pipe network
Golden Valley M117 Extensive public and private
work 7+ miles gravity Good flow data
Mound M423 Extensive public work; no
private work
5 miles gravity and force
main, six lift stations Incomplete data
MCES Meter Review and Analysis
7
Table 2-2. Available Metershed Information
Community Flow Meter I/I Mitigation Efforts MCES Facilities in
Metershed Notes
Moundsview M212 Little to none None Possible control site
Minneapolis SW M101
(M101A+M101B)
Extensive public work; some
private work 15+ miles gravity Unmetered upstream Edina connec-
tions
New Hope M114 Some public; no private None
Newport M603 Public and private <1,000 feet gravity
Plymouth M118 Public work only 1+ miles gravity, one lift sta-
tion
Shoreview
M048 Public work only None
Meter currently measures more than
50% of the community’s metered
flow
M050 Public work only None Meter currently measures less than
5% of the community’s metered flow
M204 Public work only 2.5 miles gravity
Meter currently measures more than
35% of the community’s metered
flow
Spring Lake Park M214 None None Possible control site
Stillwater M606 Public work only None Flow measured at influent flume to
treatment plant
West St. Paul
M056 Little to none None
Possible control site
Meter currently measures less than
5% of the community’s metered flow
M058 Extensive public and private
work None
Meter currently measures more than
35% of the community’s metered
flow
Based on the above conditions, the following monitoring sites are recommended for further evaluation of I/I
flow reduction:
• Site 1: M048, Shoreview
• Site 2: M101 (M101A + M101B), Minneapolis Southwest
• Site 3: M117, Golden Valley
• Site 4 (control): M501A, Burnsville
MCES Meter Review and Analysis
8
2.2.1 Site 1: M048, Shoreview
Meter M048 receives and measures wastewater flow from 4,476 acres of developed land in the City of
Shoreview (Shoreview). It is a well-defined metershed basin with no upstream meters or tributary areas. Me-
ter M048 measures more than 50 percent of the community’s metered flow.
M048 was chosen as a rehabilitation site because there was visual evidence of flow reduction during the
initial data evaluation and because available data indicate that the Shoreview public system has been reha-
bilitated.
Figure 2-2 provides a detailed view of metershed M048; Figure 2-3 depicts the measured hourly flow and
rain data for M048 for the pre-rehab and post-rehab periods (2004–06 and 2013–15).
Mitigation efforts in metershed M048, provided by the City of Shoreview, are summarized below:
• Public infrastructure I/I mitigation work:
- One lift station was added and three existing lift stations were replaced
- A complete inventory of the sewer mains was completed in 2013. All lines were televised and rated
as part of Shoreview’s “red zone” asset management program.
- 2 percent of sewer mains repaired or replaced (approximate)
- 2-3 percent of sewer mains lined (approximate)
- 5 percent of sewer services repaired, replaced or lined (approximate)
- Additional 2 percent of sewer services repaired, replaced or lined as part of private work completed
(approximate)
• Private infrastructure I/I mitigation work:
- Meter change-outs and sump pump inspections were completed at each home in 2009
- All commercial buildings and properties were inspected for proper roof drain discharges
MCES Meter Review and Analysis
9
Figure 2-2. Site 1: Shoreview M048 metershed map
MCES Meter Review and Analysis
10
Figure 2-3. Site 1: Shoreview M048 monitoring data
MCES Meter Review and Analysis
11
2.2.2 Site 2: M101, Minneapolis Southwest
Meters M101A and M101B receive and measure wastewater flows from 18,489 acres of developed land in
the southwest part of the City of Minneapolis (Minneapolis) and other upstream communities. Its total tribu-
tary area is 37,195 acres and includes MSP. Three meters directly upstream (M121, M127, and M130), as
well as three meters farther upstream (M122, M128, and M129), account for flow from St. Louis Park, Hop-
kins, Edina, Richfield, and Fort Snelling. Approximately 402 acres of the tributary area from Edina is not me-
tered. The combined flow from these metersheds are measured at meters M101A and M101B, each receiv-
ing a portion of the total flow. The measured flows from M101A and M101B have been added together and
are referred to as M101 for this evaluation.
This region of Minneapolis was chosen as it represented the least complicated, defined area in which flow
reduction achieved by Minneapolis’s continuing inflow disconnection efforts could be evaluated. Since the
mid-2000s, Minneapolis has embarked on a thorough program to identify and disconnect remaining areas
of stormwater inflow to the sewer system that remained after completing the combined sewer separation
program. According to Minneapolis’s 2016 report, areas of connected inflow and downspouts remain, but a
significant number have been disconnected since 2003.
Figure 2-4 provides a detailed view of metershed M101, along with the six metersheds that are upstream of
M101. Figure 2-5 depicts the measured hourly flow and rain data for M101, along with the measured flow
data from the meters directly upstream (M121, M127, and M130). There is a noticeable change in the
shape of the hydrographs from pre-rehab to post-rehab periods. The pre-rehab period flows have sharp (high
peak and short duration) hydrograph shapes. The post-rehab hydrograph peaks are lower with longer reces-
sion periods after the events.
A summary of the known mitigation efforts in metershed M101 is provided below:
• Public property I/I mitigation projects: Minneapolis began a sewer separation program in 1986 that sep-
arated more than 4,600 acres in Minneapolis that were served by combined sewers (now referred to as
Phase 1 of the Combined Sewer Overflow (CSO) Program). Minneapolis continues its separation pro-
gram to convert combined sewer areas to separated sewer areas. Based on Minneapolis’s CSO annual
reports, from 2003 to 2015 an additional 545 acres were separated. Of the 545 acres, 449 acres (82
percent) were separated prior to the post-rehab period (2013–15).
• Private property I/I mitigation projects: Based on Minneapolis’s CSO annual reports, 6,989 downspouts
have been disconnected since 2003 (90 percent prior to the post-rehab period). As of March 1, 2016,
there were 276 remaining connections.
MCES Meter Review and Analysis 12 Figure 2-4. Site 2: Minneapolis Southwest M101 metershed map
MCES Meter Review and Analysis
13
Figure 2-5. Site 2: Minneapolis Southwest M101 monitoring data
MCES Meter Review and Analysis
14
2.2.3 Site 3: M117, Golden Valley
Meter M117 receives and measures wastewater flow from 6,398 acres of developed land in the City of
Golden Valley (Golden Valley) and upstream areas in the City of St. Louis Park. Its total tributary area is
9,684 acres. Upstream flow from the City of St. Louis Park is monitored at meter M120.
This area was chosen as a rehabilitation site because Golden Valley has undergone extensive public and pri-
vate rehabilitation and because there was visual evidence of flow reduction during the initial data evalua-
tion.
A map of metershed M117 and its upstream metershed M120 is provided as Figure 2-6. Figure 2-7 depicts
the measured hourly flow and rain data for M117, along with the upstream measured flow data for M120.
Within Golden Valley there are 113 miles of public sanitary sewer mains and approximately 147 miles of pri-
vate sewer laterals. Mitigation efforts since 2006 in Golden Valley (provided by the City of Golden Valley) are
summarized below:
• Public infrastructure I/I mitigation work:
- 49,570 LF of sewer main lined or replaced
- 2,770 manhole covers with holes replaced with solid covers
- 1,046 manhole rings and casting frames sealed
- 6 manhole structures sealed
- $8.9M construction cost
• Private infrastructure I/I mitigation work:
- 3,520 out of 8,000 laterals (44 percent) have completed I/I compliance repairs (lining or replace-
ment)
- $17.1M construction cost (estimated)
MCES Meter Review and Analysis
15
Figure 2-6. Site 3: Golden Valley M117 metershed map
MCES Meter Review and Analysis
16
Figure 2-7. Site 3: Golden Valley M117 monitoring data
MCES Meter Review and Analysis
17
2.2.4 Site 4 (Control): M501A, Burnsville
Meter M501A receives and measures wastewater flow from 12,852 acres of developed land in the City of
Burnsville (Burnsville) and upstream areas in the Cities of Apple Valley, Lakeville, and Savage. Its total tribu-
tary area is 21,380 acres. Upstream flows are monitored at meters M405, M406, M630, and M644A.
No known mitigation efforts have taken place in the M501A area in Burnsville, and the flow data indicated a
stable I/I flow response over time. Based on these criteria, M501A was selected as the control meter site for
this analysis.
Figure 2-8 provides a detailed view of metershed M501A, along with the four metersheds that are upstream
(M405, M406, M630, and M644A). Figure 2-9 depicts the measured hourly flow and rain data for M501A.
Flow data for the meters upstream are not shown because data were not provided for all four sites.
Figure 2-9. Site 4: Burnsville M501A monitoring data
MCES Meter Review and Analysis 18 Figure 2-8. Site 4: Burnsville M501A metershed map
MCES Meter Review and Analysis
19
Section 3: Flow Reduction Analysis
This section presents the flow reduction analysis, including modeling tools and calibration parameters,
model output hydrographs, and flow reduction results.
3.1 Modeling Tools and Calibration Parameters
Hydrologic flow generation models predict how wastewater flows respond relative to metershed characteris-
tics and the rainfall intensity of wet weather events. Model calibration is the process of modifying model pa-
rameters and comparing modeled results to actual measurements.
The flow generation models for this study were constructed using the Capacity Assurance Planning Environ-
ment (CAPE) software (version 3). Within the CAPE model the continuous hydrology was simulated using the
Hydrologic Simulation Program-Fortran (HSPF). HSPF is a public-domain regional hydrologic model currently
supported by the U.S. Geological Survey (USGS) that uses local rainfall and other meteorological data to sim-
ulate the general rainfall response of the watershed environment. The HSPF model generates runoff in four
components: pervious land active groundwater (PAGWO), pervious land interflow groundwater (PIFWO), pervi-
ous land surface runoff (PSURO) and impervious land surface runoff (ISURO).
Using CAPE, the general rainfall response (from HSPF) was applied to the rehabilitation and control meter-
shed basins to predict flows attributed to I/I flow in the sanitary sewers by adjusting connected area calibra-
tion parameters. A sample of the model parameter input screen within CAPE is shown as Figure 3-1. The
PAGWO and PIFWO connected area calibration parameters are used to represent the slower I/I flow compo-
nents that are sensitive to soil moisture. The ISURO and PSURO connected area calibration parameters can
be used to represent the rapid I/I flow components; however, these were not used for this study. Instead, an
alternative surface runoff routine was applied that has three sets of surface runoff unit hydrograph compo-
nents, each with a connected area, time to peak (T), and recession factor (K), allowing for a more refined fit
to the rapid I/I component. (The routine is similar to the RTK unit hydrograph method used in U.S. Environ-
mental Protection Agency [EPA] Storm Water Management Model [SWMM] models, where R is the percent-
age of rainfall that enters the sanitary sewer as I/I, T is the time to peak flow, and K is the ratio of time to
recession to time to peak.) The total modeled flow into the sewer system is the sum of the base sanitary
flow, HSPF I/I flow components, and three sets of surface runoff I/I flow components.
Figure 3-1. Model parameter input screen
MCES Meter Review and Analysis
20
CAPE provides a flexible method that can calibrate events with a wide range of antecedent moisture condi-
tions. It also provides a modeling structure that accounts for rehabilitation work by varying the parameters
that are most affected by rehabilitation efforts. For this study, with the exception of Site M101, only the con-
nected areas in the surface runoff component were modified from pre-rehab to post-rehab conditions. At Site
M101 the time to peak parameter was also modified, but only for the first surface runoff unit hydrograph.
Table 3-1 is a summary of the CAPE modeling parameters used for each model: PAGWO, PIFWO, and the sur-
face runoff components. The calibration parameters are the connected areas for each I/I flow component,
as well as the unit hydrograph components T and K. The table lists the parameters for both the pre-rehab
and post-rehab models for each flow meter area.
Table 3-1. CAPE Modeling Parameters
Model
Incremental
Metershed
Area, acres
Connected
Groundwater
Area (PAGWO),
acres
Connected
Pervious
Infiltration Area
(PIFWO), acres
Pervious
Surface Area
Runoff (PSURO),
acres
Impervious Surface Area Runoff a
Connected
Area, acres
Time to Peak
(T), hours
Ratio of Time to
Recede to Time
to Peak (K)
Shoreview
M048
pre-rehab
4,476 125 50 0
3.25 1.25 2
2 4 6
2 6 12
Shoreview
M048
post-rehab
4,476 125 50 0
2.75 1.25 2
1.75 4 6
1.75 6 12
Minneapolis SW
M101
pre-rehab
18,489 4,500 640 0
230 0.5 1.5
40 2 3
30 3 12
Minneapolis SW
M101
post-rehab
18,489 4,500 640 0
40 1 1.5
30 2 3
30 3 12
Golden Valley
M117
pre-rehab
6,398 810 250 0
15 2 2
9 3 4
8 4 8
Golden Valley
M117
post-rehab
6,398 810 250 0
10 2 2
4 3 4
3 4 8
Burnsville
M501A
pre-rehab
21,380 b 825 350 0
9 1 2
5 2 4
6 3 8
Burnsville
M501A
post-rehab
21,380 b 825 350 0
9 1 2
5 2 4
6 3 8
a. Three sets of surface runoff unit hydrograph parameters were used instead of the ISURO component.
b. Metershed area for M501A includes upstream metershed areas.
MCES Meter Review and Analysis
21
3.2 Model Output Hydrographs
Figures 3-2 through 3-21 are model output hydrographs that show the peak flow rate and total volume of
water, as well as the general shape of the hydrograph, for both modeled and measured flows at each site.
The CAPE modeled hourly flow data are shown in red and labeled “total flow”, the measured hourly flow data
are shown in blue and labeled “outlet flow”, and rainfall intensity is shown in orange (plotted downward from
the top of the figure using the scale on the right-side axis) and labeled “rain”. Each model included numer-
ous rain events that were taken into consideration during calibration. The greater number of quality calibra-
tion events results in a greater confidence in calibration and the ability of the model to be representative of
the wet weather response of the collection system.
3.2.1 Site 1: M048, Shoreview
Figure 3-2 shows the measured hourly flow data for both the pre-rehab and post-rehab periods, along with
the pre-rehab modeled hourly flow data for site M048. During the pre-rehab period the modeled and meas-
ured flows are nearly equal, indicating the model is accurately predicting flow. However, when applying the
pre-rehab model calibration parameters to the post-rehab period rain data, the modeled flows are greater
than the measured flows.
Figure 3-2. Site 1: M048, pre-rehab and post-rehab flow data using pre-rehab model parameters
Figures 3-3 and 3-4 are plots that show shorter time frames during both the pre-rehab and post-rehab peri-
ods depicted in Figure 3-2. The pre-rehab modeled flow data in Figure 3-3 indicate a positive correlation to
the pre-rehab measured flow data, while the pre-rehab modeled flow data shown in Figure 3-4 are greater
than the post-rehab measured flow data. This is evidence of a flow reduction.
MCES Meter Review and Analysis
22
Figure 3-3. Site 1: M048, example of pre-rehab flow data using pre-rehab model parameters
Figure 3-4. Site 1: M048, example of post-rehab flow data using pre-rehab model parameters
MCES Meter Review and Analysis
23
Figure 3-5 shows the model results after recalibrating the model to fit the post-rehab period. Base flow and
I/I modeling parameters were adjusted down to better match the post-rehab measured flow data. Figure 3-6
shows the same period as Figure 3-4, but uses the improved post-rehab modeled flows. The post-rehab
model more accurately predicts dry and wet weather flows in the post-rehab period than the pre-rehab
model. Note that the elevated measured flow data circled in green on Figure 3-6 also occurred during the
same period (end of June) in previous years. While it is possible that the rain data during these periods are
inaccurate, it is more likely that scheduled operations and maintenance activities may have been taking
place.
Figure 3-5. Site 1: M048, pre-rehab and post-rehab flow data using post-rehab model parameters
MCES Meter Review and Analysis
24
Figure 3-6. Site 1: M048, example of post-rehab flow data using post-rehab model parameters
3.2.2 Site 2: M101, Minneapolis Southwest
Figure 3-7 shows the measured hourly flow data for both the pre-rehab and post-rehab periods, along with
the pre-rehab modeled hourly flow data for site M101. The measured upstream flow is the sum of the meas-
ured flows at meters M121, M127, and M130. These upstream flow data are shown as the purple colored
hydrograph labeled “inlet flow” in the legend. These areas are necessary to account for as the analysis of
flow reduction is focused only on the area downstream of these meters and upstream of M101.
During the pre-rehab period the modeled and measured flows are nearly equal, indicating the model is accu-
rately predicting flow. However, when applying the pre-rehab model calibration parameters to the post-rehab
period rain data the modeled base flow is greater than the metershed’s measured base flow, and the mod-
eled wet weather event peak flows are significantly greater than the measured wet weather event peak
flows.
MCES Meter Review and Analysis
25
Figure 3-7. Site 2: M101, pre-rehab and post-rehab flow data using pre-rehab model parameters
Figures 3-8 and 3-9 are plots that show shorter time frames during both the pre-rehab and post-rehab peri-
ods depicted in Figure 3-7. The pre-rehab modeled flow data in Figure 3-8 indicate a positive correlation to
the pre-rehab measured flow data, while the pre-rehab modeled peak flows shown in Figure 3-9 are much
greater than the post-rehab measured peak flows.
MCES Meter Review and Analysis
26
Figure 3-8. Site 2: M101, example of pre-rehab flow data using pre-rehab model parameters
Figure 3-9. Site 2: M101, example of post-rehab flow data using pre-rehab model parameters
MCES Meter Review and Analysis
27
Figure 3-10 shows the model results for M101 after the model was recalibrated to fit the post-rehab period.
The I/I modeling parameters were modified considerably in order to match the post-rehab measured flow
data; the site’s base flow was adjusted slightly down. Figure 3-11 shows the same period as Figure 3-9, but
uses the improved post-rehab modeled flows. The post-rehab model more accurately predicts dry and wet
weather flows in the post-rehab period than the pre-rehab model.
Figure 3-10. Site 2: M101, pre-rehab and post-rehab flow data using post-rehab model parameters
Figure 3-11. Site 2: M101, example of post-rehab flow data using post-rehab model parameters
MCES Meter Review and Analysis
28
3.2.3 Site 3: M117, Golden Valley
Figure 3-12 shows the measured hourly flow data for both the pre-rehab and post-rehab periods for site
M117, along with the pre-rehab modeled hourly flow data. The measured upstream flow data from site
M119 are also shown. During the pre-rehab period the modeled and measured flows are nearly equal, indi-
cating the model is accurately predicting flow. However, when applying the pre-rehab model calibration pa-
rameters to the post-rehab period rain data the modeled base flow is greater than the metershed’s meas-
ured base flow, and the modeled wet weather event peak flows are slightly greater than the measured peak
flows.
Figure 3-12. Site 3: M117, pre-rehab and post-rehab flow data using pre-rehab model parameters
Figures 3-13 and 3-14 are plots that show shorter time frames during both the pre-rehab and post-rehab pe-
riods depicted in Figure 3-12. The pre-rehab modeled flow data shown in Figure 3-13 closely match the pre-
rehab measured flow data. The pre-rehab modeled flow data shown in Figure 3-14 are a reasonable match
to the post-rehab measured flow data, but are slightly greater. Therefore, this area does not show a strong
reduction in flow after rehabilitation. Note on Figure 3-14 (and subsequently on Figure 3-16) that the dis-
crepancy between the measured and modeled flow data following the June 21, 2013, rainfall event is influ-
enced by missing upstream flow data from meter M119.
MCES Meter Review and Analysis
29
Figure 3-13. Site 3: M117, example of pre-rehab flow data using pre-rehab model parameters
Figure 3-14. Site M117, example of post-rehab flow data using pre-rehab model parameters
MCES Meter Review and Analysis
30
Figure 3-15 shows the model results after recalibrating the model to fit the post-rehab period. Base flow and
I/I modeling parameters were adjusted down to better match the post-rehab measured flow data. Figure 3-
16 shows the same period as Figure 3-14, but uses the improved post-rehab modeled flows. The post-rehab
model more accurately predicts dry and wet weather flows in the post-rehab period than the pre-rehab
model.
Figure 3-15. Site 3: M117, pre-rehab and post-rehab flow data with post-rehab model
MCES Meter Review and Analysis
31
Figure 3-16. Site 3: M117, example of post-rehab flow data with post-rehab model
3.2.4 Site 4: M501A, Burnsville
Figure 3-17 shows the measured hourly flow data for both the pre-rehab and post-rehab periods, along with
the pre-rehab modeled hourly flow data for site M501A. While no known mitigation efforts have taken place
in metershed M501A, for consistency, the periods shown are still referred to as pre-rehab and post-rehab.
During the pre-rehab period the modeled and measured flows are nearly equal, indicating the model is accu-
rately predicting flow. When applying the pre-rehab model calibration parameters to the post-rehab period
rain data the modeled base flow is slightly greater than the measured base flow, but the wet weather event
peak flows are a good match.
MCES Meter Review and Analysis
32
Figure 3-17. Site 4: M501A, pre-rehab and post-rehab flow data with pre-rehab model
Figures 3-18 and 3-19 are plots that show shorter time frames during both the pre-rehab and post-rehab pe-
riods depicted in Figure 3-17.
Figure 3-18. Site 4: M501A, example of pre-rehab flow data with pre-rehab model
MCES Meter Review and Analysis
33
Figure 3-19. Site 4: M501A, example of post-rehab flow data with pre-rehab model
The model was changed slightly for the post-rehab period. The base flow for M501A was adjusted down to
better match the post-rehab measured flow data, but the I/I modeling parameters were left unchanged.
Figure 3-20 shows the measured flow data for both the pre-rehab and post-rehab periods, along with the
post-rehab modeled flows. Figure 3-21 shows the same period as Figure 3-19, but uses a reduced base flow.
MCES Meter Review and Analysis
34
Figure 3-20. Site 4: M501A, pre-rehab and post-rehab flow data with post-rehab model
Figure 3-21. Site 4: M501A, example of post-rehab flow data with post-rehab model
MCES Meter Review and Analysis
35
3.2.5 Calibration Summary
The validity of the pre-rehab and post-rehab model calibrations was also evaluated using volume and peak
flow error percentages derived from differences between measured and modeled event values. For each
event, the difference between the modeled and measured peak hourly flow values was compared. Event vol-
umes were also compared similarly. Individual event errors were averaged to get an estimate of how well the
model performs over all of the events. This approach helps to balance the events that are more or less than
the measured values. Table 3-2 summarizes the average volume and peak flow error percentages, as well as
the number of events and base flow used, for each metershed. A negative error value indicates that the
modeled flow data were less than the measured flow data and a positive number indicates that the modeled
flow data were greater than the measured flow data.
Table 3-2. Model Calibration Summary
Model
Incremental
Metershed
Area, acres
Base Flow,
mgd
Number of
Events Used
Average
Volume Error
Average
Peak Flow Error
Shoreview M048
pre-rehab 4,476 1.5 30 1.6% 1.0%
Shoreview M048
post-rehab 4,476 1.2 41 3.3% 0.5%
Minneapolis SW M101
pre-rehab 18,489 13.9 38 5.2% 1.9%
Minneapolis SW M101
post-rehab 18,489 12.3 44 1.1% -0.4%
Golden Valley M117
pre-rehab 6,398 2.3 33 6.7% 5.5%
Golden Valley M117
post-rehab 6,398 2.2 38 9.3% 6.9%
Burnsville M501A
pre-rehab 21,380 a 7.8 36 2.6% 0.4%
Burnsville M501A
post-rehab 21,380 a 7.4 45 4.0% 0.8%
a. Metershed area for M501A includes upstream metershed areas.
MCES Meter Review and Analysis
36
3.3 Flow Reduction Results
After hydrologic model calibrations were finalized, flow frequency analyses were used to define peak flow
recurrence interval curves for both pre-rehab and post-rehab periods. Figures 3-22 through 3-25 represent
the peak hourly flow recurrence interval curves for each modeled site. Both I/I flow and total flow recurrence
curves were generated. Total flow includes base sanitary flow and I/I flow, including the PAGWO, PIFWO, and
surface runoff components.
An evaluation of flow reduction from pre-rehab to post-rehab conditions was based on the reduction in flows
defined by the flow recurrence interval curves. The reduction was quantified for both total flow and I/I flow
for the 10-year recurrence interval.
Table 3-3 summarizes the flow reduction results by site for both base flow and 10-year recurrence interval
peak hourly flow. The reduction in peak hourly total flow for site M048 (17 percent) is influenced by both a
reduction in base flow and a reduction in I/I flow. The I/I modeling parameters (previously summarized in
Section 3.1) were reduced only slightly in the M048 post-rehab model, resulting in an 11 percent I/I flow re-
duction.
Peak hourly total flow reduction for M101 was more substantial (69 percent). The reduction in I/I flow was
75 percent because the I/I modeling parameters were modified significantly.
Flow reduction for M117 was 24 percent for total flow and 28 percent for I/I flow.
Meter M501A is a control meter. There was no reduction in I/I flow because the I/I modeling parameters for
M501A were unchanged from pre-rehab to post-rehab periods. The reduction in total flow was 4 percent,
due solely to the base flow reduction in the post-rehab period. The differences in flow from the pre-rehab to
post-rehab period reflect the general variability in flows over time, not a reduction due to rehabilitation work.
Therefore, a 4 percent change is not considered significant. The other meter sites had greater reductions, so
those areas reflect a significant and measurable benefit from rehabilitation.
Table 3-3. Flow Reduction Summary
Site Base Flow, mgd 10-year Peak Hourly Total Flow, mgd 10-year Peak Hourly I/I Flow, mgd
Pre-Rehab Post-Rehab Reduction Pre-Rehab Post-Rehab Reduction Pre-Rehab Post-Rehab Reduction
Shoreview M048 1.5 1.2 24% 3.7 3.1 17% 2.1 1.9 11%
Minneapolis SW M101 13.9 12.3 11% 155 47 69% 140 35 75%
Golden Valley M117 2.3 2.2 5% 12.9 9.8 24% 10.9 7.8 28%
Burnsville M501A a 7.8 7.4 6% 17.8 17.1 4% 9.3 9.3 0%
a. Flows for metersheds upstream of M501A are included in the base flow and peak hourly flow values for M501A.
MCES Meter Review and Analysis
37
Figure 3-22. Site 1: M048 pre-rehab and post-rehab peak hourly flow recurrence intervals
MCES Meter Review and Analysis
38
Figure 3-23. Site 2: M101 pre-rehab and post-rehab peak hourly flow recurrence intervals
MCES Meter Review and Analysis
39
Figure 3-24. Site 3: M117 pre-rehab and post-rehab peak hourly flow recurrence intervals
MCES Meter Review and Analysis
40
Figure 3-25. Site 4: M501A pre-rehab and post-rehab peak hourly flow recurrence intervals
MCES Meter Review and Analysis
41
Section 4: Summary
The effectiveness of I/I mitigation efforts in communities served by MCES were evaluated for three monitor-
ing sites across the region: M048 (Shoreview), M101 (Minneapolis SW), and M117 (Golden Valley). A fourth
site, M501A (Burnsville), is a control meter for an area with no changes. Calibrated pre-rehab and post-rehab
hydrologic models were used to develop flow recurrence interval curves; these interval curves were used to
estimate reduction in flows. For a 10-year recurrence interval, the reduction in peak hourly total flows ranged
from 17 to 69 percent in the metersheds where rehabilitation efforts were made. The analysis did not indi-
cate a significant decrease in flow at the control meter.
The most significant peak flow reduction (69 percent) occurred at Minneapolis site M101. The post-rehab
flow data at M101 do not exhibit sharp peak flows that are visible during the pre-rehab period. The City’s re-
habilitation efforts within this metershed are measurable at site M101.
Rehabilitation in Golden Valley produced a 24 percent reduction in peak hourly total flows at site M117, re-
sulting from extensive private and public rehabilitation efforts.
Rehabilitation in Shoreview produced a 17 percent reduction in peak hourly total flows at site M048, result-
ing from rehabilitation of only public infrastructure.
Rehabilitation has not occurred in Burnsville. The 4 percent reduction in peak hourly total flows at site
M501A is due only to a reduction in base flow.
For an analysis of this nature, there are always issues that can influence the results. The following items
provide general descriptions of the issues that concern this specific analysis. None of them are believed to
materially influence the conclusions provided in this report.
• The monitoring areas are very large relative to the area rehabilitated within each basin. Therefore,
the effectiveness of the rehabilitation may be greater than estimated closer to where the rehabilita-
tion was performed.
• Certain periods of flow monitoring data for some of the sites evaluated were inconsistent with the
recorded rainfall conditions or the rest of the recorded monitored history. In such cases, these peri-
ods were not used in the calibration as noted in the report.
• Rainfall data used as an input to the models for calibration was radar-rainfall data obtained from
MCES. In some cases, these data were in question, and the MSP airport rainfall data were used in-
stead.
• Rainfall is variable within the basin areas. The rain data used for the evaluation reflects the average
rainfall over the area.
• The results reported are based on flow models that simulate the hydrologic response of the areas
evaluated. They are not detailed hydraulic models of the sewer collection system upstream. This ap-
proach ignores any travel time, system storage, system bottlenecks, or concentration of large I/I in-
puts that may be present in the actual system. The approach assumes that these hydraulic behav-
iors are manifest in the flow data used for model calibration and therefore are inferred by the
approach. When measured data contains events with magnitudes similar to the 10-year flows, then
these results have been tested for events of that size.
• There were approximately 10 years from the pre to post-rehabilitation periods. Other changes in the
basin besides the benefits of rehabilitation (such as growth and development, or further degradation
of the rest of the system) are reflected in the final outcome.
MCES Meter Review and Analysis
42
• In some cases, a community may have been actively performing system rehabilitation during either
the pre- or post-rehabilitation analysis time periods, or both, and from a strict sense one could con-
sider these periods as “non-stationary.” Because these rehabilitation efforts are long term and much
of the efforts occurred during the time between pre and post-rehab analysis periods, these changes
during the analysis periods are not believed to have a significant influence on the outcome.
MCES Meter Review and Analysis
43
References
City of Minneapolis Public Works Department, 2004, Minneapolis Combined Sewer Overflow Program 2003 Annual Report,
April (http://www.minneapolismn.gov/publicworks/stormwater/cso/cso_annual-reports)
City of Minneapolis Public Works Department, 2005, Minneapolis Combined Sewer Overflow Program 2004 Annual Report,
April (http://www.minneapolismn.gov/publicworks/stormwater/cso/cso_annual-reports)
City of Minneapolis Public Works Department, 2006, Minneapolis Combined Sewer Overflow Program 2005 Annual Report,
April (http://www.minneapolismn.gov/publicworks/stormwater/cso/cso_annual-reports)
City of Minneapolis Public Works Department, 2007, Minneapolis Combined Sewer Overflow Program 2006 Annual Report,
April (http://www.minneapolismn.gov/publicworks/stormwater/cso/cso_annual-reports)
City of Minneapolis Public Works Department, 2008, Minneapolis Combined Sewer Overflow Program 2007 Annual Report,
April (http://www.minneapolismn.gov/publicworks/stormwater/cso/cso_annual-reports)
City of Minneapolis Public Works Department, 2009, Minneapolis Combined Sewer Overflow Program 2008 Annual Report,
April (http://www.minneapolismn.gov/publicworks/stormwater/cso/cso_annual-reports)
City of Minneapolis Public Works Department, 2010, Minneapolis Combined Sewer Overflow Program 2009 Annual Report,
April (http://www.minneapolismn.gov/publicworks/stormwater/cso/cso_annual-reports)
City of Minneapolis Public Works Department, 2011, Minneapolis Combined Sewer Overflow Program 2010 Annual Report,
April (http://www.minneapolismn.gov/publicworks/stormwater/cso/cso_annual-reports)
City of Minneapolis Public Works Department, 2012, Minneapolis Combined Sewer Overflow Program 2011 Annual Report,
April (http://www.minneapolismn.gov/publicworks/stormwater/cso/cso_annual-reports)
City of Minneapolis Public Works Department, 2013, Minneapolis Combined Sewer Overflow Program 2012 Annual Report,
April (http://www.minneapolismn.gov/publicworks/stormwater/cso/cso_annual-reports)
City of Minneapolis Public Works Department, 2014, Minneapolis Combined Sewer Overflow Program 2013 Annual Report,
April (http://www.minneapolismn.gov/publicworks/stormwater/cso/cso_annual-reports)
City of Minneapolis Public Works Department, 2015, Minneapolis Combined Sewer Overflow Program 2014 Annual Report,
April (http://www.minneapolismn.gov/publicworks/stormwater/cso/cso_annual-reports)
City of Minneapolis Public Works Department, 2016, Minneapolis Combined Sewer Overflow Program 2015 Annual Report,
April (http://www.minneapolismn.gov/publicworks/stormwater/cso/cso_annual-reports)
Appendix E
Water and Sanitary Sewer CIP
city 0
golden
alley
Capital Improvement Program 2017-2021
Water and Sanitary Sewer Utility Section
A five-year projection of the Water and Sanitary Sewer Fund reveals some potential financial
challenges the City may have to address. The contract pricing with the City of Minneapolis and
Golden Valley-Crystal-New Hope Joint Water Commission was renewed in 2013. The Metropolitan
Council Environmental Services (MCES) surcharge program related to inflow and infiltration will have
a direct affect on rates as it requires the City to make improvements to the sanitary system that will
reduce the rate of inflow and infiltration into the system.
Fees from the City's utility bill are the main source of revenue.
96
City of Golden Valley, Minnesota
Capital Plan
2017 thru 2021
PROJECTS BY DEPARTMENT
Department Project# Priority 2017 2018 2019 2020 2021 Total
Water&Sewer Systems
Sanitary Sewer&Water Line Repair/Recon. W&SS-001 n/a 870,000 500,000 500,000 500,000 500,000 2,870,000
Sewer Jet Truck W&SS-012 n/a 190,000 190,000
Multiquip Portable Generator W&SS-041 n/a 10,000 10,000
Mill and Overlay Water/Sewer Repairs W&SS-051 n/a 50,000 50,000
Portable Generator W&SS-052 n/a 10,000 10,000
Televising and Electroscan Equipment W&SS-053 n/a 225,000 225,000
Rubber Tired Excavator W&SS-056 n/a 245,000 245,000
Step Van W&SS-060 n/a 80,000 80,000
Radio Meter Reading System W&SS-063 n/a 355,000 355,000 355,000 100,000 1,165,000
Utility Building Locker Room Repair/Upgrades W&SS-065 n/a 100,000 100,000
Valve ReplacemenUWatermain Lining W&SS-066 n/a 100,000 100,000
Tractor Loader Backhoe W&SS-070 n/a 150,000 150,000
1-394 Inflow/Infiltration Project W&SS-074 n/a 300,000 300,000 600,000
Sewer Flow Meters W&SS-076 n/a 35,000 35,000
Asset Management Software W&SS-079 n/a 30,000 30,000
Asset Management Equipment W&SS-080 n/a 20,000 20,000
800 MHz Radios W&SS-081 n/a 40,000 40,000
Water&Sewer Systems Total 1,670,000 1,810,000 895,000 935,000 610,000 5,920,000
GRAND TOTAL 1,670,000 1,810,000 895,000 935,000 610,000 5,920,000
Page 97
Project# W&SS-001
Department Water&Sewer Systems
Contact
Project Name Sanitary Sewer& Water Line Repair/Recon.Type Unassigned
Useful Life
Category Water and Sewer
Priority
Description
Major repairs and reconstruction on the City's sanitary sewer and water systems as needed. Repairs will be done in conjunction with the City's Pavement
Management Program(See S#1).
Justification
To maintain City's water mains and sanitary sewer mains.
Expenditures 2017 2018 2019 2020 2021 Total
Construction/Maintenance 870,000 500,000 500,000 500,000 500,000 2,870,000
Total 870,000 500,000 500,000 500,000 500,000 2,870,000
Funding Sources 2017 2018 2019 2020 2021 Total
Water&Sewer Utility Fund 870,000 500,000 500,000 500,000 500,000 2,870,000
Total 870,000 500,000 500,000 500,000 500,000 2,870,000
Project# W&SS-012
Department Water&Sewer Systems
Contact
Project Name Sewer Jet Truck Type Unassigned
Useful Life
Category Water and Sewer
Priority
Description
High pressure sewer jet/rodder truck for the Utility Division,Unit 678 is an essential piece of equipment for mainline sewer cleaning. j
Justification
Increased repair and maintenance expenditures on Unit 648,which will be 11 years old. 1
Expenditures 2017 2018 2019 2020 2021 Total
EquipNehicles/Furnishings 190,000 190,000
Total 190,000 190,000
Funding Sources 2017 2018 2019 2020 2021 Total
Water&Sewer Utility Fund 190,000 190,000
Total 190,000 190,000
Page 98
Project# W&SS-041
Department Water&Sewer Systems
Contact
Project Name Multiquip Portable Generator Type Unassigned
Useful Life
Category Water and Sewer
Priority
Description
A Multiquip portable generator Unit 692,a 2010 portable generator.
Justification
Increased repair and maintenance expenditures on Unit 692.
Expenditures 2017 2018 2019 2020 2021 Total
EquipNehicles/Furnishings 10,000 10,000
Total 10,000 10,000
Funding Sources 2017 2018 2019 2020 2021 Total
Water&Sewer Utility Fund 10,000 10,000
Total 10,000 10,000
Project# W&SS-051
Department Water&Sewer Systems
Contact
Project Name Mill and Overlay Water/Sewer Repairs Type Improvement
Useful Life
Category Water and Sewer
Priority
Description
Water and Sanitary Sewer repairs willl be made in conjuction with the annual Asphalt Overlay program.Repairs include but not limited to valve and hydrant-
replacement,manhole adjustments,manhole sealing,and pipe replacement.
Justification
To maintain the City's sanitary sewer and water systems.
Expenditures 2017 2018 2019 2020 2021 Total
Construction/Maintenance 50,000 50,000
Total 50,000 50,000
Funding Sources 2017 2018 2019 2020 2021 Total
Water&Sewer Utility Fund 50,000 50,000
Total 50,000 50,000
Page 99
Project# w&SS-052
Department Water&Sewer Systems
Contact
Project Name Portable Generator Type Equipment
Useful Life
Category Water and Sewer
Priority
Description
Generator to replace Unit 692 a 2010 standby generator militized for emergency response.
Justification 1
hicreased repair and maintenance expenditures on Unit#692 which will be eight years old. 1
Expenditures 2017 2018 2019 2020 2021 Total
EquipNehicles/Furnishings 10,000 10,000
Total 10,000 10,000
Funding Sources 2017 2018 2019 2020 2021 Total
Water&Sewer Utility Fund 10,000 10,000
Total 10,000 10,000
Project# W&SS-053
Department Water&Sewer Systems
Contact
Project Name Televising and Electroscan Equipment Type Equipment
Useful Life
Category Water and Sewer
Priority
Description
Sewer televising mainline computer and electronic equipment purchased with the televising truck will be five years old.The televising equipment will be replaced
along with new Electroscan equipment.
Justification 1
Update computer and electronic equipment that will televise and incorporate electroscan into the upgraded televising equipment.Enhanced sanitary sewer inspection
Ito identify,quantify and prioritize defects in the sanitary sewer system.
Expenditures 2017 2018 2019 2020 2021 Total
EquipNehicies/Furnishings 225,000 225,000
Total 225,000 225,000
Funding Sources 2017 2018 2019 2020 2021 Total
Water&Sewer Utility Fund 225,000 225,000
Total 225,000 225,000
Page 100
Project# W&SS-056
Department Water&Sewer Systems
Contact
Project Name Rubber Tired Excavator Type Equipment
Useful Life 15 years
Category Water and Sewer
Priority
Description
Rubber tired excavator to replace Unit#671,a 2000 Caterpillar Excavator.
Justification
hicreased repair and maintenance on Unit#671,a tractor backhoe that will be eighteen years old.
Expenditures 2017 2018 2019 2020 2021 Total
Equip/Vehicles/Furnishings 245,000 245,000
Total 245,000 245,000
Funding Sources 2017 2018 2019 2020 2021 Total
Water&Sewer Utility Fund 245,000 245,000
Total 245,000 245,000
Project# W&SS-060
Department Water&Sewer Systems
Contact
Project Name Step Van Type Unassigned
Useful Life
Category Unassigned
Priority
Description
Step Van for the Utility Department to replace Unit#674,a 2002 Work Horse Step Van.
Justification
Increased repair and maintenance expenditures on Unit#674.
Expenditures 2017 2018 2019 2020 2021 Total
Equip/Vehicles/Furnishings 80,000 80,000
Total 80,000 80,000
Funding Sources 2017 2018 2019 2020 2021 Total
Water&Sewer Utility Fund 80,000 80,000
Total 80,000 80,000
Page 101
Project# W&SS-063
Department Water&Sewer Systems
Contact
Project Name Radio Meter Reading System Type Equipment
Useful Life
Category Water and Sewer
Priority
Description
Fixed base radio metering reading system for utility billing..
stification
Existing FCC radio frequency utilized for reading city water meters has been banned by the FCC and city is forced to comply with the rule changes.
Expenditures 2017 2018 2019 2020 2021 Total
EquipNehicles/Furnishings 355,000 355,000 355,000 100,000 1,165,000
Total 355,000 355,000 355,000 100,000 1,165,000
Funding Sources 2017 2018 2019 2020 2021 Total
Water&Sewer Utility- 100,000 100,000
Operating
Water&Sewer Utility Fund 355,000 355,000 355,000 1,065,000
Total 355,000 355,000 355,000 100,000 1,165,000
Project# W&SS-065
Department Water&Sewer Systems
Contact
Project Name Utility Building Locker Room Repair/Upgrades Type Unassigned
Useful Life
Category Unassigned
Priority
Description
Utility Building is the oldest maintenance building and is in need of locker room repairs and upgrades to meet current staffing.
Justification
Utility building locker room was designed for a smaller staff levels.Currently utility division has twelve staff utilizing a locker room that was designed for a staff size
of 6-8 utility operators.The health and safety issue with the current locker room size and configuration is that staff is forced to use the shower stall space as a
changing and clothing locker area.This is a problem for utility staff that needs to shower after a day of sewer system maintenance.Staff also is using the shop/garage
area for lockers and changing area.
Expenditures 2017 2018 2019 2020 2021 Total
EquipNehicles/Furnishings 100,000 100,000
Total 100,000 100,000
Funding Sources 2017 2018 2019 2020 2021 Total
Water&Sewer Utility Fund 100,000 100,000
Total 100,000 100,000
Page 102
Project# W&SS-066
Department Water&Sewer Systems
Contact
Project Name Valve Replacement/Watermain Lining Type Unassigned
Useful Life
Category Unassigned
Priority
Description
Watermain valve replacement and strategic watermain lining associated with future overlay project.
Justification
Includes the cost to replace leaking water valves and line minor portions of the public watermain in conjunction with the future overlay program.
Expenditures 2017 2018 2019 2020 2021 Total
Construction/Maintenance 100,000 100,000
Total 100,000 100,000
Funding Sources 2017 2018 2019 2020 2021 Total
Water&Sewer Utility Fund 100,000 100,000
Total 100,000 100,000
Project# W&SS-070
Department Water&Sewer Systems
Contact
Project Name Tractor Loader Backhoe Type Unassigned
Useful Life
Category Unassigned
Priority
Description
Tractor loader backhoe to replace Unit 675,a 2004 Cat tractor loader backhoe.
Justification
Increased repair and maintenance expenditures on Unit 675,which will be 14 years old.
Expenditures 2017 2018 2019 2020 2021 Total
EquipNehicles/Furnishings 150,000 150,000
Total 150,000 150,000
Funding Sources 2017 2018 2019 2020 2021 Total
Water&Sewer Utility Fund 150,000 150,000
Total 150,000 150,000
Page 103
Project# W&SS-074
Department Water&Sewer Systems
Contact
Project Name I-394 Inflow/Infiltration Project Type Unassigned
Useful Life
Category Unassigned
Priority
Description
educe inflow/infiltration in the I-394 sewer shed district.
Justification
The sanitary sewer in the I-394 sewer shed is currently neaz capacity following large storm events.The reduction of UI in the sewer shed is necessary in order to
continue to allow future redevelopment of the corridor.
Expenditures 2017 2018 2019 2020 2021 Total
Construction/Maintenance 300,000 300,000 600,000
Total 300,000 300,000 600,000
Funding Sources 2017 2018 2019 2020 2021 Total
Water&Sewer Utility Fund 300,000 300,000 600,000
Total 300,000 300,000 600,000
Project# W&SS-076
Department Water&Sewer Systems
Contact
Project Name Sewer Flow Meters Type Unassigned
Useful Life
Category Unassigned
Priority
Description
Portable sewer flow meters for monitoring inflow and infiltration in sanitary sewer system.
Justification
Replace older portable sewer flow meters to accurately monitor sewer flows.
Expenditures 2017 2018 2019 2020 2021 Total
EquipNehicles/Furnishings 35,000 35,000
Total 35,000 35,000
Funding Sources 2017 2018 2019 2020 2021 Total
Water&Sewer Utility Fund 35,000 35,000
Total 35,000 35,000
Page 104
Project# W&SS-079
Department Water&Sewer Systems
Contact
Project Name Asset Management Software Type Equipment
Useful Life
Category Water and Sewer
Priority
Description
Conversion from the existing Cartegraph Software Navigator desktop software to a web-based Asset and Work Managemement Software with mobile component.
Includes software purchase,data migration,implementation,and training.50%of purchase from the Vehicle and Equipment CII',25%Water and Sewer CIP and
25%from the Storm Sewer CIP.
Justification
The move to a mobile web-based work management system will improve efficiencies within the organization and service delivery to external customers.The software
will be utilized to manage routine tasks and business workflows,track inspections and maintenance,and assist in programming future expenditures.
Expenditures 2017 2018 2019 2020 2021 Total
EquipNehicles/Furnishings 30,000 30,000
Total 30,000 30,000
Funding Sources 2017 2018 2019 2020 2021 Total
Water&Sewer Utility Fund 30,000 30,000
Total 30,000 30,000
Project# W&SS-OHO
Department Water&Sewer Systems
Contact
Project Name Asset Management Equipment Type Equipment
Useful Life
Category Water and Sewer
Priority
Desctiption
Purchase of hardware,mobile devices and equipment necessary to support the implementation of the new mobile web-based Asset and Management Software system.
Justification
The move to a mobile web-based work management system will improve efficiencies within the organization and service delivery to external customers.The software
will be utilized to manage routine tasks and business workflows,track inspections and maintenance,and assist in programming future expenditures.
Expenditures 2017 2018 2019 2020 2021 Total
Equip/Vehicles/Furnishings 20,000 20,000
Total 20,000 20,000
Funding Sources 2017 2018 2019 2020 2021 Total
Water&Sewer Utility Fund 20,000 20,000
Total 20,000 20,000
Page 105
Project# W&cSS-081
Department Water&Sewer Systems
Contact
Project Name 800 MHz Radios Type Equipment
Useful Life
Category Water and Sewer
Priority
Description
8-800 MHz portable radios and accessories to be purchased in 2019.
Justification
Replace current raidos purchased in 2008.Hennepiin County will no longer support the current 800 Mhz radios past December 31,2019.New radios P25 Phase II
modulation compliant.
Expenditures 2017 2018 2019 2020 2021 Total
Equip/Vehicles/Furnishings 40,000 40,000
Total 40,000 40,000
Funding Sources 2017 2018 2019 2020 2021 Total
Water&Sewer Utility Fund 40,000 40,000
Total 40,000 40,000
Page 106
Sustainable buildings, sound infrastructure, safe transportation systems, clean water,
renewable energy and a balanced environment. Building a Better World for All of Us communicates
a companywide commitment to act in the best interests of our clients and the world around us.
We’re confident in our ability to balance these requirements.
Barr Engineering Co.
DRAFT Surface Water Management Plan
2018-2027
Prepared for
City of Golden Valley
March 2018
i
DRAFT Surface Water Management Plan
March 2018
Contents
Executive Summary ....................................................................................................................................................................... ES-1
1.0 Introduction ....................................................................................................................................................................... 1-1
Location and History ................................................................................................................................................. 1-1
SWMP Purpose and Scope ..................................................................................................................................... 1-1
1.2.1 Regulatory History ................................................................................................................................................ 1-2
Water Resources Agreements ............................................................................................................................... 1-3
2.0 Goals, Objectives and Policies .................................................................................................................................... 2-1
Water Quality of Lakes and Streams ................................................................................................................... 2-1
Stormwater Runoff ..................................................................................................................................................... 2-3
Streams ........................................................................................................................................................................... 2-5
Flood Risk Reduction and Rate Control ............................................................................................................. 2-5
Erosion and Sediment Control .............................................................................................................................. 2-7
Wetlands, Habitat, Shoreland and Natural Areas .......................................................................................... 2-8
Groundwater .............................................................................................................................................................. 2-10
Funding and Administration................................................................................................................................ 2-11
Education and Public Involvement ................................................................................................................... 2-12
3.0 Land and Water Resource Inventory ........................................................................................................................ 3-1
Climate and Precipitation ........................................................................................................................................ 3-1
Topography ................................................................................................................................................................... 3-3
Watersheds and Drainage Patterns ..................................................................................................................... 3-4
3.3.1 Bassett Creek Drainage District ....................................................................................................................... 3-4
3.3.2 Medicine Lake Drainage District ...................................................................................................................... 3-5
3.3.3 Sweeney Lake Drainage District ...................................................................................................................... 3-5
3.3.4 Wirth Lake Drainage District ............................................................................................................................. 3-5
3.3.5 Minnehaha Creek Drainage District ............................................................................................................... 3-6
Land Use ......................................................................................................................................................................... 3-6
Soils .................................................................................................................................................................................. 3-7
Geology and Groundwater ..................................................................................................................................... 3-8
3.6.1 Bedrock Aquifers ................................................................................................................................................... 3-8
3.6.2 Surficial Aquifers .................................................................................................................................................... 3-9
3.6.3 Wellhead Protection Areas ................................................................................................................................ 3-9
Surface Waters ............................................................................................................................................................. 3-9
3.7.1 MNDNR Public Waters ........................................................................................................................................ 3-9
3.7.2 Public Ditches....................................................................................................................................................... 3-10
3.7.3 Lakes and Ponds ................................................................................................................................................. 3-11
3.7.3.1 Sweeney Lake ............................................................................................................................................. 3-11
ii
3.7.3.2 Twin Lake ..................................................................................................................................................... 3-12
3.7.3.3 Wirth Lake ................................................................................................................................................... 3-12
3.7.3.4 Westwood Lake ......................................................................................................................................... 3-13
3.7.3.5 South Rice Pond ........................................................................................................................................ 3-13
3.7.4 Streams ................................................................................................................................................................... 3-14
3.7.4.1 Main Stem of Bassett Creek ................................................................................................................. 3-14
3.7.4.2 Sweeney Lake Branch of Bassett Creek ........................................................................................... 3-14
Wetlands and Natural Resources ...................................................................................................................... 3-15
3.8.1 National Wetland Inventory ........................................................................................................................... 3-15
3.8.2 City Wetland Inventories ................................................................................................................................. 3-15
3.8.3 MCWD Functional Wetland Assessment – 2003 .................................................................................... 3-16
3.8.4 City of Golden Valley Wetland Banks ......................................................................................................... 3-16
3.8.5 Bassett Creek Stream Erosion Inventory ................................................................................................... 3-17
3.8.6 City Natural Resource Inventory and Management Plan ................................................................... 3-17
City’s Stormwater Management System ........................................................................................................ 3-18
3.9.1 Summary of the Trunk Stormwater Management System ................................................................ 3-19
3.9.1.1 Bassett Creek Drainage District .......................................................................................................... 3-19
3.9.1.2 Medicine Lake Drainage District ......................................................................................................... 3-19
3.9.1.3 Sweeney Lake Drainage District ......................................................................................................... 3-19
3.9.1.4 Wirth Lake Drainage District ................................................................................................................ 3-20
3.9.1.5 Minnehaha Creek Drainage District .................................................................................................. 3-20
3.9.2 Intercommunity Flows ...................................................................................................................................... 3-20
3.9.2.1 City of Minneapolis .................................................................................................................................. 3-20
3.9.2.2 City of Robbinsdale ................................................................................................................................. 3-20
3.9.2.3 City of Crystal ............................................................................................................................................. 3-20
3.9.2.4 City of New Hope ..................................................................................................................................... 3-21
3.9.2.5 City of Plymouth ....................................................................................................................................... 3-21
3.9.2.6 City of St. Louis Park ................................................................................................................................ 3-21
3.9.3 Best Management Practices (BMPs) ........................................................................................................... 3-21
3.9.3.1 BCWMC BMPs ............................................................................................................................................ 3-22
3.9.4 MNDNRBCWMC Flood Risk Reduction Projects .................................................................................... 3-22
Water Quality ............................................................................................................................................................ 3-24
3.10.1 Water Quality Monitoring and Data ........................................................................................................... 3-24
3.10.1.1 City of Golden Valley Monitoring ...................................................................................................... 3-24
3.10.1.2 BCWMC Lake and Pond Water Quality Monitoring ................................................................... 3-24
3.10.1.3 BCWMC Stream Biological Monitoring ........................................................................................... 3-25
3.10.1.4 Other Monitoring Programs ................................................................................................................ 3-25
3.10.1.5 Water Quality Data .................................................................................................................................. 3-26
3.10.2 Water Quality Management Classifications ............................................................................................. 3-26
3.10.3 Water Quality Modeling .................................................................................................................................. 3-30
3.10.3.1 City PONDNET Modeling (1999) ........................................................................................................ 3-30
3.10.3.2 BCWMC P8 Modeling ............................................................................................................................. 3-30
iii
3.10.3.3 MCWD HHPLS (2003) ............................................................................................................................. 3-31
Water Quantity and Flooding ............................................................................................................................. 3-31
3.11.1 Flood Insurance Studies ................................................................................................................................... 3-31
3.11.2 BCWMC Flood Control Project ...................................................................................................................... 3-32
3.11.3 Regulatory Water Levels and Flow Rates .................................................................................................. 3-33
3.11.4 Water Quantity Modeling ............................................................................................................................... 3-33
3.11.5 Water Quantity Monitoring ............................................................................................................................ 3-34
3.11.5.1 City of Golden Valley Monitoring ...................................................................................................... 3-34
3.11.5.2 BCWMC Lake Level Monitoring .......................................................................................................... 3-35
3.11.5.3 Stream Gauging and Flow Data .......................................................................................................... 3-35
Fishery and Aquatic Habitat ................................................................................................................................ 3-35
3.12.1 Aquatic Plants (Macrophytes) ........................................................................................................................ 3-35
Natural Communities and Recreational Areas ............................................................................................. 3-36
3.13.1 Recreational Areas ............................................................................................................................................. 3-37
Potential Pollutant Sources .................................................................................................................................. 3-37
3.14.1 Hazardous Materials Emergency Response Plan ................................................................................... 3-38
4.0 Assessment of Issues and Opportunities ............................................................................................................... 4-1
Water Quality ............................................................................................................................................................... 4-1
4.1.1 Stormwater Runoff Water Quality .................................................................................................................. 4-1
4.1.1.1 National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System (NPDES) ........................................................ 4-2
4.1.2 Impaired Waters and Total Maximum Daily Load (TMDL) Issues ...................................................... 4-3
4.1.3 Metropolitan Council Issues .............................................................................................................................. 4-5
4.1.4 Waterbody Classification and WMO Water Quality Goals .................................................................... 4-5
4.1.5 Specific Water Quality Issues and Opportunities ..................................................................................... 4-6
4.1.5.1 Stormwater Pond Management ............................................................................................................ 4-6
4.1.5.2 Stormwater System Maintenance Programming ............................................................................ 4-7
4.1.5.3 Private Stormwater Facility Maintenance........................................................................................... 4-7
4.1.5.4 Low Impact Development Practices ..................................................................................................... 4-7
4.1.5.5 Minnehaha Creek Watershed District (MCWD) Phosphorus Reduction Requirement .... 4-7
Stormwater Infrastructure Replacement ........................................................................................................... 4-8
Water Quantity and Flood Risk Reduction ....................................................................................................... 4-8
4.3.1 General Issues ......................................................................................................................................................... 4-8
4.3.2 Floodplain Management and Flood Insurance Studies ...................................................................... 4-10
4.3.3 Hydrologic Modeling ........................................................................................................................................ 4-11
4.3.3.1 Areas of Potential Localized Flooding Identified by Modeling .............................................. 4-11
4.3.4 Specific Water Quantity Issues ...................................................................................................................... 4-12
4.3.4.1 DeCola Ponds Flooding Issues ............................................................................................................ 4-12
4.3.4.2 Medicine Lake Road Flooding Issues ............................................................................................... 4-13
4.3.4.3 Structures within the BCWMC Floodplain ...................................................................................... 4-13
4.3.4.4 Wisconsin Avenue Control Structure ................................................................................................ 4-14
4.3.4.5 Public Ditch Maintenance ..................................................................................................................... 4-14
Wetland Management ........................................................................................................................................... 4-15
iv
4.4.1 Wetland and Shoreland Buffers .................................................................................................................... 4-15
4.4.2 Aquatic Invasive Species (AIS) ....................................................................................................................... 4-16
4.4.3 Wetland Management and Wetland Classification .............................................................................. 4-17
Groundwater Management ................................................................................................................................. 4-17
4.5.1 Wellhead Protection .......................................................................................................................................... 4-18
Erosion and Sediment Control ........................................................................................................................... 4-19
4.6.1 Bassett Creek Erosion Issues .......................................................................................................................... 4-20
Interagency Issues ................................................................................................................................................... 4-20
Adequacy of Existing Programs ......................................................................................................................... 4-22
Opportunities ............................................................................................................................................................ 4-22
4.9.1 BCWMC Cooperative Efforts and Funding ............................................................................................... 4-22
4.9.2 Cooperation with the MCWD ........................................................................................................................ 4-22
4.9.3 Cooperative Efforts with MNDNR, MnDOT, Hennepin County and the MPRB ......................... 4-22
4.9.4 Partnership with Neighboring Cities ........................................................................................................... 4-23
4.9.5 Redevelopment Opportunities...................................................................................................................... 4-23
4.9.6 Coordination with Other City Programs .................................................................................................... 4-24
5.0 Implementation Program ............................................................................................................................................. 5-1
NPDES MS4 Permit .................................................................................................................................................... 5-1
Stormwater System Operation and Maintenance ......................................................................................... 5-2
5.2.1 Stormwater Infrastructure Renewal Program ............................................................................................. 5-3
Flood Management Program ................................................................................................................................. 5-4
5.3.1 BCWMC Flood Control Project ......................................................................................................................... 5-5
MCWD Roles and Responsibilities ....................................................................................................................... 5-6
BCWMC Roles and Responsibilities ..................................................................................................................... 5-8
5.5.1 Project Review and Permitting ......................................................................................................................... 5-8
5.5.2 Capital Improvement Program and Implementation .............................................................................. 5-9
Education and Public Involvement ...................................................................................................................... 5-9
Funding Programs ................................................................................................................................................... 5-11
City Ordinance and Official Controls ............................................................................................................... 5-11
Implementation Priorities and Coordination ................................................................................................ 5-12
5.9.1 BCWMC Projects ................................................................................................................................................. 5-13
Plan Update and Amendment Procedures .................................................................................................... 5-14
6.0 References .......................................................................................................................................................................... 6-1
List of Tables
Table 3-1 Selected Rainfall and Snowmelt Runoff Events .................................................................................. 3-2
Table 3-2 Land Use (2010) as a Percentage by Major Drainage District ...................................................... 3-6
Table 3-3 Summary of Structural Best Management Practices by Drainage District ............................ 3-22
Table 3-4 Summary of Flood Control Projects in the City of Golden Valley ............................................. 3-23
Table 3-5 BCWMC Priority Waterbodies in Golden Valley .............................................................................. 3-27
Table 3-6 Eutrophication Water Quality Standards for Golden Valley Waterbodies ............................ 3-28
v
Table 3-7 Summary of Impaired Waters within and downstream of Golden Valley ............................. 3-29
Table 5-1 Implementation Program – Capital Improvements and Studies ............................................... 5-16
Table 5-2 Implementation Program – Ongoing Programs .............................................................................. 5-18
Table 5-3 Implementation Program – Capital Improvements and Studies (Year by Year) ................. 5-20
Table 5-4 Implementation Program – Ongoing Programs (Year by Year) ................................................ 5-21
Table 5-5 City of Golden Valley Stormwater Design and Performance Standards ................................ 5-22
List of Figures
Figure 3-1 Drainage Districts (Size D) ........................................................................................................................ 3-39
Figure 3-2 Drainage Districts, Hydrologic Modeling Subwatersheds, and Flow Directions (Size D) 3-40
Figure 3-3 Drainage Districts and Water Quality Modeling Subwatersheds (Size D) ............................. 3-41
Figure 3-4 Current Land Use .......................................................................................................................................... 3-42
Figure 3-5 Future Land Use ............................................................................................................................................ 3-43
Figure 3-6 Hydrologic Soil Groups .............................................................................................................................. 3-44
Figure 3-7 Wellhead Protection Areas and Well Data ......................................................................................... 3-45
Figure 3-8 Public Water Inventory (PWI) .................................................................................................................. 3-46
Figure 3-9 National Wetland Inventory (NWI) ........................................................................................................ 3-47
Figure 3-10 City Wetland Assessment.......................................................................................................................... 3-48
Figure 3-11 City Water Resource Classifications (Size D) ..................................................................................... 3-49
Figure 3-12 Minnesota Land Cover Classification System (MLCCS) ................................................................. 3-50
Figure 3-13 Stormwater Management System (Size D) ........................................................................................ 3-51
Figure 3-14 Subsurface Stormwater Management System (Size D) ................................................................ 3-52
Figure 3-15 Stormwater Best Management Practices (Size D) ........................................................................... 3-53
Figure 3-16 Water Quality and Water Quantity Monitoring Sites .................................................................... 3-54
Figure 3-17 Impaired Waters ........................................................................................................................................... 3-55
Figure 3-18 Total Phosphorus Loading Estimated from P8 Modeling ............................................................ 3-56
Figure 3-19 FEMA Flood Inundation Areas ................................................................................................................ 3-57
Figure 3-20 BCWMC 100-year Floodplain .................................................................................................................. 3-58
List of Appendices, Attachments, or Exhibits
Appendix A City of Golden Valley Storm Water Pollution Prevention Plan (SWPPP)
Appendix B City of Golden Valley/MCWD Coordination Plan
vi
Certifications
I hereby certify that this plan, specification, or report was prepared by me or under my direct
supervision and that I am a duly Licensed Professional Engineer under the Laws of the State of
Minnesota.
Sterling G. Williams Jr.
PE #: 47642
Date
vii
Acronyms
Acronym Description
AIS Aquatic Invasive Species
APM Aquatic Plan Management
BCWMC Bassett Creek Watershed Management Commission
BMP Best Management Practice
BWSR Minnesota Board of Water and Soil Resources
CAMP Citizen Assisted Monitoring Program
CIP Capital Improvement Program
CLMP Citizen Lake Monitoring Program
CWA Clean Water Act
DWSMA Drinking Water Supply Management Area
EPA Environmental Protection Agency
FAW Functional Assessment of Wetlands
FCP (BCWMC) Flood Control Project
FEMA Federal Emergency Management Agency
FIRM Flood Insurance Rate Map
FIS Flood Insurance Study
FWPCA Federal Water Pollution Control Act
HHPLS (MCWD) Hydrologic, Hydraulic, and Pollutant Loading Study
JWC Joint Water Commission
LA Load Allocation
LGU Local Governmental Unit
LID Low Impact Development
LiDAR Light Detection and Ranging
LOMA Letter of Map Amendment
MCES Metropolitan Council Environmental Services
MCM Minimum Control Measure
MCWD Minnehaha Creek Watershed District
MCSC Minnesota Cities Stormwater Coalition
MNDNR Minnesota Department of Natural Resources
MDH Minnesota Department of Health
MGS Minnesota Geological Survey
MIDS Minimal Impact Design Standards
MLCCS Minnesota Land Cover Classification System
MnDOT Minnesota Department of Transportation
MnRAM Minnesota Routine Assessment Method
MPCA Minnesota Pollution Control Agency
MPRB Minneapolis Park and Recreation Board
MRCC Midwestern Regional Climate Center
MS4 Municipal Separate Storm Sewer System
viii
MSP Minnsota/St. Paul International Airport
NAPP National Aerial Photography Program
NFIP National Flood Insurance Program
NOAA National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration
NHIS Natural Heritage Information System
NPDES National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System
NRCS Natural Resource Conservation Service
NRMP Natural Resources Management Plan
NURP National Urban Runoff Program
NWI National Wetland Inventory
OHWL Ordinary High Water Level
P8 Program for Predicting Polluting Particle Passage through Pits, Puddles and Ponds
PWI Public Waters Inventory
SCADA Supervisory Control and Data Acquisition
SCS Soil Conservation Service
SSURGO Soil Survey Geographic Dataset
SSTS Subsurface Sewage Treatment System
SWMP Surface Water Management Plan
SWPMP Stormwater Pond Management Program
SWPPP Storm Water Pollution Prevention Program
TAC Technical Advisory Committee
TMDL Total Maximum Daily Load
TP Total Phosphorus
TSS Total Suspended Solids
USACE United States Army Corps of Engineers
USDA United States Department of Agriculture
USFWS United States Fish and Wildlife Service
VIC Voluntary Investigation and Cleanup
WCA Wetland Conservation Act
WHPP Wellhead Protection Plan
WLA Waste Load Allocation
WMO Watershed Management Organization
WOMP Watershed Outlet Monitoring Program
WRAPS Watershed Restoration and Protection Strategy
WWTP Wastewater Treatment Plant
ES-1
Executive Summary
The City of Golden Valley Surface Water Management Plan (SWMP) sets the course for the City’s
management of the water resources and stormwater within the City. The SWMP provides data and other
background information, outlines the applicable regulations, assesses City-wide and specific issues, sets
goals and policies for the City and its resources, and lists implementation tasks to achieve the goals. The
SWMP also provides information regarding the funding of the implementation program. The SWMP is
organized into six major sections, summarized as follows:
Section 1 – Introduction
Section 1 of this SWMP summarizes the City of Golden Valley’s location and history and describes the
purpose of the SWMP. This surface water management plan (SWMP) replaces the 2008 City of Golden
Valley Surface Water Management Plan (2008 SWMP) prepared by Barr Engineering Co. The SWMP is
intended to provide a complete and detailed guide and reference for managing water resources within
the City. The SWMP will assist the City with policy decisions, water resource management,
implementation priorities, regulatory program references, and capital improvement budgeting to address
water resource issues.
The purpose of this SWMP includes those given in Minnesota Statute 103B.201 for metropolitan water
management programs, which include:
• Protect, preserve, and use natural surface and groundwater storage and retention systems;
• Minimize public capital expenditures needed to correct flooding and water quality problems;
• Identify and plan for means to effectively protect and improve surface and groundwater quality;
• Establish more uniform local policies and official controls for surface and groundwater
management;
• Prevent erosion of soil into surface water systems;
• Promote groundwater recharge;
• Protect and enhance fish and wildlife habitat and water recreational facilities; and
• Secure the other benefits associated with proper management of surface and ground water.
This SWMP has been developed consistent with the requirements of Minnesota Statutes 103B.235,
Minnesota Rules Chapter 8410, guidance from the Metropolitan Council, and the watershed management
organizations (WMOs) with jurisdiction in the City including the Bassett Creek Watershed Management
Commission (BCWMC) and the Minnehaha Creek Watershed District (MCWD).
Section 2 – Goals, Objectives, and Policies
This section of the plan describes the goals, objectives, and policies for water resource management
within the City of Golden Valley. The City of Golden Valley is proactive in the area of water resource
management, reflecting the value the community places on natural resources. The policies described in
this SWMP are designed to continue to maintain and improve the quality and effectiveness of water
resource planning and management in the City of Golden Valley. Funding and staffing resources are not
ES-2
always sufficient to meet the full scope of stated goals, objectives, and policies. The City will pursue the
goals, objectives, and policies described in this section to the full utilization of available resources.
Section 5.0 describes the City’s funding sources and implementation program in greater detail.
The City of Golden Valley’s 2040 Comprehensive Plan identifies several goals related to the management
of stormwater and surface water resources. These goals include:
1. Sustain and improve water quality
2. Maintain and rehabilitate infrastructure
3. Protect and enhance aquatic resources
4. Minimize the risk and impact of floods
5. Ensure system capacities meet future needs
6. Balance water use and conservation
7. Involve and educate the public in water resource management
To achieve these goals, the City has identified objectives and policies. Objectives represent steps towards
the City’s goals, with policies providing the means to achieving those objectives. The objectives included
in Section 2.0 are organized into the following topic areas:
Section 2.1 Water Quality of Lakes and Streams
1. Achieve pollutant load reductions as required by the state or watershed management
organizations (e.g., as specified in Total Maximum Daily Loads).
2. Achieve BCWMC and state water quality standards in City lakes and streams to preserve
beneficial uses.
Section 2.2 Stormwater Runoff
1. Minimize pollutant loading from stormwater runoff through non-point source pollution
reduction and treatment.
2. Comply with all applicable stormwater regulations established by the Federal Government,
the State of Minnesota, Hennepin County, the Bassett Creek Watershed Management
Commission (BCWMC), the Minnehaha Creek Watershed District (MCWD) and the
Metropolitan Council.
Section 2.3 Streams
1. Minimize the volume of stormwater runoff entering Bassett Creek.
2. Increase the groundwater base flow of Bassett Creek.
3. Reduce the frequency of bank full runoff events in Bassett Creek.
Section 2.4 Flood Risk Reduction and Rate Control
1. Minimize the risk of flooding along Bassett Creek, its tributaries, and other flood-prone areas.
2. Protect human life, property, and surface water systems that may be damaged by flood
events.
ES-3
3. Maintain the City’s stormwater system to consistently provide the intended level of service
and protection
4. Implement strategies to manage the impact of future increased precipitation and changing
climate patterns on City stormwater infrastructure and planning
Section 2.5 Erosion and Sediment Control
1. Minimize erosion and sedimentation to protect the City’s water resources
2. Implement soil protection and sedimentation controls whenever necessary to maintain public
health, safety, and welfare.
Section 2.6 Wetlands, Habitat, Shoreland and Natural Areas
1. Preserve and enhance the quantity and quality of wetlands.
2. Protect and restore natural areas.
3. Protect and enhance fish and wildlife habitat
4. Preserve and enhance the ecological function of aquatic resources to enhance aesthetics and
associated recreation opportunities.
5. Maintain and enhance the integrity and ecological function of shoreland areas
Section 2.7 Groundwater
1. Protect the quantity and quality of groundwater resources.
Section 2.8 Funding and Administration
1. Provide sufficient funding to implement measures and policies contained in this plan.
2. Promote efficiency in stormwater and surface water management roles through cooperation
with WMOs.
Section 2.9 Education and Public Involvement
1. Involve and educate the residents of the City in water resource related issues.
2. Increase public awareness of individual property owner’s impacts on water quality
3. Build community capacity to implement storm water best management practices at a local
level.
Section 3 – Land and Water Resource Inventory
Section 3.0 of this Plan contains information on climate and precipitation, topography, watersheds and
drainage patterns, land use, soils, geology and groundwater resources, surface waters, wetlands and
natural resources, the City stormwater system, water quality, water quantity and flooding, fisheries and
aquatic habitat, recreational and scenic areas, and potential pollutant sources in the City. This important
information describes the conditions in the City and affects decisions about infrastructure, development,
and ecological preservation. By way of summary, some of the most notable information in Section 3
includes:
ES-4
Climate and precipitation: The climate of the Minneapolis-St. Paul area is a humid continental climate
characterized by moderate precipitation, wide daily temperature variations, large seasonal variations in
temperature, warm humid summers, and cold winters with moderate snowfall. Average weather imposes
little strain on the typical drainage system, however extremes of precipitation and snowmelt are important
for design of flood control systems. The National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA)
published data on extreme precipitation events that can be used to aid in the design of flood control
systems, now called Atlas 14. This data indicates increased precipitation depths for more extreme storm
events relative to previously published values.
Topography: The City of Golden Valley is relatively flat, with generally mild slopes and little change in
topography across the area. The urbanization of the City over time has greatly altered the natural
topography of the watershed. With these alterations, drainage patterns have become more defined. The
steep slopes within the City and are typically found along Bassett Creek and the major water bodies within
the City. The location of steep slopes is of interest as these areas limit options for land development and
have a higher potential for erosion.
Watersheds and Drainage Patterns: There are five major drainage districts within the City of Golden
Valley. These districts include the Bassett Creek, Medicine Lake, Minnehaha Creek, Sweeney Lake, and
Wirth Lake drainage districts. The Minnehaha Creek drainage district, which covers a small area in the
southeast corner of the City, is located within the Minnehaha Creek Watershed District (MCWD). The other
four drainage areas are located within the Bassett Creek Watershed Management Commission (BCWMC).
All areas of the City of Golden Valley ultimately drain to the Mississippi River.
Land Use: Almost all of the land in Golden Valley is fully developed. As a fully-developed community,
changes in land use will be the result of redevelopment. Changes in land use are expected to be modest
over the life of this Plan. However, redevelopment with or without land use changes may provide
opportunities to implement a variety of stormwater best management practices (BMPs) that can improve
water quality, reduce the risk of flooding, provide habitat, or achieve other benefits.
Geology and groundwater: The City of Golden Valley is located in the northwestern portion of a
bowl-like bedrock structure underlying the Minneapolis-St. Paul metropolitan area (called the Twin Cities
basin). The bedrock is overlain by a layer of glacial drift which varies from over 250 feet thick in the
western part of the City and to less than 50 feet near the eastern border of the City. Three buried
erosional valleys cut deep into the bedrock and bisect the glacial drift. The region is underlain by four
major bedrock aquifers: (1) St. Peter Sandstone, (2) Prairie du Chien-Jordan, (3) Wonewoc Sandstone
(formerly Ironton-Galesville Sandstones), and (4) Mt. Simon-Hinckley Sandstones. In addition, there are
numerous aquifers in the glacial drift. Some groundwater from the glacial drift and the St. Peter aquifer
discharges into Bassett Creek. The remaining aquifers discharge into the Minnesota and Mississippi rivers.
Surface waters: The Minnesota Department of Natural Resources (MNDNR) designates certain water
resources as public waters to indicate those lakes, wetlands, and watercourses over which the MNDNR has
regulatory jurisdiction. There are several designated and numbered public waters and wetlands within the
City, including the following named lakes:
ES-5
• Sweeney Lake (27-0035P)
• Twin Lake (27-0035P)
• Wirth Lake (27-0037P)
• Westwood Lake (27-0711P)
Portions of the Main Stem of Bassett Creek and Sweeney Lake Branch of Bassett Creek are classified as
public water watercourses. All of the above water bodies are classified as priority water bodies by the
BCWMC. Within Golden Valley there are three (3) public ditch segments (also known as “county ditches”
or “judicial ditches”). Public ditches are established and regulated under Chapter 103E of Minnesota
Statutes and are under the jurisdiction of the county.
Wetlands and Natural Resources: Prior to development, much of the land within the City of Golden
Valley was wetland. Many wetland areas were drained through farming and development (prior to the
establishment of regulations protecting wetlands). Although Golden Valley is almost completely
developed, numerous wetlands remain across the City. Several wetland and natural resource inventories
have been completed for the City of Golden Valley. In 2015 the City completed a Natural Resource
Management Plan (NRMP), (SEH, 2015). The purpose of the NRMP is to guide decisions makers and staff
on how to best manage the natural resources within the City, including water, land, wildlife, and
vegetation.
City Stormwater System: The City of Golden Valley stormwater management system is comprised of a
series of lateral and trunk storm sewers, stormwater ponds, public ditches, and natural water bodies such
as creeks, lakes, and wetlands, as well as a number of best management practices (BMPs). Figure 3-13
and Figure 3-14 show Golden Valley’s stormwater management system and subsurface (draintile and
cleanouts) water management system, respectively. There is also existing stormwater infrastructure that is
under the jurisdiction of other entities, including the Minnesota Department of Transportation (MnDOT),
Hennepin County, railroads, and private developments within the City. These other entities are
responsible for maintaining their own stormwater management infrastructure.
Water Quality: The City recognizes the importance of water quality in its waterbodies has taken steps to
protect and improve these resources. These steps include adopting water quality management policies,
collecting water quality monitoring data, reviewing projects for conformance with water quality
performance standards, and implementing water quality improvement projects. The City of Golden Valley
adopts by reference the water quality standards of the BCWMC and Minnesota Pollution Control Agency
(MPCA) (Minnesota Rules 7050) and will manage lakes and streams to meet or exceed the applicable
water quality criteria. Waterbodies within the City that are listed in the MPCA’s impaired waters 303(d) list
include Bassett Creek, Sweeney Lake, and Wirth Lake.
Water Quantity and Flooding: The City of Golden Valley cooperates with the BCWMC to manage the
quantity of water and reduce the risk of flooding within the City, including operation and maintenance of
the BCWMC Flood Control Project features within the City. The City has also cooperated with the BCWMC
to develop an XP-SWMM hydrologic and hydraulic model incorporating Atlas 14 precipitation data; the
model may be used to assess impacts of potential projects and developments, and prioritize flood risk
ES-6
reduction efforts. There is a Flood Insurance Study (FIS) for the City of Golden Valley prepared by the
Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA). The City’s FIS, together with the City’s floodplain
ordinance, allow the City to participate in the federal government’s flood insurance program.
Natural Communities and Habitat: Prior to settlement, the major land cover type in the City was a
predominantly oak forest interrupted by tallgrass prairie and marsh. Natural vegetation in the City of
Golden Valley has been greatly altered by agricultural development and urbanization. Remaining
vegetation in the City is typical of that found at the interface between the Eastern Deciduous Forest and
the Temperate Grassland. The county biological survey data notes the presence of a tamarack swamp in
Theodore Wirth Park. The Natural Heritage Information System (NHIS) also notes occurrences of federally-
or state-listed rare animal species within the City. Game fish are present in Bassett Creek, Sweeney Lake,
Twin Lake, and Wirth Lake.
Pollutant sources: The sources of potential pollution in the City are varied. The location of these
potentially contaminated or hazardous waste sites should be considered as sites are redeveloped and
BMPs are implemented. While there are point sources of pollution that are regulated under State permits,
the vast majority of pollution reaching surface waters comes from non-point source – those which cannot
be traced back to a single source or pipe. Instead, pollutants are carried from land to water in stormwater
or snowmelt runoff, in seepage through the soil, and in atmospheric transport. These pollutants of
concern include nutrients, bacteria, sediment, chlorides, pesticides, solvents, and chemicals.
Section 4 – Assessment of Issues and Opportunities
This section of the Plan presents and discusses the issues and opportunities facing the City, organized by
various topics. Issue identification was an important task in development of this Plan, and included review
of Metropolitan Council and watershed management organization (WMO) planning documents, review of
available studies and modeling, discussion with City staff, and public engagement performed concurrent
with the City’s Comprehensive Plan update. The issues discussed in Section 4.0 are organized into the
following topic areas:
• Water quality: including stormwater runoff water quality, MPCA impaired waters, total maximum
daily load studies, waterbody classification and water quality goals, water quality BMP
maintenance, and other water quality issues.
• Water quantity and flood risk reduction: including floodplain management, hydrologic and
hydraulic modeling, and discussion of select local flooding issues.
• Wetland management: including wetland and shoreland buffers, aquatic invasive species, and
wetland classification and inventory
• Groundwater management: including infiltration, groundwater sustainability, and wellhead
protection
• Erosion and sediment control: including Bassett Creek erosion issues
• Interagency issues: include maintenance of infrastructure and park areas not owned by the City
ES-7
Major opportunities for the City to consider in addressing these issues are summarized at the end of this
section, and include cooperative efforts with WMOs, partnerships with adjacent cities, redevelopment
opportunities, and coordination with other City programs.
Section 5 – Implementation Program
This section describes the significant components of the City’s Surface Water Management Plan (SWMP)
implementation program, including implementation of the City’s NPDES MS4 Permit, operation and
maintenance of the City’s stormwater system, education and public involvement, funding, ordinance
implementation and official controls, and implementation priorities. The implementation program is
presented in tabular format at the end of this section and includes:
• Table 5-1 Implementation Program – Capital Improvements and Studies
• Table 5-2 Implementation Program – Ongoing Programs (Operations, Regulation, and
Education)
Much of the stormwater infrastructure within the City is nearing the end of its intended operating life or
may be operating past its design life. Over the next several decades, the City will be challenged with
needing to repair and/or replace a significant amount of its stormwater infrastructure. To address this
issue, the City will implement its Infrastructure Renewal Program (IRP). The IRP provides a schedule and
funding source for updating aging infrastructure in coordination with other planned City activities. The
City will use the IRP in planning and executing updates to the stormwater management system. Section
5.0 contains more information about the City’s IRP.
Section 5.0 also describes the roles of the BCWMC and MCWD with respect to water resource
management within the City. This section also provides information regarding updating the SWMP, and
the revision/amendment process for the SWMP.
Section 6 – References
This section lists the documents and other references used in the preparation of the SWMP.
2-1
1.0 Introduction
Location and History
The City of Golden Valley is a suburb of the Twin Cities metropolitan area, located just west of the City of
Minneapolis. The City contains diverse areas of residential neighborhoods, commercial and industrial
developments, and park and recreation facilities. The City of Golden Valley is unique in that it contains
several prominent and valuable water resources, such as Bassett Creek, Sweeney Lake, Twin Lake, and
Wirth Lake, while at the same time existing as an inner metro area urban-suburban community. Nearly all
of the stormwater runoff in Golden Valley drains to Bassett Creek and then on to the Mississippi River.
The City recognizes the value of the water resources within and downstream of its borders. The goals,
policies, and implementation activities included in this plan demonstrate the City’s strong support for
natural resource protection and investment in water quality.
The Village of Golden Valley was incorporated on December 16, 1886. During its early years, Golden
Valley was an agricultural community of only a few hundred residents, full of farms, mills, and dairies.
Residential development began after the Electric Luce Line Railroad was built through the village in 1912.
Between 1910 and 1940, Golden Valley's population increased from 692 to 2,040. More residential
development followed industry's discovery of Golden Valley after World War II, and the village continued
to grow. Golden Valley became a City in 1972.
Today Golden Valley covers 10.5 square miles and has a population of approximately 20,000 (2010
census). More detailed census and demographic information is available in the City’s Comprehensive Plan
and from the City’s website at: www.goldenvalleymn.com.
Golden Valley is a fully developed City. Low density residential land use is the predominant land use,
occupying approximately half the City (see Section 3.4). Significant commercial, industrial, and
institutional development also exist within the City. The City has 25 parks and nine nature areas within the
community.
The City of Golden Valley is located almost entirely within the watershed of Bassett Creek, which is
managed by the Bassett Creek Water Management Commission (BCWMC). The far southeast corner of
the City, south of I-394 and east of Highway 100, is located within the watershed of Minnehaha Creek,
which is managed by Minnehaha Creek Watershed District (MCWD).
SWMP Purpose and Scope
This surface water management plan (SWMP) replaces the 2008 City of Golden Valley Surface Water
Management Plan (2008 SWMP) prepared by Barr Engineering Co. The purpose of this SWMP is to
provide a complete and detailed guide and reference for protecting and managing water resources within
the City, including stormwater. The SWMP will assist the City with policy decisions, water resource
management, implementation priorities, regulatory program references, and capital improvement
budgeting to address water resource issues.
2-2
The City’s SWMP is a local water management plan prepared in accordance with Minnesota Statute
103B.235 and Minnesota Rules 8410. The purpose of this SWMP includes those purposes given in
Minnesota Statute 103B.201 for metropolitan water management programs. According to statute, the
purposes of these water management programs are to:
• Protect, preserve, and use natural surface and groundwater storage and retention systems;
• Minimize public capital expenditures needed to correct flooding and water quality problems;
• Identify and plan for means to effectively protect and improve surface and groundwater quality;
• Establish more uniform local policies and official controls for surface and groundwater
management;
• Prevent erosion of soil into surface water systems;
• Promote groundwater recharge;
• Protect and enhance fish and wildlife habitat and water recreational facilities; and
• Secure the other benefits associated with proper management of surface and ground water.
This SWMP will guide the City in protecting, preserving, and managing its surface water resources and
stormwater system. This SWMP has been developed consistent the requirements of Minnesota Statutes
103B.235, Minnesota Rules Chapter 8410, guidance from the Metropolitan Council, and the watershed
management organizations (WMOs) with jurisdiction in the City including the BCWMC and the MCWD.
1.2.1 Regulatory History
In addition to the purposes and requirements outlined in state statutes and rules, this SWMP reflects
numerous other water resource-related state and federal mandates that the City must meet. As state and
federal laws have changed over the years, the role of the City in water resource management has evolved.
Some of the key regulatory milestones affecting municipal water resource management include, but are
not limited to:
1945 – Minnesota legislature authorized a new state Water Pollution Control Commission
1948 – United States (U.S.) Congress enacted the Federal Water Pollution Control Act (FWPCA)
1968 – U.S. Congress enacts the National Flood Insurance Act of 1968 creating the National Flood
Insurance Program (NFIP)
1967 – Minnesota legislature created the Minnesota Pollution Control Agency (MPCA)
1972 – U.S. Congress enacted amendments to the FWPCA known as the Clean Water Act (CWA)
1977 – U.S. Congress enacted amendments to the CWA leading to the National Pollutant Discharge
Elimination System (NPDES)
1982 – Minnesota legislature enacted the Metropolitan Surface Water Management Act (later
becoming Minnesota statute 103B) requiring cities to develop local water management plans
2-3
1987 - Minnesota legislature enacted laws broadening attention from “point” source to “nonpoint”
source pollution (including stormwater)
1987 – U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) delegated authority for administering NPDES
program to the MPCA
1990 – NPDES Phase I Stormwater Program required regulation of municipal separate storm sewer
systems (MS4s) serving more than 100,000 people
1991 – Minnesota Legislature enacted the Wetland Conservation Act (WCA)
1999 – Phase II federal regulations expanded the scope of the NPDES Stormwater Program to include
smaller MS4s (including Golden Valley) and limited construction and industrial activities
2002 – MPCA began identifying surface water resources that are impaired for their identified uses
(see Section 4.1.2)
2003 – As part of the NPDES Phase II program, the MPCA issued a General Permit (MS4 permit)
applicable to Golden Valley; the permit requires cities to comply with six “minimum control
measures” (see Section 5.1)
2013 – MPCA reissued the MS4 General Permit; the revised permit, including new requirements for
smaller MS4s including Golden Valley
The above regulations and requirements have led to following specific requirements for the City of
Golden Valley and other similar cities:
• Preparation of the MS4 General Storm Water Permit Application and Storm Water Pollution
Prevention Program
• Preparation of this Surface Water Management Plan (SWMP)
• Preparation of future updates to the NPDES-MS4 permit and SWMP to address the requirements
of future Total Maximum Daily Loading (TMDL) analyses.
Water Resources Agreements
The City of Golden Valley has entered into the following water resource management related agreements:
1. Joint Powers Agreement establishing the Bassett Creek Watershed Management Commission
(BCWMC). The original joint powers agreement between the nine member cities (including
Golden Valley) went into effect in 1984. A revised and restated joint powers agreement was
developed and signed in 1993, and again most recently in 2015.
2. Agreement with the Golden Valley Country Club, Inc. regarding inspection, access, and
maintenance for a dam/flood control structure on Golden Valley Country Club property, on
Bassett Creek. The agreement was executed in June, 1993.
2-4
3. Easement agreement with the Golden Valley Country Club, Inc. regarding inspection, access, and
maintenance for a pump/lift station on Golden Valley Country Club property, on Bassett Creek.
The agreement was executed in May, 2002.
In addition to the specific agreements listed above, the City continues to require owners of private
stormwater facilities to enter into maintenance agreements with the City to ensure that those facilities
continue to function as originally intended (see Section 5.2).
2-1
2.0 Goals, Objectives and Policies
This section of the plan describes the goals, objectives, and policies for water resource management
within the City of Golden Valley. The City of Golden Valley is proactive in the area of water resource
management, reflecting the value the community places on natural resources. The policies described here
are designed to continue to improve the quality and effectiveness of water resource planning and
management in the City of Golden Valley. Funding and staffing resources are not always sufficient to
meet the full scope of stated goals, objectives, and policies. The City will pursue the goals, objectives, and
policies described in this section to the full utilization of available resources. Section 5.0 describes the
City’s funding sources and implementation program in greater detail.
The City of Golden Valley’s 2040 Comprehensive Plan identifies several goals related to the management
of stormwater and surface water resources. These goals include:
1. Sustain and improve water quality
2. Maintain and rehabilitate infrastructure
3. Protect and enhance aquatic resources
4. Minimize the risk and impact of floods
5. Ensure system capacities meet future needs
6. Balance water use and conservation
7. Involve and educate the public in water resource management
To achieve these goals, the City has identified objectives and policies. Objectives and policies are
organized into the following topic areas:
• Water quality of lakes and streams
• Stormwater runoff
• Streams
• Flood risk reduction and rate control
• Erosion and sediment control
• Wetlands, habitat, shoreland, and natural areas
• Groundwater
• Funding and administration
• Education and public involvement
Water Quality of Lakes and Streams
The water quality of lakes and streams within the City is a primary focus of the City’s surface water
management efforts and the efforts of the Bassett Creek Watershed Management Commission (BCWMC).
In its 2015 Watershed Management Plan, the BCWMC established goals for lake and stream management
and developed water quality management classifications for several streams, lakes, and ponds within the
City (see Section 3.10.2). The City has established the goals, objectives, and policies described herein to be
consistent with and complement the water quality goals of the BCWMC.
2-2
Objectives:
1. Achieve pollutant load reductions as required by the state or watershed management
organizations (e.g., as specified in Total Maximum Daily Loads).
2. Achieve BCWMC and state water quality standards in City lakes and streams to preserve
beneficial uses.
Policies:
(a) The City of Golden Valley will consider the protection and enhancement of natural
resources including lakes, ponds and adjacent uplands when designing and
implementing City projects.
(b) The City of Golden Valley adopts by reference the water quality standards of the
BCWMC and MPCA (Minnesota Rules 7050) and will manage lakes and streams to meet
or exceed the applicable water quality criteria.
(c) The City of Golden Valley adopts the BCWMC priority waterbody classification system
within Golden Valley.
(d) The City of Golden Valley will work with the BCWMC to implement the improvement
projects in the City identified in the BCWMC’s capital improvement program based on
feasibility, prioritization, and available funding.
(e) The City of Golden Valley will prioritize water quality improvement projects that are
most effective at achieving water quality goals, including non-structural BMPs and
education, with an emphasis give to projects that also provide flood mitigation benefit.
(f) The City of Golden Valley will cooperate with the BCWMC, MCWD, the MPCA and other
stakeholders in the preparation and implementation of Total Maximum Daily Load
(TMDL) studies for waterbodies on the MPCA’s current or future impaired waters
(303(d)) list located in, or receiving drainage from, the and/or Watershed Restoration
and Protection Strategy (WRAPS) study.
(g) The City of Golden Valley will continue to identify and pursue opportunities to maintain
or improve the excellent water quality in Twin Lake.
(h) The City will continue to implement (or require developers to implement) BMPs that
reduce phosphorus loading to receiving water within the MCWD by two (2) pounds per
year and report progress to the MCWD (see Section 4.1.5.5).
(i) The City of Golden Valley will continue to support the water quality monitoring efforts
in the City performed by other agencies and organizations.
2-3
Stormwater Runoff
Objectives:
1. Minimize pollutant loading from stormwater runoff through non-point source pollution
reduction and treatment.
2. Comply with all applicable stormwater regulations established by the Federal Government,
the State of Minnesota, Hennepin County, the Bassett Creek Watershed Management
Commission (BCWMC), the Minnehaha Creek Watershed District (MCWD) and the
Metropolitan Council.
Policies:
(a) The City will continue to implement all aspects of the Golden Valley NPDES MS4 permit
SWPPP (see Appendix A), including all required inspection and maintenance activities.
(b) The City requires stormwater treatment for development, redevelopment, and linear
projects as defined in City Code Section 4.31, and including:
• New, nonlinear development that creates more than one acre of new
impervious surface shall capture and retain onsite 1.1 inches of runoff from the
new impervious surface.
• Nonlinear redevelopment sites that create one acre or more of new or fully
reconstructed impervious surface shall capture and retain onsite 1.1 inches of
runoff from the new or fully reconstructed impervious surface.
• Linear projects that create one acre or more of net new impervious surface shall
capture and retain onsite 1.1 inches of runoff from the net new impervious
surface.
(c) If the performance goal is not feasible and/or is not allowed for a proposed project
(e.g., due to site restrictions as defined in the MPCA’s MIDS flexible treatment options),
then the project proposer must implement the flexible treatment options, as shown in
the BCWMC Design Sequence Flow Chart in Appendix C of the BCWMC Requirements
for Improvements and Development Proposals (2017, as amended).
(d) The City will continue forwarding proposed projects to the BCWMC for review, as
required. The types of projects that must be submitted to the BCWMC for review, the
BCWMC’s review procedure, submittal requirements, guidelines, design criteria, etc. are
provided in the BCWMC’s document Requirements for Improvements and
Development Proposals (2017, as amended, see BCWMC website:
http://www.bassettcreekwmo.org/).
(e) The City requires developers to meet all BCWMC requirements, where applicable, as
identified in the BCWMC’s Requirements for Improvements and Development
Proposals (2017, as amended, see BCWMC website: http://www.bassettcreekwmo.org).
2-4
(f) The City requires developers to meet all MCWD requirements, where applicable, as
identified in the MCWD Rules (see MCWD website: http://www.minnehahacreek.org/).
(g) As part of the City’s development review and approval process, the City will continue to
ensure that stormwater discharges will not adversely affect endangered species,
threatened species, historic places, and archaeological sites.
(h) The City will continue to explore implementation of emerging stormwater management
technologies, BMPs, and methods as research develops.
(i) The City will continue to monitor opportunities for BMP implementation, including
retrofits and flow diversions, within the City and implement stormwater BMPs as funds
and opportunities become available.
(j) The City will continue to require maintenance agreements for private stormwater
facilities and maintain procedures, resources, and authority to enforce these
agreements.
(k) The City will coordinate with other cities and agencies, as applicable, to encourage
ongoing maintenance of water quality facilities draining to, or receiving drainage from,
the City.
(l) The City will continue to require project proposers to perform stormwater management
activities consistent with the City’s stormwater management ordinance.
(m) The City promotes using vegetation, with an emphasis on native species, to assimilate
nutrients and limit the rate of stormwater runoff (e.g., buffer strips, vegetated swales).
(n) The City requires project proposers to consider the use of low-impact design elements
in proposed projects, including, but not limited to: green roofs, rain gardens, bioswales,
and pervious pavement.
(o) The City will request MnDOT involvement in pond sediment removal within MnDOT
right-of-way.
(p) The City will continue to implement a program to track installation, inspection, and
monitoring of private stormwater facilities.
(q) The City of Golden Valley will continue to work with the League of Minnesota Cities
Stormwater Coalition (MCSC) and/or other groups toward identifying and addressing
stormwater management issues.
(r) The City will continue to evaluate stormwater pond performance consistent with its
SWPPP and consider opportunities to enhance the pollutant removal effectiveness of
existing stormwater ponds.
2-5
Streams
Streams and their respective floodplains provide an important focal point for green space and recreational
activities within Golden Valley. These streams are also critical conveyors of stormwater flow. The
following goals and policies are designed to protect these important functions of streams within the City.
Objectives:
1. Minimize the volume of stormwater runoff entering Bassett Creek.
2. Increase the groundwater base flow of Bassett Creek.
3. Reduce the frequency of bank full runoff events in Bassett Creek.
Policies:
(a) The City encourages developers and landowners to reduce areas of impervious surface
through the use of innovative materials, alternative site design, and other low impact
design strategies.
(b) The City will encourage project proposers and private land owners to restore
streambank areas where the natural integrity of the creek has been compromised.
(c) The City will coordinate with the BCWMC and private property owners to implement
streambank stabilization and restoration projects.
(d) The City will incorporate soft-armoring techniques (e.g., plants, logs, vegetative mats)
when implementing streambank and shoreline stabilization and restoration projects,
whenever feasible.
(e) The City will maintain and continue to update its Creek Inventory, which identifies
outfalls, culverts, significant erosion sites and potential obstructions in the three
branches of Bassett Creek within City limits.
Flood Risk Reduction and Rate Control
Properly designed and managed storm sewer and drainage facilities are necessary to minimize the
frequency and extent of flooding. In cooperation with the BCWMC and through the City’s floodplain
zoning requirements (City Code Section 11.60), Golden Valley works to minimize the risk to people and
property from flood waters.
Objectives:
1. Minimize the risk of flooding along Bassett Creek, its tributaries, and other flood-prone areas.
2. Protect human life, property, and surface water systems that may be damaged by flood
events.
2-6
3. Maintain the City’s stormwater system to consistently provide the intended level of service
and protection
4. Implement strategies to manage the impact of future increased precipitation and changing
climate patterns on City stormwater infrastructure and planning
Policies:
(a) The City will continue to implement its Flood Plain Management Zoning Regulations
(City Code Section 11.60) and maintain consistency with BCWMC and MCWD floodplain
management policies.
(b) The City will permanently protect stormwater ponds and drainage systems by obtaining
property land dedication and easements with new development.
(c) The City will design new municipal stormwater facilities to convey no less than the 10-
year, 24-hour rainfall event (i.e., the event with a 10% chance of occurring in any year)
based on Atlas 14 precipitation data.
(d) The City requires new development, redevelopment, and linear projects to achieve on
site volume retention consistent with the requirements of Section 2.2 policy (b) and City
Code Section 4.31. For all other projects, the City encourages use of infiltration (where
conditions allow), filtration, or other abstraction of runoff from impervious surfaces.
(e) The City requires that post-development peak discharge rates shall not exceed existing
discharge rates for the 2-year (50% annual occurrence probability), 10-year (10% annual
occurrence probability), and 100-year (1% annual occurrence probability) critical
duration storm events, as determined using Atlas 14 precipitation data.
(f) The City requires rate control in conformance with the BCWMC Flood Control Project
system design.
(g) The City will allow only those land uses in the BCWMC-established floodplain that will
not be damaged by floodwaters and will not increase flooding. Allowable types of land
use that are consistent with the floodplain include:
• Open space or recreational uses, such as golf courses, tennis courts, driving
ranges, archery ranges, picnic grounds, boat launching ramps, swimming areas,
parks, wildlife habitat, trails, nature preserves and fishing areas.
• Residential lawns, gardens, parking areas, and play areas.
• Non-residential parking areas that meet additional provisions specified in the City
floodplain ordinance
• Public utilities (consistent with special permit requirements specified in the City
floodplain ordinance)
2-7
(h) The City prohibits permanent bridges, docks, storage piles, fences and other
obstructions in the floodplain that would collect debris or restrict flood flows.
(i) The City prohibits filling within the BCWMC-established floodplain. Proposals to fill
within the BCWMC-established floodplain must obtain BCWMC approval and must
provide compensating storage and/or channel modification so that the flood level shall
not be increased at any point along the trunk system due to the fill.
(j) The City prohibits expansion of existing non-conforming land uses within the floodplain
unless they are fully flood-proofed in accordance with existing codes and regulations,
as demonstrated to the satisfaction of the City Engineer.
(k) As opportunities arise, the City will consider dedicating funds to the purchase and/or
structural flood-proofing of homes that have less than 2 feet of freeboard from their
lowest opening to the established 100 year flood level, or that have an access that has a
portion below the 100 year flood level.
(l) The City will require that the lowest floor (including basement) of new permanent
structures and significantly redeveloped structures be at least 2 feet above the
established 100-year flood plain elevation.
(m) The City discourages development where the sole access to the site is through the
established 100-year floodplain. If such access is unavoidable, the City will require that
any new roads into the site crossing the floodplain be above the regulatory floodplain
elevation and satisfy all applicable floodplain regulations.
(n) The City will continue to perform routine inspection, maintenance, and repair of
BCWMC Flood Control Project (FCP) features located within the City and will formally
notify the BCWMC of any maintenance and repair action on any FCP feature.
(o) The City will be responsible for the maintenance, repair, and replacement of road
crossings and corresponding conveyance structures that were installed as part of the
BCWMC FCP.
(p) The City will perform the initial response to emergency conditions related to the
performance or failure of the BCWMC FCP.
(q) The City will assume responsibility for maintenance and repair of FCP features that are
primarily aesthetic improvements.
Erosion and Sediment Control
Large areas of Golden Valley contribute stormwater discharge to Bassett Creek, Sweeney Lake, Medicine
Lake, Wirth Lake, and other important waters. An erosion and sediment control program is essential to
maintaining or improving the quality of the water bodies within, and downstream, of the City. Properly
2-8
implemented, an erosion and sediment control program can reduce erosion at the source and
significantly reduce sediment and pollutant loading into the receiving waters.
Objectives:
1. Minimize erosion and sedimentation to protect the City’s water resources
2. Implement soil protection and sedimentation controls whenever necessary to maintain public
health, safety, and welfare.
Policies:
(a) The City will promote land use planning and development that minimizes sediment
yield through compliance with established City, BCWMC, and MCWD policies.
(b) The City will review projects and developments for compliance with the City, MPCA,
BCWMC, and MCWD erosion and sediment control standards.
(c) The City requires development to comply with and follow appropriate best
management practices for erosion and sediment control as specified in the MPCA’s
Construction Stormwater General Permit and the Minnesota Stormwater Manual,
available at: http://stormwater.pca.state.mn.us/index.php/Main_Page.
(d) The City will continue to require permits and the preparation of erosion control plans
for construction projects as per Golden Valley City Code Section 4.31. Erosion control
plans shall show proposed methods of retaining sediment onsite during construction,
and shall specify methods and schedules for restoring, covering, or re-vegetating the
site after construction.
(e) The City will continue to perform regular erosion and sediment control inspections.
(f) The City will maintain a process for handling public complaints regarding non-
compliance issues.
(g) The City will maintain a record-keeping process to store information regarding site
inspections and report compliance to the BCWMC for those projects subject to BCWMC
erosion and sediment control standards.
(h) The City will continue to implement its tree and landscape ordinance (City Code
Section 4.32).
Wetlands, Habitat, Shoreland and Natural Areas
Wetlands, shorelands, and natural areas provide a number of benefits that are of direct value to the
community. These benefits vary according to the type of wetland or natural area. Collectively, wetlands
provide floodwater storage and retention, nutrient assimilation, sediment entrapment, groundwater
2-9
recharge, aesthetics and recreation, shoreland anchoring and erosion control, and habitat for fish and
wildlife. Natural areas also provide for aesthetics, recreation, shoreland stabilization, erosion control, and
wildlife habitat.
Objectives:
1. Preserve and enhance the quantity and quality of wetlands.
2. Protect and restore natural areas.
3. Protect and enhance fish and wildlife habitat.
4. Maintain and enhance the integrity and ecological function of aquatic resources and
shoreland areas.
Policies:
(a) The City will continue its role as the local governmental unit (LGU) responsible for
administering the Minnesota Wetland Conservation Act (WCA).
(b) The City will continue to require wetland delineation and functions and values
assessment with development proposals, as needed, and require developers to
maximize buffer zones around wetlands where possible.
(c) The City will continue to require proposed projects to sequence wetland impacts in the
order of avoid, minimize, and replace, consistent with WCA requirements. Where
wetland replacement is necessary, the City prefers local wetland replacement.
(d) The City will continue to develop wetland banks and banking credits as opportunities
arise; developed wetland credits will be used primarily for City of Golden Valley
projects.
(e) The City will continue to coordinate with other agencies, as necessary, that are also
involved in the protection of wetlands.
(f) The City will continue to use its Natural Resource Management Plan as a planning and
implementation resource and update it periodically.
(g) The City will continue to develop and maintain buffers of native shoreline vegetation on
City property, preserving naturally existing vegetation where applicable.
(h) The City requires projects containing more than one acre of new or redeveloped
impervious area to incorporate vegetated buffers around all wetlands. Average
minimum buffer widths are required according to the MnRAM wetland classification
system, as follows:
2-10
• An average of 75 feet and minimum of 50 feet from the edge of wetlands
classified as Preserve
• An average of 50 feet and minimum of 30 feet from the edge of wetlands
classified as Manage 1
• An average of 25 feet and minimum of 15 feet from the edge of wetlands
classified as Manage 2 or 3.
Allowable land uses and vegetative criteria for buffers are specified in the BCWMC’s
Requirements for Development and Redevelopment (2017, as amended). The City may
allow exemptions for public recreational facilities parallel to the shoreline (e.g. trails) up
to 20 feet in width, with that width being added to the required buffer width.
(i) The City will encourage and support the voluntary development and maintenance of
buffers of native and naturally existing shoreline vegetation on non-City property.
(j) The City will support opportunities to enhance recreational opportunities on Bassett
Creek.
(k) The City will develop objectives and guidelines to evaluate and protect the natural
integrity of lakes, ponds and adjacent uplands.
(l) The City will maintain its authority for shoreland regulation by continuing to implement
its shoreland ordinance (City Zoning Code Section 11.65).
(m) The City will encourage landowners to protect non-disturbed shoreland areas and
restore disturbed shorelines and streambanks located on private property to their
natural state, where feasible.
(n) The City will encourage preservation of streambank and lakeshore vegetation during
and after construction projects.
Groundwater
Objective:
1. Protect the quantity and quality of groundwater resources.
Policies:
(a) The City will cooperate with St. Louis Park, Robbinsdale, Plymouth, and Minnetonka
regarding wellhead protection programs and activities.
(b) The City will consider the presence of drinking water supply management areas
(DWSMAs) when planning, reviewing, and implementing projects.
2-11
(c) The City will continue to work with public and private entities that engage in soil and
groundwater sampling, monitoring, and remediation.
(d) The City requires infiltration practices to be implemented in accordance with the
following guidance for determining the feasibility of infiltration:
• NPDES Construction Stormwater General Permit (2013, as amended)
• BCWMC’s Requirements for Improvements and Development Proposals (BCWMC,
2017, as amended)
• Minnesota Department of Health’s Evaluating Proposed Stormwater Infiltration
Projects in Vulnerable Wellhead Protection Areas (MDH, 2007)
The City recommends that infiltration practices be designed with consideration for the
following guidance:
• Minnesota Pollution Control Agency’s Minnesota Stormwater Manual
(http://stormwater.pca.state.mn.us/index.php/Main_Page)
(e) The City will cooperate with efforts of the WMOs and others to educate the general
public regarding the importance of implementing BMPs to protect groundwater quality
and quantity.
(f) The City will share groundwater elevation data with the BCWMC and other public and
private partners, when available.
Funding and Administration
Objectives:
1. Provide sufficient funding to implement measures and policies contained in this plan.
2. Promote efficiency in stormwater and surface water management roles through cooperation
with WMOs.
Policies:
(a) The City of Golden Valley will continue to use the Storm Water Utility Fee program as
the primary mechanism to fund stormwater related activities.
(b) The City will continue to pursue grant and cost-share funding opportunities for
stormwater related programs and projects.
(c) The City will continue forwarding proposed projects to the BCWMC for review. The
types of projects that must be submitted to the BCWMC for review, the BCWMC’s
review procedure, submittal requirements, guidelines, design criteria, etc. are provided
2-12
in the BCWMC’s document Requirements for Improvements and Development
Proposals (BCWMC, June 2017, as revised).
(d) The City will provide ordinances and planning document updates affecting stormwater
and water resource management to the BCWMC and/or MCWD for review.
(e) For projects in the City ordered by the BCWMC, the City will acquire and maintain
easements, right-of-way, or interest of land necessary to implement and maintain the
project.
(f) The City will appoint a Commissioner and Alternative Commissioner to participate in
the BCWMC Board of Commissioners. City staff will participate in the BCWMC Technical
Advisory Committee (TAC).
(g) The City will promote sustainability and resilience through continued implementation
of its Resilience and Sustainability Plan and practices identified in the MPCA’s Green
Step Cities program applicable to stormwater and surface water management.
Education and Public Involvement
Residents living within the City of Golden Valley have a vested interest in maintaining or enhancing the
water quality within the City. Many residents may not be aware of certain practices that harm the
environment, or ways they can prevent water quality degradation.
Objectives:
1. Involve and educate the residents of the City in water resource related issues.
2. Increase public awareness of individual property owner’s impacts on water quality
3. Build community capacity to implement storm water best management practices at a local
level.
Policies:
(a) The City will maintain a public education program to develop and distribute
educational materials and perform outreach activities informing the community about
the impacts of stormwater discharges on water bodies and best practices to promote
watershed health.
(b) The City will maintain the Golden Valley Environmental Commission to educate
residents, raise awareness about environmental responsibility, and create a sense of
collaboration in the spirit of making and keeping Golden Valley an environmentally
healthy City.
2-13
(c) The City of Golden Valley will continue to conduct an annual public meeting (with
notice) to discuss its Storm Water Pollution Prevention Program (SWPPP) and inform
the public about stormwater impacts. City staff will analyze comments and written
materials gathered at the public meeting and adjust the SWPPP, where appropriate.
(d) The City of Golden Valley will continue to assist other agencies, where appropriate, in
the development and distribution of educational materials.
(e) The City will continue to utilize volunteer groups to the greatest extent possible for
public service projects such as catch basin stenciling, debris clean up, adopt-a-pond,
stream bank erosion protection, buckthorn removal, and vegetative buffer strips.
(f) The City will continue the use of demonstration projects as a means of educating the
public on issues such as stream bank stabilization, rainwater gardens, and aesthetically
pleasing stormwater ponds.
(g) The City will continue to work with other agencies to provide educational materials and
programs for schools in the City.
(h) The City will continue to provide educational and informational materials regarding
stormwater issues through a variety of media, including, but not limited to:
• City website (goldenvalleymn.gov)
• Cable TV station
• Informational packets to new residents
• City bi-monthly newsletters
3-1
3.0 Land and Water Resource Inventory
This section contains information on climate and precipitation, topography, watersheds and drainage
patterns, land use, soils, geology and groundwater resources, surface waters, wetlands and natural
resources, the City stormwater system, water quality, water quantity and flooding, fisheries and aquatic
habitat, recreational and scenic areas, and potential pollutant sources in the City. This important
information describes the conditions in the City and affects decisions about infrastructure, development,
and ecological preservation.
Climate and Precipitation
The climate of Golden Valley is a humid continental climate, characterized by moderate precipitation
(normally sufficient for crops), wide daily temperature variations, large seasonal variations in temperature,
warm humid summers, and cold winters with moderate snowfall.
The mean annual temperature for Golden Valley is 46.2°F, as measured at the Minneapolis/ St. Paul (MSP)
airport station (1981-2010). Mean monthly temperatures vary from 15.6°F in January to 73.8°F in July
(1981-2010). According to NOAA National Climatic Data Center (NCDC), extreme temperatures recorded
at MSP (or downtown Minneapolis prior to April 1938, when the location of official measurement was
changed to MSP) were a high of 108°F on July 14, 1936 and a low of -34°F on January 1, 1936 and
January 19, 1970. For the 1981-2010 climate normal period, the average date for latest occurrence of
freezing temperatures was April 26, while the average date for the first autumn frost was October 7. The
average frost-free period (growing season) is approximately 160 days.
Average total annual precipitation at the MSP airport station is 30.6 inches (1981-2010. Annual
precipitation recorded at downtown Minneapolis and MSP has ranged from a low of 11.5 inches in 1910,
to a high of 40.2 inches in 1911. The mean monthly precipitation varies from 4.3 inches in August to 0.9
inches in January (1981-2010). From May to September, the growing season months, the average rainfall
is 19.0 inches or about 62 percent of the average annual precipitation (1981-2010). Average annual lake
evaporation is about 31 inches.
Average annual snowfall is 54.4 inches at the MSP airport station (1981-2010). Extreme snowfall records
range from 98.6 inches during the 1983-1984 season to 14.2 inches during the 1930-1931 season.
Average weather imposes little strain on the typical drainage system. Extremes of precipitation and
snowmelt are important for design of stormwater management and flood risk reduction systems. NOAA
has data on extreme precipitation events that can be used to aid in the design of stormwater
management and flood risk reduction systems. Extremes of snowmelt most often affect major rivers, the
design of large stormwater storage areas, and landlocked basins, while extremes of precipitation most
often affect the design of conveyance facilities. In contrast with stormwater drainage facilities, stormwater
quality treatment systems are designed based on the smaller, more frequent storms which typically
account for the majority of pollutant loadings from urban watersheds.
3-2
NOAA published Atlas 14, Volume 8, in 2013. Atlas 14 is the primary source of information regarding
rainfall in the region. Atlas 14 supersedes publications TP-40 and TP-49 issued by the National Weather
Bureau (now the National Weather Service) in 1961 and 1964. Improvements in Atlas 14 precipitation
estimates include denser data networks, longer (and more recent) periods of record, application of
regional frequency analysis, and new techniques in spatial interpolation and mapping. Atlas 14 provides
estimates of precipitation depth (i.e., total rainfall, in inches) and intensity (i.e., depth of rainfall over a
specified period) for durations from 5 minutes up to 60 days.
Runoff from spring snowmelt is significant in this region but is not provided in Atlas 14. The Soil
Conservation Service’s (now the Natural Resources Conservation Service) National Engineering Handbook,
Hydrology, Section 4, presents maps of regional runoff volume. Table 3-1 lists selected precipitation and
runoff events used for design purposes.
Table 3-1 Selected Rainfall and Snowmelt Runoff Events
Type
Event Frequency (%
chance of annual
occurrence)
Duration Depth (inches) Rainfall 2-year (50%) 24 hour 2.87
5-year (20%) 24 hour 3.60
10-year (10%) 24 hour 4.29
25-year (4%) 24 hour 5.39
50-year (2%) 24 hour 6.36
100-year (1%) 24 hour 7.42
10-year (10%) 10 day 6.83
100-year (1%) 10 day 10.2 Snowmelt 1 10-year (10%) 10 day 4.7
25-year (4%) 10 day 5.7
50-year (2%) 10 day 6.4
100-year (1%) 10 day 7.1
Source: NOAA Atlas 14 – Volume 8. Station: Golden Valley (21-3202). Hydrology
Guide for Minnesota (USDA Soil Conservation Service – NRCS)
(1) Snowmelt depth reported as liquid water.
It is important to note that the frequency (also called recurrence interval or return period) of a given storm
event is a function of probability. The recurrence interval or return period describes the average time
between events of a given magnitude expected over extremely long periods of time. The inverse of the
recurrence interval is the probability of a given event occurring in any single year (e.g., a 100 year event
has a 1% chance of occurring in any single year). It is important to realize that the return period implies
3-3
nothing about the actual time sequence of the event. For example, two 100 year events could occur in
consecutive years, or even within a single year.
Even with wide variations in climate conditions, climatologists have found four significant climate trends in
the Upper Midwest (NOAA, 2013):
• Warmer winters
• Higher minimum temperatures
• Higher dew points
• Changes in precipitation trends – more rainfall is coming from heavy thunderstorm events and
increased snowfall
According to NOAA’s 2013 assessment of climate trends for the Midwest (NOAA, 2013), annual and
summer precipitation amounts in the Midwest are trending upward, as is the frequency of high intensity
storms. Higher intensity precipitation events typically produce more runoff than lower intensity events
with similar total precipitation amounts; higher rainfall intensities are more likely to overwhelm the
capacity of the land surface to infiltrate and attenuate runoff. Precipitation records in the Twin Cities area
show that the average annual precipitation has increased (Minnesota Climatology Working Group, 2016).
Additional climate information can be obtained from a number of sources, such as the following:
• For climate information about the Twin Cities metropolitan area:
http://www.dnr.state.mn.us/climate/twin_cities/index.html
• Local data available from the Midwestern Regional Climate Center (MRCC):
http://mrcc.isws.illinois.edu/CLIMATE/
• For a wide range of Minnesota climate information:
http://www.nws.noaa.gov/climate/index.php?wfo=mpx
• For other Minnesota climate information:
http://www.dnr.state.mn.us/climate/index.html
Topography
The City of Golden Valley is relatively flat, with generally mild slopes and little change in topography
across the area. The urbanization of the City over time has greatly altered the natural topography of the
watershed. With these alterations, drainage patterns have become more defined. There are steep slopes
within the City and are typically found along Bassett Creek and the major water bodies within the City. The
location of steep slopes is of interest as these areas limit options for land development and have a higher
potential for erosion. The highest location in the City is located southeast of the intersection of Flag
Avenue North and Olympia Street on the General Mills Research Facility property, with an elevation of
967.5 feet MSL. The lowest point in the City is on the eastern boundary of the City along Bassett Creek
where the creek passes from Golden Valley to the City of Minneapolis. The lowest elevation is
approximately 816 feet MSL.
3-4
For general purposes, the City of Golden Valley currently uses 2-foot elevation contour information based
on LiDAR data collected by the MNDNR in 2011.
Watersheds and Drainage Patterns
There are five major drainage districts within the City of Golden Valley. These districts include the Bassett
Creek, Medicine Lake, Sweeney Lake, and Wirth Lake drainage districts, which are all part of the larger
Bassett Creek watershed, and the Minnehaha Creek drainage district, which covers a small area in the
southeast corner of the City. All areas of the City of Golden Valley ultimately drain to the Mississippi
River. Figure 3-1 shows the major drainage districts within the City of Golden Valley.
The major drainage districts used for the hydrological analysis in this report closely follow the major
subwatershed divisions published in the Bassett Creek Watershed Management Commission (BCWMC)
2015 Watershed Management Plan. These divides have been updated since the 2008 City plan to reflect
more recent topographic data and stormwater management system improvements. The BCWMC (with
assistance from cities including Golden Valley) has further subdivided the major drainage districts within
the BCWMC into subwatersheds for the purposes of water quality modeling (see Section 3.10.3) and water
quantity modeling (see Section 3.11.4). Although some subwatershed divides may change with future
redevelopment or stormwater improvements, the City anticipates that such changes will be minor and will
be incorporated into future stormwater modeling and management efforts, as necessary.
The subwatersheds delineated for the purposes of hydrologic modeling (see Section 3.11.4) are shown in
Figure 3-2. The names of each of the drainage districts are the same as those used by the BCWMC for
hydrologic modeling. The BCWMC delineated additional, smaller subwatersheds to provide more accurate
inputs for water quality modeling. The subwatersheds delineated by the BCWMC for P8 water quality
modeling are presented in Figure 3-3. The subwatershed identifiers shown in Figure 3-3 are those used by
the BCWMC and the City. Despite the smaller size of the subwatersheds presented in Figure 3-2 and
Figure 3-3, the City may need to further study localized areas for the purposes of future stormwater
infrastructure design and analysis.
Figure 3-2 shows the four major drainage districts as well as the subwatersheds and general flow
directions, including the location of intercommunity flows. The following is a discussion of the major
drainage districts within the City.
3.3.1 Bassett Creek Drainage District
The Bassett Creek Drainage District is the largest district in the City, including approximately 3,900 acres
within Golden Valley. The main stem of Bassett Creek begins downstream of the Medicine Lake outlet,
flowing southeast through the City of Plymouth and then extends through the City of Golden Valley and
the drainage district. The creek crosses under Highway 169 at the western City limits and meanders
through the central part of the City toward the northeast corner. At this point, the creek becomes an
outlet for the Sweeney Lake-Twin Lake area. Bassett Creek continues south along the eastern City limits,
where it receives inflow from Wirth Lake before continuing eastward through the City of Minneapolis to
the Mississippi River.
3-5
The Bassett Creek Drainage District was divided into 235 subwatersheds within the City for the purposes
of the BCWMC hydrologic and hydraulic modeling (see Figure 3-2). Runoff occurring within the
watershed is collected by a vast storm sewer system located throughout the district. Several trunk storm
sewers route stormwater to Bassett Creek as it meanders from west to east through the watershed.
Subwatersheds receiving inflow from drainage areas outside of the City are identified in Figure 3-2.
3.3.2 Medicine Lake Drainage District
The Medicine Lake Drainage District is located in the northwestern corner of the City and includes
approximately 220 acres within the City of Golden Valley. The topography of the drainage district varies
considerably, ranging from flat areas to steep slopes. Two generally flat areas exist at the ballfields in the
Medley Park area and Lakeview Park between Olympia and Winsdale Street. Steep slopes exist west of
Flag Avenue, varying as much as 60 feet over a 350 foot City block length. Another area of steep banks
exists north of the Medley Park.
The Medicine Lake Drainage District was divided into eight subwatersheds within the City for the
purposes of the BCWMC hydrologic and hydraulic modeling (see Figure 3-2). Runoff occurs generally to
the west, under Highway 169 and out of Golden Valley into the City of Plymouth and Medicine Lake.
Medicine Lake is only 500 to 1500 feet west of Highway 169 and the Golden Valley corporate boundary.
Medicine Lake forms the headwaters for the main stem of Bassett Creek. Inflows into the Medicine Lake
drainage district from the City of New Hope are shown in Figure 3-2.
3.3.3 Sweeney Lake Drainage District
The Sweeney Lake Drainage District is located centrally in the City extending from the south edge of the
City north to the Sweeney-Twin Lake areas. This drainage district includes approximately 2,200 acres
within the City of Golden Valley.
The Sweeney Lake Drainage District was divided into 46 subwatersheds within the City for the purposes of
the BCWMC hydrologic and hydraulic modeling (see Figure 3-2). Runoff occurring in the north half of the
watershed is drained directly to Sweeney Lake as overland flow or through storm sewers. A trunk storm
sewer system extends along the Union Pacific (formerly Chicago Northwestern) Railroad from near Golden
Valley Road and drains from west to east to Sweeney Lake. Stormwater in the southwestern corner of the
drainage district is generally discharged to multiple stormwater ponds throughout the drainage district.
Stormwater from the southeastern corner of the watershed is routed northward to Sweeney Lake via trunk
storm sewer along Turners Crossroad and the Canadian Pacific (Soo Line) Railroad. Inflow into the
Sweeney Lake drainage district from the City of St. Louis Park is shown in Figure 3-2.
3.3.4 Wirth Lake Drainage District
The Wirth Lake Drainage District is in the southeastern portion of the City along the border with the City
of Minneapolis. The Wirth Lake Drainage District includes approximately 350 acres within the City of
Golden Valley. A storm sewer network in the residential area west of Wirth Lake conveys stormwater
runoff to the lake. The area south of the lake is primarily park and open space.
3-6
The Wirth Lake Drainage District was divided into 10 subwatersheds within the City for the purposes of
the BCWMC hydrologic and hydraulic modeling (see Figure 3-2). Runoff occurring west of the lake drains
to Wirth Lake via storm sewer that daylights to a drainage ditch on the east side of Theodore Wirth
parkway. Areas south of the lake drain to Wirth Lake via overland flow. Inflows into the Wirth Lake
drainage district from the City of Minneapolis is shown in Figure 3-2.
3.3.5 Minnehaha Creek Drainage District
The Minnehaha Creek Drainage District includes only a small portion of the City of Golden Valley, with a
total of approximately 80 acres in the City. This drainage district is divided into three subwatersheds.
Although this area is within the City of Golden Valley corporate boundary, the storm sewer systems
serving this watershed drain stormwater into the City of St. Louis Park to the south, and then into Brownie
Lake in Minneapolis.
Land Use
The City of Golden Valley is a suburb of the Twin Cities metropolitan area, located just west of the City of
Minneapolis. The City contains diverse areas of residential neighborhoods, commercial and industrial
developments, and park and recreation facilities. Current land use is presented in Figure 3-4. Estimated
future land use is presented in Figure 3-5. Table 3-2 provides more detailed information about the
current land use for each major drainage district within the boundary of Golden Valley.
Table 3-2 Land Use (2010) as a Percentage by Major Drainage District
Land Use Category
Land Use Percentage by Major Drainage District
City-wide Bassett
Creek
Medicine
Lake
Minnehaha
Creek
Sweeney
Lake
Wirth
Lake
Commercial 2% 3% -- 4% 0% 3%
Golf Course 13% -- -- 2% 21% 10%
Industrial 9% -- -- 6% -- 7%
Institutional1 4% 2% -- 7% -- 5%
Multi-Family 2% 2% -- 2% 2% 2%
Office 4% -- -- 6% 3% 5%
Park and Open Space 11% 19% 4% 8% 21% 11%
Right of Way 18% 21% 23% 25% 18% 20%
Railroad 2% -- -- 2% -- 2%
Single Family Attached2 1% 11% -- 1% -- 1%
Singe Family Detached 33% 42% 67% 34% 35% 34%
Undeveloped & Vacant 1% -- 5% 1% -- 1%
Total 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100%
(1) includes land use classified as “Institutional and Office”
(2) includes land use classified as “Townhome”
3-7
As a fully-developed community, changes in land use will come the result of redevelopment. Changes in
land use are expected to be modest over the life of this Plan. However, redevelopment with or without
land use changes may provide opportunities to implement a variety of stormwater best management
practices (BMPs) that can improve water quality, reduce the risk of flooding, provide habitat, or achieve
other benefits.
The City of Golden Valley estimates a general population increase in the future, with most of the projected
growth to occur in a few redevelopment areas scattered throughout the City. More detailed information
about current and future land use and expected areas of development can be found in the land use
section of the City’s Comprehensive Plan.
Soils
Soil composition, slope, and land management practices determine the impact of soils on water resource
issues. Soil composition and slope are important factors affecting the rate and volume of stormwater
runoff. The shape and stability of aggregates of soil particles—expressed as soil structure—influence the
permeability, infiltration rate, and erodibility (i.e., potential for erosion) of soils. Slope is important in
determining stormwater runoff rates and susceptibility to erosion.
Infiltration capacities of soils affect the amount of direct runoff resulting from rainfall. Higher infiltration
rates result in lower the potential for runoff from the land, as more precipitation is able to enter the soil.
Conversely, soils with low infiltration rates produce high runoff volumes and high peak discharge rates, as
most or all of the rainfall moves as overland flow.
The Natural Resources Conservation Service (NRCS – formerly the Soil Conservation Service) has
established four general hydrologic soil groups. These groups are:
• Group A Low runoff potential—high infiltration rate
• Group B Moderate infiltration rate
• Group C Slow infiltration rate
• Group D High runoff potential—very slow infiltration rate
Combined with land use, the hydrologic soil grouping symbols (A through D) may be used to estimate the
amount of runoff that will occur over a given area for a particular rainfall amount. As land is developed
for urban use, much of the soil is covered with impervious surfaces, and soils in the remaining areas are
significantly disturbed and altered. Development often results in consolidation of the soil and tends to
reduce infiltration capacity of otherwise permeable soils, resulting in significantly greater amounts of
runoff.
Figure 3-6 presents the most current soils data for the City of Golden Valley; the data are based on the
Soil Survey Geographic dataset (SSURGO) from the NRCS. However, because of urban development and
land use, there are many portions of the City that have undefined hydrologic soil groups. Most of the City
for which hydrologic soil groups have been defined are classified as type C or D soils with low infiltration
and high runoff potential. Figure 3-6is intended to provide general guidance about the infiltration
3-8
capacity of the soils throughout Golden Valley. However, soils should be inspected on a site-by-site basis
as projects are considered.
Detailed information about soil types and distributions within the City is available from the Soil Survey of
Hennepin County, Minnesota (NRCS, 2004, as amended). The NRCS soil survey identifies much of the City
as fill and cut or filled land (referred to as udorthents in the soil survey). Other mapped soils occupying
large areas of the City consist mostly of clay and loam and include: Lester loam, Angus loam, Lester
complex, and Malardi-Hawick complex. The most recent information from the NRCS soil survey is
available online at: https://websoilsurvey.nrcs.usda.gov/app/
Geology and Groundwater
The City of Golden Valley is located in the northwestern portion of a bowl-like bedrock structure
underlying the Minneapolis-St. Paul metropolitan area (called the Twin Cities basin), which has a gentle
slope to the southeast. The bedrock is overlain by a layer of glacial drift which varies from over 250 feet
thick in the western part of the City and to less than 50 feet near the eastern border of the City. Generally,
there is no uniform relationship between the existing surface topography and the bedrock structure. The
City is underlain by the Platteville and Glenwood Formation limestone and shale in the south-central part
of the City while the west, north, and east sides of the City are underlain by St. Peter Sandstone.
Three buried erosional valleys cut deep into the bedrock and bisect the glacial drift. One valley extends
southeast from Medicine Lake through the western part of the City; this valley cuts into the St. Peter
Sandstone and is filled with up to 250 feet of glacial drift. The second valley extends northerly from Wirth
Lake to the watershed border, cutting into the St. Peter Sandstone and filled with up to 200 feet of drift.
The third valley extends through the very southeastern portion of the City and is filled with up to 400 feet
of glacial drift.
3.6.1 Bedrock Aquifers
The region is underlain by four major bedrock aquifers: (1) St. Peter Sandstone, (2) Prairie du
Chien-Jordan, (3) Wonewoc Sandstone (formerly Ironton-Galesville Sandstones), and (4) Mt.
Simon-Hinckley Sandstones. In addition, there are numerous aquifers in the glacial drift. Some
groundwater from the glacial drift and the St. Peter aquifer discharges into Bassett Creek. The remaining
aquifers discharge into the Minnesota and Mississippi rivers; movement of groundwater within these
aquifers is complicated by the intersecting buried bedrock valleys.
As part of the Joint Water Commission with the cities of New Hope and Crystal, Golden Valley currently
obtains its water supply from the City of Minneapolis water department. Other cities that border Golden
Valley use groundwater for their municipal water supplies. These cities and their water sources include:
• Plymouth – 16 wells in the Prairie du Chien-Jordan aquifer (4 new wells proposed)
• Minnetonka – 14 wells in the Prairie du Chien-Jordan aquifer, 3 wells in the Jordan aquifer, and 1
well in the Prairie du Chien-St. Lawrence aquifer
3-9
• Robbinsdale – 4 wells in the Prairie du Chien-Jordan aquifer and 1 well in the St. Peter-Prairie du
Chien aquifer
• St. Louis Park – 6 wells in the Prairie du Chien-Jordan aquifer, 4 wells in the Mt. Simon-Hinckley
aquifer, and 1 well in the Platteville-St. Peter aquifer.
3.6.2 Surficial Aquifers
Surficial aquifers are water-bearing layers of sediment, usually sand and gravel, which lie close to the
ground surface. The City is not aware of any private domestic wells that draw water from these aquifers.
Since the surficial aquifers are more susceptible to pollution, they are generally not used for municipal or
public supply wells. The depth of the water table varies across the watershed, but is on the order of tens
of feet.
Recharge to the surficial aquifers is primarily through the downward percolation of local precipitation.
The ponds, lakes, and wetlands scattered throughout the City recharge the groundwater. Some of these
waterbodies are landlocked and their only outlet is to the groundwater; some landlocked lakes may be
perched above the regional level of the shallow groundwater in the watershed. Some surficial aquifers
may also be recharged during periods of high stream stage. Surficial aquifers may discharge to local
lakes, streams or to the underlying bedrock.
3.6.3 Wellhead Protection Areas
The increased population in the Twin Cities metropolitan area has put increased pressure on groundwater
quantity and quality. The Minnesota Department of Health (MDH) is responsible for the protection of
groundwater quality and aims to prevent contaminants from entering the recharge zones of public water
supply wells through its wellhead protection program. This includes the development of wellhead
protection plans (WHPPs) and guidance to limit potential for groundwater contamination (see Section
4.4.1). Wellhead protection efforts may restrict or prevent the use of certain stormwater BMPs within
these areas to prevent possibly contaminated stormwater from reaching groundwater supplies.
Figure 3-7 shows the delineated wellhead protection areas that extend into Golden Valley from
surrounding communities, as well as the municipal water supply wells in the area around Golden Valley.
Each of the communities adjacent to the City that obtains its municipal water supply from groundwater
has an MDH-approved wellhead protection plan
Surface Waters
3.7.1 MNDNR Public Waters
The MNDNR designates certain water resources as public waters to indicate those lakes, wetlands, and
watercourses over which the MNDNR has regulatory jurisdiction. By statute, the definition of public
waters includes “public waters” and “public waters wetlands.” The collection of public waters and public
waters wetlands designated by the MNDNR is generally referred to as the public waters inventory, or PWI.
3-10
Public waters are all basins and watercourses that meet the criteria set forth in Minnesota Statutes,
Section 103G.005, subd. 15 that are identified on public water inventory maps and lists authorized by
Minnesota Statutes, Section 103G.201. Public waters wetlands include all Type 3, Type 4, and Type 5
wetlands, as defined in U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service Circular No. 39, 1971 edition that are 10 acres or
more in size in unincorporated areas or 2.5 acres or more in size in incorporated areas (see Minnesota
Statutes Section 103G.005, subd. 15a and 17b). A MNDNR permit is required for work within designated
public waters.
The MNDNR uses county-scale maps to show the general location of the public waters and public waters
wetlands under its regulatory jurisdiction. These maps are commonly known as public waters inventory
(PWI) maps. PWI maps also show public waters watercourses and ditches (see Section 3.7.2). The
regulatory boundary of these waters and wetlands is called the ordinary high water level (OHWL). The
PWI maps and lists are available on the MNDNR’s website at:
http://www.dnr.state.mn.us/waters/watermgmt_section/pwi/maps.html
Figure 3-8 shows the waters, wetlands, and streams listed on the MNDNR PWI located in the City of
Golden Valley. There are 12 designated and numbered public waters basins and 6 public water wetlands
within the City, including the following named public water lakes:
• Sweeney Lake (27-0035P)
• Twin Lake (27-0035P)
• Wirth Lake (27-0037P)
• Westwood Lake (27-0711P)
3.7.2 Public Ditches
Within Golden Valley there are three (3) public ditch segments (also known as “county ditches” or “judicial
ditches”). A large portion of the Main Stem of Bassett Creek, downstream of the Medicine Lake outlet, is
designated as county ditch. In addition, a portion of the north branch of Bassett Creek, just upstream of
its confluence with the Main Stem, is designated as a county ditch. A third segment is identified along a
drainage system that feeds the Sweeney Lake branch of Bassett Creek from Highway 394 to near
Glenwood Avenue. Figure 3-8shows these public ditches. Some of the systems shown as public ditches
are no longer in existence, but the public ditch designation has not been removed. One such system is
located along Highway 100 in northern Golden Valley. The public ditch system shown following Highway
100 is currently all in a storm sewer pipe and is no longer ditched.
Public ditches are established and regulated under Chapter 103E of Minnesota Statutes and are under the
jurisdiction of the county. Although Hennepin County is responsible for the management of county
ditches in the City, the county has not actively maintained the county ditches. The BCWMC and the
member cities, including Golden Valley, perform work in public ditches. Minnesota state law requires that
they go through the public ditch process to perform this work. Per Minnesota Statute 363B.61, cities or
watershed management organizations (WMOs) within Hennepin County may petition the county to
transfer authority over public ditches to the City or WMO.
3-11
3.7.3 Lakes and Ponds
Among the public waters located in the City of Golden Valley (see Figure 3-8) are the following named
lakes and ponds:
• Sweeney Lake (27-0035P)
• Twin Lake (27-0035P)
• Wirth Lake (27-0037P)
• Westwood Lake (27-0711P)
• South Rice Pond (27-0645W)
Each of these lakes with the exception of South Rice Pond has been identified as a BCWMC priority
waterbody (see Section 4.1.4).
3.7.3.1 Sweeney Lake
Sweeney Lake is a 67-acre lake located in the City of Golden Valley. Sweeney Lake is a recreation
waterbody frequently used by residents for swimming, fishing, boating and aesthetic viewing. A public
access at the northern end of the lake offers a carry-in boat access and a City nature area on the southern
end of the lake offers an overlook deck and canoe launch.
Sweeney Lake has an estimated mean depth of 12 feet, a maximum depth of 25 feet, and a littoral area of
approximately 34 acres. Shallow areas near the shoreline of the lake allow for both emergent and
submerged vegetation growth. The normal water elevation is at approximately 827.5 feet (NGVD1929
datum) and the 100-year elevation is approximately 831.5 feet (NGVD1929 datum). Sweeney Lake has a
total tributary drainage area of approximately 2,396 acres. Portions of St. Louis Park and Golden Valley
drain into Sweeney Lake. Sweeney Lake receives outflows from the Ring Ponds, Cortlawn Pond, Schaper
Pond and Twin Lake and drains northeast into the Sweeney Lake Branch of Bassett Creek, which connects
to the Bassett Creek Main Stem shortly downstream. A precast concrete dam serves as the outlet structure
for Sweeney Lake at an elevation of 827.5 feet.
Following severe summer algal blooms in the early 1970s, lakeshore residents for the Sweeney Lakeshore
Owners Association organized efforts to protect and improve Sweeney Lake water quality. Residents have
operated an aeration system since the 1970s. Initially, residents installed aeration at a few locations; the
system has expanded to up to 18 aerators currently distributed throughout the lake. The intent of the
aerators is to keep oxygen levels high near the lake bottom, preventing the anoxic release of phosphorus
bound in lake sediments. The system is permitted by MNDNR and operates fully during the summer
months; winter aeration occurs on a limited basis (SEH and Barr, 2011). The BCWMC is currently
conducting a study to evaluate the impact of the aeration system on lake water quality.
Sweeney Lake is a BCWMC Priority 1 Deep Lake waterbody (see Section 4.1.4). The lake is currently listed
on the 303(d) impaired waters list for excess nutrients (phosphorus). A TMDL study has been conducted
for Sweeney Lake (see Section 4.1.2). Due to excessive phosphorus, the lake is not always suitable for
swimming or wading because of low clarity and excessive algae growth. Sweeney Lake is also listed in on
the 303(d) impaired waters list for chloride.
3-12
3.7.3.2 Twin Lake
Twin Lake is a 21-acre lake connected to Sweeney Lake through a channel that is navigable for small
boats, canoes, and kayaks. The southern half of the lake is located within Theodore Wirth Regional Park.
The lake is used for swimming, non-motorized boating, fishing, and aesthetic viewing.
Twin Lake has a maximum depth of 56 feet, an average depth of 25.7 feet, and a littoral area of
approximately 8 acres. Shallow areas near the shoreline of the lake allow for both emergent and
submerged vegetation growth. Floating leaf vegetation is primarily seen in the northern portion of the
lake. The lake’s normal water elevation is estimated at 827.5 feet (NGVD1929 datum) with a 100-year
elevation at 831.5 feet (NGVD1929 datum). Twin Lake’s watershed area is 131 acres. An outlet channel
discharges beneath a bridge at the north side of the lake into a wetland that is hydraulically connected to
Sweeney Lake.
Twin Lake is a BCWMC Priority 1 Deep Lake waterbody (see Section 4.1.4). The lake is not listed as
impaired by the MPCA. The relatively high ratio of lake surface to drainage area and lack of high-
imperviousness land use around the lake have prevented Twin Lake from experiencing many of negative
effects of urbanization (i.e., increased stormwater runoff and pollutant loading).
Summer average concentrations of phosphorus in Twin Lake increased significantly in 2008 and 2009,
prompting the BCWMC to performed the Twin Lake Phosphorus Internal Loading Investigation (March
2011) to determine the causes of these increased phosphorus levels. The primary source of the
phosphorus was identified as increased release from lake sediments (i.e., internal loading). A subsequent
feasibility identified alum treatment as the most feasible option based upon cost, probability for success,
and maintenance. Based on this recommendation, an alum treatment of Twin Lake was performed in
2015.
3.7.3.3 Wirth Lake
Wirth Lake is a 38-acre lake located in the in the southeast portion of the City. The lake is located in
Theodore Wirth Regional Park, which is owned and maintained by the Minneapolis Park and Recreation
Board. A public beach and parkland surrounding the lake provide opportunities for swimming, fishing,
picnicking, and aesthetic viewing, and non-motorized boating.
Wirth Lake has an estimated mean depth of 14 feet, a maximum depth of 26 feet and a littoral area of
approximately 23.3 acres. Shallow areas near the shoreline of the lake allow for both emergent and
submerged vegetation growth. Floating leaf vegetation is primarily seen in the northern portion of the
lake. Wirth Lake has an ordinary high water level of 818.9 feet (NGVD1929 datum) and a 100-year
elevation of 821.5 feet (NGVD1929 datum). Wirth Lake has a 405-acre tributary watershed including
portions of the cities of Golden Valley and Minneapolis. The lake has four main inlets, three storm sewers
and one open channel in the northern portion of the lake. The Wirth Lake outlet was modified in 2012 to
prevent backflow from Bassett Creek to Wirth Lake. The new outlet includes a fabricated steel lift gate
which closes during period of high water in Bassett Creek.
3-13
Wirth Lake is a BCWMC Priority 1 Deep Lake waterbody (see Section 4.1.4). The lake is currently listed on
the 303(d) impaired waters list for mercury and chloride. The lake’s mercury impairment is addressed
through the statewide mercury TMDL. The lake was previously listed as impaired for excessive nutrients
and a TMDL study was performed (Barr Engineering Company, 2010). Wirth Lake was removed from the
impaired waters 303(d) list because of water quality improvement projects by the BCWMC, its member
cities and the MPRB. The Minnesota Department of Health website has advice on consuming fish caught
in Wirth Lake, as the concentrations of mercury in fish tissue exceed the water quality standard.
The MPRB operates a winter aeration system in the northwest portion of the lake. This system increases
dissolved oxygen during the winter to maintain fish populations and reduce sediment nutrient release
that may occur under anoxic conditions.
3.7.3.4 Westwood Lake
Westwood Lake is a 38-acre lake located on the boundary of the City of Golden Valley and the City of St.
Louis Park. Only a small portion of the north side of the lake is located in Golden Valley. Although the
lake does not have a public beach, the adjacent parkland and Westwood Hills Nature Center trails
surrounding the lake provides opportunities for canoeing or kayaking, aesthetic viewing, birding, and
hiking.
Westwood Lake has a maximum depth of 5 feet, a normal water elevation of 886.0 feet (NGVD1929
datum), and a 100-year elevation of 889.0 feet (NGVD1929 datum). The majority of the lake bottom is
covered with submerged vegetation due to the shallow nature of the lake and emergent vegetation can
be found around the lake’s entire circumference. Westwood Lake has a watershed area of approximately
463 acres. Portions of the cities of St. Louis Park, Golden Valley, and Minnetonka drain towards Westwood
Lake. Runoff draining to Westwood Lake enters through five storm sewers located around its edge. A
400-foot-long open channel at the north side of the lake discharges to a 27-inch RCP storm sewer at an
elevation of 886.0. Drainage from Westwood Lake is tributary to the Main Stem of Bassett Creek.
Westwood Lake is a BCWMC Priority 1 Shallow Lake waterbody (see Section 4.1.4). The lake is not listed as
impaired by the MPCA.
3.7.3.5 South Rice Pond
South Rice Pond is an 11-acre waterbody located on the border of the cities of Robbinsdale and Golden
Valley in the northeast portion of the City. Parkland adjacent to the lake provides opportunities for
aesthetic viewing.
South Rice Pond has a maximum depth of 3 feet and an average depth of 1.7 feet. The lake has a 100-year
water elevation of 831.5 feet (NGVD1929 datum). Its 514-acre tributary watershed includes portions of the
cities of Crystal, Golden Valley, Minneapolis, and Robbinsdale. South Rice Pond discharges to Bassett
Creek via a small channel located at the south end of the pond. South Rice Pond is not list by the BCWMC
as a priority waterbody (see Section 4.1.4). The pond is not listed as impaired by the MPCA.
3-14
3.7.4 Streams
There are two public water watercourses located within the City of Golden Valley. , including:
• Main Stem of Bassett Creek
• Sweeney Lake Branch of Bassett Creek
Both the Main Stem of Bassett Creek and the Sweeney Lake Branch of Bassett Creek have been classified
as BCWMC priority waterbodies (see Section 4.1.4)
3.7.4.1 Main Stem of Bassett Creek
The Main Stem of Bassett Creek begins downstream of the Medicine Lake outlet west of Golden Valley
and enters the City near the intersection of Highway 169 and Betty Crocker Drive (see Figure 3-8). The
drainage area of Bassett Creek upstream of the City is approximately 19.8 square miles. The Main Stem of
Bassett Creek winds northeast through the City before exiting into the City of Crystal, where it is joined by
the North Branch of Bassett Creek.
The Main Stem of Bassett Creek, augmented within inflow from the North Branch, re-enters the City of
Golden Valley under Highway 100 at the northwest end of the Briarwood Nature Area. From there, the
Main Stem of Bassett Creek flows east toward Minneapolis before turning south under Golden Valley
Road. Just south of Golden Valley Road, the Sweeney Lake Branch of Bassett Creek discharges to the Main
Stem within Theodore Wirth Regional Park. From that confluence, the Main Stem of Bassett Creek flows
south along the eastern border of the City before crossing Highway 55 and turning toward Minneapolis.
The total drainage area tributary to Bassett Creek before it leaves the City is approximately 38 square
miles. After leaving Golden Valley, Bassett Creek flows through Minneapolis to the Mississippi River, the
last portion of which is through a 1.7-mile long tunnel. The creek enters the Mississippi River downstream
of the Upper St. Anthony Falls Lock and Dam.
The Main Stem of Bassett Creek is a BCWMC Priority 1 stream (see Section 4.1.4). The Main Stem of
Bassett Creek is included on the MPCA’s Impaired Waters 303(d) list as impaired for aquatic life (due to
chloride and fish bioassessments) and aquatic recreation (due to fecal coliform) (see Table 3-7). The Main
Stem of Bassett Creek was included in the Upper Mississippi River Bacteria TMDL and Protection Plan
(MPCA, 2014), which was approved by the US EPA in 2014 and addresses the Plymouth Creek impairment
due to fecal coliform (see Section 4.1.2).
3.7.4.2 Sweeney Lake Branch of Bassett Creek
The Sweeney Lake Branch of Bassett Creek drains northern St. Louis Park and southern portions of Golden
Valley. The Sweeney Lake Branch flows northeast through Schaper Pond and Sweeney Lake and joins the
Main Stem of Bassett Creek in Theodore Wirth Regional Park near Golden Valley Road just downstream of
Sweeney Lake. The drainage area of the Sweeney Lake Branch prior to its confluence with the Main Stem
of Bassett Creek is approximately four square miles. The BCWMC classifies Sweeney Lake Branch of
Bassett Creek is a BCWMC Priority 1 stream (see Section 4.1.4).
3-15
Wetlands and Natural Resources
Prior to development, much of the land within the City of Golden Valley was wetland. Many wetland areas
were drained or filled as the City developed (prior to the establishment of regulations protecting
wetlands). Although Golden Valley is almost completely developed, numerous wetlands remain across the
City. Several wetland and natural resource inventories have been completed for the City of Golden Valley.
3.8.1 National Wetland Inventory
Nationally, the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service (USFWS) is responsible for mapping wetlands across the
country, including those in Minnesota. Using the National Aerial Photography Program (NAPP) in
conjunction with limited field verification, the USFWS identifies and delineates wetlands, produces
detailed maps on the characteristics and extent of wetlands, and maintains a national wetlands database
as part of the National Wetland Inventory (NWI). The NWI is periodically updated based on available
imagery. Figure 3-9 shows the location of all NWI wetlands within the City of Golden Valley.
3.8.2 City Wetland Inventories
A consultant completed a wetland inventory in 1995 for Golden Valley as part of the City’s 1999 Surface
Water Management Plan (H.R. Green, 1999). Aerial photographs from two flights, on May 1, 1995 and on
August 15, 1995, were used to determine wetland locations throughout the City. Once the wetlands were
located and mapped, each wetland was classified using the Minnesota Routine Assessment Method for
Evaluating Wetland Functions (MnRAM) as a guide. The MnRAM methodology has since been revised.
Each wetland was also identified using the Circular 39 (U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, 1971) criteria to
compare with the wetland type established from the remote sensing data. Circular 39 includes a
classification system of eight types of wetlands.
Wetland functions that were evaluated as part of the 1995 inventory include:
• Floral diversity and integrity
• Wildlife habitat
• Fishery habitat
• Flooding and stormwater attenuation
• Water Quality Protection
• Aesthetics
• Recreation
• Education and Science
Often, wetland functions may be evaluated based on its position on the landscape. For instance, an
isolated basin wetland with no outlet may provide a high level of flooding and stormwater attenuation,
but may not receive a high water quality protection ranking because water quality benefits provided do
not impact downstream and/or recreational waterbodies. Results of the 1995 wetland inventory, including
functions assessments, are summarized in the 1999 Surface Water Management Plan.
3-16
Wetland and pond areas within the City were also evaluated as part of the City’s 2015 wetland and pond
assessment (WSB, 2015a) and development of the City’s Natural Resource Management Plan (SEH, 2015).
The 2015 City wetland assessment used a MnRAM 3.0 classification system to rate 119 wetlands. The
assessment included a field visit to each wetland to record data related to vegetation, hydrology, location,
and habitat. The results of the MnRAM assessment were used to determine wetland classification based
on BWSR guidance, modified slightly to account for constructed stormwater ponds (WSB, 2015a). Wetland
classifications present in the City and the number of wetlands falling into that classification include, in
order of decreasing quality:
• Preserve (4 wetlands)
• Manage 1 (8 wetlands)
• Manage 2 (52 wetlands)
• Manage 3 (56 wetlands)
Results of the 2015 wetland assessment are presented in Figure 3-10. Wetland complexes of particular
significance are identified in the City’s Natural Resource Management Plan. In addition, the City requires
site-specific delineations and functions assessments for proposed projects as they occur.
3.8.3 MCWD Functional Wetland Assessment – 2003
In 2001-2003, the MCWD undertook a functional assessment of wetlands (FAW) on wetlands within the
district, including the small portion of the southeast corner of Golden Valley located within the Minnehaha
Creek watershed district.
The inventory identified wetland vegetation, type, location and boundaries, size, groundwater interaction,
function, restoration potential, as well as the presence of buffers, invasive or nuisance vegetation, and
rare/unique features. Wetland functions were evaluated using a variant of the MnRAM methodology
(MNDNR, 1995). Restoration potential was estimated based on wetland size, property ownership, and
ease of restoration. Additionally, both USFWS Cowardin and Circular 39 classifications were assigned to
each wetland during field inspections.
Based on the wetland’s current function as well as the evaluation of critical wetland resources, and the
susceptibility to stormwater degradation, individual wetlands were assigned to one of four categories
similar to those used in the City’s 2015 wetland assessment (see Section 3.8.2).
There MCWD wetland inventory included only 2 wetlands within the City of Golden Valley—South Tyrol
Pond as well as a small wetland on the border with the City of St. Louis Park.
3.8.4 City of Golden Valley Wetland Banks
The City of Golden Valley has established wetland banks to be used for the mitigation of City projects.
These include approximately four acres of wetlands at the General Mills Nature Preserve near TH 55 and
TH 169 and approximately one acre along Minnaqua Drive south of the Briarwood Nature Area. More
information about the City of Golden Valley wetland bank is discussed in Section 2.0.
3-17
3.8.5 Bassett Creek Stream Erosion Inventory
The BCWMC and its member cities have identified the extent and severity of stream bank erosion along
most of the Bassett Creek trunk system, including the portion of Bassett Creek passing through the City.
The City’s original inventory was completed by its Department of Public Works in 2003, and it has been
updated periodically. Within Theodore Wirth Park, the Minneapolis Park and Recreation Board (MPRB)
has also completed erosion inventories along Bassett Creek in the past.
The creek inventory includes the Main Stem of Bassett Creek, the Sweeney Lake Branch of Bassett Creek,
and the Medicine Lake Branch of Bassett Creek in Golden Valley. To develop the inventory, City staff
walked the length of Bassett Creek identifying, locating, and documenting sites of significant bank erosion
and sediment deposition, as well as the presence of obstructions and storm sewer outlet structures.
Documentation includes the location of the site on aerial photographs, notes on the details of each site,
as well as a digital photograph of each site.
The City estimated the extent of erosion as a percent of the entire bank that was eroding, and classified
these locations as minor (less than 25%), moderate (25 – 50%), and severe (more than 50%). Typically, the
City found the causes of erosion were related to concentrated runoff from parking lots, streets, and ditch
drainage, storm sewer outfalls discharging above the normal water level of the creek, surface runoff
across exposed unvegetated slopes, steep slopes, or shaded slopes, and finally, areas where turf is
maintained to the edge of the creek with no vegetative buffer area. Additionally, the City identified
problems with utility structures including rusty corrugated metal pipes, broken or cracked concrete pipes,
pipes pulled apart at the joint, flared end sections that have been removed, buried pipe outlets, significant
deposition at the outlet of a structure, debris blocking a structure, as well as protruding pipes and outlets
located above the normal water levels of the creek.
To address stream erosion issues, the BCWMC has identified and implemented capital projects to restore
streambank areas since the initial stream erosion inventory was performed. Future projects to restore
remaining stream erosion issues are included in the BCWMC capital improvement program (see Section
5.5.2) and the City’s implementation program (see Table 5-1).
3.8.6 City Natural Resource Inventory and Management Plan
In 2015 the City completed a Natural Resource Management Plan (NRMP), (SEH, 2015). The purpose of
the NRMP is to guide decisions makers and staff on how to best manage the natural resources within the
City, including water, land, wildlife, and vegetation.
Development of the NRMP was preceded by a 2013 update to the City’s natural resources inventory
originally completed in 2003 and updated as part of the City’s 2008 Comprehensive Plan. The 2013
natural resources inventory included analysis of land cover using the Minnesota Land Cover Classification
System (MLCCS, see Figure 3-12) and evaluation of high resolution aerial photography to review land use
changes since the 2003 inventory. The 2013 inventory documents significant changes since the 2003
inventory and included additional assessment of invasive species within nature areas, open spaces, and
parks.
3-18
Maps included in the NRMP identify key natural areas, greenbelts (green corridors or greenways), and
open spaces. The NRMP describes several key natural areas and greenbelts in the City, including:
• Adeline Nature Area
• Bassett Creek Nature Area
• Briarwood Nature Area
• General Mills Nature Preserve (South of TH 55)
• Golden Ridge Nature Area
• Laurel Avenue Greenbelt
• Mary Hills Nature Area (now part of Sochacki Park)
• Pennsylvania Woods Nature Area
• Rice Lake Nature Area (now part of Sochacki Park)
• Western Avenue Marsh Area
For these sites, the NRMP describes forest, woodland, and prairie vegetation in each area, as well as
invasive species, aquatic resources, wetlands, and recreational amenities. Site management
recommendations for each natural area or greenbelt are also provided.
The NRMP includes policies and adaptive management strategies that seek to preserve, restore, and
enhance the City’s natural areas, green corridors, and open spaces. The NRMP also includes an
implementation program identifying short term (1-5 years), medium term (5-10 years), and long term
(10+ years) action items. Policies included in the NRMP and directly related to the management of
stormwater and surface water management within the City are also included in this Plan in Section 2.0.
The complete NRMP is available from the City website at: www.goldenvalleymn.gov/natural-
resources/natural-resources-management.php
City’s Stormwater Management System
The City of Golden Valley stormwater management system is comprised of a series of lateral and trunk
storm sewers, stormwater ponds, public ditches, and natural water bodies such as creeks, lakes, and
wetlands, as well as a number of best management practices (BMPs). Figure 3-13 and Figure 3-14 show
Golden Valley’s stormwater management system and subsurface (draintile and cleanouts) water
management system, respectively. Figure 3-13 also shows the location of the trunk storm sewers
throughout the City. The City defines a trunk storm sewer as any 72-inch round diameter or 88-inch span
arch pipe, or larger, which collects flow from laterally-connected pipes along its length.
Figure 3-13 also shows stormwater infrastructure located within the City that is under the jurisdiction of
other entities, including the Minnesota Department of Transportation (MnDOT), Hennepin County, and
railroads, as well as private developments. These other entities are responsible for maintaining their own
stormwater management infrastructure.
Much of the City’s constructed stormwater infrastructure (e.g., pipes) is at or nearing the end of its
intended operating life. Aging stormwater infrastructure has contributed to increased frequency of failures
3-19
(e.g., sinkholes, washouts) in recent years. The City’s recently-implemented Infrastructure Renewal
Program (IRP) provides a framework for prioritized updates to the City’s stormwater management system
(see also Sections 4.2 and 5.2.1).
3.9.1 Summary of the Trunk Stormwater Management System
3.9.1.1 Bassett Creek Drainage District
The Bassett Creek District includes two trunk storm sewer lines. The first trunk section, an 84–inch
diameter reinforced concrete pipe, flows south from the City of Crystal along Highway 100. Although
much of this pipe flows through Golden Valley, areas outside of the City contribute the majority of the
flows.
Historically, this trunk sewer discharged directly into Bassett Creek. However, during the reconstruction of
Highway 100 in 2001, a diversion structure was installed near the downstream end of this trunk system.
This diversion structure directs low flows and the “first flush” of storm events to the Bassett Creek Park
Pond in the City of Crystal, improving water quality treatment of flows through this system. Additionally,
the diversion of flows to the pond also provides storage during high flows before discharging to Bassett
Creek.
The second trunk storm sewer line in the Bassett Creek District runs south along an easement from
Wesley Drive across 10th Avenue where it discharges along Wisconsin Avenue directly into Bassett Creek.
This section includes 88-inch to 102-inch span reinforced concrete arch pipe.
3.9.1.2 Medicine Lake Drainage District
There are no City trunk storm sewers located within the Medicine Lake drainage district.
3.9.1.3 Sweeney Lake Drainage District
There are two trunk storm sewer systems located within the Sweeney Lake District. The first trunk storm
sewer line runs along the Union Pacific Railroad (formerly Chicago Northwestern) right of way. This
reinforced concrete trunk line varies in size from 72-inch to 88-inch diameter, and collects runoff from
45.6%
38.9%
13.1%2.4%
Source of Runoff to Highway 100 Trunk Line
Crystal
MnDOT
Robbinsdale
Golden Valley
3-20
various lateral storm sewer systems in the Sweeney Lake District. The trunk line discharges into the
Schaper Pond south of Sweeney Lake.
The second trunk storm sewer system runs east along Laurel Avenue. This line consists entirely of 84-inch
diameter reinforced concrete pipe and collects runoff from the areas along Laurel Avenue and I-394. This
line discharges into a stormwater pond along the railroad, north of Laurel Avenue. The outflow from this
pond eventually reaches Sweeney Lake after traveling through a series of ponds.
3.9.1.4 Wirth Lake Drainage District
There are no trunk storm sewers for the City of Golden Valley in the Wirth Lake drainage district.
3.9.1.5 Minnehaha Creek Drainage District
There are no trunk storm sewers for the City of Golden Valley in the Minnehaha Creek drainage district.
3.9.2 Intercommunity Flows
The following section summarizes the location of intercommunity flows between the City of Golden Valley
and the surrounding communities. Intercommunity flows include both surface runoff and point
discharges (e.g., pipes and channels). The approximate locations of these flows are shown on Figure 3-2.
3.9.2.1 City of Minneapolis
There is surface runoff from the City of Minneapolis that discharges to watersheds along the eastern
border of the City and the watershed tributary to Wirth Lake City. The City of Minneapolis has identified
several outfalls and delineated watersheds tributary the City of Golden Valley.
3.9.2.2 City of Robbinsdale
There are discharges from subwatersheds in the City of Golden Valley to North Rice Pond in the City of
Robbinsdale. Additionally, there are discharges from the City of Robbinsdale to North and South Rice
Ponds. South Rice Pond discharges into the City of Golden Valley and eventually into Bassett Creek. In
total, approximately 340 acres within the City of Robbinsdale is tributary to the City of Golden Valley.
3.9.2.3 City of Crystal
The City of Crystal contributes flows to the Highway 100 trunk storm sewer system along the northern
border of Golden Valley. These flows are then diverted to Bassett Creek Park Pond in the City of Crystal
before discharging into Bassett Creek. The City of Crystal also receives flows from the City of Golden
Valley from subwatersheds located south of the Bassett Creek Park Pond as well as flows along Bassett
Creek.
Runoff from the City of Crystal is also tributary to Golden Valley via the City of New Hope near the
intersection of Medicine Lake Road and Winnetka Avenue. This stormwater runoff contributes to flooding
issues in the DeCola ponds system (see Sections 4.2.5.1 and 4.2.5.2).
3-21
3.9.2.4 City of New Hope
The City of Golden Valley receives inflows from the City of New Hope along the City’s northern border
(see Figure 3-13). Some of the inflows from New Hope pass through the DeCola Ponds system and
contribute to Golden Valley flooding issues near the intersection of Medicine Lake Road and Winnetka
Avenue (see Sections 4.2.5.1 and 4.2.5.2). Some of the stormwater from New Hope passes through the
Medley Park area in the Medicine Lake drainage district.
A study (Terra Linda Drive/Rosalyn Court Local Flood Improvement Project, 2006) was completed for the
City of New Hope as the result of flooding issues along Terra Linda Drive and Medicine Lake Road on
border of the Cities of Golden Valley and Medicine Lake Road. This study evaluates several options to
alleviate flooding in this area. This study was superseded by the Medicine Lake Road and Winnetka Avenue
Area Long-Term Flood Mitigation Plan (Barr, 2016; see Section 4.2.5.2).
3.9.2.5 City of Plymouth
The City of Plymouth receives flows from the City of Golden Valley that drain from the Medicine Lake
drainage district. Additionally, the City of Golden Valley receives inflows from the City of Plymouth and
drainage from Highway 169, which eventually reach the Main Stem of Bassett Creek. The Main Stem of
Bassett Creek also enters the City of Golden Valley from the City of Plymouth.
Highway 169 forms the border between the City of Golden Valley and the City of Plymouth. Information
in the City of Plymouth’s Watershed Management Plan as well as as-builts for the frontage roads on the
east and west sides of Highway 169 south of Plymouth Avenue, indicates that Highway 169 may act as a
drainage divide between the two cities. More detailed drainage information for Highway 169 may be
obtained from MnDOT.
3.9.2.6 City of St. Louis Park
The City of Golden Valley receives flows from the City of St. Louis Park. Westwood Lake, located on the
southwest border between Golden Valley and St. Louis Park receives runoff from the City of St. Louis Park.
The lake drains to the north and it eventually discharges to the Main Stem of Bassett Creek. Flows from
St. Louis Park and drainage from I-394 also enter the City of Golden Valley via several storm sewers south
of the Xenia Pond system and through the I-394 and Highway 100 Loop ponds. These flows eventually
pass through Sweeney Lake. The portion of the City of Golden Valley that is located in the Minnehaha
Creek drainage district flows to the south and discharges to the City of St. Louis Park through three
separate storm sewers.
3.9.3 Best Management Practices (BMPs)
In addition to stormwater treatment ponds, the City’s stormwater management system includes a number
of structural BMPs that improve water quality and manage flood risk. These features include sump
manholes/catch basins, environmental manholes, drain tile fields, rain gardens, and skimmer structures.
Table 3-3 summarizes the structural BMPs by drainage district within the City of Golden Valley.
Figure 3-15 shows the location of BMPs within the City of Golden Valley. The City has also implemented
non-structural best management practices to manage stormwater (e.g., educational programs).
3-22
Table 3-3 Summary of Structural Best Management Practices by Drainage District
Best
Management
Practice
Number per Drainage District (public and private) Total
Number in
City Bassett
Creek
Medicine
Lake
Minnehaha
Creek
Sweeney
Lake Wirth Lake
Trunk storm
sewer 2 0 0 2 0 4
Pond 23 (public)
4 (private) 1 (private) 0 13 (public)
6 (private)
2 (public)
1 (private) 50
Sedimentation
pond
20 (public)
26 (private)
2 (public)
4 (private) 0 13 (public)
20 (private) 1 (public) 86
Bioretention
basin
6 (public)
13 (private) 0 0 1 (public)
22 (private)
1 (public)
1 (private) 44
Underground
storage 4 (private) 0 0 7 (private) 0 11
Skimmer
structures 1 (public) 0 0 1 (public) 0 2
Sump catch
basin
104 (public)
8 (private) 0 1 (public)
0 (private)
87 (public)
4 (private) 3 (public) 207
Sump manhole 59 (public)
1 (private) 0 4 (public)
0 (private)
32 (public)
4 (private) 4 (public) 100
Sump manhole
with SAFL baffle 11 (public) 2 (public) 0 1 (public)
7 (private) 2 (public) 23
Environmental
manhole
2 (public)
4 (private) 0 0 8 (public)
5 (private) 0 19
Buffer strip 14 (public)
46 (private)
2 (public)
1 (private) 1 (public) 6 (public)
52 (private)
1 (public)
4 (private) 127
Conservation
easement 5 0 0 9 0 14
Note: based on City GIS data through 2016.
3.9.3.1 BCWMC BMPs
The BCWMC capital improvement program (CIP) published in the 2015 BCWMC Watershed Management
Plan (as amended) includes additional recommended BMPs to be implemented within the City of Golden
Valley. These BMPs are included in the City’s implementation program (see Section 5.0). Additional BMPs
may be recommended by the BCWMC in future iterations of the BCWMC CIP. The City will continue to
work with the BCWMC to implement recommended BMPs.
3.9.4 MNDNRBCWMC Flood Risk Reduction Projects
The BCWMC, in a cooperative effort with the COE, MNDOT, MNDNR, and all the cities within the Bassett
Creek watershed, undertook a structural flood control project, the Bassett Creek Flood Control Project,
from 1987 through 1996. This $40 million flood control project addressed flooding in portions of Golden
3-23
Valley, Plymouth, Minneapolis, and Crystal and reduced flood elevations along the Bassett Creek corridor
by 2 feet in Golden Valley, 1½ feet in Crystal, and up to 4½ feet in Minneapolis. The flood control project
also reduced average annual flood damages across the Bassett Creek watershed by 62 percent.
Table 3-4 summarizes the flood control projects constructed within the City of Golden Valley as part of
the larger Bassett Creek Flood Control Project. The control structures constructed along Bassett Creek
leaves the creek virtually unaffected during normal flow conditions. For large storm events, the storage
upstream of control structures generally results in higher water levels than under pre-project conditions,
while each control structure lowers peak discharges immediately downstream of the structure.
The BCWMC has constructed other flood risk reduction projects within the City, including the Breck
School Stormwater Storage Area, as well as the Cortlawn and Ring Pond systems. Additionally, the City of
Golden Valley and the City of Robbinsdale acquired all the area around Rice Lake to preserve the wetland
and natural inundation area for temporary stormwater storage. Bassett Creek Park Pond, in Crystal,
provides flood storage of flows along Highway 100 in Golden Valley and also provides water quality
benefits. Table 3-4 also lists these other projects.
Table 3-4 Summary of Flood Control Projects in the City of Golden Valley
Feature Year
Constructed
Partners
Bassett Creek Flood Control Project
Golden Valley Flood Control Project:
Regent Avenue Crossing
Noble Avenue Crossing
Minnaqua Drive Bridge Removal
Highway 100 Control Structure
1981 - 1984 BCWMC, USACE, Golden Valley
Wisconsin Avenue Control Structure 1987 BCWMC, Golden Valley
Highway 55 Control Structure 1987 BCWMC, USACE, Minneapolis, MNDR
Westbrook Road Crossing 1993 BCWMC, USACE, Golden Valley, MNDR
Golden Valley Country Club 1994 BCWMC, USACE, Golden Valley, MNDR
Other Flood Control Projects
East and West Ring Ponds 1978 Golden Valley
Cortlawn Pond 1986 Golden Valley
Breck Stormwater Storage Area 1984, 1995 Golden Valley, MnDOT
Land Acquisition around Rice Pond 1990 Golden Valley, Robbinsdale
Bassett Creek Park Pond 1995 BCWMC, USACE, Crystal, MNDR, MnDOT
BCWMC = Bassett Creek Watershed Management Commission; USACE = United States Corps of Engineers; MNDR =
Minnesota Department of Natural Resources; MnDOT = Minnesota Department of Transportation
Flood profile elevations for the Bassett Creek Main Stem as well as the Sweeney Lake Branch of Bassett
Creek in Golden Valley are included in Table 2-9 of the 2015 BCWMC Watershed Management Plan (2015,
as amended). The flood profiles reflect the implementation of the above mentioned flood risk reduction
projects.
3-24
The BCWMC also implements nonstructural flood control measures, which prevent flood damages from
occurring along the BCWMC trunk system. Examples of these measures include:
• Monitoring water levels on lakes and streams in the watershed
• Developing models (e.g., XP-SWMM) to assess flood risk
• Review of proposed projects with potential impacts to floodplains
• Establishing policy and/or requirements to:
o Set minimum building elevations
o Preserve floodplain storage
o Limit alteration to existing structures
Water Quality
The lakes, ponds, streams, and wetlands in the City of Golden Valley are important community assets. The
City recognizes the need for good water quality in its waterbodies has taken steps to protect and improve
these resources. These steps include adopting water quality management policies, collecting water quality
data, reviewing projects for conformance with water quality performance standards, and implementing
water quality improvement projects.
3.10.1 Water Quality Monitoring and Data
A number of agencies and organizations have been monitoring the water quality of the water resources in
the City of Golden Valley. Figure 3-16 shows the location of the various water quality (and water quantity)
monitoring sites. The following sections discusses the various water quality monitoring efforts that have
taken place within the City.
3.10.1.1 City of Golden Valley Monitoring
The City of Golden Valley performed water quality monitoring of several stormwater ponds in 1995 as part
of the development of the 1999 SWMP. Since then, the City has not conducted any additional water
quality monitoring on its own.
The 1995 monitoring effort included the monitoring of the East and West Ring and Cortlawn stormwater
ponds to determine nutrient and sediment loadings from the different land use types and to estimate the
effectiveness of stormwater ponds on nutrient and sediment load reduction
Four stormwater runoff events were sampled during the summer and fall of 1995. Removal rates over the
four events averaged 82% removal of total phosphorus and 69% removal of total suspended solids.
3.10.1.2 BCWMC Lake and Pond Water Quality Monitoring
The BCWMC performs detailed monitoring of several lakes and ponds within the City of Golden Valley on
a rotating basis, including:
• Sweeney Lake
• Twin Lake
3-25
• Westwood Lake
• South Rice Pond
BCWMC lake monitoring has included assessment of chemical water quality (e.g., total phosphorus,
nitrogen chlorophyll a, transparency, pH, dissolved oxygen, conductivity), water clarity (secchi disc
transparency), phytoplankton, zooplankton, and aquatic macrophytes. Chemical water quality,
phytoplankton, and zooplankton sampling is typically performed at monthly intervals during the growing
season (and twice monthly in early summer). Macrophyte surveys are typically performed twice per
growing season, in June and August.
Results of BCWMC water quality monitoring are available from the BCWMC website at:
www.bassettcreek.org.
3.10.1.3 BCWMC Stream Biological Monitoring
The BCWMC conducts biotic (invertebrate) monitoring of streams in the watershed on a regular basis and
analyzes the data to determine if the water quality is improving or degrading. The biological data are
indicators (bioindicators) of water quality.
Monitoring for the presence of biological indicator organisms provides evidence of the water quality of
Bassett Creek, including transitory changes in stream water quality related to stormwater runoff.
Evaluating benthic macroinvertebrates (bottom-dwelling aquatic organisms, mainly insects) in a stream
provides a long-term assessment of its water quality. The benthic invertebrates are exposed to all the
temporal variations in stream water quality and ‘integrate’ the quality of passing water. Therefore the
presence or absence of pollutant tolerant organisms demonstrates the water quality impacts of urban
runoff better than grab samples of water flowing in the creek. The inventory of benthic organisms also
indicates whether there is a suitable food supply for fish.
The BCWMC collected and inventoried benthic organisms from several Bassett Creek locations since 1980.
Since 2000, biotic monitoring has been performed by the BCWMC or MPCA at three year intervals (2000,
2003, 2006, 2008/2009, and in 2012) Two of the six sampling locations were located within the City of
Golden Valley (see Figure 3-16):
• Main Stem of Bassett Creek at Rhode Island Avenue in Golden Valley
• Sweeney Lake Branch of Bassett Creek at Turner’s Crossroad (Xenia Avenue) in Golden Valley
Results of BCWMC biologic stream monitoring are presented in the 2015 BCWMC Watershed
Management Plan and available from the BCWMC website at: www.bassettcreek.org.
3.10.1.4 Other Monitoring Programs
The Metropolitan Council’s Citizen-Assisted Monitoring Program (CAMP) has been collecting water quality
data on a number of Twin Cities metropolitan area lakes since 1980. On a bi-weekly basis (April-October),
citizen volunteers collect a surface water sample for laboratory analysis of total phosphorus, total Kjeldahl
nitrogen, and chlorophyll-a; obtain a Secchi transparency measurement; and provide some user-
3-26
perception information about the lake's physical and recreational condition. There are a number of lakes
that are partially or entirely within the City of Golden Valley that have been monitored as part of the
CAMP program. The BCWMC provides funding for all the CAMP monitoring within the City of Golden
Valley. For more information about the CAMP program, please see the following website:
http://www.metrocouncil.org/environment/RiversLakes/Lakes/index.htm
The Citizen Lake Monitoring Program (CLMP) is a cooperative program combining the technical resources
of the Minnesota Pollution Control Agency (MPCA) and the volunteer efforts of citizens who collect water
quality data on their lakes. Citizens measure Secchi transparency weekly.
The Minneapolis Park and Recreation Board (MPRB) administers lake and water resource management
programs within the City of Minneapolis as well as MPRB-owned land within the City of Golden Valley
comprising Wirth Park. The MPRB performs bi-weekly testing of Wirth Lake for total suspended solids,
total phosphorus, nitrogen, dissolved oxygen, and other nutrients. This testing is done from the
beginning of April to the end of October.
The Hennepin County Environment and Energy Department manages the River Watch program. The
program has been in place since 1995, and provides hands-on environmental education opportunities for
students in Hennepin County. Each spring and fall, students collect macroinvertebrate data to assess the
overall health of the biological communities within streams throughout Hennepin County. Some of the
monitoring stations for Bassett Creek have been in place since 1999. The BCWMC assists with funding
and support of this program.
3.10.1.5 Water Quality Data
Current water quality data available for BCWMC priority waterbodies located within the City is available
from the BCWMC website at: http://www.bassettcreekwmo.org/lakes-streams
Additional water quality data collected by other parties is available using a map-based search tool
available from the MPCA’s Environmental Data Access website at: https://www.pca.state.mn.us/quick-
links/eda-surface-water-search-map-based
3.10.2 Water Quality Management Classifications
Within its jurisdiction, the BCWMC identified priority waterbodies subject to BCWMC water quality
standards and management actions. BCWMC priority waterbodies partially or entirely located within the
City of Golden Valley are listed in Table 3-5. The City adopts the BCWMC classification system by
reference.
The BCWMC and City have adopted MPCA eutrophication water quality standards applicable to lakes and
streams; these standards are listed in Table 3-6. Additional information about the MPCA’s eutrophication
water quality standards may be found in Guidance Manual for Assessing the Quality of Minnesota Surface
Waters for Determination of Impairment: 305(b) Report and 303(d) List (MPCA, 2014).
3-27
Table 3-5 BCWMC Priority Waterbodies in Golden Valley
BCWMC Priority Classification1 Waterbodies
Priority Streams • Main Stem Bassett Creek
• Sweeney Lake Branch Bassett Creek
Priority 1 Deep Lakes
• Sweeney Lake
• Twin Lake
• Wirth Lake
Priority 1 Shallow Lakes • Westwood Lake
Priority 2 Shallow Lakes None
Note(s):
(1) BCWMC waterbody management classifications are described in section 2.7.2.2 of the 2015 BCWMC Watershed
Management Plan.
Note that waterbodies within the City are also subject to state water quality standards addition to those
presented in Table 3-6; these standards are published in Minnesota Rules 7050 and are applicable to
lakes, ponds, and streams in the City.
As the authority responsible for administering the Clean Water Act (CWA) in Minnesota, the MPCA
establishes priority rankings for waters that do not meet the water quality standards. The list of impaired
waters, sometimes called the 303(d) list, is updated by the state every two years. Waterbodies within the
City or receiving runoff from the City that are listed as impaired are summarized in Table 3-7.
3-28
Table 3-6 Eutrophication Water Quality Standards for Golden Valley Waterbodies
Waterbody BCWMC
Classification
BCWMC Water Quality Standards Total Phosphorus, summer average (ug/L) Chlorphyll a summer average (ug/L) Secchi Depth, summer average (m) Total Suspended Solids (mg/L) Daily Dissolved Oxygen Flux (mg/L) Biological Oxygen Demand (5 day) (mg/L) Escherichia coli (# per 100 mL) Chloride (mg/L) Main Stem Bassett Creek
Priority 1
Stream 100 18 NA 30 3.5 2 126 1 230 Sweeney Lake Branch
Bassett Creek
Sweeney Lake Priority 1
Deep Lake 40 14 1.4 NA NA NA 126 1 230 Twin Lake
Wirth Lake
Westwood Lake Priority 1
Shallow Lake 60 20 1.0 NA NA NA 126 1 230
Note: standards presented above are summer average values calculated from June through September. MN Rule 7050.0220
includes water quality standards for additional parameters.
(1) 126 organisms per 100 mL as a geometric mean of not less than five samples within any month, nor shall more than 10%
of all samples within a month exceed 1,260 organisms per 100 mL
3-29
Table 3-7 Summary of Impaired Waters within and downstream of Golden Valley
Waterbody Impaired Use Pollutant or Stressor Year
Listed
TMDL
Study
Target
Start
TMDL Study
Target
Completion
TMDL Study
Approved
Sweeney
Lake
Aquatic
Recreation Nutrients/Eutrophication 2004 -- -- 2011
Aquatic Life Chloride 2014 -- -- 20164
Wirth Lake
Aquatic
Consumption Mercury in Fish Tissue; 1998 -- -- 20082
Aquatic Life Chloride 2014 2009 2015 --
Aquatic
Recreation1 Nutrients/Eutrophication 2002 -- -- 2010
Bassett Creek
(Main Stem)
Aquatic Life Chloride 2010 -- -- 20164
Aquatic Life Fish Bioassessments 2004 2012 2016 --
Aquatic
Recreation Fecal Coliform 2008 -- -- 20143
Medicine
Lake
Aquatic
Consumption Mercury in Fish Tissue; 1998 -- -- 20082
Aquatic
Recreation Nutrients/Eutrophication 2004 -- -- 2011
Minnehaha
Creek
Aquatic Life Dissolved Oxygen 2010 2020 2024 --
Aquatic Life Macroinvertebrate
Bioassessments 2014 2020 2024 --
Aquatic Life Chloride 2008 -- -- 20163
Aquatic Life Fish Bioassessments 2004 2020 2024 --
Aquatic
Recreation Fecal Coliform 2008 -- -- 20143
Lake
Hiawatha
Aquatic
Recreation Nutrients/Eutrophication 2002 -- -- 2014
(1) Wirth Lake was delisted for aquatic recreation due to nutrients/eutrophication in 2014.
(2) Wirth Lake mercury impairment is addressed by the statewide mercury TMDL, approved in 2008.
(3) Bassett Creek fecal coliform impairment is addressed by the Mississippi River Bacteria TMDL Study and Protection Plan,
approved in 2014
(4) Chloride impairments for Bassett Creek, Sweeney Lake, and Minnehaha Creek are addressed by the Twin Cities
Metropolitan Area Chloride TMDL Study, approved in 2016.
3-30
3.10.3 Water Quality Modeling
Water quality modeling serves many purposes, including estimating existing pollutant loads to
downstream waterbodies, evaluating performance of existing water quality BMPs, and estimating the
potential benefits of future water quality improvements. This section describes City-wide water quality
modeling efforts. In addition to the City-wide modeling efforts described in the following subsections, the
City has performed localized water quality modeling to evaluate proposed improvements as needed.
3.10.3.1 City PONDNET Modeling (1999)
As part of the development of its 1999 SWMP, the City developed a PONDNET model for the entire City
stormwater pond network to identify locations in need of stormwater improvements and increased
stormwater pond nutrient and sediment removal efficiency. The PONDNET model estimated total
suspended solids (TSS) and total phosphorus (TP) loads from each subwatershed as well as the total
loading to the primary water bodies in and near Golden Valley, including Bassett Creek, Sweeney and Twin
Lakes, and Medicine Lake. PONDNET estimated these loadings in terms of annual loadings based upon
work published by the EPA from the National Urban Runoff Program (NURP) and computed the loadings
as the product of mean pollutant concentration and annual runoff volume. The model predicted load
reductions due to existing stormwater ponds within the City, but did not account for other BMPs such as
filter strips, swales, and street sweeping.
Results of the PONDNET modeling are published in the 2008 SWMP. PONDNET results are not included in
this SWMP as they have been superseded by the results of BCWMC watershed-wide P8 water quality
modeling (see Section 3.10.3.2).
3.10.3.2 BCWMC P8 Modeling
As part of developing lake and stream watershed management plans, the BCWMC developed models to
estimate total flow and phosphorus loadings to lakes and streams within the Bassett Creek watershed
using the water quality model P8. P8 (Program for Predicting Polluting Particle Passage through Pits,
Puddles and Ponds) is a model for predicting the generation and transport of stormwater runoff
pollutants in urban watersheds.
In 2012-2013, BCWMC performed a comprehensive update to the existing Bassett Creek P8 models.
Eleven P8 models, distributed throughout the Bassett Creek watershed, were updated to simulate the
quantity and quality of water annually added to Bassett Creek during stormwater runoff events. Sources of
information for the 2012 model construction included data collected from municipalities and other
government agencies, information from previously constructed P8 models, field surveys, estimation from
GIS, and calculations from XP-SWMM (i.e., outlet rating curve calculations). Subwatershed delineations for
use in the P8 model within the City are shown in Figure 3-3. The P8 modeling results were then compiled
and compared to the available monitoring data from the Bassett Creek WOMP station. More detailed
information regarding data sources, model updates, and model calibration is included in a report entitled
Bassett Creek Water Quality Modeling (BCWMC, 2013).
3-31
The updated P8 water quality modeling provides a tool for the BCWMC and member cities to use in
tracking the progress of the BCWMC and the member cities towards TMDL implementation for impaired
waterbodies within and downstream of the City. When projects are proposed and/or completed, the
updated P8 model may be used to estimate the loading reduction that will be achieved by the projects.
The updated P8 modeling may also be used to evaluate the effect of proposed City and BCWMC projects.
The BCWMC works with the member cities to periodically update the P8 model to incorporate BCWMC
capital improvements and BMP information provided by the member cities. Estimated total phosphorus
concentrations in runoff from subwatersheds within the City are shown in Figure 3-18.
3.10.3.3 MCWD HHPLS (2003)
The MCWD developed a water quality model of the entire Minnehaha Creek watershed district as part of
the Hydrologic, Hydraulic, and Pollutant Loading Study (HHPLS) (MCWD, 2003). The pollutant loading
model, PLOAD, was used to estimate watershed pollutant loads. A small portion of the southeastern part
of Golden Valley is located within the MCWD. The lake water quality model, WiLMS, was used for in-lake
modeling of several lakes within the MCWD. None of the lakes within Golden Valley are located within
the watershed.
Water Quantity and Flooding
The City of Golden Valley cooperates with the BCWMC to manage the quantity of water and reduce the
risk of flooding within the City. To perform these duties, the City and/or BCWMC have performed studies,
constructed flood risk mitigation projects, and performed ongoing monitoring of stage (i.e., water surface
elevation) and flow at several locations within the City (see Figure 3-16).
Runoff from most of the City is tributary to the Main Stem of Bassett Creek through overland flow, storm
sewer discharge, or other tributaries streams. It is important to note that flows in the Main Stem of Bassett
Creek where it enters the City are controlled by the fixed weir outlet on Medicine Lake, in the City of
Plymouth. Therefore, baseflows in the creek are significantly affected by the discharge (or lack of
discharge) from Medicine Lake.
3.11.1 Flood Insurance Studies
The Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA) maps the floodplains of larger basins and streams to
create community Flood Insurance Studies (FIS) and Flood Insurance Rate Maps (FIRMs). There is a FIS for
the City of Golden Valley. Updated FIRMs for Hennepin County and including the City of Golden Valley
were made effective in November 2016. It should be noted, however, that the November 2016 FIRMs are
based on analysis performed using older, TP-40 precipitation data versus the newer, Atlas 14 precipitation
data (see Section 3.1). The FEMA-delineated floodplain within the City is shown in Figure 3-19.
The FIRM mapping, together with the City’s floodplain ordinance, allow the City to participate in the
federal government’s National Flood Insurance Program (NFIP). Homeowners with federally backed
mortgages located within the FEMA-designated floodplains are required to purchase flood insurance. In
some cases, homes within the FEMA-designated floodplains on the FEMA floodplain maps may actually
3-32
not be in the floodplain. In order to waive the mandatory flood insurance requirements for their homes,
residents must remove their homes from the FEMA-designated floodplain by obtaining Letters of Map
Amendments (LOMA). The City provides information and technical assistance to help with this effort. The
City participates in FEMA’s Community Rating System program, which allows eligible residents to receive a
discount on purchasing flood insurance.
In addition to FEMA-delineated floodplains, the BCWMC and MCWD have established their own 100-year
floodplains for watershed management purposes. WMO-delineated floodplains may differ from FEMA-
delineated floodplains due to input data, level of detail, and other factors. The BCWMC recently
performed hydrologic and hydraulic modeling using Atlas 14 inputs to establish new 100-year flood
elevations and floodplain inundation extents (see Section 4.2.4). The BCWMC and MCWD review proposed
activities in their respective floodplain, as described in the BCWMC Requirements document and MCWD
Rules document. The City uses the BCWMC and MCWD floodplain information to design public projects
and review private development proposals.
3.11.2 BCWMC Flood Control Project
The largest structural Flood Control Project undertaken by the BCWMC was the Bassett Creek Flood
Control Project. Constructed from 1987 – 1996, the project was the cooperative effort of the USACE,
MnDOT, MNDNR, the BCWMC, and the BCWMC member cities, including the City of Golden Valley. The
project controls flooding in portions of Golden Valley, Plymouth, Minneapolis, and Crystal and reduced
flood elevations along the Bassett Creek corridor by 2 feet in Golden Valley.
Table 2-8 of the 2015 BCWMC Plan lists all of the features of the BCWMC Flood Control Project. Figure 2-
14 of the 2015 BCWMC Plan identifies the BCWMC Flood Control Project structures. Major Flood Control
Project features located within the City of Golden Valley include:
• Highway 100 control structure
• Wisconsin Avenue control structure
• Highway 55 control structure
• Golden Valley Country Club control structure
The control structures consist of low flow orifices with overflow weirs to restrict flows. Each control
structure leaves the creek virtually unaffected during normal flow conditions. For large storm events, the
storage upstream of control structures generally results in higher water levels than under pre-project
conditions. In late 2001/early 2002, the Wisconsin Avenue structure, along with the Hampshire Avenue
crossing, was outfitted with continuous water level monitoring systems. Water levels at the Hampshire
Avenue crossing control the gate structure at Wisconsin Avenue.
Responsibilities related to the BCWMC Flood Control Project are split between the BCWMC and member
cities and are described in greater detail in Section 5.3.
3-33
3.11.3 Regulatory Water Levels and Flow Rates
Following the construction of the BCWMC Flood Control Project, the BCWMC worked with the USACE to
approve revised flood profiles along sections of Bassett Creek for the National Flood Insurance Program’s
Flood Insurance Rate Map (FIRM). The BCWMC has since updated the flood profiles along Bassett Creek
to reflect updated hydrologic and hydraulic analysis performed using Atlas 14 precipitation data (see
Section 3.1).
The BCWMC and City use the revised flood profiles in its review of improvements and development
proposals. The flood profiles and critical event flow rates that are now in effect are included in Table 2-9
of the 2015 BCWMC Plan (as amended). Current BCWMC policy and City policy requires no net increase in
peak flow rates for specific storm events (see Section 2.4).
3.11.4 Water Quantity Modeling
Water quantity modeling is necessary to establish flood levels and determine floodplain extents, design
hydraulic structures adequate to meet their intended functions, and assess hydraulic impacts of projects
proposed by developers, the City, and the WMOs.
In 2012 and 2013, the BCWMC and its member cities developed a watershed-wide hydrologic and
hydraulic model using XP-SWMM software. XP-SWMM allows for calculating both hydrology and
hydraulics within one modeling program, rather than requiring two separate programs, as with the HEC-1
and HEC-2 models. Model development was split into two phases, with the first phase in 2012 and 2013
including:
• Updating watershed divides based on recent digital topographic data
• Modifying hydrologic inputs (because of the changes in watershed divides and available
methodology)
• Enhancing detail along the creeks by using updated channel geometry and current bridge and
culvert geometry
The XP-SWMM model can be used to compare relative changes in flow rate (i.e., existing vs. proposed
conditions runoff rates), or relative changes in water surface elevations (i.e., existing vs. proposed
conditions maximum water surface elevations in the creeks or storage areas).
Since its initial development, the BCWMC XP-SWMM model has been revised, including:
• Subdividing the original watersheds to increase model resolution and consistency with the
BCWMC watershed-wide P8 water quality model (see Section 3.10.3)
• Incorporating additional municipal storm sewer systems between upstream modeled ponds
• Integrating detailed storage in modeled ponds upstream of the creek system
• Incorporating Atlas 14 precipitation depths and updated soils data (see Sections 3.1 and 0)
By incorporating these changes, the modeled runoff rates to the creek system may more realistically
represent actual conditions, resulting in an acceptable calibration. The BCWMC has updated the flood
3-34
profiles of Bassett Creek (Table 2-9 of the 2015 BCWMC Plan, as amended) to reflect the incorporation of
the Atlas 14 precipitation data. Maximum water surface elevations, peak runoff, and peak discharge
estimated by the model for the subwatersheds shown in Figure 3-2 are available from the BCWMC.
The City will use the XP-SWMM model to assess hydrologic and hydraulic impacts of potential projects
and prioritize flood risk reduction efforts (see Section 5.3). The BCWMC works with the member cities to
periodically update the XP-SWMM model to reflect current conditions within the watershed.
3.11.5 Water Quantity Monitoring
3.11.5.1 City of Golden Valley Monitoring
The City has performed flow and stage monitoring at a limited number of locations within the City. Some
monitoring data are the result of a specific stormwater study while other monitoring data are collected
continuously or semi-continuously for the operation of flood control structures.
East and West Ring and Cortlawn Stormwater Pond Monitoring - 1995
In 1995, as part of the development of the 1999 SWMP, the City was involved in a water quality
monitoring effort that included the monitoring and sampling of the runoff entering the East and West
Ring and Cortlawn stormwater ponds. To obtain representative stormwater runoff samples, each
monitoring station also employed a flow measuring device and an automated composite sampler in order
to estimate a flow-weighted pollutant load to and from each stormwater pond. Total runoff volumes at
each monitoring location are available for each storm event monitored in 1995.
Bassett Creek Staff Gauges – 2002 to Present
In 2002, several staff gages were installed by the City along Bassett Creek. Presently, the City maintains
automated or manual staff gauges at the following road crossings along the Main Stem and Sweeney
Lake Branch of Bassett Creek:
• Bassett Creek Main Stem
o Wisconsin Avenue
o Pennsylvania Avenue
o Hampshire Avenue
o St. Croix Avenue
o Westbrook Road
o T.H. 100 (at the Main Stem outlet structure)
o Regent Avenue
o Bassett Creek Drive
o Golden Valley Road (County Road 66)
• Sweeney Lake Branch Bassett Creek
o Sweeney Branch at Schaper Park
o Sweeney Branch upstream of T.H. 100
3-35
The City uses these gauges to record the stage of Bassett Creek during various storm and flood events.
Figure 3-16 shows the location of the staff gauges located on Bassett Creek within Golden Valley.
3.11.5.2 BCWMC Lake Level Monitoring
The BCWMC is responsible for the monitoring of water levels on the primary lakes within the Bassett
Creek Watershed. These monitored lakes include the following lakes within or receiving runoff from the
City of Golden Valley:
• Medicine Lake (1972 to present)
• Sweeney Lake (1972 to present)
• Westwood Lake (1974 to present)
• Wirth Lake (2006 to present)
The BCWMC typically measures water levels twice per month during the open water period and once per
month in winter. More detailed information is available from the MNDNR lakefinder website
(http://www.dnr.state.mn.us/lakefind/index.html) and from the BCWMC, upon request.
3.11.5.3 Stream Gauging and Flow Data
In 2000, the BCWMC, in cooperation with Metropolitan Council Environmental Services (MCES), began
monitoring flow and stage in the Main Stem of Bassett Creek as part of the Watershed Outlet Monitoring
Program (WOMP). The Bassett Creek WOMP site is located at Irving Avenue, one-fourth mile upstream of
the storm sewer tunnel that runs beneath downtown Minneapolis to the Mississippi River (see
Figure 3-16). Data collection consists of continuous measurements of stage (which is converted to stream
flow using a rating curve), temperature and conductivity. Data collected at the Bassett Creek WOMP
station is maintained and published by the MCES. Information can be found at: metrocouncil.org/
Fishery and Aquatic Habitat
The MNDNR completed fishery surveys for Sweeney Lake, Twin Lake, and Wirth Lake in Golden Valley as
well as for nearby Medicine Lake. Additionally, the MNDNR has stocked Wirth and Medicine Lakes in the
recent past.
A 2013 MNDNR survey of Sweeney Lake identified 13 different fish species. Gamefish present in Sweeney
Lake included largemouth bass and northern pike. Common carp were also identified in the 2013 survey.
The BCWMC also performed a trapnet fish survey of Sweeney and Twin Lakes in 2013. Wirth Lake was
most recently surveyed by the MNDNR during the summer of 2012. Although walleye have been sampled
in past surveys of Wirth Lake, none were captured in 2012 despite stocking adult walleye every five years
(most recently in 2007 and 2012). Walleye fingerlings were stocked in 2011 and 2008. Results can be
found at http://www.dnr.state.mn.us/lakefind/index.html.
3.12.1 Aquatic Plants (Macrophytes)
Aquatic plants, or macrophytes, are a natural and integral part of most lake communities. A lake’s aquatic
plants, generally located in the shallow areas near the shoreline of the lake provide habitat for fish, insects,
3-36
and small invertebrates, provide food for waterfowl, fish and wildlife, produce oxygen, provide spawning
areas for fish, help stabilize and protect shorelines from wave erosion, and provide nesting sites for
waterfowl.
The BCWMC performs macrophyte surveys of most of its priority waterbodies. In Golden Valley, this
includes Sweeney Lake, Twin Lake, Wirth Lake, and Westwood Lake. Macrophyte surveys are generally
performed during the same year as BCWMC chemical water quality monitoring and include two surveys
(typically June and August). Macrophyte monitoring includes the identification of key invasive
macrophytes (e.g., curlyleaf pondweed and Eurasian watermilfoil) that are present in the waterbodies (see
also Section 4.3.2).
Eurasian watermilfoil has been identified in:
• Wirth Lake.
Curlyleaf pondweed has been identified in
• Sweeney Lake
• Twin Lake
• Wirth Lake
• Westwood Lake
BCWMC macrophyte surveys noted that curlyleaf pondweed, while present in Sweeney Lake, Twin Lake,
and Westwood Lake, constituted only a minor part of the overall plant community of those lakes and did
not warrant management activity at the time (Barr, 2015; Barr, 2016). Continued monitoring of the
curlyleaf pondweed presence in these lakes is recommended. The MPRB manages Eurasian watermilfoil
and curlyleaf pondweed in Wirth Lake through periodic mechanical harvesting.
Natural Communities and Recreational Areas
Prior to settlement, the major land cover type in the City was a predominantly oak forest interrupted by
tallgrass prairie and marsh. Although scattered remnants of this forest are still present throughout much
of its original range, very few remnants remain within the City according to the map Natural Communities
and Rare Species of Carver, Hennepin, and Scott Counties (Minnesota County Biological Survey, 1998).
Native vegetation in the City of Golden Valley has been greatly altered by agricultural development and
urbanization. Remaining vegetation in the City is typical of that found at the interface between the
Eastern Deciduous Forest and the Temperate Grassland. With agriculture gone from the City, urbanization
has occurred in former agricultural areas. In addition to the forested areas, numerous wetlands were once
present in the City, but the majority have been drained or filled for development.
Minnesota Land Cover Classification System (MLCCS) information is currently available for the City of
Golden Valley as a source of information and as a management tool. Figure 3-12 shows the MLCCS
3-37
classification of natural areas within the City. Natural Resource Inventory (2013) is another source of
information and is found in the Parks and Natural Resource Chapter of this comprehensive plan.
The county biological survey map notes the presence of a tamarack swamp in Theodore Wirth Park. This
map also notes the presence of a federally or state-listed rare animal species in the City located near
Turners Crossroad and Interstate 394. The Natural Heritage Information System (NHIS) also notes
occurrences of federally- or state-listed rare animal species within the City. Blanding’s turtles, trumpeter
swans, peregrine falcons, and hooded warblers are rare species that occur in the area, and the habitat for
these species should be protected and improved where feasible. Due to the sensitive nature of this
information, the actual species and specific locations are not publicly available.
3.13.1 Recreational Areas
Approximately 15 percent of the City (more than 1,000 acres) is dedicated to parks and open space, with
25 parks and nine nature areas within the community. The City maintains numerous ball fields, courts,
and activity areas and nearly 50 miles of trails, all of which are on City property, except for the trails at the
General Mills Research facility. By mutual consent between the City and General Mills, these trails are
maintained by the City for public use. Additionally, Theodore Wirth Regional Park, part of the
Minneapolis Park and Recreation Board, is located along the eastern edge of Golden Valley and extends
south into the City of Minneapolis. Sochacki Park is located in the northeast part of the City and is jointly
operated by the City of Robbinsdale, City of Golden Valley, and Three Rivers Park Board.
Potential Pollutant Sources
The sources of potential pollution in the City are many and varied. There are permitted sites, hazardous
waste generators, and contaminated sites within the City. The MPCA maintains a database of these sites,
which includes permitted sites (air, industrial stormwater, construction stormwater, and wastewater
discharge), hazardous waste generating sites, leak sites, petroleum brownfields, tank sites, unpermitted
dump sites, and sites enrolled in the Voluntary Investigation and Cleanup (VIC) program. Much of this
information can be found in the “What’s in my neighborhood?” interactive MPCA map.
The MPCA or Hennepin County should be contacted for details about specific sites, since many of the
sites have been cleaned up or are in the clean-up process. The location of these potentially contaminated
or hazardous waste sites should be considered as sites are redeveloped and BMPs are implemented. The
presence of soil contamination at many of these sites, if not removed, may limit or prevent infiltration as a
stormwater management option.
Additionally, there is currently one Superfund Site within the City of Golden Valley. This site is the
Honeywell, Inc. Golden Valley Plant. Spills and leaks have contaminated the soils and groundwater with
trichloroethylene, trichloroethane, and other solvents. In 1982, contaminated soils were excavated and
disposed of and pump-out wells were installed to address the groundwater contamination.
In contrast to sites with known hazards, non-point source pollution cannot be traced to a single source or
pipe. Instead, pollutants are carried from land to water in stormwater or snowmelt runoff, in seepage
3-38
through the soil, and in atmospheric transport. Discharge from stormwater pipes is considered a non-
point source discharge as the pollutants coming from the pipe are generated across the watershed
contributing to the pipe, not at a single location. Point sources frequently discharge continuously
throughout the year, while non-point sources discharge in response to precipitation or snowmelt events.
For most waterbodies, non-point source runoff, especially stormwater runoff, is the major contributor of
pollutants.
Failing or substandard subsurface sewage treatment systems (SSTS) may be a non-point source of
pollutants. Historically, there were several subsurface sewage treatment systems (SSTS) operating within
the City of Golden Valley. The City is not aware of any SSTS systems in the city.
More information about potential pollutant sources is available from the MPCA website:
http://www.pca.state.mn.us/index.php/data/wimn-whats-in-my-neighborhood/whats-in-my-
neighborhood.html
3.14.1 Hazardous Materials Emergency Response Plan
The City of Golden Valley’s Hazardous Materials Emergency Response Plan establishes a procedure for the
reporting and mitigation of hazardous material incidents (i.e., a spill, leak, or release of a hazardous
material). The City’s fire department is responsible for the implementation of this plan.
§¨¦394W
§¨¦394
£¤169
100
55
456740
4567102
456770
456766
36th Ave Boone Ave 32nd Ave N
26th Ave N
36th Ave N
Laurel Ave
10th Ave N Noble Ave N Golden Valley Rd
Olympia St Texas Ave S France Ave N Flag Ave S Plymouth Ave Brunswick Ave 34th Ave N
Winnetka Ave S Duluth St
Western Ave
6th Av e N
Harold Ave Zane Ave N Country Club Dr
Sandburg Rd
Hub
b
a
r
d
A
v
e
N
Nevada Ave Boone Ave N 26th Ave
Oakd
a
l
e
A
v
e
N
Louisiana Ave Park
PlaceBlvdXeniaAveSNathanLa Meadow La N Welcome Ave Colorado Ave SGold en ValleyLa
W 16th St
M
e
d
i
c
i
n
e
R
i
d
g
e
R
d
Pennsylvania Ave SGo l den Hills D r Adair Ave 29th Ave N Noble Ave JerseyAveS Reve
re
La
Edgewood Ave S Srv Rd GeneralMillsBlvd Jersey Ave NMarket
St Turners Csrd Kilmer La N Welcome Ave Hampshire Ave W Franklin Ave
36th Ave N Noble Ave NGolden V a l l e y R d
£¤169
GOLDEN VALLEY
CRYSTAL
MINNEAPOLIS
PLYMOUTH
SAINT LOUIS PARK
NEW HOPE
ROBBINSDALE
MINNETONKA Sweeney LakeTwin LakeWirth Lake
Westwood Lake
B a s s e t t C r e e k
Barr Footer: ArcGIS 10.4.1, 2018-03-07 15:26 File: I:\Client\GoldenValley\23271538_SWMP_2017\Maps\Report\Figure 3-1 Drainage Districts 24x36.mxd User: MRQFIGURE 3-1MAJOR DRAINAGE DISTRICTS
0 2,000 4,000
Feet
!;N
Municipal Boundary
Major Roadway
Railroad
Lakes and Ponds
Stream
Ditch/Drainage Way
Drainage District
Bassett Creek
Medicine Lake
Minnehaha Creek
Sweeney Lake
Wirth Lake
Date: March 2018Sources:- Barr Engineering Company for watershed boundaries.- MN-DOT for roads, railroads, and municipal boundaries.- City of Golden Valley for all other layers.
DRAFT
#*#*#*#*#*#*#*#*#*#*#*#*
#*#*#*#*#*#*#*#*#*#*#*#*#*#*#*#*#*#*#*#*#*#*#*#*#*#*#*#*#*#*#*#*#*#*#*#*#*#*#*#*#*
#*#*#*#*#*#*#*#*#*#*#*#*#*#*#*#*#*#*#*#*#*#*#*
#*#*#*#*#*#*#*#*#*#*
#*#*#*#*#*#*#*#*
#*#*#*#*#*#*#*#*#*#*#*#*#*#*#*#*#*#*#*#*#*#*#*#*#*#*
#*#*#*#*#*#*#*
#*#*#*#*#*#*#*#*#*#*
#*#*#*#*#*#*
#*
#*#*#*#*#*#*#*#*#*#*#*#*#*#*#*#*#*#*#*#*#*#*#*
#*#*#*#*#*
#*
#*#*#*#*#*#*#*#*#*#*
#*#*#*#*#*#*#*#*
#*#*#*#*#*#*#*#*#*#*#*#*#*
#*
#*
§¨¦394W
§¨¦394
£¤169
100
55
456740
4567102
456770
456766
36th Ave Boone Ave 32nd Ave N
26th Ave N
36th Ave N
Laurel Ave
10th Ave N Noble Ave N Golden Valley Rd
Olympia St Texas Ave S France Ave N Flag Ave S Plymouth Ave Brunswick Ave 34th Ave N
Winnetka Ave S Duluth St
Western Ave
6th Av e N
Harold Ave Zane Ave N Country Club Dr
Sandburg Rd
Hub
b
a
r
d
A
v
e
N
Nevada Ave Boone Ave N 26th Ave
Oakd
a
l
e
A
v
e
N
Louisiana Ave Park
PlaceBlvdXeniaAveSNathanLa Meadow La N Welcome Ave Colorado Ave SGold en ValleyLa
W 16th St
M
e
d
i
c
i
n
e
R
i
d
g
e
R
d
Pennsylvania Ave SGo l den Hills D r Adair Ave 29th Ave N Noble Ave JerseyAveS Reve
re
La
Edgewood Ave S Srv Rd GeneralMillsBlvd Jersey Ave NMarket
St Turners Csrd Kilmer La N Welcome Ave Hampshire Ave W Franklin Ave
36th Ave N Noble Ave NGolden V al le y R d
£¤169
GOLDEN VALLEY
CRYSTAL
MINNEAPOLIS
PLYMOUTH
SAINT LOUIS PARK
NEW HOPE
ROBBINSDALE
MINNETONKA Sweeney LakeTwin LakeWirth Lake
Westwood Lake
B a s s e t t C r e e k
SL-018
SL-001
SL-025
SL-023
SL-042
SL-043
BCM-013
WL-002
SL-031
WL-001
BCM-007
BCM-003
SL-044
SL-012
BCM-025
SL-002
SL-029
BCM-032
SL-027
BUE-013
SL-040
MLD-037
SL-028
SL-016
BUE-008
BUE-005
BUE-152
BUE-009
MC-2
BUE-010
BCM-004
BCM-006
BUE-011
MC-3
BUE-016
BUE-071
SL-019
GRL-001
BCM-035
WL-006
SL-038
BCM-002
SL-037
SL-022
BUE-003AMLD-019
WL-005
SL-024
BPP-003
BUE-018
SL-021
BUE-001
BUE-014
SL-034
BUE-022
BUE-012
BCM-028
BUE-028 BUE-002
SL-032
MLD-036
BCM-017
BUE-032
BUE-024
BUE-025
BCM-018
BUE-096
BUE-006
BUE-031
BCM-005
BUE-155
BUE-033
MLD-034
BUE-178
MC-1
BCM-012
SL-020
SL-015
BUE-184
BUE-030
BUE-034
BUE-136
BUE-036
BUE-037
BUE-175
GRL-009
BCM-042
BUE-021A
WWL-001
BUE-154
BUE-038
BUE-039
BUE-156
BCM-019
SL-014
SL-011
BCM-009
BUE-153
BUE-148
SL-010
BUE-043
WL-007
SL-017
BCM-015
BUE-144
BUE-041
WL-004
BCM-027
BUE-042
BCM-026
BUE-017
BUE-035
SL-003
WL-011
BUE-048
BUE-049
BUE-023
BPP-014
BUE-051
BUE-050
SL-033
BCM-031
GRL-002BCM-008
BUE-053
SL-013
BUE-055
BUE-105
BUE-056
SL-026
BUE-058
BUE-157
BCM-016
GRL-005
BUE-165
SL-036
BUE-059
BUE-060
BUE-061
BUE-081
BCM-039
BUE-063
BUE-007
BUE-045B
BUE-067
BUE-068
BUE-069
BCM-037
SL-035
SL-030
SL-005
SL-009
BUE-072
BUE-020A
WL-003
BUE-074
MLD-033
BUE-075
BCM-038
BPP-001
MLD-024
BUE-077
BUE-078
WL-010
BUE-182A
BCM-029
MLD-035
BUE-082
BCM-034
BCM-041
BUE-054A
BUE-052A
BUE-087
BUE-088
BUE-090
BCM-022
BUE-089
BUE-160
SL-008
BUE-173
BUE-091
BUE-015
BUE-147
BUE-057
BUE-086
BUE-098
SL-007
BUE-179
BUE-097
BCM-030
BUE-100
BUE-020D
BUE-104
BUE-106B
SL-041
BUE-111 BUE-054BBUE-052B
BCM-021
BUE-044
BUE-127
BUE-064
GRL-004
BUE-021B
BUE-062 BUE-106A
BUE-138
BCM-036BUE-080
WL-009
BUE-076
SL-006
BUE-180
BUE-093
BUE-020B
BCM-040
BPP-011
BUE-094
BCM-043
BUE-183
BUE-045C
BUE-026
BUE-102
BUE-163
BCD-019
BUE-112
BUE-109
BUE-079A
BUE-084
BUE-134
BUE-170
BCM-011
BUE-113
BUE-073
BCM-020
BUE-114
WWL-002
BUE-182B
BUE-172
BUE-119
BUE-122
BUE-135
BUE-181
BUE-123
BCD-049B
BUE-185
BUE-130
BUE-168
BUE-140
BUE-128
BUE-133
BUE-124
BUE-129
BUE-029A
BCM-068
BUE-120
BUE-126
BUE-079B
SL-038
BUE-131
BCM-033
BUE-003B
BUE-095A
BUE-132
BUE-137
BUE-095B
BCM-014
BUE-169
BUE-020E
WL-003
BCM-023
BCD-049A
MLD-032
BUE-079C
BUE-164
BUE-139
BCM-024
BCM-063
BUE-065
BUE-118
BUE-143
BCM-044
BUE-145
BCM-065
SL-004
BCD-040
BUE-095C
BUE-070
BUE-101
BUE-047
BPP-005
BCM-055
BUE-146
BPP-010
SL-039
BUW-006
BUE-085
BCD-017
GRL-006
WWL-009
BCM-055
GRL-010
BPP-002
BCM-076
Barr Footer: ArcGIS 10.4.1, 2017-05-01 10:04 File: I:\Client\GoldenValley\23271538_SWMP_2017\Maps\Report\Figure 3-2 Drainage Districts, Subdistricts, and Flow Directions 24x36.mxd User: MRQFIGURE 3-2DRAINAGE DISTRICTS, SUBDISTRICTS, AND FLOW DIRECTIONS
0 2,000 4,000
Feet
!;N
#*Flow Direction
#*Inflows to Golden Valley
#*Outflows from Golden Valley
Municipal Boundary
Subwatershed Boundary
Bassett Creek
Medicine Lake
Minnehaha Creek
Sweeney Lake
Wirth Lake
Major Roadway
Railroad
Lakes and Ponds
Stream
Ditch/Drainage Way
Parcel Boundary
Drainage District
Bassett Creek
Medicine Lake
Minnehaha Creek
Sweeney Lake
Wirth Lake
Date: March 2018Sources:- Barr Engineering Company for watershed boundaries.- MN-DOT for roads, railroads, and municipal boundaries.- Hennipin County for parcel boundaries.- City of Golden Valley for all other layers.
DRAFT
§¨¦394W
§¨¦394
£¤169
100
55
456740
4567102
456770
456766
36th Ave Boone Ave 32nd Ave N
36th Ave N
Laurel Ave
10th Ave N Noble Ave N Golden Valley Rd
Olympia St Texas Ave S France Ave N Flag Ave S Plymouth Ave Brunswick Ave 34th Ave N
Winnetka Ave S Duluth St
Western Ave
6th Av e N
Harold Ave Zane Ave N Country Club Dr
Sandburg Rd
Hubbar
d
A
v
e
N
Nevada Ave Boone Ave N 26th Ave
Oakd
a
l
e
A
v
e
N
Louisiana Ave Park
PlaceBlvdXeniaAveSNathanLa Meadow La N Welcome Ave Colorado Ave SGold en ValleyLa
W 16th St
M
e
d
i
c
i
n
e
R
i
d
g
e
R
d
Pennsylvania Ave SGo l den Hills Dr Adair Ave 29th Ave N Noble Ave JerseyAveS Reve
re
La
Edgewood Ave S Srv Rd GeneralMillsBlvd Jersey Ave NMarket
St Turners Csrd Kilmer La N Welcome Ave Hampshire Ave W Franklin Ave
36th Ave N Noble Ave NGolden V a ll ey R d
£¤169
GOLDEN VALLEY
CRYSTAL
MINNEAPOLIS
PLYMOUTH
SAINT LOUIS PARK
NEW HOPE
ROBBINSDALE
MINNETONKA Sweeney LakeTwin LakeWirth Lake
Westwood Lake
B a s s e t t C r e e k
448A
SL-SL1-A1
BC-8-10A
Hwy-55
BC-9-5-2
SL-WB9A
BC-9-5-1
BC-72-1
SL-SP3
WL-FR-2
SL-WB8
BC-72-2
BC-HH12A-4
BC-71-1-1
SL-WB15A
SL-LL1
BC-11115-E1A-1
ML-GV-ML2
BC-91-5
BC-102-3
SL-RR3-1
WL-DIRECT
SL-WB7
SL-WB12
BC-102-4
SL-SB1
BC-101-2
BC-HH12A-5
BC-10-3
WL-8
WL-BP-1
SL-WB16B
WL-FR-4
BC-11115-W
SL-SB6
SL-RR2
SL-SL2-A
SL-WB14
BC-7-12
BC-72-4-1
BC84-4a
SL-DNR1A
SL-RR1
BC-61-2
BC-10-1A-1
70 AC-1A WL-PK-2
BC-11115-E1B
BC-102-5
BC-HH12A-1
SL-DNR3A
BC-HH123222-2A
BC81-1g
BC-HH121-NBC-HH12311-3
SL-WB15B
BC-101-4
BC-11115313-S1
BC-11115-SW1
448D
BC-61-1
BC-HH1232-0A-2 WL-FR-6
BC83-1c
SL-WB4
BC81-3b
SL-RR4
BC81-1f
448C
SL-RR3-2
SL-WB9B
SL-TL1
SL-WB5
GR-BC6M
BC-HH123-0
BC-6-1-1
SL-SB8
BC-A4.1
SL-RR5
BC-HH12311-4A
ML-NH-ML-01A
SL-LL2
BC-72-3
SL-WB3
Egret
BC-HH12311-4B
SL-LL3
BC-8-9-1
BC-HH1232-0B
BC-HH1232-5
BC-10-4
Loops
70 AC-1B
SL-DNR2
SL-SB5A
BC-7-13
BC-6-1-2
BC-11115-NW
BC-10-1A-4
BC84-6g
BC83-4a
BC46-6a
BC-HH1232-GVGC5
BC84-7
BC7-11-1
BC84-1b
BC-HH12321-NW-A
BC-HH1232-1
BC-NB1-E2
BC-11115-E2
SL-SP4A
BC84-5a
ML-GV-ML1-A
BC81-3a
BC-10-1B-1
BC-6-4-1
GR-BC6O
SL-SB7
SL-WB6
BC-HH123-1A
BC-HH1232-4
BC-7-2-1
BC84-6e
BC-71-1-2
BC81-3f
WL-PK-3
BC-7-15
BC7-11-4
SL-WB13A
BC83-2c
BC83-3c
BC-84-6b
BC-HH12B
BC-9-5-3
SL-SL1-A2
SL-SB5B
SL-WB2
BC-61-3
BC-11115-E1A-2
SL-SB5
BC-7-1-1
SL-SP4B
BC84-6c
GR-BC62D
BC81-3c
WL-FR-1
SL-WB13B
BC-HH1231-E
SL-RR6
BC-7-1-2
448B
BC-72-0-1
BC-HH123-1B1
BC84-1c
SL-SL2-B
BC84-3
BC-11115311-SBC81-3dBC-HH12311-1
BC81-3e
SL-SB5C
BC-11115-S
BC84-1a-1
BC84-4b
BC-HH1232-GVGC11
WL-FR-5
BC-72-5
BC-HH1232-2
SL-WB11
BC-10-1B-3
BC-HH12A-3
BC84-5c
SL-SB5
SL-SP1
SL-DNR3C
SL-WB10A
BC83-1a
BC-HH1232-0A-1
BC-HH123221-1A
BC83-1d
GR-BC6N
BC-7-14D
BC-HH1231-SW2A
BC83-1e
SL-WB16C
BC-HH1232-6
BC-HH1232-3A
BC-HH121-S
BC-7-14C
SL-WB9
BC-1111-2
WL-PK-1
BC84-6f
ML-PLY-BC35C
BC-HH12311-4C
BC-HH1232-0A-3
BC-72-0-2
BC-HH1232-GVGC17
BC-HH12322-3
BC84-6d
SL-SP2
BC84-1a-2
BC84-2
BC-NB1-E1
BC-HH1232-GVGC12
BC-HH12321-NW-B
BC-HH1-1
BC-HH1232-GVGC13
BC-HH12A-2
BC-11115313-N
BC83-4b
BC-HH1232-0A-4
SL-WB10C
BC83-4c
WL-FR-3-A
BC83-4f
BC-HH12322-2
BC-11115-W-S
BC-HH1231-SW1
SL-WB10B
BC-HH1232-GVGC15
BC-11115313-S2
BC-HH12-1
BC-HH1232-GVGC2
SL-WB10
SL-DNR1C
BC-HH1231-NW
WL-FR-3-B
BC-HH123-3-1
BC83-3b
BC-6-4-2
BC-7-2-2
BC-1111531-SABC84-5b
SL-DNR1B
BC-HH1232-GVGC16
BC-HH1232-3B
BC-HH1232-GVGC1
BC-111152
BC-HH123222-2B
BC83-4d
BC-11115-SW2
BC-HH123-1
BC-11115-E3
BC7-11-3
BC-HH1231-SW2B
BC-HH1232-GVGC3
BC-HH1231-NE
ML-GV-ML1-B
SL-WB16A
BC-72-6
BC-10-1B-2
BC-HH1232-0C
BC-HH1232-GVGC4
BC-HH1232-GVGC14
BC-7-14A
BC83-1b
SL-DNR1D
SL-SL1-B
BC-11115313-S3
BC-HH1232-GVGC10
BC-HH1232-GVGC6
BC-10-1A-2
ML-PLY-BC96-C
BC-7-14B
BC-HH123-1B2
BC-8-10B
BC-HH1232-GVGC9
BC-1111531-SB
SL-SL1-C
BC-11115-W1
SL-WB9C
BC-HH123-3-3
SL-DNR3B
BC-11115-W2
GR-BC6P
BC-HH1232-GVGC7
BC83-2b
SL-SB4
BC83-3a
BC-HH123222-2C
Montesorri
SL-SL1-A3
BC7-11-2
BC-HH12322-14
SL-WB10D
BC83-2a
BC-72-4-2
New BC Tunnel
SL-SL1-A4
BC-8-9-2
BC-HH12322-5-1
WL-2WL-9WL-9
GR-BC62A
Barr Footer: ArcGIS 10.4.1, 2018-03-07 16:14 File: I:\Client\GoldenValley\23271538_SWMP_2017\Maps\Report\Figure 3-3 Drainage Districts and Water Quality Modeling Subwatersheds 24x36.mxd User: MRQFIGURE 3-3DRAINAGE DISTRICTS AND WATERQUALITY MODELING SUBWATERSHEDS
0 2,000 4,000
Feet
!;N
Municipal Boundary
Major Roadway
Railroad
Lakes and Ponds
Stream
Ditch/Drainage Way
Parcel Boundary
Water Quality SubwatershedBoundary
Drainage District
Bassett Creek
Medicine Lake
Minnehaha Creek
Sweeney Lake
Wirth Lake
Date: March 2018Sources:- Barr Engineering Company for watershed boundaries.- MN-DOT for roads, railroads, and municipal boundaries.- Hennipin County for parcel boundaries.- City of Golden Valley for all other layers.
DRAFT
§¨¦394W
§¨¦394
100
55
456740
4567102
456770
456766
32nd Ave N
Laurel Ave
10th Ave N Noble Ave N Golden Valley Rd
Olympia St Texas Ave S France Ave N Plymouth Ave Brunswick Ave 34th Ave N
Winnetka Ave S Duluth St
Western Ave
6th Av e N
Harold Ave Zane Ave N Country Club Dr
Sandburg Rd Nevada Ave Boone Ave N 26th Ave
Oakd
a
l
e
A
v
e
N
Louisiana Ave Park
PlaceBlvdXeniaAveSNathanLa Meadow La N Welcome Ave Colorado Ave SGold en ValleyLa
W 16th St
M
e
d
i
c
i
n
e
R
i
d
g
e
R
d
Pennsylvania Ave SGo lden Hills Dr
29th Ave N Noble Ave JerseyAveS Reve
re
La
Edgewood Ave S Srv Rd GeneralMillsBlvd Jersey Ave NMarket
St Turners Csrd Kilmer La N Welcome Ave Hampshire Ave W Franklin Ave
Golden V a ll ey Rd
£¤169
GOLDEN VALLEY
CRYSTAL
MINNEAPOLIS
PLYMOUTH
SAINT LOUIS PARK
NEW HOPE
ROBBINSDALE
MINNETONKA Sweeney LakeTwin LakeWirth Lake
Westwood Lake
B a s s e t t C r e e k
Barr Footer: ArcGIS 10.4.1, 2018-03-07 16:22 File: I:\Client\GoldenValley\23271538_SWMP_2017\Maps\Report\Figure 3-4 Current Land Use 11x17.mxd User: MRQFIGURE 3-4CURRENT LAND USE
0 2,000 4,000Feet!;N
Municipal Boundary
Major Roadway
Railroad
Lakes and Ponds
Stream
Ditch/Drainage Way
Date: March 2018Sources:- MN-DOT for roads, railroads, and municipal boundaries.- City of Golden Valley for all other layers.
Current Land Use (DRAFT)
Residential
Single Family Detached
Single Family Attached (Duplex, Triplex)
Townhome
Multi-Family (Apartment, Condo)
Commercial and Industrial
Commercial
Office
Industrial (includes Utility)
Mixed Use - Industrial and Office
InstitutionalInstitutional - Residential (includes NursingHomes)
Institutional - School, Church, Public Facility,or Medical
Open Space
Park (includes Golf Courses)
Other Open Space
Open Water
Other
Street / Right of Way (public and private)
Railroad
Vacant / Undeveloped
DRAFT
§¨¦394W
§¨¦394
100
55
456740
4567102
456770
456766
32nd Ave N
Laurel Ave
10th Ave N Noble Ave N Golden Valley Rd
Olympia St Texas Ave S France Ave N Plymouth Ave Brunswick Ave 34th Ave N
Winnetka Ave S Duluth St
Western Ave
6th Av e N
Harold Ave Zane Ave N Country Club Dr
Sandburg Rd Nevada Ave Boone Ave N 26th Ave
Oakd
a
l
e
A
v
e
N
Louisiana Ave Park
PlaceBlvdXeniaAveSNathanLa Meadow La N Welcome Ave Colorado Ave SGold en ValleyLa
W 16th St
M
e
d
i
c
i
n
e
R
i
d
g
e
R
d
Pennsylvania Ave SGo lden Hills Dr
29th Ave N Noble Ave JerseyAveS Reve
re
La
Edgewood Ave S Srv Rd GeneralMillsBlvd Jersey Ave NMarket
St Turners Csrd Kilmer La N Welcome Ave Hampshire Ave W Franklin Ave
Golden V a ll ey Rd
£¤169
GOLDEN VALLEY
CRYSTAL
MINNEAPOLIS
PLYMOUTH
SAINT LOUIS PARK
NEW HOPE
ROBBINSDALE
MINNETONKA Sweeney LakeTwin LakeWirth Lake
Westwood Lake
B a s s e t t C r e e k
Barr Footer: ArcGIS 10.4.1, 2018-03-07 16:38 File: I:\Client\GoldenValley\23271538_SWMP_2017\Maps\Report\Figure 3-5 Future Land Use 11x17.mxd User: MRQFIGURE 3-5FUTURE LAND USE
0 2,000 4,000
Feet
!;N
Municipal Boundary
Major Roadway
Railroad
Lakes and Ponds
Stream
Ditch/Drainage Way
Land Use Plan
Low Density Residential
Medium-Low Density Residential
Medium High Density Residential
High Density Residential
Office
Retail-Service
Light Industrial
Industrial
Mixed Use
Open Space
Institutional
Public
Semi-Public
Railroad
Vacant
Date: March 2018Sources:- MN-DOT for roads, railroads, and municipal boundaries.- City of Golden Valley for all other layers.
DRAFT
§¨¦394W
§¨¦394
100
55
456740
4567102
456770
456766
32nd Ave N
Laurel Ave
10th Ave N Noble Ave N Golden Valley Rd
Olympia St Texas Ave S France Ave N Plymouth Ave Brunswick Ave 34th Ave N
Winnetka Ave S Duluth St
Western Ave
6th Av e N
Harold Ave Zane Ave N Country Club Dr
Sandburg Rd Nevada Ave Boone Ave N 26th Ave
Oakd
a
l
e
A
v
e
N
Louisiana Ave Park
PlaceBlvdXeniaAveSNathanLa Meadow La N Welcome Ave Colorado Ave SGold en ValleyLa
W 16th St
M
e
d
i
c
i
n
e
R
i
d
g
e
R
d
Pennsylvania Ave SGo lden Hills Dr
29th Ave N Noble Ave JerseyAveS Reve
re
La
Edgewood Ave S Srv Rd GeneralMillsBlvd Jersey Ave NMarket
St Turners Csrd Kilmer La N Welcome Ave Hampshire Ave W Franklin Ave
Golden V a ll ey Rd
£¤169
GOLDEN VALLEY
CRYSTAL
MINNEAPOLIS
PLYMOUTH
SAINT LOUIS PARK
NEW HOPE
ROBBINSDALE
MINNETONKA Sweeney LakeTwin LakeWirth Lake
Westwood Lake
B a s s e t t C r e e k
Barr Footer: ArcGIS 10.4.1, 2018-03-08 08:11 File: I:\Client\GoldenValley\23271538_SWMP_2017\Maps\Report\Figure 3-6 Hydrologic Soil Groups 11x17.mxd User: MRQFIGURE 3-6HYDROLOGIC SOIL GROUPS
0 2,000 4,000
Feet
!;N
Municipal Boundary
Major Roadway
Railroad
Lakes and Ponds
Stream
Ditch/Drainage Way
Hydrologic Soils Group
Urban/No Data
A - Well Drained
A/D*
B - Moderately Drained
B/D*
C - Poorly Drained
C/D*
D - Very Poorly Drained
Date: March 2018Sources:- NRCS for soils data. - MN-DOT for roads, railroads, and municipal boundaries.- City of Golden Valley for all other layers.
* Dual hyrdrologic groups are given for certain wet soils that can be adequately drained. The first letter applies to the drained condition, the second to the undrained condition.
DRAFT
§¨¦394W
§¨¦394
100
55
456740
4567102
456770
456766
32nd Ave N
Laurel Ave
10th Ave N Noble Ave N Golden Valley Rd
Olympia St Texas Ave S France Ave N Plymouth Ave Brunswick Ave 34th Ave N
Winnetka Ave S Duluth St
Western Ave
6th Av e N
Harold Ave Zane Ave N Country Club Dr
Sandburg Rd Nevada Ave Boone Ave N 26th Ave
Oakd
a
l
e
A
v
e
N
Louisiana Ave Park
PlaceBlvdXeniaAveSNathanLa Meadow La N Welcome Ave Colorado Ave SGold en ValleyLa
W 16th St
M
e
d
i
c
i
n
e
R
i
d
g
e
R
d
Pennsylvania Ave SGo lden Hills Dr
29th Ave N Noble Ave JerseyAveS Reve
re
La
Edgewood Ave S Srv Rd GeneralMillsBlvd Jersey Ave NMarket
St Turners Csrd Kilmer La N Welcome Ave Hampshire Ave W Franklin Ave
Golden V a ll ey Rd
£¤169
GOLDEN VALLEY
CRYSTAL
MINNEAPOLIS
PLYMOUTH
SAINT LOUIS PARK
NEW HOPE
ROBBINSDALE
MINNETONKA Sweeney LakeTwin LakeWirth Lake
Westwood Lake
Barr Footer: ArcGIS 10.4.1, 2018-03-08 08:44 File: I:\Client\GoldenValley\23271538_SWMP_2017\Maps\Report\Figure 3-7 Wellhead Protection Areas and Well Data 11x17.mxd User: MRQFIGURE 3-7WELLHEAD PROTECTION AREASAND WELL DATA
0 2,000 4,000Feet!;N
Municipal Boundary
!.Municipal Water Supply Wells
Major Roadway
Railroad
Wellhead Protection Area
Edina
Robbinsdale
Saint Louis Park
Surface Water Relationship toGroundwater (Regional Screeningby Met Council)
Disconnected from the regionalgroundwater system
Recharges aquifers
Receives and dischargesgroundwater
Supported by upwellinggroundwater
Drainage District
Bassett Creek
Medicine Lake
Minnehaha Creek
Sweeney Lake
Wirth Lake
Date: March 2018Sources:- Barr for Surface Water Relationship to Groundwater layer.- MDH for Wellhead Protection Areas (2014).- DNR for Municipal Water Supply Wells (2014).- MN-DOT for roads, railroads, and municipal boundaries.- City of Golden Valley for all other layers.
DRAFT
§¨¦394W
§¨¦394
100
55
456740
4567102
456770
456766
32nd Ave N
Laurel Ave
10th Ave N Noble Ave N Golden Valley Rd
Olympia St Texas Ave S France Ave N Plymouth Ave Brunswick Ave 34th Ave N
Winnetka Ave S Duluth St
Western Ave
6th Av e N
Harold Ave Zane Ave N Country Club Dr
Sandburg Rd Nevada Ave Boone Ave N 26th Ave
Oakd
a
l
e
A
v
e
N
Louisiana Ave Park
PlaceBlvdXeniaAveSNathanLa Meadow La N Welcome Ave Colorado Ave SGold en ValleyLa
W 16th St
M
e
d
i
c
i
n
e
R
i
d
g
e
R
d
Pennsylvania Ave SGo lden Hills Dr
29th Ave N Noble Ave JerseyAveS Reve
re
La
Edgewood Ave S Srv Rd GeneralMillsBlvd Jersey Ave NMarket
St Turners Csrd Kilmer La N Welcome Ave Hampshire Ave W Franklin Ave
Golden V a ll ey Rd
£¤169
GOLDEN VALLEY
CRYSTAL
MINNEAPOLIS
PLYMOUTH
SAINT LOUIS PARK
NEW HOPE
ROBBINSDALE
MINNETONKA Sweeney LakeTwin LakeWirth Lake
Westwood Lake
B a s s e t t C r e e k
27071100
27003501
27003700
27003502
27003600
27070800
27064500
27063000
27064900
27065000
27064800
27064700
27065100
27070600
27065200
27070500
27070400
27072500 27065800Barr Footer: ArcGIS 10.4.1, 2018-03-08 09:11 File: I:\Client\GoldenValley\23271538_SWMP_2017\Maps\Report\Figure 3-8 Public Water Inventory (PWI) 11x17.mxd User: MRQFIGURE 3-8PUBLIC WATER INVENTORY (PWI)
0 2,000 4,000
Feet
!;N
Municipal Boundary
Major Roadway
Railroad
Public Ditches
Altered Natural Watercourse
Public Water Inventory (PWI)
Watercourse
Basin
Wetland
Drainage District
Bassett Creek
Medicine Lake
Minnehaha Creek
Sweeney Lake
Wirth Lake
Date: March 2018Sources:- BCWMC for Public Ditches.- DNR for PWI lakes and watercourses.- MPCA for Altered Natural Watercourses.- MN-DOT for roads, railroads, and municipal boundaries.- City of Golden Valley for all other layers.
County Ditch 23County Ditch 25County Ditch 30
Judicial Ditch 6
County Ditch 18
DRAFT
§¨¦394W
§¨¦394
100
55
456740
4567102
456770
456766
32nd Ave N
Laurel Ave
10th Ave N Noble Ave N Golden Valley Rd
Olympia St Texas Ave S France Ave N Plymouth Ave Brunswick Ave 34th Ave N
Winnetka Ave S Duluth St
Western Ave
6th Av e N
Harold Ave Zane Ave N Country Club Dr
Sandburg Rd Nevada Ave Boone Ave N 26th Ave
Oakd
a
l
e
A
v
e
N
Louisiana Ave Park
PlaceBlvdXeniaAveSNathanLa Meadow La N Welcome Ave Colorado Ave SGold en ValleyLa
W 16th St
M
e
d
i
c
i
n
e
R
i
d
g
e
R
d
Pennsylvania Ave SGo lden Hills Dr
29th Ave N Noble Ave JerseyAveS Reve
re
La
Edgewood Ave S Srv Rd GeneralMillsBlvd Jersey Ave NMarket
St Turners Csrd Kilmer La N Welcome Ave Hampshire Ave W Franklin Ave
Golden V a ll ey Rd
£¤169
GOLDEN VALLEY
CRYSTAL
MINNEAPOLIS
PLYMOUTH
SAINT LOUIS PARK
NEW HOPE
ROBBINSDALE
MINNETONKA Sweeney LakeTwin LakeWirth Lake
Westwood Lake
B a s s e t t C r e e k
Barr Footer: ArcGIS 10.4.1, 2018-03-08 09:18 File: I:\Client\GoldenValley\23271538_SWMP_2017\Maps\Report\Figure 3-9 National Wetland Inventory (NWI) 11x17.mxd User: MRQFIGURE 3-9NATIONAL WETLAND INVENTORY (NWI)
0 2,000 4,000
Feet
!;N
Municipal Boundary
Major Roadway
Railroad
National Wetland Inventory (NWI)
Freshwater Emergent Wetland
Freshwater Forested/Shrub Wetland
Freshwater Pond
Lake
Riverine
Drainage District
Bassett Creek
Medicine Lake
Minnehaha Creek
Sweeney Lake
Wirth Lake
Date: March 2018Sources:- BCWMC for Public Ditches.- USFWS for NWI wetlands.- MPCA for Altered Natural Watercourses.- MN-DOT for roads, railroads, and municipal boundaries.- City of Golden Valley for all other layers.
County Ditch 23County Ditch 25County Ditch 30
Judicial Ditch 6
County Ditch 18
DRAFT
§¨¦394W
§¨¦394
100
55
456740
4567102
456770
456766
32nd Ave N
Laurel Ave
10th Ave N Noble Ave N Golden Valley Rd
Olympia St Texas Ave S France Ave N Plymouth Ave Brunswick Ave 34th Ave N
Winnetka Ave S Duluth St
Western Ave
6th Av e N
Harold Ave Zane Ave N Country Club Dr
Sandburg Rd Nevada Ave Boone Ave N 26th Ave
Oakd
a
l
e
A
v
e
N
Louisiana Ave Park
PlaceBlvdXeniaAveSNathanLa Meadow La N Welcome Ave Colorado Ave SGold en ValleyLa
W 16th St
M
e
d
i
c
i
n
e
R
i
d
g
e
R
d
Pennsylvania Ave SGo lden Hills Dr
29th Ave N Noble Ave JerseyAveS Reve
re
La
Edgewood Ave S Srv Rd GeneralMillsBlvd Jersey Ave NMarket
St Turners Csrd Kilmer La N Welcome Ave Hampshire Ave W Franklin Ave
Golden V a ll ey Rd
£¤169
GOLDEN VALLEY
CRYSTAL
MINNEAPOLIS
PLYMOUTH
SAINT LOUIS PARK
NEW HOPE
ROBBINSDALE
MINNETONKA Sweeney LakeTwin LakeWirth Lake
Westwood Lake
Barr Footer: ArcGIS 10.4.1, 2018-03-08 09:43 File: I:\Client\GoldenValley\23271538_SWMP_2017\Maps\Report\Figure 3-10 Wetland Assessment 2015 11x17.mxd User: MRQFIGURE 3-102015 CITY WETLAND ASSESSMENT
0 2,000 4,000
Feet
!;N
Municipal Boundary
Major Roadway
Railroad
2015 Wetland Assessment
Preserve - Needs an average bufferwidth of 75 feet with a minimumbuffer width of 50 feet
Manage 1 - Needs an averagebuffer width of 50 feet with a minimum buffer width of 30 feet
Manage 2 - Need an averagebuffer width of 25 feet with aminimum buffer width of 15 feet
Manage 3 - Need an averagebuffer width of 25 feet with aminimum buffer width of 15 feet
Other Waterbody - Not assessed
Drainage District
Bassett Creek
Medicine Lake
Minnehaha Creek
Sweeney Lake
Wirth Lake
Date: March 2018Sources:- BCWMC for Public Ditches.- USFWS for NWI wetlands.- MPCA for Altered Natural Watercourses.- MN-DOT for roads, railroads, and municipal boundaries.- City of Golden Valley for all other layers.
DRAFT
§¨¦394W
§¨¦394
£¤169
100
55
456740
4567102
456770
456766
36th Ave
32nd Ave N
36th Ave N
Laurel Ave
10th Ave N Noble Ave N Golden Valley Rd
Olympia St Texas Ave S France Ave N Flag Ave S Plymouth Ave Brunswick Ave 34th Ave N
Winnetka Ave S Duluth St
Western Ave
6th Av e N
Harold Ave Zane Ave N Country Club Dr
Sandburg Rd
Hubbard
A
v
e
N
Nevada Ave Boone Ave N 26th Ave
Oakd
a
l
e
A
v
e
N
Louisiana Ave Park
PlaceBlvdXeniaAveSNathanLa Meadow La N Welcome Ave LinberghDr Colorado Ave SGold en ValleyLa
W 16th St
M
e
d
i
c
i
n
e
R
i
d
g
e
R
d
Pennsylvania Ave SGo l den Hills D r Adair Ave 29th Ave N Noble Ave JerseyAveS Reve
re
La
Edgewood Ave S Srv Rd GeneralMillsBlvd Jersey Ave NMarket
St Turners Csrd Kilmer La N Welcome Ave Hampshire Ave W Franklin Ave
36th Ave N Noble Ave NGolden V a ll ey R d
£¤169
GOLDEN VALLEY
CRYSTAL
MINNEAPOLIS
PLYMOUTH
SAINT LOUIS PARK
NEW HOPE
ROBBINSDALE
MINNETONKA Sweeney LakeTwin LakeWirth Lake
Westwood Lake
B a s s e t t C r e e k
Barr Footer: ArcGIS 10.4.1, 2018-03-08 09:57 File: I:\Client\GoldenValley\23271538_SWMP_2017\Maps\Report\Figure 3-11 City Water Resources Classifications 24x36.mxd User: MRQFIGURE 3-11CITY WATER RESOURCE CLASSIFICATIONS
0 2,000 4,000
Feet
!;N
Municipal Boundary
Major Roadway
Railroad
Parcel Boundary
Water Features
Creek
Ditch
! ! !Natural Drainage Way
Swale
?Spillway
Lake
Pond
Sedimentation Basin
Wetland
Bioretention Basin
Underground Pipe Chamber
Underground Wet Vault
Subwatershed Boundary
Bassett Creek
Medicine Lake
Minnehaha Creek
Sweeney Lake
Wirth Lake
Drainage District
Bassett Creek
Medicine Lake
Minnehaha Creek
Sweeney Lake
Wirth Lake
Date: March 2018Sources:- Barr Engineering Company for watershed boundaries.- MN-DOT for roads, railroads, and municipal boundaries.- Hennipin County for parcel boundaries.- City of Golden Valley for all other layers.
Wetland Bank DRAFT
§¨¦394W
§¨¦394
100
55
456740
4567102
456770
456766
32nd Ave N
Laurel Ave
10th Ave N Noble Ave N Golden Valley Rd
Olympia St Texas Ave S France Ave N Plymouth Ave Brunswick Ave 34th Ave N
Winnetka Ave S Duluth St
Western Ave
6th Av e N
Harold Ave Zane Ave N Country Club Dr
Sandburg Rd Nevada Ave Boone Ave N 26th Ave
Oakd
a
l
e
A
v
e
N
Louisiana Ave Park
PlaceBlvdXeniaAveSNathanLa Meadow La N Welcome Ave Colorado Ave SGold en ValleyLa
W 16th St
M
e
d
i
c
i
n
e
R
i
d
g
e
R
d
Pennsylvania Ave SGo lden Hills Dr
29th Ave N Noble Ave JerseyAveS Reve
re
La
Edgewood Ave S Srv Rd GeneralMillsBlvd Jersey Ave NMarket
St Turners Csrd Kilmer La N Welcome Ave Hampshire Ave W Franklin Ave
Golden V a ll ey Rd
£¤169
GOLDEN VALLEY
CRYSTAL
MINNEAPOLIS
PLYMOUTH
SAINT LOUIS PARK
NEW HOPE
ROBBINSDALE
MINNETONKA Sweeney LakeTwin LakeWirth Lake
Westwood Lake
B a s s e t t C r e e k
Barr Footer: ArcGIS 10.4.1, 2018-03-08 10:37 File: I:\Client\GoldenValley\23271538_SWMP_2017\Maps\Report\Figure 3-12 Minnesota Land Cover Classification System (MLCCS) 11x17.mxd User: MRQFIGURE 3-12MINNEOSTA LAND COVERCLASSIFICATION SYSTEM (MLCCS)
0 2,000 4,000
Feet
!;N
Municipal Boundary
Major Roadway
Railroad
Land Cover Classification
5-10% Impervious
11-25% Impervious
26-50% Impervious
51-75% Impervious
76-100% Impervious
Short Grasses
Maintained Tall Grass
Tree Plantation
Forest
Wetland Forest
Shrubland
Wetland Shrubs
Tall Grasses
Wetland Emergent Veg.
Dry Tall Grasses
Open Water
Wetland Open Water
Date: March 2018Sources:- University of MN for Minnesota Land Cover Classificationand Impervious Surface Area dataset, 2013 update.- MN-DOT for roads, railroads, and municipal boundaries.- City of Golden Valley for all other layers.
DRAFT
§¨¦394W
§¨¦394
£¤169
100
55
456740
4567102
456770
456766
36th Ave Boone Ave 32nd Ave N
36th Ave N
Laurel Ave
10th Ave N Noble Ave N Golden Valley Rd
Olympia St Texas Ave S France Ave N Flag Ave S Plymouth Ave Brunswick Ave 34th Ave N
Winnetka Ave S Duluth St
Western Ave
6th Av e N
Harold Ave Zane Ave N Country Club Dr
Sandburg Rd
Hubbar
d
A
v
e
N
Nevada Ave Boone Ave N 26th Ave
Oakd
a
l
e
A
v
e
N
Louisiana Ave Park
PlaceBlvdXeniaAveSNathanLa Meadow La N Welcome Ave Colorado Ave SGold en ValleyLa
W 16th St
M
e
d
i
c
i
n
e
R
i
d
g
e
R
d
Pennsylvania Ave SGo lden Hills D r Adair Ave 29th Ave N Noble Ave JerseyAveS Reve
re
La
Edgewood Ave S Srv Rd GeneralMillsBlvd Jersey Ave NMarket
St Turners Csrd Kilmer La N Welcome Ave Hampshire Ave W Franklin Ave
36th Ave N Noble Ave NGolden V a l l e y R d
£¤169
GOLDEN VALLEY
CRYSTAL
MINNEAPOLIS
PLYMOUTH
SAINT LOUIS PARK
NEW HOPE
ROBBINSDALE
MINNETONKA Sweeney LakeTwin LakeWirth Lake
Westwood Lake
B a s s e t t C r e e k
Barr Footer: ArcGIS 10.4.1, 2018-03-08 11:23 File: I:\Client\GoldenValley\23271538_SWMP_2017\Maps\Report\Figure 3-13 Stormwater Management System 24x36.mxd User: MRQFIGURE 3-13STORMWATER MANAGEMENT SYSTEM
0 2,000 4,000Feet !;N
Storm Sewer Structures
")Catch Basin
")Sump Catch Basin
")(Catch Basin Manhole
")!Sump Catch Basin Manhole
")Median Drain
#*Pipe Inlet
!.Outlet Control
'4 Skimmer
"Flood Control Structure
!(Manhole
!(Sump Manhole
kj Environmental Manhole
C Diverter Manhole
"C\Control Weir Manhole
#*Apron Outlet
#*Pipe Outlet
#*Private Outlet
#*Other Agency Outlet
!(Lift Station
G!.Dry Hydrant
")Drain
'4 Skimmer
!(Gate Valve
!(Pipe Transition
!(Other Agency Manhole
")Other Agency Catch Basin
#*Other Agency Inlet
#*Other Agency Outlet
!.
Other Agency OutletControl
!(Private Manhole
")(
Private Catch BasinManhole
")Private Catch Basin
!P Private Sump
kj
Private EnvironmentalManhole
#*Private Pipe Inlet
#*Private Outlet
!.Private Outlet Control
'4 Private Skimmer
"/Private Pump
")Private Roof Drain
!(Abandoned Manhole
#*Abandoned Pipe Outlet
Date: March 2018Sources:- MN-DOT for roads, railroads, and municipal boundaries.- Hennipin County for parcel boundaries.- City of Golden Valley for all other layers.
Storm Sewer
?City Storm Sewer
?City Forcemain
?City Storm Culvert
?Other Agency Culvert
?Other Agency Storm
?Private Culvert
?Private Storm
Private Forcemain
Abandoned
Trunk Storm Sewer 1
Water Features
Creek
Ditch/Drainage Way
Lake
Pond
Wetland
Sedimentation Basin
Bioretention Basin
Underground Pipe Chamber
Underground Wet Vault
Drainage District
Bassett Creek
Medicine Lake
Minnehaha Creek
Sweeney Lake
Wirth Lake
DRAFT
1 A trunk storm sewer is any 72inch round diameter or 88 inchspan arch pipe, or larger, whichcollects flow from laterals along
§¨¦394W
§¨¦394
£¤169
100
55
456740
4567102
456770
456766
36th Ave
32nd Ave N
36th Ave N
Laurel Ave
10th Ave N Noble Ave N Golden Valley Rd
Olympia St Texas Ave S France Ave N Flag Ave S Plymouth Ave Brunswick Ave 34th Ave N
Winnetka Ave S Duluth St
Western Ave
6th Av e N
Harold Ave Zane Ave N Country Club Dr
Sandburg Rd
Hubbard
A
v
e
N
Nevada Ave Boone Ave N 26th Ave
Oakd
a
l
e
A
v
e
N
Louisiana Ave Park
PlaceBlvdXeniaAveSNathanLa Meadow La N Welcome Ave LinberghDr Colorado Ave SGold en ValleyLa
W 16th St
M
e
d
i
c
i
n
e
R
i
d
g
e
R
d
Pennsylvania Ave SGo l den Hills D r Adair Ave 29th Ave N Noble Ave JerseyAveS Reve
re
La
Edgewood Ave S Srv Rd GeneralMillsBlvd Jersey Ave NMarket
St Turners Csrd Kilmer La N Welcome Ave Hampshire Ave W Franklin Ave
36th Ave N Noble Ave NGolden V a ll ey R d
£¤169
GOLDEN VALLEY
CRYSTAL
MINNEAPOLIS
PLYMOUTH
SAINT LOUIS PARK
NEW HOPE
ROBBINSDALE
MINNETONKA Sweeney LakeTwin LakeWirth Lake
Westwood Lake
B a s s e t t C r e e k
Barr Footer: ArcGIS 10.4.1, 2018-03-08 11:29 File: I:\Client\GoldenValley\23271538_SWMP_2017\Maps\Report\Figure 3-14 Subsurface Stormwater Management System 24x36.mxd User: MRQFIGURE 3-14DRAINTILE AND DRAINTILE CLEANOUTS
0 2,000 4,000
Feet
!;N
Municipal Boundary
Major Roadway
Railroad
Parcel Boundary
Water Features
Stream
Ditch/Drainage Way
Lake
Pond
Sedimentation Basin
Wetland
Bioretention Basin
Underground PipeChamber
Underground WetVault
Draintile Structures
!.Cleanout
!.
Other AgencyCleanout
!.Private Cleanout
Draintile Pipes
?Draintile
?
Other AgencyDraintile
?Private Draintile
Abandoned Draintile
Drainage District
Bassett Creek
Medicine Lake
Minnehaha Creek
Sweeney Lake
Wirth Lake
Date: March 2018Sources:- MN-DOT for roads, railroads, and municipal boundaries.- Hennipin County for parcel boundaries.- City of Golden Valley for all other layers.
DRAFT
§¨¦394W
§¨¦394
£¤169
100
55
456740
4567102
456770
456766
36th Ave
32nd Ave N
36th Ave N
Laurel Ave
10th Ave N Noble Ave N Golden Valley Rd
Olympia St Texas Ave S France Ave N Flag Ave S Plymouth Ave Brunswick Ave 34th Ave N
Winnetka Ave S Duluth St
Western Ave
6th Av e N
Harold Ave Zane Ave N Country Club Dr
Sandburg Rd
Hubbard
A
v
e
N
Nevada Ave Boone Ave N 26th Ave
Oakd
a
l
e
A
v
e
N
Louisiana Ave Park
PlaceBlvdXeniaAveSNathanLa Meadow La N Welcome Ave LinberghDr Colorado Ave SGold en ValleyLa
W 16th St
M
e
d
i
c
i
n
e
R
i
d
g
e
R
d
Pennsylvania Ave SGo l den Hills D r Adair Ave 29th Ave N Noble Ave JerseyAveS Reve
re
La
Edgewood Ave S Srv Rd GeneralMillsBlvd Jersey Ave NMarket
St Turners Csrd Kilmer La N Welcome Ave Hampshire Ave W Franklin Ave
36th Ave N Noble Ave NGolden V a ll ey R d
£¤169
GOLDEN VALLEY
CRYSTAL
MINNEAPOLIS
PLYMOUTH
SAINT LOUIS PARK
NEW HOPE
ROBBINSDALE
MINNETONKA Sweeney LakeTwin LakeWirth Lake
Westwood Lake
B a s s e t t C r e e k
Barr Footer: ArcGIS 10.4.1, 2018-03-08 11:32 File: I:\Client\GoldenValley\23271538_SWMP_2017\Maps\Report\Figure 3-15 Stormwater Best Management Practices 24x36.mxd User: MRQFIGURE 3-15STORMWATER BEST MANAGEMENT PRACTICES
0 2,000 4,000
Feet
!;N
Municipal
Major
Lakes and
Ditch/Drainage
Parcel
?City Storm
?City
?City Storm
Best Management Practices(BMPs)
kj Environmental Manhole
kj
Private EnvironmentalManhole
!(Sump Manhole
!P Private Sump
")Sump Catch Basin
")!
Sump Catch BasinManhole
""Flood Control Structure
'4 Skimmer
'4 Private Skimmer
!
Structure Has SAFLBaffle
Sedimentation Basin
Bioretention Basin
ConservationEasement enforcedby City
MaintenanceAgreement forprivate stormwaterquality treatmentfacility
MaintenanceAgreement forstreet sweeping
Wetland Bank
Native Buffermaintained by City
Private/OtherAgency Buffer
Drainage
Bassett
Medicine
Minnehaha
Sweeney
Wirth
Date: March 2018Sources:- MN-DOT for roads, railroads, and municipal boundaries.- Hennipin County for parcel boundaries.- City of Golden Valley for all other layers.
DRAFT
§¨¦394W
§¨¦394
100
55
456740
4567102
456770
456766
32nd Ave N
Laurel Ave
10th Ave N Noble Ave N Golden Valley Rd
Olympia St Texas Ave S France Ave N Plymouth Ave Brunswick Ave 34th Ave N
Winnetka Ave S Duluth St
Western Ave
6th Av e N
Harold Ave Zane Ave N Country Club Dr
Sandburg Rd Nevada Ave Boone Ave N 26th Ave
Oakd
a
l
e
A
v
e
N
Louisiana Ave Park
PlaceBlvdXeniaAveSNathanLa Meadow La N Welcome Ave Colorado Ave SGold en ValleyLa
W 16th St
M
e
d
i
c
i
n
e
R
i
d
g
e
R
d
Pennsylvania Ave SGo lden Hills Dr
29th Ave N Noble Ave JerseyAveS Reve
re
La
Edgewood Ave S Srv Rd GeneralMillsBlvd Jersey Ave NMarket
St Turners Csrd Kilmer La N Welcome Ave Hampshire Ave W Franklin Ave
Golden V a ll ey Rd
£¤169
GOLDEN VALLEY
CRYSTAL
MINNEAPOLIS
PLYMOUTH
SAINT LOUIS PARK
NEW HOPE
ROBBINSDALE
MINNETONKA
Westwood Lake
B a s s e t t C r e e k
Barr Footer: ArcGIS 10.4.1, 2018-03-08 11:40 File: I:\Client\GoldenValley\23271538_SWMP_2017\Maps\Report\Figure 3-16 Water Quality and Water Quantity Monitoring Sites 11x17.mxd User: MRQFIGURE 3-16WATER QUALITY AND WATERQUANTITY MONITORING SITES
0 2,000 4,000Feet!;N
Municipal Boundary
Monitoring Sites
!.Biotic Index (HCRW)
!.Biotic Index (BCWMC)
!.Flow (GV) - Staff Gage
!.Flow (GV) - Automated
!.Lake Level (BCWMC)
!.Water Quality (BCWMC)
!.Water Quality (MPRB)
!.Water Quality (CAMP)
!.Water Quality & Volume (GV)
Major Roadway
Railroad
Lakes and Ponds
Stream
Ditch/Drainage Way
Drainage District
Bassett Creek
Medicine Lake
Minnehaha Creek
Sweeney Lake
Wirth Lake
Date: March 2018Sources:- Metropolitan Council for CAMP monitoringdata.- BCWMC for Biotic Index monitoring data.- MN-DOT for roads, railroads, and municipal boundaries.- City of Golden Valley for all other layers.Twin LakeSweeney LakeWirthLake BCWMC: Bassett Creek Watershed Management CommissionHCRW: Hennepin County River WatchCAMP: Metropolitan Council Citizen-Assissted Monitoring ProgramMMPRB: Minneapolis Park & Rec BoardGV: Golden Valley Monitoring limited to four storm events in the summer of 1995.1
DRAFT
§¨¦394W
§¨¦394
100
55
456740
4567102
456770
456766
32nd Ave N
Laurel Ave
10th Ave N Noble Ave N Golden Valley Rd
Olympia St Texas Ave S France Ave N Plymouth Ave Brunswick Ave 34th Ave N
Winnetka Ave S Duluth St
Western Ave
6th Av e N
Harold Ave Zane Ave N Country Club Dr
Sandburg Rd Nevada Ave Boone Ave N 26th Ave
Oakd
a
l
e
A
v
e
N
Louisiana Ave Park
PlaceBlvdXeniaAveSNathanLa Meadow La N Welcome Ave Colorado Ave SGold en ValleyLa
W 16th St
M
e
d
i
c
i
n
e
R
i
d
g
e
R
d
Pennsylvania Ave SGo lden Hills Dr
29th Ave N Noble Ave JerseyAveS Reve
re
La
Edgewood Ave S Srv Rd GeneralMillsBlvd Jersey Ave NMarket
St Turners Csrd Kilmer La N Welcome Ave Hampshire Ave W Franklin Ave
Golden V a ll ey Rd
£¤169
GOLDEN VALLEY
CRYSTAL
MINNEAPOLIS
PLYMOUTH
SAINT LOUIS PARK
NEW HOPE
ROBBINSDALE
MINNETONKA Sweeney LakeTwin LakeWirth Lake
Westwood Lake
B a s s e t t C r e e k
Barr Footer: ArcGIS 10.4.1, 2018-03-08 11:44 File: I:\Client\GoldenValley\23271538_SWMP_2017\Maps\Report\Figure 3-17 Impaired Waters 11x17.mxd User: MRQFIGURE 3-17IMPAIRED WATERS
0 2,000 4,000
Feet
!;N
Municipal Boundary
Major Roadway
Railroad
Impaired Streams
Impaired Lakes
Lakes and Ponds
Stream
Ditch/Drainage Way
Drainage District
Bassett Creek
Medicine Lake
Minnehaha Creek
Sweeney Lake
Wirth Lake
Date: March 2018Sources:- MPCA for Impaired Water Bodies (2016 draft).- MN-DOT for roads, railroads, and municipal boundaries.- City of Golden Valley for all other layers.
Sweeney Lake Impairments:- Chloride- Excess nutrients
Wirth Lake Impairments: - Chloride- Mercury in fish tissue(delisted for nutrients)
Bassett Creek Impairments:- Chloride- Fecal coliform- Fish bioassessments
DRAFT
Medicine Lake Impairments:- Mercury in fish tissue- Excess nutrients(Downstream of Golden Valley)
Minnehaha Creek Impairments:- Chloride- Dissolved oxygen- Fecal coliform- Fish Bioassessments- Macroinvertebrate bioassessments(Downstream of Golden Valley)
Lake Hiawatha Impairments:- Excess nutrients(Downstream of Golden Valley)
§¨¦394W
§¨¦394
100
55
456740
4567102
456770
456766
32nd Ave N
Laurel Ave
10th Ave N Noble Ave N Golden Valley Rd
Olympia St Texas Ave S France Ave N Plymouth Ave Brunswick Ave 34th Ave N
Winnetka Ave S Duluth St
Western Ave
6th Av e N
Harold Ave Zane Ave N Country Club Dr
Sandburg Rd Nevada Ave Boone Ave N 26th Ave
Oakd
a
l
e
A
v
e
N
Louisiana Ave Park
PlaceBlvdXeniaAveSNathanLa Meadow La N Welcome Ave Colorado Ave SGold en ValleyLa
W 16th St
M
e
d
i
c
i
n
e
R
i
d
g
e
R
d
Pennsylvania Ave SGo lden Hills Dr
29th Ave N Noble Ave JerseyAveS Reve
re
La
Edgewood Ave S Srv Rd GeneralMillsBlvd Jersey Ave NMarket
St Turners Csrd Kilmer La N Welcome Ave Hampshire Ave W Franklin Ave
Golden V a ll ey Rd
£¤169
GOLDEN VALLEY
CRYSTAL
MINNEAPOLIS
PLYMOUTH
SAINT LOUIS PARK
NEW HOPE
ROBBINSDALE
MINNETONKA
Barr Footer: ArcGIS 10.4.1, 2018-03-12 10:24 File: I:\Client\GoldenValley\23271538_SWMP_2017\Maps\Report\Figure 3-18 Total Phosphorous Loading 11x17.mxd User: MRQFIGURE 3-18TOTAL PHOSPHOROUS IN RUNOFF
0 2,000 4,000Feet!;N
Municipal Boundary
Major Roadway
Railroad
Phosphorus Concentration in Runoff
Low (<0.08 mg/L)
Moderately Low (0.08-0.16 mg/L)
Moderate (0.16-0.24 mg/L)
High (0.24-0.32 mg/L)
Very High (>0.32 mg/L)
Date: March 2018Sources:- MN-DOT for roads, railroads, and municipal boundaries.- City of Golden Valley for all other layers.
Service Layer Credits:
DRAFT
§¨¦394W
§¨¦394
100
55
456740
4567102
456770
456766
32nd Ave N
Laurel Ave
10th Ave N Noble Ave N Golden Valley Rd
Olympia St Texas Ave S France Ave N Plymouth Ave Brunswick Ave 34th Ave N
Winnetka Ave S Duluth St
Western Ave
6th Av e N
Harold Ave Zane Ave N Country Club Dr
Sandburg Rd Nevada Ave Boone Ave N 26th Ave
Oakd
a
l
e
A
v
e
N
Louisiana Ave Park
PlaceBlvdXeniaAveSNathanLa Meadow La N Welcome Ave Colorado Ave SGold en ValleyLa
W 16th St
M
e
d
i
c
i
n
e
R
i
d
g
e
R
d
Pennsylvania Ave SGo lden Hills Dr
29th Ave N Noble Ave JerseyAveS Reve
re
La
Edgewood Ave S Srv Rd GeneralMillsBlvd Jersey Ave NMarket
St Turners Csrd Kilmer La N Welcome Ave Hampshire Ave W Franklin Ave
Golden V a ll ey Rd
£¤169
GOLDEN VALLEY
CRYSTAL
MINNEAPOLIS
PLYMOUTH
SAINT LOUIS PARK
NEW HOPE
ROBBINSDALE
MINNETONKA Sweeney LakeTwin LakeWirth Lake
Westwood Lake
B a s s e t t C r e e k
Barr Footer: ArcGIS 10.4.1, 2018-03-12 09:16 File: I:\Client\GoldenValley\23271538_SWMP_2017\Maps\Report\Figure 3-19 Flood Inundation Areas 11x17.mxd User: MRQFIGURE 3-19FEMA 100-YEAR FLOOD INUNDATION AREAS
0 2,000 4,000
Feet
!;N
Municipal Boundary
FEMA 100 year Floodplain
Major Roadway
Railroad
Lakes and Ponds
Stream
Ditch/Drainage Way
Drainage District
Bassett Creek
Medicine Lake
Minnehaha Creek
Sweeney Lake
Wirth Lake
Date: March 2018Sources:- Barr Engineering Company for flood inundation areas and major watershed boundaries.- MN-DOT for roads, railroads, and municipal boundaries.- City of Golden Valley for all other layers.
DRAFT
§¨¦394W
§¨¦394
100
55
456740
4567102
456770
456766
£¤169
G O L D E N V A L L E Y
C R Y S TA L
M I N N E A P O L I S
P L Y M O U T H
S A I N T L O U I S PA R K
N E W H O P E
R O B B I N S D A L E
M I N N E T O N K A Sweeney LakeTwin LakeWir t h La ke
We st w oo d La ke
B a s s e t t C r e e k
Barr Footer: ArcGIS 10.4.1, 2018-03-12 09:11 File: I:\Client\GoldenValley\23271538_SWMP_2017\Maps\Report\Figure 3-20 BCWMC 100-Year Flood Inundation Areas 11x17.mxd User: MRQFIGURE 3-20BCWMC 100-YE AR FLOOD INUNDATION AREAS
0 2,000 4,000
Feet
!;N
Municipal Boundar y
100-Year Flood Inundation Area1
BCWMC Jurisdiction
City Jurisdiction
Major Roadway
Railroad
Lakes and Ponds
Stream
Ditch/Drainage Way
Drainage District
Bassett Creek
Medicine Lake
Minnehaha Creek
Sweeney Lake
Wir th Lake
Date: March 2018Sources:- Barr Engineering Company for flood inundation areas and major watershed boundaries.- MN-DOT for roads, railroads, and municipal boundaries.- City of Golden Valley for all other layers.
Note:1The inundation areas shown on this figure are based onmodeling results and are subject to change.
DRAFT
4-1
4.0 Assessment of Issues and Opportunities
This section of the Plan presents and discusses the issues and opportunities facing the City, organized by
various topics. Issue identification was an important task in development of this Plan, and included review
of Metropolitan Council and watershed management organization (WMO) planning documents, review of
available studies and modeling, discussion with City staff, and public engagement performed concurrent
with the City’s Comprehensive Plan update. The identified issues are discussed in the respective topical
subsections below. Major opportunities for the City to consider in addressing these issues are summarized
at the end of this section.
Water Quality
4.1.1 Stormwater Runoff Water Quality
Pollutants are discharged to surface waters as either a point source or nonpoint source. Point source
pollutants discharge to receiving surface waters at a specific point from a specific identifiable source.
Discharges of treated sewage from a wastewater treatment plant or discharges from an industry are
examples of point sources. Unlike point sources, nonpoint source pollution cannot be traced to a single
source or pipe. Instead, pollutants are carried from land to water in stormwater or snowmelt runoff, in
seepage through the soil, and in atmospheric transport. All these forms of pollutant movement from land
to water make up nonpoint source pollution.
For most water bodies, nonpoint source runoff, especially stormwater runoff, is a major contributor of
pollutants. As urbanization increases and other land use changes occur in the City, nutrient and sediment
inputs (i.e., loading) from stormwater runoff can far exceed the natural inputs to City water bodies. In
addition to phosphorus and sediment, stormwater runoff may contain pollutants such as chlorides, oil,
grease, chemicals (including hydrocarbons), nutrients, metals, litter, and pathogens (e.g., E. coli and fecal
coliform), which can severely reduce water quality.
For lakes, ponds, and wetlands, phosphorous is typically the pollutant of major concern. Land use
changes resulting in increased imperviousness (e.g., urbanization) or land disturbance (e.g., urbanization,
construction or agricultural practices) result in increased amounts of phosphorus carried in stormwater
runoff. In addition to watershed (stormwater runoff) sources, other possibly significant sources of
phosphorus include atmospheric deposition, and internal loading (e.g., release from anoxic sediments,
algae die-off, aquatic plant die-back, and fish-disturbed sediment).
As phosphorus loadings increase, it is likely that water quality degradation will accelerate, resulting in
unpleasant consequences, such as profuse algae growth or algal blooms. Algal blooms, overabundant
aquatic plants, and the presence of nuisance/exotic species, such as Eurasian watermilfoil, purple
loosestrife, and curlyleaf pondweed, interfere with ecological function as well as recreational and aesthetic
uses of water bodies. Phosphorus loadings must often be reduced to control or reverse water quality
degradation.
4-2
The Minnesota Pollution Control Agency (MPCA) is the state regulatory agency primarily tasked with
protecting and improving water quality in Minnesota. In its enforcement of the federal Clean Water Act
(CWA), the MPCA administers the Municipal Separate Storm Sewer System (MS4) permit program. Subject
to this program, the City is required to maintain an MS4 permit from the MPCA and annually submit an
MS4 report to the MPCA. The MPCA also maintains a list of impaired waters (see Section 3.10.2). Issues
related to impaired waters are described in greater detail in Section 4.1.2.
The City currently requires implementation of water quality treatment best management practices (BMPs)
for development and redevelopment projects consistent with the triggers and performance standards of
the BCWMC. The City may need to revise its performance standards to achieve higher levels of water
quality treatment in the future in response to changing WMO, state, or federal requirements or to address
impaired waters issues.
4.1.1.1 National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System (NPDES)
Mandated by Congress under the federal Clean Water Act and implemented in Minnesota through the
MPCA, the National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System (NPDES) Stormwater Program is a national
program for addressing polluted stormwater runoff.
The City of Golden Valley is included in a group of communities with populations greater than 10,000 that
are required to obtain a MS4 permit from the MPCA for managing non-point source stormwater. The
NPDES MS4 permit addresses how the City will regulate and improve stormwater discharges. The permit
must include a Storm Water Pollution Prevention Program (SWPPP) addressing all of the requirements of
the permit.
The Golden Valley Physical Development Department manages the permit renewal process, including
identifying issues and developing implementation measures to address the issues. Golden Valley’s NPDES
SWPPP addresses six minimum control measures (MCMs) outlined in the permit requirements:
1. Public Outreach and Education
2. Public Participation/Involvement
3. Illicit Discharge Detection and Elimination
4. Construction Site Runoff Control
5. Post-Construction Runoff Control
6. Pollution Prevention/Good Housekeeping
The SWPPP identifies issues related to the above minimum measures and more. The SWPPP is designed
to address these issues thereby minimizing the discharge of pollutants into the City’s stormwater system,
protecting and enhancing water quality, and satisfying the appropriate requirements of the Clean Water
Act of 1972, as amended.
The MPCA reissued the MS4 General Permit in August, 2013. The 2013 update shifted the initial focus on
permit program development towards measuring program implementation. The MPCA is in the process of
issuing a new NPDES MS4 General Permit, expected in 2018. The 2018 update is expected to include
4-3
additional requirements tracking performance of water quality ponds and other stormwater management
BMPs. Additional information about the MS4 permit program and SWPPP requirements is available from
the MPCA website: http://www.pca.state.mn.us/index.php/water/water-types-and-
programs/stormwater/municipal-stormwater/municipal-separate-storm-sewer-systems-ms4.html#permit
The City submitted its MS4 SWPPP Authorization for Renewal under the revised general permit in
December 2013. The City developed the best management practices (BMP) required in the NPDES permit.
The current SWPPP is presented in Appendix A.
TMDL studies for the North Branch and Main Stem of Bassett Creek were not complete at the time the
City’s MS4 permit was reissued (see Section 4.1.2). Strategies to address the impairments of these
resources will be reflected in future reissuances of the permit, if those strategies are applicable to the City.
Strategies resulting from future TMDL or WRAPS studies may also impact City stormwater quality
requirements.
4.1.2 Impaired Waters and Total Maximum Daily Load (TMDL) Issues
The federal Clean Water Act (CWA) requires states to adopt water quality standards to protect the nation’s
waters. Water quality standards designate beneficial uses for each waterbody and establish criteria that
must be met within the waterbody to maintain the water quality necessary to support its designated
use(s). Section 303(d) of the CWA requires each state to identify and establish priority rankings for waters
that do not meet the water quality standards. In Minnesota, these responsibilities are administered by the
MPCA. The list of impaired waters, sometimes called the 303(d) list, is updated by the state every two
years.
The MPCA performs Total Maximum Daily Load (TMDL) studies to address impaired waters. A TMDL is a
threshold calculation of the amount of a pollutant that a waterbody can receive and still meet water
quality standards. A TMDL study establishes the pollutant loading capacity within a waterbody and
develops an allocation scheme amongst the various contributors, which include point sources, nonpoint
sources, and natural background, as well as a margin of safety. As a part of the allocation scheme, a waste
load allocation (WLA) is developed to determine allowable pollutant loadings from individual point
sources (including loads from storm sewer networks in MS4 communities), and a load allocation (LA) is
developed to establish allowable pollutant loadings from nonpoint sources and natural background levels
in a waterbody. A watershed restoration and protection strategy (WRAPS) is similar to a TMDL and may
examine other waterbodies in a watershed in addition to impaired waterbodies. Both TMDLs and WRAPSs
may result in implementation plans to address water quality issues of the affected waterbodies.
Impaired waters within the City of Golden Valley or that receive stormwater directly from the City are
identified in Table 3-7 and Figure 3-17.
Lake Pepin is on the impaired waters list for excess nutrients. Once the Lake Pepin TMDL study is
completed, it may impact the City of Golden Valley, since the area tributary to Lake Pepin includes the
entire Mississippi River basin upstream of the lake. Load reductions could be assigned to the City, based
on the TMDL study results.
4-4
A TMDL study for Sweeney Lake (aquatic recreation impairment) was completed in 2011. Projects to
address nutrient loading to Sweeney Lake are included in the BCWMC capital improvement program (see
Section 5.5.2). Projects applicable to the City of Golden Valley are included in the City’s implementation
program (see Table 5-1). A TMDL study addressing the aquatic life impairment of Sweeney Lake is not yet
complete.
The aquatic recreation impairments of Main Stem Bassett Creek and the North Branch Bassett Creek, due
to fecal coliform and Escherichia coli, respectively, are addressed by the Upper Mississippi River Bacteria
TMDL Study and Protection Plan approved in 2014. TMDL studies to address impairments of aquatic life in
Main Stem Bassett Creek due to chloride and fish bioassessments are in progress.
A TMDL study was completed for Medicine Lake in 2010 to address the aquatic recreation impairment
due to excess nutrients. The Medicine Lake Total Maximum Daily Load (MPCA, 2010) includes a categorical
waste load allocation of approximately 3,200 lbs/year of phosphorus assigned to MS4s tributary to
Medicine Lake. The City of Golden Valley comprises 1.7% of the drainage area tributary to Medicine Lake
from MS4 communities. The BCWMC serves as the convener for the categorical waste load allocation.
Several projects to address nutrient loading to Medicine Lake are included in the BCWMC capital
improvement program (see Section 5.5.2). Projects applicable to the City of Golden Valley are included in
the City’s implementation program (see Table 5-1).
Although not located within the City, both Minnehaha Creek and Lake Hiawatha are included on the
impaired waters list (see Table 3-7). The small portion of Golden Valley located within the MCWD is
tributary to both of these waterbodies. These impairments are addressed by Minnehaha Creek E. Coli
Bacteria/Lake Hiawatha Nutrients Total Maximum Daily Load study (MPCA, 2014). The TMDL found that
the phosphorus load reduction assigned to the City via the MCWD’s 2003 Hydrologic, Hydraulic, and
Pollutant Loading Study (HHPLS) is sufficient to achieve water quality goals included in the TMDL (see
Section 4.1.4). The TMDL does not assign a waste load allocation to the City due to the extremely small
area draining to Minnehaha Creek and Lake Hiawatha.
Several waterbodies within the City are listed as impaired due to chlorides and high chloride
concentrations in Bassett Creek (and other metropolitan area streams) are an emerging water quality
concern. In 2015, the MPCA worked with cities and other stakeholders in the 7-County Twin Cities
metropolitan area to assess the level of chloride in water resources, including lakes, streams, wetlands and
groundwater. The study identified two primary sources of chloride to metro water resources: (1) salt
applied to roads, parking lots and sidewalks for deicing; and (2) water softener brine discharges to
municipal wastewater treatment plants (WWTPs). The MPCA and stakeholders also worked together to
develop a plan to restore and protect waters impacted by chloride, documented in the Twin Cities
Metropolitan Area Chloride Management Plan (MPCA, 2015). The City will work with the BCWMC to
implement the recommendations included in the TCMA Chloride Management Plan in its ongoing
operations and through its education program.
Historically, the Bassett Creek Watershed Management Commission (BCWMC) has taken the lead in
assessing and developing TMDL studies and implementation options for its member cities, including
4-5
Golden Valley, for impaired water bodies within the BCWMC. The BCWMC capital improvement program
includes projects for Sweeney Lake derived from the TMDL study. These projects are included in the City’s
implementation program summarized in Table 5-1. The completion of current and future TMDL studies
will likely result in additional projects and programs to address water quality. The BCWMC and the cities
will continue to cooperate on implementing the resulting projects.
The developed nature of the City reduces the availability of space for feasible water quality improvement
projects to address water quality issues. Therefore, the City considers opportunities for water quality
improvement projects (or water quality benefits potentially as added value on other projects including
flood mitigation projects) as redevelopment occurs (see Section 4.8.5). The City maintains a list of priority
areas where such projects are likely and desirable to address impaired waters and other water quality
issues.
4.1.3 Metropolitan Council Issues
Local water management plans must be consistent with the Metropolitan Council’s 2040 Water Resource
Policy Plan (May, 2015). The plan emphasizes integrating planning for wastewater, water supply, and
surface water management. The plan includes surface water management strategies designed to:
• Reduce "nonpoint" and "point" source pollution into receiving waters.
• Decrease stormwater runoff
• Partner with state, federal, and local units of government
• Work with stakeholders to promote protection of water bodies
• Decrease adverse impact on water quality in the region
• Develop target pollution loads for the major watershed basins
The goals, policies, and implementation items included in this Plan have been developed with
consideration for the Metropolitan Council’s guidance and contribute to the region water management
objections identified by the Metropolitan Council. This Plan is also incorporated into the City’s 2018
Comprehensive Plan, which is reviewed and approved by the Metropolitan Council Environmental
Services.
4.1.4 Waterbody Classification and WMO Water Quality Goals
The BCWMC 2015 Watershed Management Plan identifies priority waterbodies subject to BCWMC water
quality standards and management actions. BCWMC priority waterbodies partially or entirely located
within the City of Golden Valley are listed in Section 3.10.2. The City adopts the BCWMC classification
system by reference.
The BCWMC and City have adopted MPCA eutrophication water quality standards applicable to lakes and
streams; these standards are listed in Table 3-6. Current water quality data available for BCWMC priority
waterbodies located within the City is available from the BCWMC website at:
http://www.bassettcreekwmo.org/lakes-streams
4-6
The MCWD conducted a Hydrologic, Hydraulic, and Pollutant Loading Study (HHPLS) of the entire
Minnehaha Creek watershed in 2003. The MCWD performed additional stream and lake water quality
assessments in 2013. The MCWD updated their water quality goals based on the results of the HHPLS,
subsequent water quality data, and 2013 water quality assessments. Because only a very small portion of
Golden Valley is located within the MCWD and there are no lakes located within this area, the new MCWD
water quality goals do not directly apply to waterbodies in Golden Valley. However, the portion of Golden
Valley located within the MCWD drains to Lake Hiawatha via the Minneapolis Chain of Lakes and
Minnehaha Creek. The HHPLS estimated that a 15 percent reduction in phosphorus loading to Minnehaha
Creek from the entire tributary subwatershed would be necessary to achieve the MCWD’s phosphorus
goals identified in the HHPLS (80 ug/L for Minnehaha Creek and 50 ug/L for Lake Hiawatha). This
translates to an annual phosphorus load reduction of 2 pounds from the portion of the City of Golden
Valley tributary to Minnehaha Creek. Since completion of the HHPLS, the MPCA has adopted
eutrophication water quality standards for streams (see Section 3.10.2). The MCWD phosphorus goal for
Minnehaha Creek used in development of the HHPLS is more stringent than current MPCA standards.
Section 3.10.2 provides greater detail on water body classification in Golden Valley.
4.1.5 Specific Water Quality Issues and Opportunities
4.1.5.1 Stormwater Pond Management
The City has an extensive network of stormwater ponds and maintains an inventory of its stormwater
ponds consistent with the requirements of the City’s MS4 permit. Sediment accumulation in stormwater
ponds decreases pollutant removal efficiencies. To ensure stormwater ponds continue to function as
intended, the amount of sediment accumulated in ponds must be monitored to determine when
sediment removal is needed. The City performs sediment removal as necessary when ponds approach
50% sedimentation.
The City developed and began implementing a stormwater pond management program (SWPMP) in 2015
(WSB, 2015b). The SWPMP considers the attributes of each stormwater basin within the city in order to
assist the City in scheduling and budgeting pond assessment and maintenance activities and is used to
help meet the City’s MS4 permit requirements. The City’s SWPMP also provides information to assist in
tracking Total Suspended Solids (TSS) and Total Phosphorus (TP) loadings to ponds. This information, in
combination with results of the BCWMC P8 modeling (see Section 3.10.3.2) may be used to assist in
prioritizing maintenance activities for ponds with higher estimated nutrient loading or sedimentation
rates.
Some stormwater ponds were constructed before the construction of staged outlets to improve water
quality performance (by better detaining more frequent rainfall events that carry the bulk of the pollutant
loading) became common practice. As part of the City’s ongoing efforts to improve the performance of
the stormwater system, the City evaluated existing stormwater ponds to identify those ponds with
opportunities for retrofits to improve stormwater detention and water quality performance; the City will
implement these retrofits as redevelopment opportunities and funding allow. City. The City also
maintains a list of ponding areas not built to National Urban Runoff Program (NURP) design guidelines
4-7
where dredging or expanding footprint might bring these ponds closer to achieving current water quality
performance standards.
4.1.5.2 Stormwater System Maintenance Programming
The City is responsible for the operation and maintenance of its stormwater infrastructure. This includes
the periodic inspection of storm sewer components as specified in the City’s SWPPP. The City’s
stormwater funding mechanisms are strained to keep pace with a growing list of issues and demands
facing an aging stormwater system. To promote efficiency, the City inspects stormwater systems in
coordination with its pavement management program. The City developed an Infrastructure Renewal
Program (IRP, see Section 5.2.1) to coordinate stormwater system updates with other utility and
transportation work.
4.1.5.3 Private Stormwater Facility Maintenance
For projects requiring private and public entities to install and maintain stormwater infrastructure on their
property (e.g., to satisfy stormwater performance standards of the BCWMC, MCWD, and or the City), the
City requires maintenance agreements. The number and complexity of private stormwater management
facilities within the City has grown over time. It is increasingly difficult to manage, monitor, and inspect
these facilities. The City recognizes the need to continue overseeing its program to ensure proper
maintenance and water quality treatment capacity.
4.1.5.4 Low Impact Development Practices
Soil conditions and existing development throughout the city limit opportunities for additional
stormwater management infrastructure. These poor soil conditions resulted as wetlands were filled for
development before the Wetland Construction Act in 1991.This is of particular concern along the I-394
corridor, as identified in the CityI-394 Corridor Study initiated in 2005.
To mitigate the difficulty and expense of development and re-development on poor soils, the City will
continue to foster sustainable development and work to establish a balance between urban and natural
systems. The City will promote the use of low impact development practices (e.g., infiltration,
evapotranspiration, reuse/ harvesting, urban forestry, and green roofs) throughout the City, where
appropriate. These techniques promote water quality improvements and reduction of runoff volumes to
receiving waters.
4.1.5.5 Minnehaha Creek Watershed District (MCWD) Phosphorus Reduction
Requirement
Within the small area of the City under the jurisdiction of the MCWD (see Figure 3-1), Golden Valley is
required to reduce the annual phosphorus loading to receiving waters by 2 pounds relative to year 2000
levels. The MCWD requires that the City’s local water management plan (i.e., this Plan) include strategies
and specific steps for achievement of the prescribed loading reductions, including operational, land use,
and capital improvements implemented to address this goal. The City achieved this phosphorus reduction
goal by implementing a series of BMPs within Minnehaha Creek drainage district (see Section 5.3.1 of the
2008 SWMP). The City is responsible for annually reporting progress toward the loading reduction goal.
4-8
Stormwater Infrastructure Replacement
The City of Golden Valley is responsible for maintaining its stormwater system, including storm sewer
pipes, ponds, pond inlets and outlets, and channels. Non-functioning or improperly maintained
stormwater management infrastructure may limit the ability of the system to convey runoff, thereby
increasing the risk of flooding, limiting water quality treatment effectiveness, and contributing to other
negative consequences (e.g., excessive erosion).
As an older, fully developed City, much of the stormwater infrastructure within the City is at or nearing the
end of its intended operating life. Aging infrastructure has experienced increased failures in recent years
(e.g., sinkholes). Much of the City’s stormwater management system will need to be replaced during then
coming decades. Replacement of existing stormwater infrastructure represents a significant engineering
challenge and capital cost to the City, complicated by the need to provide continuous service and work in
fully developed areas crowded by private property and existing utilities.
The City developed an Infrastructure Renewal Program (IRP) to most efficiently replace or otherwise
address aging stormwater infrastructure throughout the City (see Section 5.2.1). The IRP provides a
schedule and funding source for updating aging infrastructure in coordination with other planned City
activities. The City will use the IRP in planning and executing updates to the stormwater management
system.
Water Quantity and Flood Risk Reduction
4.3.1 General Issues
In a natural, undeveloped setting, the ground is often pervious, which means that water (including
stormwater runoff) can infiltrate into the soil. Land development dramatically changes how stormwater
runoff moves in the local watershed. The conversion of pervious ground surfaces to impervious surfaces
(e.g., bituminous or concrete surfaces, compacted gravel, building roofs and structures) reduces
infiltration of water into the soil and increases the rate and volume of stormwater runoff. This can create
significant problems for downstream properties and water resources. Further, the reduced amount of
infiltration means less water is being recharged into the groundwater system, which can result in
decreased baseflows in creeks and streams and, potentially, a loss to the long-term sustainability of
groundwater drinking water supplies.
Although both high-water levels (flooding) and low-water levels are of concern to City residents and
public officials/staff, more concern and attention is usually paid to flooding because it is a greater threat
to public health and safety and can result in significant economic losses, including but not limited to:
• Damage to structures, utilities, and transportation facilities
• Flood fighting and post-flood cleanup costs
• Business and property losses
• Increased expenses for normal operating and living during a flood situation
• Benefits paid to owners of flood insurance
• Emergency response and personal safety
4-9
Flooding may cause other damages that are harder to quantify, including the following:
• Flooding of roads so they are impassable to emergency vehicles and residents
• Shoreline erosion
• Increased pollution due to the inundation of hazardous materials
• Destruction of riparian habitats and vegetation such as grass, shrubs, trees, etc.
• Unavailability of recreational facilities for use by the public (e.g., inundation of shoreline, park and
golf facilities) and/or restricted recreational use of waterbodies
• Alterations to the mix and diversity of wildlife species as a result of inundation of habitats
The BCWMC was originally formed as the Bassett Creek Flood Control Commission to address flooding
issues in the watershed as the primary responsibility of the organization. Aging stormwater control
facilities and rapid urbanization caused the Bassett Creek watershed to experience flooding problems
beginning in the 1960s. Severe storms in the summers of 1974, 1978, and 1987 resulted in millions of
dollars in damage to homes and infrastructure. In a 1982 design memorandum, the US Army Corps of
Engineers (USACE) estimated the damages sustained by Bassett Creek flooding exceeded approximately
$4 million per year (extrapolated to 2017 dollars). The worst problem was the 1.5-mile long Bassett Creek
Tunnel, which was undersized and severely deteriorated.
To address the major flooding along Bassett Creek, the BCWMC cooperated with the USACE, Minnesota
Department of Transportation (MnDOT), Minnesota Department of Natural Resources (MNDNR), and its
member cities to construct the Bassett Creek Flood Control Project (Flood Control Project). Table 2-8 and
Figure 2-14 of the 2015 BCWMC Watershed Management Plan lists all of the features of the Flood Control
Project, and Section 2.8.1 of the 2015 BCWMC Watershed Management Plan provides a more detailed
description of the Flood Control Project. Table 3-4 in this SWMP lists the Flood Control Project features in
the City of Golden Valley.
The BCWMC continues to perform activities to protect against flood risks and minimize the problems,
damages, and future costs of flooding along the Bassett Creek trunk system (the BCWMC trunk system is
defined in Figure 2-15 of the 2015 BCWMC Watershed Management Plan). To that end, the BCWMC:
• Implements flood risk reduction projects
• Monitors water levels on the lakes and streams in the watershed
• Establishes flood levels and reviews proposed activities in the floodplains
• Reviews development and redevelopment projects to make sure there are no detrimental
flooding impacts to the BCWMC trunk system
Construction of the Flood Control Project and continued BCWMC and City flood risk reduction practices
have addressed the most significant flooding issues along Bassett Creek, though flooding issues still exist
as evidenced by the CWMC model adopted in 2017. Continuing Bassett Creek flood control issues include:
• Maintaining and repairing the Flood Control Project system,
4-10
• Managing development and redevelopment throughout the watershed to minimize the risk of
flooding
• Identifying and implementing additional projects to reduce flood risk along the Bassett Creek
trunk system.
• Flood-proofing or voluntary acquisition of homes that are remaining in the floodplain
• Protecting life, property, and surface water systems that could be damaged by flood events.
• Regulating stormwater runoff discharges and volumes to minimize flood risk, flood damages, and
the future costs of stormwater management systems
• Providing leadership and assistance to member cities with coordination of intercommunity
stormwater runoff planning and design.
The BCWMC and City are jointly responsible for managing flood risk within the City. The responsibilities of
each entity are defined in greater detail among the policies included in Section 4.2.2 of the 2015 BCWMC
Watershed Management Plan and Section 2.4 of this Plan.
4.3.2 Floodplain Management and Flood Insurance Studies
Minnesota law defines the floodplain as the land adjoining lakes, water basins, rivers, and watercourses
that has been or may be covered by the “100-year” or “regional” flood. Floodplains of larger basins and
streams are mapped by the Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA) on Flood Insurance Rate
Maps (FIRMs), which are included in community Flood Insurance Studies (FIS).
The City of Golden Valley has a Flood Insurance Study (FIS). The FIS, together with the City’s floodplain
management ordinance, allows the City to participate in the federal government’s flood insurance
program. Homeowners within FEMA-designated floodplains are required to purchase flood insurance. In
some cases, homes within FEMA-designated floodplains may actually not be in the floodplain. In order to
waive the mandatory flood insurance requirements for their homes, residents must remove their homes
from the FEMA-designated floodplain by obtaining a Letter of Map Amendment (LOMA).
Flood risk, however, does not stop at the edge of a mapped floodplain; approximately 25% of all flood
insurance claims occur outside of the high-risk areas. Therefore, property owners should assess their own
risk of flooding and consider purchasing flood insurance, regardless of whether or not flood insurance is
required by FEMA or respective mortgage lenders. The City participates in FEMA’s Community Rating
System program, which allows eligible residents to receive a discount on purchasing flood insurance.
In addition to FEMA-delineated floodplains, the BCWMC and MCWD have established their own 100-year
floodplains for watershed management purposes. WMO-delineated watersheds may differ from FEMA-
delineated watersheds due to input data, level of detail, and other factors. FEMA-delineated floodplains
within the City were established prior to the publication of the National Oceanic and Atmospheric
Administration’s (NOAA) Atlas 14 precipitation data (see Section 3.1). The BCWMC recently performed
hydrologic and hydraulic modeling using Atlas 14 inputs to establish new 100-year flood elevations and
floodplain inundation extents (see Section 4.2.4). The BCWMC and MCWD review proposed activities in
their respective floodplain, as described in the BCWMC Requirements document.
4-11
There are no known flooding issues, or MCWD-delineated floodplain, within the small (82 acres) MCWD
jurisdictional area of the City of Golden Valley.
As development and redevelopment occur within the watershed, appropriate rate and volume controls
are necessary to avoid creating future flooding issues or exacerbating existing flooding issues. The
BCWMC and MCWD have established rate and volume control performance standards applicable to those
areas of the City within their respective jurisdictions. The City has adopted these performance standards
(see Section 5.8).
4.3.3 Hydrologic Modeling
The BCWMC completed hydrologic and hydraulic modeling of areas draining to Bassett Creek in early
2017. The modeling used Atlas 14 precipitation data (see Section 3.1) as inputs. Model results were used
to determine 100-year flood elevations and floodplain extent (i.e., inundation areas). The resulting 100-
year flood elevations along the Bassett Creek trunk system are included in Table 2-9 of the 2015 BCWMC
Plan (as amended). The approximate 100-year floodplain based on the BCWMC hydrologic and hydraulic
modeling is presented in Figure 3-20.
Information about flood water levels and inundated areas in Golden Valley identified in the 2017
modeling and located outside the Bassett Creek trunk system are available from the City upon request.
Areas located within the BCWMC trunk system floodplain (i.e., the BCWMC flood envelope) are subject to
floodplain management requirements included in the BCWMC Rules and Requirements document
(BCWMC, 2015). The area outside of the BCWMC flood envelope that may be inundated in the 100-year
event is defined by the City as the “advisory floodplain”. These areas may not subject to BCWMC
floodplain requirements under specific circumstances. However, the City manages these areas as
floodplain and implements measures to reduce flood risk within these areas, as appropriate.
4.3.3.1 Areas of Potential Localized Flooding Identified by Modeling
The updated hydrologic and hydraulic modeling identifies potential flooding issues resulting from the
100-year design storm. In addition to the areas specifically described in Sections 4.2.5.1 and 4.2.5.2, areas
of potential flood risk identified by modeling include:
• Hampshire Park
• Lakeview Park
• Medley Park
• Wesley Park
• Briarwood Nature Area
• Minnaqua Pond
In most cases, the most recent modeling identifies already known or suspected issues (although the
magnitude may be increased in some cases). For example, flooding of roads, driveways, trails, and park
space near the Briarwood Nature Area is a known issue and has been well-documented.
4-12
Additional evaluation of areas is necessary to determine whether the model results are consistent with
reported existing and/or anticipated future flooding conditions. This evaluation is included as an
implementation item in Table 5-1. Following further assessment of potential flooding issues, the City will
use available modeling to optimize its operations to minimize flood risk and evaluate mitigation
opportunities.
4.3.4 Specific Water Quantity Issues
4.3.4.1 DeCola Ponds Flooding Issues
Located in the northwestern part of the City, southeast of the intersection of Rhode Island Avenue and
Medicine Lake Road, the DeCola Ponds system is comprised of a series of six ponds (DeCola Ponds A
through F). The Decola Ponds system receives water from Golden Valley, the City of New Hope and the
City of Crystal. DeCola Ponds A, B, and C were historically wetlands and are classified on the public waters
inventory (PWI) by the MNDNR. The DeCola Ponds area is not within a FEMA-delineated floodplain due to
the size of the watershed, but is located within the BCWMC-delineated 100-year floodplain (see
Figure 3-20).
Chronic flooding has occurred at this location historically, especially in the most downstream ponds in the
system (DeCola Ponds D, E, and F), resulting in private and public property damage. Several flood
insurance claims have been made in response to area flooding dating back to 1978, and anecdotal
evidence suggests there has been unreported damage to properties. A more detailed history of flooding
associated with the DeCola Ponds area is documented in the City’s DeCola Ponds Area Flood Mitigation
Study (2012 DeCola Ponds Study; Barr, 2012).
After the 1978 flooding, the City evaluated various alternatives to alleviate the flooding (Barr, July 1979).
1985, the stoplog weir outlet at DeCola Pond F was replaced by a manually-controlled adjustable gate
outlet. A 1984 agreement between the City of Golden Valley and the homeowners affected by the
flooding (Wildwood Weir Association) gives operational control of the adjustable gate outlet to the
Wildwood Weir Association. This agreement can be found in Appendix F of the 2012 DeCola Ponds Study.
Because the weir is manually adjustable and under the control of residents, this leaves City staff without
systematic control of the structure and could exacerbate the flooding problems.
The 2012 DeCola Ponds Study further addresses flooding at the low point on Medicine Lake Road east of
Winnetka Avenue and around the downstream DeCola Ponds. As part of the study, an XP-SWMM model
was developed and used to evaluate engineering alternatives to reduce flooding at Medicine Lake Road
and in the DeCola Ponds system. None of the proposed alternatives fully resolved the flooding issues (i.e.,
some structures would remain at-risk of flooding even with implementation of the project). Additionally,
the most promising flood mitigation projects came with a significant cost.
In 2016, the City completed the Medicine Lake Road and Winnetka Avenue Area Long-Term Flood
Mitigation Plan (MLRWA Flood Mitigation Plan; Barr, 2016) which also addressed the DeCola Ponds
system. The MLRWA Flood Mitigation Plan recommended an alternative (“Alternative 2.5”) thatincluded
the construction of eight flood storage mitigation projects, flood-proofing of 23 structures, and
4-13
acquisition of four structures (two in Golden Valley, one in New Hope, and one in Crystal). Implementation
of the Alternative 2.5 flood mitigation projects has already started with the design and construction of the
Liberty Crossing flood mitigation storage and conveyance project as part of the Liberty Crossing
redevelopment project in Golden Valley. Additional projects identified in the flood mitigation plan will be
implemented as funding allows (see also Section 5.3). Full implementation could take as long as 10 or 20
years (or more) depending on the availability of funding for the various projects.
4.3.4.2 Medicine Lake Road Flooding Issues
Flooding at the low point on Medicine Lake Road occurs at the boundary of the cities of Golden Valley
and New Hope and poses a complex intercommunity water management issue. Several feet of flooding
has been observed during intense storm events, resulting in the road being temporarily impassable and
posing a potential public safety issue. The flooding at Medicine Lake Road is the result of runoff from the
cities of Golden Valley, New Hope, and Crystal. Approximately 275 acres contribute runoff to the low point
along Medicine Lake Road with the majority of the flows coming from surface overflows from the
upstream areas.
Flows from the Medicine Lake Road low point are conveyed downstream to DeCola Pond B via a storm
sewer pipe or overland flow. The current storm sewer that carries flows from the Medicine Lake Road low
point south along Rhode Island Avenue to DeCola Pond B is restrictive and cannot convey all of the flows
reaching the low point. Also, high water levels in the downstream DeCola Ponds system (see Section
4.2.5.1) cause increased flood levels at the low point on Medicine Lake Road.
The City investigated the flooding issues along Medicine Lake Road as part of its MLRWA Flood
Mitigation Plan (Barr, 2016). The proposed solution identified in that plan (alternative 2.5, see Section
4.2.5.1) includes solutions to address the Medicine Lake Road flooding issues.
4.3.4.3 Structures within the BCWMC Floodplain
Many Golden Valley homes within the floodplain of the Bassett Creek trunk system have been flood-
proofed or removed, including nearly all homes within the Bassett Creek floodplain defined in the 2004
BCWMC Watershed Management Plan. Hydrologic and hydraulic modeling published by the BCWMC in
2017 expanded the floodplain along the BCWMC trunk system in some locations and identified
potentially new advisory floodplain areas in the City disconnected from the trunk system. The model
results identify many additional structures within the revised 100-year floodplain that were not located
within the previously defined 100-year floodplain. In addition to homes located within the BCWMC flood
envelope and City advisory floodplain, several homes are also located within 1 foot of the BCWMC
100-year floodplain elevation. These homes would not meet current codes, and are marginally protected
and sometimes inaccessible during high water events.
As homes in the floodplain become available for sale, the City will work with property owners to pursue
acquisition of them. Funding may come from City funds set-aside for this purpose, or with help from
other agencies such as the MDNR and/or the BCWMC. Homes in the floodplain with less than 2 feet of
freeboard or with driveways or accesses that are below the BCWMC 100-year flood level may be targeted
for this acquisition program.
4-14
4.3.4.4 Wisconsin Avenue Control Structure
The Wisconsin Avenue control structure was originally constructed as a fixed weir at the Wisconsin
Avenue crossing of Bassett Creek. In 2001, the City installed an automatic gate in a flood control structure
at the Wisconsin Avenue crossing of Bassett Creek. Brookview Golf Course is typically inundated when
Bassett Creek exceeds approximately elevation 882.0. Operation of the adjustable gate has helped to
reduce the inundation time of the golf course.
Proper operation of the flow structure balances the need for rapid draining of floodwaters upstream of
Wisconsin Avenue with the need to prevent any increase in downstream peak flood levels. The most
vulnerable area for downstream flooding is the Hampshire Avenue crossing. The Wisconsin Avenue gate
is currently set to produce a very conservative (i.e., low) downstream flow rate due to vulnerable
properties downstream of the gate at the time of its installation. Results of recent modeling (see Section
4.2.4), however, suggest that restrictive flow rates through the structure may contribute to potential
flooding issues upstream of the crossing. Since the automated gate was initially installed, downstream
homes have been flood-proofed, a pond on the General Mills site has been constructed, and a pond and
pumping station have been installed near Highway 55 and Bassett Creek. All of these improvements
affect the magnitude of the downstream flow and vulnerability of the downstream properties to high flow.
With these improvements, it may be possible to increase the flow rate through the Wisconsin Avenue
structure to reduce flooding on the Brookview Golf Course and potential upstream flooding while still
protecting downstream properties. The City will review the results of recent BCWMC hydrologic and
hydraulic modeling and consider revising the operations algorithm and manual for the automated gate at
the Wisconsin Avenue structure (see Table 5-1).
4.3.4.5 Public Ditch Maintenance
Public ditches (also referred to as judicial ditches or county ditches) are public drainage systems
established under Chapter 103E of Minnesota Statutes and are under the jurisdiction of the county. Some
flow systems designated as public ditches are no longer streams but retain the public ditch designation.
One such system is located along Highway 100 in Golden Valley and Crystal. The public ditch system
shown following Highway 100 is currently all in a storm sewer pipe and is no longer ditched.
While Hennepin County retains responsibility for the management of public ditches within the City, the
county has not actively maintained them. Instead, the BCWMC and the member cities, including Golden
Valley, perform maintenance work on infrastructure designated as public ditches, while state law requires
a cumbersome public ditch process for them to do so. Hennepin County may transfer authority over
public ditches to the City, if such action is petitioned by the City. The City may consider requesting
transfer of authority to reduce the cost and efforts of complying with MS 103E. Concurrently the City of
Golden Valley will support legislation that eliminates such a requirement. See Figure 3-8 for public ditch
system.
4-15
Wetland Management
Diverse wetland systems and shoreland areas are critical components of a healthy hydrologic system and
positively affect soil systems, groundwater and surface water quality and quantity, wildlife, fisheries and
insects, aesthetics, and recreation. Development of land and other human activities can affect the
hydrology and ecological functions of wetlands and shoreland areas. Although Golden Valley is fully
developed, numerous wetlands exist across the City (see Section 3.8).
Overloading wetlands beyond their natural capacity with water, sediment, or nutrients diminishes their
effectiveness in providing water quality benefits. Most natural wetland systems have developed with
relatively low levels of sediment and nutrient inputs (riparian wetlands located in floodplains are an
exception). When land use and/or upstream hydrologic systems become altered, the hydraulic, natural
sediment, and nutrient loads can (and often do) increase in magnitude and frequency. These changes may
result in tipping the ecological balance to benefit non-native, invasive, and aggressive plant species,
thereby reducing the benefits to wildlife, fisheries, amphibians, and humans. Degraded water quality in
wetlands can pass on to downstream waters, contributing to degradation of additional resources.
Wetlands and shoreland areas provide valuable habitat for many types of wildlife including waterfowl,
songbirds, raptors, mammals, fish, and many species of amphibians. Maintaining and improving wildlife
viability requires that water resources and land management activities consider the life cycles of various
animals. The overall ecological health of wetland and shoreland areas can be significantly impacted by the
presence or absence of vegetated buffers (see Section 3.5.1) and aquatic invasive species (see Section
3.5.2).
By considering habitat benefits or detriments when approaching water resources projects, the City has the
opportunity to protect and enhance these benefits. The City will identify opportunities to create additional
wetland banks in conjunction with flood risk reduction projects (e.g., creation of additional flood storage)
and other City projects.
4.4.1 Wetland and Shoreland Buffers
Buffers are upland, vegetated areas located adjacent to wetlands and shoreland areas. Many of the
hydrologic, water quality, and habitat benefits achieved by wetland and shoreland areas are directly
attributable to, or dependent on, the presence of buffers. Vegetation and organic debris shield the soil
from the impact of rain and bind soil particles with root materials, reducing erosion. Vegetation obstructs
the flow of runoff, thereby decreasing water velocities, allowing infiltration and uptake of nutrients, and
reducing the erosion potential of stormwater runoff. Leaf litter from vegetation can also increase the
organic content of the soil and increase adsorption and infiltration. As a physical barrier, vegetation also
filters sediment and other insoluble pollutants from runoff. Vegetation scatters sunlight and provides
shade, limiting nuisance algae growth, and reducing the release of nutrients from the sediment. Buffers
also have habitat benefits; native plants provide the best food and shelter for native wildlife, including
pollinators, fish, and amphibians. Buffers provide needed separation and interspersion areas for animals,
to reduce competition and maintain populations.
4-16
The presence of adequate buffers surrounding wetland and shoreland areas is critical to preserving the
ecological functions and environmental benefits of downstream waterbodies, including wetlands.
Establishing buffers in developed areas may be difficult, as existing structures may be located within the
desired buffer area. Redevelopment offers an opportunity to establish adequate buffers in areas that are
already developed.
The City has included buffer requirements in is stormwater management ordinance (City Code chapter
4.31). These requirements are included among the policies and performance standards included in Section
2.0 of this Plan and are consistent with BCWMC buffer requirements for cities. Additionally, buffer
requirements of the MCWD are applicable within its jurisdiction.
4.4.2 Aquatic Invasive Species (AIS)
The term “invasive species” describes plants, animals, or microorganisms within lakes and streams that are
non-native and that 1) cause or may cause economic or environmental harm or harm to human health, or
2) threaten or may threaten natural resources or the use of natural resources in the state (Minnesota
Statutes Chapter 84D.01). Aquatic invasive species (AIS) is a term given to invasive species that inhabit
lakes, wetlands, rivers, or streams and overrun or inhibit the growth of native species. Aquatic invasive
species pose a threat to natural resources and local economies that depend on them.
AIS identified in the City of Golden Valley by the BCWMC and/or MNDNR include:
• Eurasion watermilfoil (Wirth Lake)
• Curlyleaf pondweed (Sweeney Lake, Twin Lake, Westwood Lake, and Wirth Lake)
• Common carp (Sweeney Lake)
• Chinese mystery snail
• Yellow Iris
Curlyleaf pondweed is an invasive aquatic macrophyte that displaces native aquatic species. Because of
the timing of its growth and die-back cycle, curlyleaf pondweed can be a significant source of phosphorus
in a lake during the mid-summer months. Eurasian watermilfoil is another invasive macrophyte that can
displace native species and significantly interfere with the recreational uses of a lake by forming dense
mats at the water surface. Recent BCWMC macrophyte surveys noted that curlyleaf pondweed
constituted only a minor part of the overall plant community in Golden Valley lakes and did not warrant
additional management activity (see Section 3.12.1). The MPRB manages Eurasian watermilfoil and
curlyleaf pondweed in Wirth Lake through periodic mechanical harvesting.
The MDNR has identified common carp in Sweeney Lake. However, the number of carp estimated in the
lake is small and no specific management action has been recommended to manage the carp population.
Although not identified within the City, zebra mussels have been identified in surrounding watersheds.
Curlyleaf pondweed is of special concern due to its potential as a source of internal phosphorus loading.
This submersed aquatic plant grows vigorously during early spring, outcompeting native species for
nutrients. After curlyleaf pondweed dies out in early to mid-summer, decay of the plant releases nutrients
4-17
and consumes oxygen, exacerbating internal sediment release of phosphorus. This process may result in
algal blooms during the peak of the recreational use season, which further inhibit native macrophytes by
reducing water clarity and blocking sunlight necessary for growth. Common carp may also impact water
quality by disturbing bottom sediment, reducing water clarity and releasing sediment-bound phosphorus
that may contribute to algal growth.
At the state level, management of AIS is the responsibility of the MNDNR. The City cooperates with the
MNDNR, BCWMC, and Hennepin County to address the impacts of AIS at the local level. The BCWMC
2015 Watershed Management Plan describes the BCWMC’s role in addressing AIS. City staff have
participated in the BCWMC’s aquatic plant management/aquatic invasive species (APM/AIS) committee.
More information about AIS is available from the BCWMC Rapid Response Plan and MNDNR at:
http://www.dnr.state.mn.us/invasives/aquatic/index.html
4.4.3 Wetland Management and Wetland Classification
The City of Golden Valley acts as the Local Governmental Unit (LGU) responsible for administering the
Minnesota Wetland Conservation Act (WCA). This includes requiring and verifying that all projects
impacting wetlands meet the requirements of the WCA. The City also actively pursues opportunities to
restore wetlands, create wetland banks, and establish wetland buffers.
Per the requirements of WCA, the City has developed a comprehensive wetland inventory and continues
to inventory, classify, and assess the functions and values of wetlands on an as-needed basis. The City
uses the Minnesota Rapid Assessment Method (MnRAM) when performing functions and values
assessments. The City implements wetland management performance standards through its stormwater
management ordinance and this Plan. The BCWMC requires that member City wetland ordinances:
• Consider the results of functions and values assessments
• Are based on comprehensive wetland management plans, if available
• Include performance standards for wetlands classified as Preserve or Manage 1 similar to BWSR
guidance that address:
o bounce
o inundation
o runout control
Results from the 2015 wetland inventory show that Golden Valley has only 4 Preserve and 8 Manage 1
wetlands.
Groundwater Management
Groundwater is a valuable resource that must be protected from contamination and conserved for
sustainable use. Increased population in the Twin Cities metropolitan area has put increased pressure on
groundwater supplies. In addition, development results in larger impervious areas and more compacted
soils, thus decreasing opportunities for infiltration and recharge.
4-18
The City recognizes that surface water resources and groundwater resources are interdependent, although
it is extremely difficult to quantify the exchange of water between surface waters and groundwater. The
interaction of groundwater and surface water can have negative consequences on either resource.
Contaminated groundwater discharged to surface waters may have a direct impact on surface water
quality and/or habitat. Declines in groundwater levels may result in decreased baseflow to streams, which
can in turn result in decreased water quality and ecosystem function. Lower water levels in lakes may limit
recreational use, reduce habitat areas, and result in increased growth of aquatic plants including invasive
species (via an increased littoral zone).
Maintaining clean, safe groundwater supplies is critical to human and environmental health and to the
economic and social vitality of communities. Groundwater can be contaminated by commercial and
industrial waste disposal, landfills, leaking underground storage tanks, subsurface sewage treatment
systems (SSTS), mining operations, accidental spills, feedlots, and fertilizer/pesticide applications.
Prevention of groundwater contamination through best management practices is critical. Increased public
awareness of the importance of groundwater protection on the public’s general health and well-being is
critical to promote responsible practices.
While infiltration is often a preferred method of stormwater treatment, it may have negative
consequences in areas with vulnerable groundwater resources. Many locations within the City are not
favorable for infiltration (e.g., presence of tight soils, aging sanitary sewer pipes, contamination) over
sanitary sewer infrastructure. To protect water quality, the City requires that infiltration practices be
implemented with consideration of guidance provided by the MPCA in its NPDES General Construction
Stormwater permit (2013, as amended), MIDS guidance (2013, as amended), and the Minnesota
Department of Health’s (MDH), Evaluating Proposed Stormwater Infiltration Projects in Vulnerable
Wellhead Protection Areas (2007).
4.5.1 Wellhead Protection
Golden Valley is part of the Joint Water Commission (JWC) water system (Golden Valley, Crystal, and New
Hope). These communities purchase treated Mississippi River water from the City of Minneapolis water
department. Therefore the City of Golden Valley does not currently operate community water supply
wells. The JWC is considering developing an emergency supply well possibly located in Golden Valley
Several adjacent cities obtain their drinking water from groundwater. Potentially vulnerable wellhead
protection areas for municipal wells that belong to the Cities of Robbinsdale and St. Louis Park extend
into the City (see Figure 3-7). These cities maintain wellhead protection plans identifying areas of risk and
management practices to protect groundwater resources. Golden Valley will continue to cooperate with
St. Louis Park and Robbinsdale with respect to wellhead protection and stormwater runoff management.
The neighboring cities of Plymouth and Minnetonka have wellhead protection plans but the wellhead
protection areas for those cities do not extend into the City of Golden Valley.
4-19
Erosion and Sediment Control
Sediment is a major contributor to water pollution. Stormwater runoff from streets, parking lots, and other
impervious surfaces carries suspended sediment consisting of fine particles of soil, dust and dirt.
Abundant amounts of suspended sediment are carried by stormwater runoff from actively eroding areas.
Although erosion and sedimentation are natural processes, they are often accelerated by human activities,
especially during construction activities. Prior to construction, the existing vegetation on a site intercepts
rainfall and slows down stormwater runoff rates, which allows more time for runoff to infiltrate into the
soil. When a construction site is cleared and graded, the vegetation (and its beneficial effects) is removed.
Also, natural depressions that provided temporary storage of rainfall are filled and graded, and soils are
exposed and compacted, resulting in increased erosion, sedimentation, and decreased infiltration. As a
result, the rate and volume of stormwater runoff from the site increases (Minnesota Urban Small Sites BMP
Manual, 2001). The increased stormwater runoff rates and volumes cause increased soil erosion, which
releases significant amounts of sediment that may enter the City’s water resources.
Regardless of its source, sediment deposition decreases water depth, degrades water quality, smothers
fish and wildlife habitat, and degrades aesthetics. Sediment deposition can also wholly or partially block
culverts, manholes, storm sewers, etc., causing flooding. Suspended sediment, carried in water, clouds
lakes and streams and disturbs aquatic habitats. Sediment also reduces the oxygen content of water and
is a major source of phosphorus, which is frequently bound to the fine particles. Erosion also results in
channelization of stormwater flow, increasing the rate of stormwater runoff and further accelerating
erosion. Sediment deposition in detention ponds minimizes negative impacts to downstream resources,
but creates a need for periodic maintenance as the storage volume capacity and water quality treatment
effectiveness are reduced over time.
As erosion and sedimentation increase, the City’s stormwater management systems (e.g., ponds, pipes)
require more frequent maintenance, repair, and/or modification to ensure they will function as designed.
The City has documented of existing erosion and sedimentation problems at various stormwater ponds
and pond inlets. The City also inspects and documents Bassett Creek channel erosion and sediment
deposition at storm sewer outfall locations along the creek.
Monitoring the stormwater system, including inspection of sediment build-up in stormwater ponds,
continues to be an important task for the City. Continued urbanization in the City will result in increased
erosion and sedimentation unless effective erosion prevention and sediment control measures are
implemented before, during, and after construction.
In recognition of these issues, the City’s ordinances and approval processes address erosion and sediment
control at construction sites. The current ordinance requires implementation of temporary and
permanent erosion and sediment control measures for developments and other projects. The City will
continue its ongoing review of its erosion control program to evaluate its effectiveness and improve it
where possible and feasible. In addition, the BCWMC reviews projects which result in more than 200 yards
of cut or fill or more than 10,000 square feet of grading.
4-20
The City conducts inspections of City-permitted/approved projects to ensure compliance with applicable
erosion and sedimentation requirements and identify potential problems. However, the City may not be
aware of erosion and sedimentation problems at locations where a City permit/approval is not required.
City appreciates when residents notify City staff of potential erosion and sedimentation problems,
regardless of location.
In addition to meeting City requirements, owners and operators of construction sites disturbing one or
more acres of land must obtain a National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System (NPDES) Construction
Stormwater Permit from the MPCA. Owners/operators of sites smaller than one acre that are a part of a
larger common plan of development or sale that is one acre or more must also obtain permit coverage. A
key permit requirement is the development and implementation of a Stormwater Pollution Prevention
Plan (SWPPP) with appropriate best management practices (BMPs). The SWPPP must be a combination of
narrative and plan sheets that: (1) address foreseeable conditions, (2) include a description of the
construction activity, and (3) address the potential for discharge of sediment and/or other potential
pollutants from the site. The SWPPP must include the following elements:
• Temporary erosion prevention and sediment control BMPs
• Permanent erosion prevention and sediment control BMPs
• Permanent stormwater management system
• Pollution prevention management measures
A project’s plans and specifications must incorporate the SWPPP before applying for NPDES permit
coverage. The permittee must also ensure final stabilization of the site, which includes final stabilization
of individual building lots.
4.6.1 Bassett Creek Erosion Issues
The maintenance of the natural beauty of Bassett Creek is a primary concern of residents. As a result,
there is concern about channel modifications that could negatively impact the aesthetic appeal of the
creek. In addition to the maintenance of the creek, areas of concentrated erosion and sedimentation exist
along the creek. The BCWMC and its member cities have identified the extent and severity of stream bank
erosion along most of the Bassett Creek trunk system, including the portion of Bassett Creek passing
through the City of Golden Valley. The City’s original inventory was completed by its Department of
Public Works in 2003, and it has been updated annually since.
The BCWMC and member cities have performed stream bank stabilization and restoration projects along
several reaches of Bassett Creek. Restoration of additional reaches of Bassett Creek are planned for future
implementation (see Table 5-1).
Interagency Issues
The City has many capital project and maintenance requirements that benefit, impact or are also required
for other agencies. Often these requirements overlap with other agencies where jurisdiction is shared.
4-21
Current issues in Golden Valley are shared with the Minnesota Department of Transportation (MnDOT)
and the Minneapolis Park and Recreation Board (MPRB).
Issues with MnDOT have primarily concerned maintenance responsibilities for trunk highway related
stormwater facilities. When responsibility for implementation and/or maintenance is unclear, projects do
not occur in a timely manner or they simply may not occur. The City will seek to engage MnDOT toward
making sure that BMPs are installed and maintained by the responsible agency.
The MPRB is a semi-autonomous independent body of Minneapolis City government founded in 1883 by
legislative authority. It is responsible for developing and maintaining the Minneapolis park system and
providing a comprehensive set of services and recreation programs on behalf of the Minneapolis City
Council. The MPRB provides for the maintenance and policing of its park properties.
The MPRB owns large tracts of land outside the City of Minneapolis, including Theodore Wirth Regional
Park which lies largely within the City of Golden Valley. As well as large areas of green space and public
infrastructure such as roads and utilities, this park contains areas draining to several public waters
including Sweeney Lake, Twin Lake, Wirth Lake, Quaking Bog, MNDNR public water 27-648P, and Bassett
Creek.
Historically, the park property has been managed by the MPRB and the City of Golden Valley as though it
were a part of the City of Minneapolis. To date, no written agreements have been found that specify the
respective water resource- related responsibilities of the two parties. Continued coordination between
the City of Golden Valley and the MPRB is necessary to address issues including, but not limited to:
• Responsibility for implementation of BCWMC maintenance and capital projects on Bassett Creek
and Twin Lake within park property
• Responsibility for implementation of BCWMC and future TMDL projects for Sweeney and Wirth
Lakes
• Responsibility for storm sewer system facilities and drainage issues
• BCWMC dues for the park property
• Participation in planning for future park maintenance and improvements
• NPDES MS4 Permit responsibilities within the park land
Golden Valley has authority to administer the Wetland Conservation Act (WCA) and floodplain and
shoreland management authority within the park.
Wirth Park is an important resource for City of Golden Valley residents and the City desires a positive and
constructive relationship with the MPRB. The City seeks to partner with the MPRB in developing written
agreements regarding common issues to achieve the highest level of water quality and infrastructure
service on behalf of residents and park users.
4-22
Adequacy of Existing Programs
The City of Golden Valley addresses the stormwater and natural resource management issues described in
this section through various means, including:
• Management plans containing goals, objectives, policies, and implementation strategies
• The City’s NPDES MS4 permit
• Stormwater system operation and maintenance
• The City’s Flood Management Program
• Regulations (e.g., ordinances and official controls)
• Education and Public Involvement
• Capital Improvements
These programs are described in greater detail in Section 5.0 – Implementation. The capacity of the City to
fund and carryout these programs is also described in Section 5.0.
Opportunities
The City of Golden Valley has several distinct opportunities which may assist them in implementing this
plan. The City will actively pursue these opportunities.
4.9.1 BCWMC Cooperative Efforts and Funding
The Bassett Creek Watershed Management Commission provides technical support and funding toward
solving various water resource problems and completing water resource projects. The Commission has a
long record of working successfully with individual member cities toward meeting shared goals, including
the City of Golden Valley. The City will continue to collaborate with and contribute to this organization
and take advantage of the available benefits. City staff will continue to participate as active members of
the BCWMC’s Technical Advisory Committee (TAC). Specific opportunities for collaboration include
proposed projects included in the BCWMC’s capital improvement program as well as those cooperative
roles defined in the policies included in Section 4.0 of the BCWMC 2015 Watershed Management Plan.
4.9.2 Cooperation with the MCWD
The MCWD 2017 Watershed Management Plan promotes collaboration with LGUs like the City of Golden
Valley. The City will work with the MCWD to assess opportunities within the MCWD’s jurisdiction and
pursue collaborative action when opportunities arise. Targeted areas of collaboration may include land
use policy development and implementation, capital improvement feasibility planning, and City
operations and facility maintenance. Collaborative opportunities between the City and MCWD are
described in greater detail in Section 5.4. The City will assess opportunities for collaboration through the
implementation of its LGU/MCWD coordination plan (see Appendix B).
4.9.3 Cooperative Efforts with MNDNR, MnDOT, Hennepin County and the MPRB
The City has many capital project and maintenance requirements that benefit, impact, or are also required
by other agencies. Often these requirements overlap with other agencies where jurisdiction is shared.
4-23
Current issues in Golden Valley are shared with the Minnesota Department of Transportation (MnDOT),
Hennepin County, and the Minneapolis Park and Recreation Board (MPRB). There exist shared issues at
Wirth Lake, Twin Lake Sweeney Lake, Bassett Creek, and water quantity issues upstream of Medicine Lake
near TH 169. The impaired waters will be the focus of future cooperative efforts aimed at protecting and,
in the case of Twin Lake, improving water quality that the City and other agencies might have difficulty
addressing individually.
The City has collaborated with Hennepin County to address impaired waters and TMDLs (including Bassett
Creek chloride impairment) and flooding issues including the Medicine Lake Road Winnetka Avenue flood
mitigation plan. The City also plans to continue to work with the MNDNR to address shared issues
including aquatic invasive species, fisheries, and public waters issues.
Successful and cooperative partnerships will benefit all involved parties. The City will continue to require
MnDOT and the MPRB to accept fair responsibility for stormwater management on their respective
properties, including inspection and maintenance of infrastructure located on their property. Cooperation
for the management and financing of future projects, studies, or other activities will benefit all parties.
The City will continue to actively seek this cooperation and looks forward to expanding cooperative efforts
beyond stormwater management.
4.9.4 Partnership with Neighboring Cities
The City will continue to seek opportunities to partner with neighboring cities to address intercommunity
issues. Examples of this is the chronic flooding of the Decola Ponds system (see Section 4.2.5.1) and
Medicine Lake Road (see Section 4.2.5.2). Located in the northwestern part of the City, just east of
Winnetka Avenue, the Decola Ponds system and Winnetka Avenue receive stormwater runoff from Golden
Valley, the City of New Hope and the City of Crystal. A joint solution to the problems at this location will
result in a reduction in the flood levels at the DeCola Ponds system and along Medicine Lake Road. The
City will pursue a cooperative effort for solving this problem, as the most comprehensive solutions will
require the support of each affected community. It is expected that all three cities will continue to look for
opportunities for flood storage through redevelopment and land use changes.
Medicine Lake is located in the City of Plymouth but a portion of Golden Valley drains to the lake. .
Westwood Lake is located primarily in the City of St. Louis Park, although a portion of the tributary
watershed, the north shore, and the lake outlet are located within the City of Golden Valley. North and
South Rice Ponds are location entirely and partially within the City of Robbinsdale, respectively, while their
tributary watersheds include portions of the City of Golden Valley. Brownie Lake is located in Minneapolis,
but a portion of Golden Valley drains to the lake. Cooperation between the cities that share these
watersheds provides opportunities to efficiently use funding, technical support, and other resources to
maximize water quality improvements to these lakes and, ultimately, Bassett Creek or Minnehaha Creek.
4.9.5 Redevelopment Opportunities
Golden Valley is fully developed. Therefore, opportunities for updating and upgrading the City storm
drainage system will exist primarily in redevelopment activities. As private and public properties
4-24
redevelop, the City will implement the policies and programs of this plan. Recent examples of this include
the redevelopment of Liberty Crossing and the construction of the new Brookview Community Center. The
City will continue to be proactive in using the regulatory controls at its disposal to ensure that
opportunities presented by redevelopment to improve the stormwater system and implement the policies
of this plan are not lost.
4.9.6 Coordination with Other City Programs
Coordinating stormwater and surface water management activities with other City programs presents an
opportunity to increase operational efficiency, reduce costs, and limit the frequency and duration of
disruptions to City services. The City’s pavement management program, for example, may be coordinated
with stormwater management activities so that potentially disruptive maintenance or improvements may
be performed simultaneously with road maintenance, minimizing the number of closures. Park and
recreation programs also provide opportunities for the City to consider and implement stormwater
management improvement activities with planned City actions.
5-1
5.0 Implementation Program
This section describes the significant components of the City’s Surface Water Management Plan (SWMP)
implementation program, including implementation of the City’s NPDES MS4 Permit, operation and
maintenance of the City’s stormwater system, education and public involvement, funding, ordinance
implementation and official controls, and implementation priorities. The implementation program is
presented in tabular format at the end of this section. Table 5-1 and Table 5-2 summarize the different
types of implementation activities as follows:
• Table 5-1 Implementation Program – Capital Improvements and Studies
• Table 5-2 Implementation Program – Ongoing Programs (Operations, Regulation, and
Education)
NPDES MS4 Permit
Under the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency’s (EPA) Storm Water National Pollutant Discharge
Elimination System (NPDES) Rules, the City of Golden Valley is required to maintain a Municipal Separate
Storm Sewer System (MS4) Permit for managing non-point source stormwater. The City last renewed
MS4 permit in 2013 and is scheduled to update its MS4 permit again in 2018.
As part of the permit, the City must also prepare and maintain a Storm Water Pollution Prevention
Program (SWPPP) addressing all requirements of the permit.
The SWPPP outlines the appropriate best management practices (BMPs) for the City of Golden Valley to
control or reduce the pollutants in stormwater runoff to the maximum extent practicable. The City will
accomplish this through the implementation of the BMPs outlined within its SWPPP. These BMPs are a
combination of education, operations and maintenance, site control techniques, system design and
engineering methods, and other such provisions that are appropriate to meet the requirements of the
NDPES permit.
BMPs have been prepared to address each of the six minimum control measures as outlined in the rules:
1. Public education and outreach on stormwater impacts
2. Public participation/involvement
3. Illicit discharge detection and elimination
4. Construction site stormwater runoff control
5. Post-construction stormwater management in new development and redevelopment
6. Pollution prevention/good housekeeping for municipal operations
For each of these six minimum control measures, the City identified appropriate BMPs, along with
measurable goals, an implementation schedule, and the City staff responsible to complete each measure.
The SWPPP BMP implementation program is incorporated by reference into the City’s overall stormwater
5-2
implementation program (see Table 5-1 and Table 5-2); additional detail may be found in the City SWPPP
(see Appendix A).
Prior to June 30 of each year of the five-year permit cycle, the City must hold an annual public meeting.
At this meeting, the City distributes educational materials and presents an overview of the MS4 program
and the City’s SWPPP. The City also receives oral and written statements and considers them for inclusion
into the SWPPP.
Also prior to June 30, the City must submit an annual report to the MPCA. This annual report summarizes
the following:
1. Status of Compliance with Permit Conditions. The annual report contains an assessment of the
appropriateness of the BMPs and the City’s progress toward achieving the identified measurable
goals for each of the minimum control measures. This assessment is based on results collected
and analyzed, inspection findings, and public input received during the reporting period.
2. Work Plan. The annual report lists the stormwater activities that are planned to be undertaken in
the next reporting cycle.
3. Modifications to the SWPPP. The annual report identifies any changes to BMPs or measurable
goals for any of the minimum control measures.
4. Notice of Coordinated Activities. A notice is included in the annual report for any portions of the
permit for which a government entity or organization outside of the MS4 fulfills, or assists with
fulfilling, any BMP contained in the SWPPP.
Stormwater System Operation and Maintenance
The City of Golden Valley is responsible for maintaining its stormwater system, including storm sewer
pipes, ponds, pond inlets and outlets, and channels. The City implements an operation and maintenance
program consistent with the requirements of its MS4 SWPPP. The City’s operation and maintenance
program is incorporated into Table 5-2.
Stormwater pond maintenance is a significant element of the City’s overall maintenance program. The
program includes sediment removal in many of the primary stormwater treatment ponds in the City. The
City maintains a list of ponds that are below 50% of their design volume, based on survey data. Based on
survey information and relevant water quality modeling information (e.g., estimated sediment rate), the
City prioritizes sediment removal activities as funding is available.
Along with the stormwater pond sediment removal program, the City of Golden Valley also has an active
catch basin cleaning program. The City cleans sump catch basins, and many other catch basins that collect
sediment, as needed.
The City recognizes the benefits of sweeping streets—sweeping removes pollutants from the pavement
surface before the pollutants are carried away by stormwater runoff into lakes and streams. The City has
maintained an active street sweeping program for many years. The City currently performs major street
sweeping efforts in the spring and in the fall, and completes more routine efforts through the summer
5-3
along priority areas. Areas where there is a high degree of deposition of organics and soils onto the
street are swept more often. The City monitors its streets and sweeps as often as needed to prevent the
accumulation of sediment on the street.
The City performs additional inspection and maintenance activities as required by its MS4 permit and
outlined in the City’s SWPPP (see Appendix A). The City periodically reviews its operations and
maintenance program to determine its adequacy to meet the requirements of its MS4 permit and SWPPP.
The City will adjust its program, as needed, to meet these requirements and ensure the City’s stormwater
system functions as designed.
Other entities, including Hennepin County, MnDOT, and private owners are responsible for maintaining
stormwater infrastructure under their respective jurisdictions. The City’s project review and permitting
process requires submittal of a maintenance agreement for privately owned stormwater infrastructure.
As part of the City’s ongoing efforts to improve the performance of the stormwater system, the City
performed a City-wide review of opportunities for new and retrofit BMP implementation and maintains a
current list of such opportunities. The City will continue to seek to implement these new and retrofit BMPs
as funds become available.
5.2.1 Stormwater Infrastructure Renewal Program
The City performs regular inspection and maintenance of its stormwater system consistent with the
requirements of its MS4 permit and SWPPP (see Sections 5.1 and 5.2). However, much of the stormwater
infrastructure within the City is nearing the end of its intended operating life. In some cases, infrastructure
may be operating past its design life. Over the next several decades, the City will be challenged with
needing to repair and/or replace a significant amount of its stormwater infrastructure. Replacement of
existing infrastructure is complicated by the need to provide continuous service and work in fully
developed areas crowded by private property and existing utilities.
Replacement of existing stormwater infrastructure represents a significant potential cost to the City.
Currently, the City’s stormwater system inspection, maintenance, and improvements are funded through
the City’s stormwater utility fee, which may not be sufficient to fund large-scale infrastructure replacement
(see Section 5.7).
To address the challenge of infrastructure replacement, the City developed an Infrastructure Renewal
Program (IRP) to most efficiently replace or otherwise address aging stormwater infrastructure throughout
the City (see Section 5.2.1). The IRP provides a schedule and funding source for updating aging
infrastructure in coordination with other planned City activities. The IRP divides the City into
approximately 40 areas based on similar number of road miles. One area is addressed each year;
improvements are performed over a two year period, with underground utilities (including most
stormwater infrastructure) addressed during the first year. The City will use the IRP in planning and
executing updates to the stormwater management system.
5-4
Flood Management Program
The City performs many actions to reduce the risk of flooding and protect human life, property, and
natural resources that may be damaged by flood events. The includes establishing and enforcing to flood
risk reduction and rate control policies included in Section 2.4 of this Plan and in City ordinances (see
Section 5.8. The City also performs studies and capital improvements to identify and implement projects
to reduce the risk and/or consequences of flooding. The city will look for opportunity to partner with
public and private entities to address water quantity issues. Potential areas for further study and possible
improvements include:
• DeCola Ponds Area/Medicine Lake Road-Winnetka Avenue – The City has performed several
studies to address reoccurring flooding issues adjacent to Medicine Lake Road and Winnetka
Avenue and the downstream DeCola Ponds system (see Sections 4.2.5.1 and Section 4.2.5.2),
including the 2012 DeCola Ponds Study (Barr, 2012) and the 2016 MLRWA Flood Mitigation Study
(Barr, 2016). Several projects, staged in phases, to jointly address these flooding issues are
planned in cooperation with the BCWMC (see Table 5-1).
• Hampshire Park
• Lakeview Park Area–
• Medley Park Area
• Minnaqua Pond/Briarwood Nature Area
• Wesley Park Area
The City may perform additional hydrologic modeling to further evaluate existing and/or anticipated
future flood risk at these locations. This evaluation is included as an implementation item in Table 5-1.
Following further assessment of these issues, the City will consider options to minimize flood risk and
evaluate mitigation opportunities.
The City also participates in the Federal Emergency Management Agency’s (FEMA’s) National Flood
Insurance Program (NFIP). Homeowners within FEMA-designated floodplains are required to purchase
flood insurance. The City also participates in FEMA’s Community Rating System; this program includes
additional floodplain management activities beyond the minimum required by NFIP and allows eligible
residents to receive a discount on purchasing flood insurance. The City provides information and technical
assistance to residents to address flood risk issues and flood insurance questions.
The City has identified the acquisition of properties affected by, or at-risk of, flooding as a method to
address flood risk. As homes in the floodplain (including some flood-proofed homes) become available,
the City may work with property owners to pursue voluntary acquisition. Funding may come from City
funds set-aside for this purpose or with help from other agencies such as the MNDNR or the BCWMC.
Homes with less than 1 foot of freeboard between the lowest floor and the 100-year flood level or have
driveways or accesses that are below the 100-year flood level may also be targeted for this acquisition
program. In several cases, the City has applied for Hazard Mitigation Assistance (HMA) funding from the
Minnesota Department of Public Safety.
5-5
The City will continue to seek opportunities to address areas of flood risk through creation of additional
flood storage within the watershed, low flow diversions, and incorporating flood mitigation benefits to
water quality retrofit or other City projects.
Many of the City’s flood mitigation efforts are performed in cooperation with the BCWMC. The
coordinated responsibilities of each entity with respect to addressing flood risk are defined in greater
detail among the policies included in Section 4.2.2 of the 2015 BCWMC Watershed Management Plan and
Section 2.4 of this Plan, as well as Section 5.3.1.
5.3.1 BCWMC Flood Control Project
The City understands that the BCWMC will continue its inspection and maintenance program for the
BCWMC Flood Control Project (FCP) features (see Section 3.9.4). This program is described in the Bassett
Creek Flood Control Project Operation and Maintenance Manual. The City will continue to perform routine
maintenance and repair of FCP features located within the City of Golden Valley. Routine maintenance
and repair activities may include:
• Maintain vegetation: remove trees, remove brush, chemically treat stumps, control noxious
weeds, and establish vegetation on bare areas.
• Remove debris: woody debris, riprap, trash from channel, inlets, culverts
• Repair erosion; channels, inlet and outlet structures, culvert ends
• Repair/replace riprap: on inlet and outlet ends of culverts, channels, banks
• Remove sediment from channels, structures, culverts, etc.
• Repair/maintain guard rails, hand rails and fencing: remove rust, prime and paint, repair
damaged rails and posts, replace rusted-out sections, repair cables, replace posts, repair
chain link fence
• Repair concrete pipe: repair joints, tie-bolts, spalling, connection to culverts, breakage
• Repair/replace catch basins, manholes, casting assemblies, grates
• Repair/maintain debris barrier: removal of debris, repair cables, replace poles
• Repair/maintain tunnel inlet trash rack: repair/replace trash rack rods, loose or broken,
vandalized, bent
• Street repairs: pavement, curb and gutter, cracks, depressions, settlement
The City may request reimbursement from the BCWMC for maintenance and repairs that exceed
$25,000. The City (or other road authority within the City) is also responsible for maintenance, repair,
and replacement of road crossings and associated conveyance structures that were installed as part
of the FCP.
The City understands that the BCWMC will identify major repairs, rehabilitation, and replacement of
FCP features and add those to the BCWMC CIP (see Section 5.5.2); the BCWMC will fund those
projects through its ad valorem levy. In the event of an emergency affecting FCP features, the City will
perform the initial response, as the BCWMC is not set up to perform emergency response and
management services. The BCWMC will assist the City in obtaining reimbursement for emergency
5-6
response actions either through BCWMC funds or grants (e.g., Federal Emergency Management
Agency funding).
MCWD Roles and Responsibilities
The Minnehaha Creek Watershed District (MCWD) includes only a small portion of the City of Golden
Valley – approximately 80 acres (less than 0.1% of the overall MCWD drainage area). Although this area is
within the City of Golden Valley’s corporate boundary, the storm sewer systems serving this watershed
drain stormwater into the City of St. Louis Park to the south and, ultimately, to Minnehaha Creek.
The MCWD is in the process of updating its Comprehensive Water Resources Management Plan (MCWD
Plan). The MCWD Plan details how the watershed district will interact with cities, including Golden Valley,
to accomplish its goals, including:
• Water Quantity - To manage the volume and flow of stormwater runoff to minimize the impacts
of land use change on surface and groundwater.
• Water Quality - To preserve and improve the quality of surface and groundwater.
• Ecological Integrity - To restore, maintain, and improve the health of ecological systems.
• Thriving Communities - To promote and enhance the value of water resources in creating
successful, sustainable communities.
The previous MCWD Plan (MCWD, 2006) delegated specific actions to the City of Golden Valley, including
a phosphorus load reduction from the area of the City tributary to Minnehaha Creek. The current draft
MCWD Plan promotes a collaborative approach through the MCWD’s Balanced Urban Ecology policy. The
policy prioritizes partnership with the land use community to integrate policy, planning, and
implementation i to maximize the value of integrated natural and constructed landscapes.
To this end, the MCWD will work with the City of Golden Valley to understand land use and
redevelopment opportunities within the City and pursue collaborative action when opportunities arise.
Targeted areas of collaboration include:
• Land use policy development and its implementation through planning activities including long-
range land use and infrastructure plans, area-wide plans, and recreation and open-space plans.
• Capital improvement feasibility planning for public infrastructure including roads, sewer, drinking
water, and localized power generation.
• Land use and development regulation, from initial development feasibility through ongoing
inspection and facility maintenance functions.
• City operations and facility maintenance
MCWD spending and use of resources are likely to depend in part on local water plan focus and City
commitment to collaborative efforts as identified in the local water management plans (e.g., this Plan) and
the City’s implementation of it. Examples of possible District activities that could be performed in
collaboration with the City of Golden Valley include:
5-7
• Joint grant applications: Coordination to seek funding for work that serves aligned interests of the
District and City.
• District incentive programs: Grant or cost-share funds awarded at the discretion of the Board of
Managers to an LGU, or to institutional or individual property owners within an LGU.
• Technical assistance: Services of the District staff or engineer to assist LGUs and their residents in
resolving water resource issues or pursuing opportunities in areas such as flood management,
wetland banking and others.
• Education initiatives and coordination of education activities for MS4 compliance and other
purposes.
• Conservation: Helping Cities and their property owners achieve mutual conservation goals by
serving as easement holder for conservation development, assuming wetland bank maintenance
obligations, and similar roles.
• Watershed management district: Using watershed district authority to establish localized taxing
district to allow lake associations or other groups with common, geographically defined interests
to raise funds in order to pursue community goals.
To facilitate these cooperative actions, the MCWD expects that the City of Golden Valley’s local water
management plan (this document) promote LGU/MCWD coordination. The goal of coordination efforts is
to maintain mutual awareness of needs and opportunities to develop and implement programs and
projects that:
i. develop out of coordinated, subwatershed-based planning;
ii. reflect the cooperation of other public and private partners;
iii. align investments; and
iv. secure a combined set of District, LGU and partner goals. The coordination plan provides
for ongoing and periodic communications as to land use planning, infrastructure
programming, and development regulation.
Many of the policies included in Section 2.0 identify collaborative action with watershed management
organizations, including the MCWD. The City will continue to engage the MCWD in land use planning,
where appropriate, and consider cooperative roles with the MCWD in developing and implementing
programs and capital improvements (see Table 5-1). Coordination activities between the City and MCWD
are identified in the LGU/MCWD Coordination Plan included as Appendix B.
The City of Golden Valley coordinates with the MCWD in reviewing and permitting proposed projects
located within the MCWD’s jurisdiction. Proposers of projects located within the MCWD portion of the
City must apply for and obtain applicable permits from the MCWD prior to project construction. This
requirement is in addition to any required City permits and state or federally mandated permits (e.g.,
NPDES). The City will continue to inform proposers of projects located within the MCWD of this
requirement. If the City pursues permitting authority for MCWD rules in the future, it will do so following
the procedure described in see Appendix A of the draft MCWD Plan.
5-8
The MCWD requires that cities prepare and submit annual reports to the MCWD detailing actions
performed in the previous year relevant to the requirements and goals of the MCWD. The
implementation program presented in Table 5-1 includes this task.
BCWMC Roles and Responsibilities
Nearly all of the City of Golden Valley lies within the jurisdiction of the Bassett Creek Watershed
Management Commission (BCWMC) (see Figure 3-1). The BCWMC acknowledges that its success is
dependent upon cooperation with its member cities (Golden Valley). The BCWMC relies on the member
cities to perform many roles. These roles are detailed in Section 5.1.2 of the BCWMC 2015 Watershed
Management Plan (BCWMC Plan) and include:
1. Commissioner and Alternate Commissioner appointment
2. Technical Advisory Committee (TAC) participation
3. Project review and permitting
4. Local Water Management Plan preparation
5. Maintaining official controls (e.g., ordinances) consistent with BCWMC requirements
6. Capital Improvement Projects implementation (see Table 5-3 of the BCWMC Plan)
7. Land and easement acquisition for BCWMC projects
8. Financial contribution to the BCWMC general fund (see Section 5.2.2.1 of the BCWMC Plan).
5.5.1 Project Review and Permitting
The City of Golden Valley is responsible for incorporating the BCWMC’s requirements into its official
controls and implementing BCWMC policies at the time of development and redevelopment. The City
informs developers and other project applicants that BCWMC review of their project may be required and
directs applicants to the BCWMC requirements and more information online at
http://www.bassettcreekwmo.org. Conversely, BCWMC staff will ensure that developers and project
applicants have first contacted appropriate City staff before reviewing or discussing details of the
proposed project.
Within the BCWMC’s jurisdiction, the City of Golden Valley permits only those projects that conform to
the policies and standards of the BCWMC. The City is responsible for first reviewing a proposed project
and providing preliminary approval to projects that demonstrate compliance with City requirements. Once
the proposed project has received preliminary approval from the City. City staff must sign the BCWMC
Application Form before it is submitted to the BCWMC for its review. The signed application form
authorizes the BCWMC or its staff to commence its review. Following BCWMC review, the BCWMC or its
staff will send a letter of approval or disapproval to the City, stating that the proposed project meets the
requirements of the BCWMC Plan or stating how the proposed project does not meet BCWMC
requirements. The City will not issue construction permits, or other approvals, until the BCWMC has
approved the project.
5-9
5.5.2 Capital Improvement Program and Implementation
The BCWMC Plan includes a 10-year capital improvement program (CIP) (Table 5-3 in the BCWMC Plan)
and the BCWMC maintains a “working CIP” that covers the next 5-year period. The City cooperates with
the BCWMC in the development of its CIP. After the BCWMC approves the working CIP, the BCWMC or
the member City prepares a feasibility study for the project(s) next in line. Following receipt of the
feasibility study, the BCWMC holds a public hearing on the project. After the hearing, the BCWMC decides
whether to order the project. When the BCWMC orders a project included in its CIP, the BCWMC begins
project implementation through an agreement with the member City where the project is located. The
member City is responsible for implementing the project. Table 5.1 of the BCWMC plan lists the project-
related costs incurred by member cities that are eligible or ineligible for reimbursements.
BCWMC projects located within the City of Golden Valley and included in the BCWMC CIP or BCWMC
working CIP are also included in Table 5-1 of this Plan. The City will cooperate with the BCWMC in the
implementation of these projects, including activities performed prior to ordering the project (e.g.,
development of feasibility studies, cost estimates). The City may also identify projects consistent with
BCWMC goals and request the BCWMC add the identified project to the BCWMC CIP.
Education and Public Involvement
The City of Golden Valley performs various education and communication activities addressing water
resources issues. The City’s education and public involvement program is closely tied with the City’s
implementation of its NPDES MS4 permit. Fundamental to those efforts is the City’s Comprehensive
Stormwater Communication Plan. Through the communication plan, the City distributes educational
materials to the community and conducts outreach activities illustrating the impacts of stormwater
discharges on water bodies and encouraging good water resource stewardship practices. This program
includes materials addressing each of the SWPPP six minimum control measures (see Section 5.1). The
plan focuses on the general public, contractors, developers, and business owners.
Educational materials distributed to residents and businesses as part of the Stormwater Communication
Plan may include, but are not limited to:
• Adopt a pond
• Phosphorus Free “Fertilizer” Education Brochures
• “How to Stencil Storm Drains” Brochure
• “There’s a Fish on your Street” Storm Drain Brochure
• Yard Waste “Compost” Brochures
• “Grading, Drainage and Erosion Control” Brochure
• “Recyclopedia” - Residents Guide to Recycling, which also addresses stormwater issues.
• IDDE
The City also provides educational materials and links for additional information regarding stormwater
issues on the City website with topical information relating to each of the six SWPPP minimum control
measures. Topics include, but are not limited to:
5-10
• Reporting IDDE
• Watershed education
• Links to local watershed organizations
• Phosphorus education and educational video
• Golden Valley’s Surface Water Management Plan information
• Landscaping for water quality information
• Water-wise household decisions
• Water resource projects
The City also provides informational packets to new residents who homestead in Golden Valley. The
packets contain information aimed at developing awareness of water resource issues and promoting
good water resource stewardship.
The City seeks to inform residents regrading water resource issues through various broadcast media.
First, it provides water resource education information on its local cable TV scroll. The information may
include volunteer water resource programs, public notices, and other activities regarding the six minimum
control measures. Secondly, the City provides a bi-monthly newsletter with at least one page dedicated
to environmental issues. Water resource education articles have played a significant role in many of the
“CityNews” publications, including issues relating to each of the six minimum control measures from the
NPDES Permit.
The City has also established a program to stencil appropriate markings on storm inlets and allow public
interest groups to assist. City staff distributes maps and stenciling supplies to volunteer groups and
provide volunteers with educational handouts to be distributed to neighborhood residents. The City also
provides the “How to Stencil Storm Drains” laminated educational tool and the “There’s a Fish on Your
Street” educational handout for neighborhood residents.
The City maintains the Golden Valley Environmental Commission under Section 2.56 of the Golden Valley
City Code to educate residents, raise awareness about environmental responsibility, and create a sense of
collaboration in the spirit of making and keeping Golden Valley an environmentally healthy City.
There are opportunities for residents to participate when the BCWMC conducts its monthly public
meetings at Golden Valley City Hall. Invitations are sent via the City website, the cable TV scroll, the City
newsletter, and by announcement at the City council meetings. The City also encourages public
involvement through the following natural resource volunteer programs:
• Adopt-a-pond
• Adopt-an-open-space
Buckthorn controlThe City will continue to use the Comprehensive Stormwater Communication Plan to
promote public education and involvement, and will periodically update the program to address the most
relevant topics and communication methods.
The City’s education and public involvement program is incorporated into Table 5-2.
5-11
Funding Programs
The City of Golden Valley plans to use its stormwater utility fee program (established in 1992) to fund
stormwater-related activities. Under the City’s system, a stormwater utility fee is charged against all
parcels based on acreage and property types (i.e., higher fees for property types that are larger and
generate more runoff). The Storm Water Utility Fee is the primary funding source for all stormwater
related projects and programs included in the City’s Surface Water Management Plan, Pavement
Management Program, and NPDES MS4 requirements. The City periodically reviews its stormwater utility
program to determine its adequacy for funding the projects and programs needed.
Over the next several years, the City will be challenged with needing to replace an increasing amount of
stormwater infrastructure that is at or beyond the end of its design life (see Section 5.2.1). While the City’s
storm water utility program has to date been adequate to address the City’s storm water and surface
water management needs, it is possible the City may need to explore alternative funding options. Other
funding options available to the City of Golden Valley include:
• Ad valorem taxes (i.e., City general fund)
• Special assessments (Minnesota Statutes 429)
• Franchise fees
• Cost-share opportunities
• Grants
Regardless of the funding sources used, the City will continue to use this Plan and other available
resources to ensure that the City carries out its stormwater and surface water management roles in a
financially responsible manner.
This plan, along with its capital improvement and implementation programs, combined with the
stormwater utility fund provides the City with adequate tools to address current and future surface water
issues.
City Ordinance and Official Controls
The City of Golden Valley manages stormwater to protect life, property, waterbodies within the City, and
receiving waters outside the City. Toward this end, the City of Golden Valley created and implements
regulatory programs that accomplish these aims. The City intends to continue implementing the
following regulations and programs.
City regulations include the following stormwater-related ordinances:
• Stormwater Management ordinance (Golden Valley City Code, Section 4.31).
• Floodplain zoning ordinance (Golden Valley City Code, Section 11.60).
• Shoreland zoning ordinance (Golden Valley City Zoning Code, Section 11.65).
• Zoning ordinance (Golden Valley City Code, Chapter 11).
• Subdivision ordinance (Golden Valley City Code, Chapter 12).
5-12
• Prohibition regarding phosphorous-containing fertilizers (Golden Valley City Code Section 10.52
and State of Minnesota Statute).
• Coal tar sealant ban (Golden Valley City Code Section 10.54)
• Tree and Landscape ordinance (Golden Valley City Code Section 4.3.2).
Many of the City’s stormwater management-related requirements, design standards, and performance
standards referenced in the above ordinances are summarized in Table 5-5. The City requires permits
and/or approvals for land disturbing projects (including developments), depending on the type and size
of the project. City
Applications for preliminary plat approvals, major site plan approval, and planned unit development
permits must include a grading and drainage plan (showing post-construction stormwater BMPs, as
necessary), a stormwater management plan, and a wetland plan.
The City of Golden Valley is the Local Governmental Unit (LGU) responsible for administering the Wetland
Conservation Act (WCA). This includes requiring and verifying that all projects impacting wetlands meet
the requirements of the Minnesota WCA. The City also actively pursues opportunities to restore wetlands
and create wetland buffers.
The City also actively works with the BCWMC and the MCWD toward accomplishing common goals and
adhering to the policies of these watershed organizations. The City notifies project proposers of the
potential applicability of WMO rules, requirements, and/or permit review. The City coordinates its project
review and permitting process with the BCWMC and MCWD, where applicable.
To improve the City’s stormwater management effectiveness, the City periodically reviews its stormwater
and surface water-related ordinances for consistency with the City goals and policies and other local,
state, and federal requirements.
The City’s ordinance implementation and official controls are incorporated into Table 5-2.
Implementation Priorities and Coordination
Many of the implementation items listed in the following Tables 5-1 and Tables 5-2 are required per the
City’s NPDES MS4 permit and incorporated into the City’s SWPPP. These tasks will be addressed per the
schedule presented in the SWPPP. The City will implement surface water management and stormwater
system improvement projects in a priority that achieves the City’s goals while promoting efficiency and
minimizing cost. Therefore, the City will seek opportunities to coordinate stormwater system repair and/or
replacement with its Pavement Management Program, redevelopment opportunities, or other
coordinated projects (e.g., park improvements, other utility upgrades).
Generally, the City will places a higher priority on projects, programs, or activities that address issues that,
if left unchecked, pose an imminent risk to property, public safety, or environmental resources. This
includes flood risk mitigation projects and infrastructure projects that, if deferred, may impact the function
5-13
of the City’s stormwater management system. Specific actions prioritized for implementation through the
life of this SWMP are listed in Table 5-1 and Table 5-2 and include the following:
• Implementing improvements to alleviate flooding at Medicine Lake Road Winnetka Avenue
(DeCola Ponds) flooding issues
• Identifying, rehabilitating, and/or replacing priority stormwater infrastructure
• Addressing flooding issues near Minnaqua Pond and Briarwood Nature Center Area, Hampshire
Park Area, Medley Park Area, Wesley Park Area, and other areas at risk of flooding.
The City may also prioritize projects based on the availability of grant funding, cost-share opportunities,
or availability of other funding sources that may reduce the City’s financial responsibility.
5.9.1 BCWMC Projects
The City cooperates with the BCWMC to implement projects within the City (see Section 5.5.2). Table 5-1
identifies joint BCWMC/City of Golden Valley projects and studies scheduled for implementation in the
next 10 years. These projects include:
• Medicine Lake Rd and Winnetka Ave Long Term Flood Mitigation Plan Projects and Water Quality
Improvements (BCWMC Projects BC-2, BC-3, BC-8, and BC-10)
• Medley Park Stormwater Treatment Facility to improve water quality in Medicine Lake (BCWMC
Project ML-12) and drainage and flooding concerns in the area.
• Dredging of accumulated sediment in Main Stem of Bassett Creek just north of Highway 55,
Theodore Wirth Regional Park, to reduce phosphorus loading and improve habitat (BCWMC
Project BC-7)
• Bassett Creek main channel restoration to reduce phosphorus and sediment loading, from
Minnaqua Pond to Golden Valley Road (BCMWC Project 2021CR-M)
The BCWMC capital improvement program (Table 5-3 of the BCWMC Plan) also includes several potential
projects in the Sweeney Lake watershed scheduled for implementation at some time after 2020. These
projects are derived from the Sweeney Lake TMDL study. The scheduling and implementation of these
projects may be adjusted based on future observed water quality in Sweeney Lake and performance of
other BMPs. Possible future projects in the Sweeney Lake watershed include:
• Sweeney Lake shoreland restoration (BCWMC Project SL-4)
• Water quality retrofits to existing stormwater ponds upstream of Sweeney Lake (BCWMC Project
SL-5)
• Dredging of Spring Pond and diversion of Sweeney Lake branch into Spring Pond (BCWMC
Project SL-6
• Projects to reduce loading from untreated Hennepin County and MnDOT right-of-way (BCWMC
Project SL-7)
• In-lake alum treatment of Sweeney Lake (BCWMC Project SL-8)
• Chemical treatment of inflow to Sweeney Lake from Sweeney Lake Branch of Bassett Creek
(BCWMC Project SL-9)
5-14
• Impervious area runoff retention and retrofits, including bioretention, rainwater gardens, and soil
restoration at various locations (BCWMC Project SL-10)
• Stormwater treatment system for dissolved phosphorus removal upstream of Sweeney Lake
(BCWMC Project SL-11)
The estimated costs for the above projects included in Table 5-1, Table 5-2, Table 5-3, and Table 5-4 are
intended as planning level costs. Consistent with the BCWMC capital improvement project
implementation process, the City will cooperate with the BCMWC to complete feasibility studies and
develop more detailed cost estimates for these projects prior to implementation.
Plan Update and Amendment Procedures
This Surface Water Management Plan (SWMP or Plan) will guide the City of Golden Valley’s activities
through 2028, or until superseded by adoption and approval of a subsequent SWMP. The City will begin
the process of updating this plan one to two years before its expiration date in coordination with the
City’s comprehensive planning process. The updated plan will meet the requirements of the applicable
Minnesota laws and rules, the BCWMC, and the MCWD.
The City may revise this SWMP through an amendment prior to the scheduled SWMP update, if either
minor changes are required, or if problems arise that are not addressed in the SWMP. However, this
SWMP remains in full force and effect until an updated SWMP is approved by the BCWMC and the MCWD
and adopted by the City.
Any significant changes to this SWMP must be approved by the affected WMO(s). Minor changes to this
SWMP will not require WMO approval and can be made by City staff and supplied to the WMOs for their
information. The City considers minor changes to be those that do not modify the goals, policies,
standards, or commitments identified in the SWMP. Examples of minor changes include:
• Inclusion of updated hydrologic modeling results and mapping, as long as the changes do not
significantly affect the rate or quality of intercommunity stormwater runoff.
• Inclusion of new/updated water quality monitoring data.
• Minor changes to the City’s implementation program, such as added projects, schedule changes,
and revised cost estimates, as long as there are no intercommunity impacts of such changes and
the changes are consistent the goals and policies in the SWMP.
If it is unclear whether a proposed SWMP change is minor or not, the City will bring the issue to the
WMOs for their determination.
The City’s amendment procedure for significant changes to the SWMP is as follows:
• City staff preparation and review of SWMP amendment.
• City council consideration of SWMP amendment. The City council would either approve submittal
of the amendment for WMO review and approval, or decide not to move forward with the
amendment. If the City council decides to submit the amendment for WMO approval, the council
5-15
would also need to determine when/if a public hearing or other public process should be
undertaken.
•Submittal of proposed SWMP amendment to BCWMC and MCWD for review and approval. The
City must also submit the proposed SWMP amendment to the Metropolitan Council and
Hennepin County. The proposed SWMP amendment would also be distributed to appropriate
City staff. The review process for a SWMP amendment is the same as for the original SWMP—the
WMOs have 60 days to review and comment on the proposed SWMP amendment.
•City council adoption of SWMP amendment, after WMO approval of the SWMP amendment.
INTRODUCTION
The City of Golden Valley faces a continual need to operate, maintain, and invest in its
water supply and distribution system. By setting forth a broad planning vision of water
stewardship, the City provides a frame of reference for making individual water supply
decisions. It also helps ensure that each new decision is consistent with others rather
than at cross-purposes. This chapter of the City’s Comprehensive Plan outlines the
goals, objectives, and policies to guide future decisions regarding the supply of clean,
potable drinking water to Golden Valley residents. Golden Valley’s water supply plan
includes a description of the City’s water supply system and water consumption
patterns.
WATER SUPPLY SYSTEM
Since the early 1960s, Golden Valley’s drinking water has come from the Mississippi
River and is treated and conveyed by the City of Minneapolis. Since the mid-1960s,
Golden Valley has been a member of the Joint Water Commission (JWC), a partnership
that includes the cities of Crystal and New Hope. These three cities jointly own and
operate the water system that stores and transmits potable drinking water throughout
the three-city service area. The JWC currently purchases Minneapolis potable water un-
der a 20-year agreement signed in 2004 (which replaced a previous agreement signed
in 1963). As the supplier, Minneapolis must deliver treated water that meets federal
Primary Drinking Water Standards. Golden Valley owns and operates the network of
smaller diameter pipelines that directly serve Golden Valley residents.
In 2014, the JWC installed Emergency Backup Wells in Crystal and New Hope and
infrastructure was put in place to install a future well in Golden Valley. The existing three
wells in Crystal and New Hope exceeded predictions on production capacity and
therefore the Golden Valley well was not constructed in 2014.
Minneapolis owns and operates two water treatment plants: Fridley and Columbia
Heights. Almost all of the water purchased by the JWC is treated at the Fridley plant.
The Fridley facility provides ultra-filtration treatment which was installed in 2012. The
Columbia Heights water treatment plant currently provides membrane ultra-filtration in
addition to filtration and chlorination. The JWC has two separate connections to the
Minneapolis water system: a 36-inch connection in Crystal and a 48-inch connection in
Golden Valley.
Water Storage and Transmission
Due to the level terrain, the Golden Valley water system operates as a single pressure
zone. Five ground reservoirs and three elevated tanks provide a total of 31.5 million
gallons of storage for the JWC water system. The Golden Valley reservoir consists of
two 4.5 million-gallon (MG) tanks that typically receive water from the City of
Minneapolis between 11 pm and 6 am. Water is pumped from the reservoirs and into
the JWC water transmission system by four vertical turbine pumps.
The Crystal ground reservoir system consists of two 4.5-MG tanks and one 10-MG tank.
These tanks typically receive water from Minneapolis between 11 pm and 6 am. Four
vertical turbine pumps deliver water from the Crystal reservoir into the JWC water trans-
mission system.
Golden Valley residents are served from both reservoir systems, depending on the time
of year and specific water demands.
The JWC water system also has three elevated water tanks, one in Golden Valley and
two in New Hope. These tanks provide a total of 3.5 million gallons of operating storage.
They are used to store water during low demand periods and release water during high
demand periods and emergency situations, such as fires.
Since the water system is deemed adequate to provide both storage and fire pumping
capacities during maximum day demand through 2027, the JWC has no current plans to
expand or modify the water system.
In 2016, the JWC performed a system wide study on all of the Prestressed Concrete
Cylinder Pipe (PCCP) that makes up the JWC distribution system. A model of the
system was developed to demonstrate how the system will operate during varying flows
and pressure scenarios. Hydrants were used to collect data and pressure fluctuations
across the system to calibrate the model. Forensic testing was then done on sections
of pipe excavated from the ground and the findings were used in the model determine
a criticality ranking on each segment of PCCP throughout the three Cities. The results
of the study found that the majority of the PCCP in the JWC system is in good condition
in relation to the age of the pipe and no part of the PCCP system is in need of
immediate replacement. However, PCCP will still be proactively replaced on an
opportunity basis as street project allow.
Water Consumption
The water supply system is designed to meet expected future water consumption of
Golden Valley residents. Over the last 10 years, Golden Valley’s population has been
fairly consistent and water demand has shown a slight decline (see Table 9.1).
Reductions in water use during this time appears to be due to low flow fixtures,
precipitation, and conservation.
Table 9.1: Golden Valley Water Demand
Year
Population
Water
Service
Connections
Total Water
Sold (MG)
Average
Day Water
Demand (MGD)
2007 20,900 7,059 1,040 2.84
2008 20,317 7,139 1,028 2.82
2009 20,508 7,150 1,006 2.76
2010 20,371 7,143 887 2.43
2011 20,595 7,144 934 2.56
2012 20,773 7,139 1,008 2.76
2013 20,845 7,141 918 2.52
2014 20,866 7,149 807 2.21
2015 20,571 7,148 787 2.16
2016 20,367 7,157 768 2.10
Historical annual water sales data is reported in three customer categories: residential,
commercial and industrial (see Table 9.2). Over the last 10 ye ars, residential water
consumption has averaged 62 percent of water sold.
Table 9.2: Golden Valley Water Sales
Year
Residential
(gallons)
Commercial
(gallons)
Industrial
(gallons)
Total
2007 654,717,115 270,786,223 115,165,662 1,040,669,000
2008 627,803,000 310,768,000 89,363,000 1,027,934,000
2009 636,446,000 287,738,000 82,695,000 1,006,879,000
2010 547,476,000 267,388,000 73,016,000 887,880,000
2011 554,757,000 308,845,000 71,171,000 934,773,000
2012 632,683,000 298,408,000 78,479,000 1,009,570,000
2013 556,132,000 285,431,000 77,389,000 918,952,000
2014 516,707,000 216,239,000 74,741,000 807,687,000
2015 499,155,000 213,268,000 74,716,000 787,139,000
2016 486,605,000 210,336,000 71,776,000 768,717,000
Total Water
Sold (gallons)
5,712,481,115 2,669,207,223 808,511,662 9,190,200,000
Percentage 62% 29% 9%
Per Capita Water Use
Per capita water use is determined by dividing total daily water use (including
residential, commercial, and industrial categories) by the total service area population
and is expressed as gallons per capita per day (GPCPD). Total residential per capita
water use has averaged 75 GPCPD over the last 10 years (see Table 9.3).
Residential per capita water consumption is calculated by dividing the average
residential daily water demand by the total population. For Golden Valley, this falls
within the range normally expected for residential water u se and is about average for
the Twin Cities metropolitan area.
Unmetered Water Use
As in all water systems, some of the water the JWC purchases from Minneapolis is
never sold to water system customers. The difference between the water produced and
the water sold is referred to as unmetered water. It can result from many factors,
including:
s unidentified leaks in the storage and distribution system
s water main breaks
s periodic fire hydrant flushing
s fire fighting and training
s unmetered hockey rink flooding
s municipal pool uses
s storage tank maintenance
s unauthorized use
s unmetered services
s inaccurate meters.
Unmetered water use below 10 percent is considered acceptable for normal system
leakage, unbilled water uses, and meter inaccuracies.
Golden Valley’s unmetered water use is estimated by comparing the average annual
water purchased from the City of Minneapolis with the average annual metered
consumption of Golden Valley customers. From 2012 – 2016, unmetered water use has
ranged from 9 to 12 percent of the total water purchased from Minneapolis.
Table 9.3: Golden Valley Per Capita Water Use
Year
Population
Total Water
Sold (gallons)
Residential
Water Sold
(gallons)
Residential
GPCPD
Total
GPCPD
2007 20,900 1,040,669,000 654,717,115 85.8 136.4
2008 20,317 1,027,934,000 627,803,000 84.6 138.6
2009 20,508 1,006,879,000 636,446,000 85.0 134.5
2010 20,371 887,880,000 547,476,000 73.6 119.4
2011 20,595 934,773,000 554,757,000 73.8 124.4
2012 20,773 1,009,570,000 632,683,000 83.4 133.2
2013 20,845 918,952,000 556,132,000 73.1 120.8
2014 20,866 807,687,000 516,707,000 67.8 106.1
2015 21,571 787,139,000 499,155,000 63.4 100.0
2016 21,367 768,717,000 486,605,000 62.4 98.6
Average 75.3 121.2
In 2012, the JWC purchased and installed new intake meters for the Golden Valley
reservoirs. The JWC also works with the City of Minneapolis to calibrate water supply
meters regularly. Future plans call for effluent meters at the Golden Valley reservoirs to
more accurately measure water leaving the reservoir site and entering the distribution
system.
Future Water Consumption
Water use projections (see Table 9.4) are based on the following assumptions:
s continued stable or slightly increasing population in accordance with the Metropolitan
Council’s projections
s reduced per capita water consumption due to enhanced water conservation efforts
s a maximum day to average day water demand ratio of 1.85 (based on statistics from
2012-2016)
s adequacy of the existing water supply for meeting projected water demands through
2017 and be- yond (based on the demand projections).
Table 9.4: Golden Valley Water Use Projections
Year
Projected
Population
Per Capita
Residential
Use (GPCD)
Average Day
Use (MG)
Maximum
Day Use
(MG)
Annual
Water Use
(MGal)
2018 21,200
75 1.59 2.94 580
2019 21,250 74 1.57 2.90 573
2020 21,300 73 1.55 2.87 566
2021 21,400 72 1.54 2.85 562
2022 21,500 71 1.53 2.83 558
2023 21,600 70 1.51 2.79 551
2024 21,700 70 1.52 2.81 555
2025 21,800 70 1.53 2.83 558
2026 21,900 70 1.53 2.83 558
2027 21,900 70 1.53 2.83 558
Emergency Preparedness
If the JWC were to experience an interruption in the Minneapolis water supply, or any
distribution lines to the Crystal or Golden Valley reservoir, it would rely upon three
emergency wells that were installed in 2014. The emergency wells provide flows tha t
meet the average day demand. Prior to 2014, the JWC could only rely on 31.5 million
gallons of operating storage within the Crystal and Golden Valley reservoirs. There
were two instances, one in 2013 and one in 2014 where service was interrupted due to
a watermain break on the 36-inch PCCP distribution line that runs through Robbinsdale
to the Crystal reservoir. That watermain has since been replaced, but as a result of the
two large breaks and as part of that project, emergency procedures were fine tuned to
prepare for large disruptions to the system. The JWC has also installed backup
generators at the Crystal and Golden Valley pump houses to ensure power is available
for the pumps to distribute water into the system in the event of a power outage.
To comply with Minnesota Statutes, which require a water supply plan be adopted as a
component of the Public Facilities Plan, the JWC prepared a Water Supply, Emergency
and Conservation Plan. The plan was also submitted to the Metropolitan Council as an
amendment to the local comprehensive plan for communities with municipal water
supplies in the seven-county Twin Cities metropolitan area.
The JWC and the City of Golden Valley have policies and procedures in place in the
event of a water emergency. Critical customers and highest users were identified to
ensure service is provided during conditions that require reduced water service.
Emergency situations include drought, flood, tornado, loss of supply, or contamination
of the Mississippi River. The emergency backup wells and inter-connections with
neighboring Cities greatly reduce the risk of a water shortage during a potential
emergency situation.
Challenges and Programs
Communities often face a number of challenges when managing a water supply and
distribution system and being a good steward of water resources.
Water Supply Challenges
Water supply challenges include aging infrastructure, conservation, and back-up water
supply. Specifically, the JWC and the City of Golden Valley are faced with the n ew
challenge of developing a comprehensive repair/replacement strategy for the water
systems in order to maintain the current level of service. The challenge will be to
balance the repair/replacement given that the majority of the pipes are reaching the en d
of their service life. It is not feasible to replace the majority of water system at once.
Prioritizing replacement will be the leading challenge. Other challenges include
reducing the per capita residential water consumption in a manner that minimizes
operations financial impacts and creating appropriate incentives for commercial and
multi-family residential customers to reduce water consumption through water-saving
irrigation systems and landscaping.
Water Supply Programs
To help meet or overcome these challenges, the City administers several programs to
address the needs of the water supply system and Golden Valley residents. These
include:
s coordinating water main replacement with the City’s Pavement Management Program,
reducing costly and disruptive street construction
s avoiding unnecessary water consumption associated with excessive hydrant flushing
s quickly responding to water main breaks to reduce the loss of water
s managing active and ongoing water meter replacement repair and testing programs
s maintaining an active water conservation public education pro -
The City is also implementing a long term infrastructure renewal program to
systematically identify and prioritize replacement and rehabilitation of the underground
public utilities including watermain, storm sewer, sanitary sewer, and streets. It will be
called the Infrastructure Renewal Program (IRP). The program will commence once the
street reconstruction portion of the Pavement Management Program is substantially
completed. The IRP involves breaking the City into 40 different areas to go through
infrastructure rehabilitation or replacement in the first year and pavement rehabilitation
in the second year of each of the 40 neighborhoods. The City has recently adopted
and will continue to develop funding mechanisms to fund the IRP.
Goals, Objectives, & Policies
The foundation of Golden Valley’s water supply plan rests on four goal statements
supported by objectives and policies
Goal 1: Maintain Current Level of Service
The majority of the City of Golden Valley’s water distribution system was installed in the
late 50s and early 60s and consists of cast iron pipe which is brittle and prone to
breaking. These mains are reaching the end of their design life as more and more
watermain breaks are occurring each year. The IRP will allow for a systematic
approach to prioritize replacement across the City in a cost effective manner. The City
of Golden Valley will adopt the IRP to address aging infrastructure issues.
Goal 2: Reduce Water Consumption
Reducing residential and commercial water consumption provides several benefits. It
reduces reliance on vulnerable resources, it reduces the amount of water that must be
purchased, and it directly reduces the cost of water service.
The City of Golden Valley and the JWC have established the following water
conservation objectives:
s Limit per capita residential demand to 70 gallons per capita per day (GPCD), which is
the Twin Cities metro median.
s Limit peak daily demand to less than 1.85 times average daily demand.
s Limit total peak daily JWC purchases from Minneapolis to less than 11.4 million
gallons per day (MGD).
s Limit unaccounted-for water to less than 9 percent.
These objectives meet or exceed those set forth in the Phase I interim report to the
Minnesota Legislature by the Metropolitan Council as part of the Regional Water Supply
Plan currently in development. By meeting these objectives, the City of Golden Valley
and the JWC can postpone development of new water supply facilities, avoid
surcharges imposed by Minneapolis, reduce the impact of a short-term emergency or
longer term drought, and decrease operating costs.
Residential Water Demands
Reducing excessive discretionary summer residential water demand is a primary
objective. Residential demands comprise 62 percent of total water use. The JWC’s 10-
year goal will be to maintain residential per capita use at 70 GPCD.
Commercial Water Demands
Reducing excessive discretionary summer commercial water demand is also a primary
objective, particularly water use related to commercial landscape irrigation. The JWC’s
goal is to re- duce commercial peak water demands through public education and other
programs.
Unmetered Water Use
Water main leaks, inaccurate meters, unmetered connections, and fire department use
all contribute to unaccounted-for water use. Planned meter replacements and regular
calibration, leak detection surveys, and maintenance programs will improve
measurement of water use and help identify if there is a water loss problem. The JWC’s
goal is to maintain unaccounted-for water use at or be- low 9 percent of Minneapolis
water purchases.
Policies
The City and the JWC will maintain water conservation goals through programs
focusing on short-term and long-term objectives. Long-term conservation will be
accomplished by improving water use efficiencies. Specific elements include the
following:
s Continue the meter maintenance program to continue improving billing accuracy and
efficiency and to track water losses.
s Test meters when customers request that they be checked or when meter readings
indicate, as determined by the utility staff or by computer software, that the meter may
be inaccurate.
s Annually review water billings and compare with Minneapolis metered water delivery
volumes to monitor unaccounted-for water use.
s Maintain a program of voluntary and mandatory reduction measures in the event of an
emergency. Contact the media, including local television, radio stations and
newspapers, and issue a notice to residents that there is an imminent water shortage
and they must reduce their water use. Reduction measures would include odd/ even
sprinkling, restricting vehicle washing, minimizing bath use, reducing shower length, and
other measures, mainly among domestic users. The impacts of these reductions in
water use are difficult to determine, as data from conservation and non -conservation
periods are not available. An average reduction in per capita use of 1 gallon per day
could reduce demand by 0.07 MGD (three percent of total daily demand).
s Maintain a program of mandatory water use reduction measures in the event of an
emergency. Implement a total sprinkling ban in an extreme emergency. The sprinkling
ban ordinance makes violation of the sprinkling ban a petty misdemeanor. Customers
that violate the sprinkling ban can receive a citation by a City Manager’s designee.
People who do not pay their fines can be held in contempt of court.
s Maintain a program of mandatory water use reduction measures in the event of an
emergency. Implement a total sprinkling ban in an extreme emergency.
Based on the length and severity of the emergency conditions, water use would be
decreased based on priorities established in state statutes.
s Protect domestic water supply, excluding industrial and commercial uses of municipal
water supply, and use for power production that meets the contingency planning
requirements. According to MN Rules 6115.0630, Subp. 9, domes - tic use is defined as
use for general household purposes for human needs such as cook ing, cleaning,
drinking, washing, and waste disposal, and for farm livestock watering, excluding
commercial livestock operations which use more than 10,000 gallons per day.
The goals, objectives, and policies in the water supply plan guide future decisions
regarding the supply of clean, potable drinking water to Golden Valley residents.
Distribute water equitably within each water use priority and customer category. Non -
essential water uses are the lowest priority and will be the first water use subject to
allocation restrictions. Quick responses to restrict non-essential uses of water during
periods of limited supplies will help protect domestic and economic uses of water. Water
used for human needs at hospitals, nursing homes, and similar types of facilities should
be designated as high priority to be maintained in an emergency. Local water allocation
will need to address water used for other human needs at other types of facilities such
as hotels, office buildings, and manufacturing plants. Domestic use must have priority
over economic needs.
s Achieve additional water demand reduction through more aggressive water
conserving rates that incorporate inclining pricing tiers. Seasonal rates or surcharges
that increase the cost for excess water use during the summer peak usage season
could also be implemented.
s Adopt a uniform ordinance governing installation and operation of commercial
landscape irrigation systems. Such an ordinance would establish minimum design
standards, link approvals for system designs to overall development approvals, focus on
reducing peak summer demands, minimize the wasting of water, and reduce overall
landscape water consumption. Design standards would avoid overspray, runoff, and low
head drainage. Control equipment would include rain sensors, repeat cycles, battery
backup, and multiple pro- gram capabilities and would be calibrated and timed to deliver
¾ to 1 inch of water per cycle. Designs would address sprinkler spacing and coverage,
and turf area zones would be separate from landscape zones.
s Enact an education program to in- form people about how to sprinkle more efficiently.
Peak water use in the summer months is attributed to lawn and garden sprinkling. A
JWC conservation education program is planned to include: web site information,
informational cable television announcements, indoor water efficiency brochures,
pamphlets describing water-saving sprinkling practices, billing inserts, literature racks at
city halls, and consumer confidence reports.
Goal 3: Emergency Supply
The JWC has installed three emergency wells that draw water from the Prairie du
Chien/Jordan aquifer. Infrastructure was put in place in preparation for a fourth well in
Golden Valley if future needs warrant the additional well. In an emergency, the JW C
would use these resources to augment or replace the existing Minneapolis supply.
PROGRAM/PROJECT UPDATES – March 2018
NATURAL RESOURCES
Staff is working with Hennepin County Sentencing to Service crews to remove invasive species like buckthorn and
volunteer trees and vegetation growing near park amenities, storm sewer facilities, and stormwater ponds. This work
occurs annually between November and April. Among the recent work areas is the Laurel Avenue Greenbelt Nature Area
in the south portion of the City.
WATER RESOURCES
Municipal Separate Storm Sewer System (MS4) General Permit
The City’s permit with MPCA to operate a storm sewer system and discharge stormwater into natural receiving waters is
expiring and being reissued in 2018. This permit is updated approximately every 5 years. Staff attended the annual
meeting of the League of MN Cities Minnesota Cities Stormwater Coalition in mid-March. MPCA staff was in attendance
to discuss the new MS4 permit. The draft permit is set to be released for review and comment in fall 2018 and is
expected to be finalized in early 2019. Based on this timeframe, it is anticipated that Golden Valley will be working on its
application for permit coverage, including any modifications to its stormwater program, in 2019.
MLRWA Long Term Flood Mitigation Plan -
DeCola Ponds B and C Improvement Project feasibility study
The Bassett Creek Watershed Management Commission authorized a feasibility study for the DeCola Ponds B and C
Improvement Project. The areas around DeCola Ponds B and C are being considered for expansion of flood storage to
help alleviate a flooding problem within the watershed. The primary benefits of the project include reducing flood
damages to homes and businesses, and improving public safety by reducing flooding on Medicine Lake Road. Additional
benefits include improving water quality, restoring and enhancing vegetation and wildlife habitat, and improving
recreation and park user experience.
Information received at the fall 2017 open house is being used to help develop concept plans for a future project. The
concept plans will be presented at a second open house scheduled for April 11, 2018 from 5-7:30 at city hall. The
upcoming meeting will be announced on the city’s website in the coming weeks.
Chloride management
Attached is an email and letter of support sent by the BCWMC to legislators regarding a proposed bill on chloride
management and limited liability in Minnesota. The goal is to reduce salt use statewide.
RECYCLING
The Commission had a couple questions about the recycling summary provided last month. Below is information
addressing those questions.
The City continues to get great participation in the curb side program (Republic Services reports about 90%
participation rate in their surveys) and has received more calls and input in the last two years about possible options
(questions about textiles, organics, bigger carts, more frequent pickups, what can I recycle?).
PLANNING AND ZONING AND DEVELOPMENTS
Mar 9, 2018
700 Meadow Lane North (Lot Consolidation)—Consolidation of two lots in order to construct an enclosed
walkway between two buildings. Mortenson Construction is proposing to connect two of its campus
buildings which currently sit on separate lots; the consolidation would allow this to take place. The Planning
Commission recommended approval (6-0) at its meeting on February 26. Scheduled for the March 20 City
Council meeting.
8806 Olson Memorial Highway (Conditional Use Permit)—Proposal to establish a Class III restaurant which
allows stand-up bar service in place of the existing Perkins. The applicants would renovate the interior to
create new seating and bar areas and would construct an outdoor patio space to the east of the building.
The Planning Commission recommended approval (6-0) at its meeting on February 26. A parking variance
related to this proposal will be heard by the Board of Zoning Appeals on March 27. Tentatively scheduled
for the April 17 City Council meeting.
2040 Comprehensive Plan—A draft of the Intro/Community Profile chapter was sent to all Commissions as
well as to the City Council and will be discussed at a work session on March 12. The entire draft document
will be released for public comment in May.
7040 Glenwood Avenue (Minor Subdivision)—Subdivision request to split one lot into three. The
applicant’s proposal would require variances in order to preserve the existing home. Staff have been in
conversation with Hennepin County about concerns regarding access onto Glenwood Avenue. Scheduled
for the March 26 meeting.
701 Lilac Drive (Major PUD Amendment)—The proposal from Tennant Company would adjust the current
PUD boundary in order to provide space for a relocated Damascus Way outside of the existing PUD.
Scheduled for the March 26 meeting.
Douglas Drive Redevelopment Area—Review of a revised expansion of the Douglas Drive Redevelopment
Area taking into account the withdrawal of the Tennant Campus project. This item was sent back to the
Planning Commission by the City Council (5-0) its meeting on February 20. Scheduled for the March 26
meeting.
1017 Ravine Trail (Subdivision)—Subdivision request to split one lot into two. The existing home will
remain and a new home will be able to be constructed to the south. A subdivision at this address was
approved in 2008 but not recorded with Hennepin County. The City Council approved the subdivision (5-0)
at its meeting on March 6.
Mixed-Income Housing Policy (Zoning Text Amendments)—Updated zoning language to support the City’s
adopted Mixed-Income Housing Policy. The text amendments will require projects to comply with the
policy of providing affordable housing units when certain planning actions are requested, such as land use
changes, rezonings, Conditional Use Permits, and Planned Unit Developments. The City Council approved
the zoning text amendments (5-0) at its meeting on March 6 with suggested language from the Planning
Commission allowing additional amenity points for providing affordable units above and beyond what is
required.
Tennant Campus Project—Considerations of a land use change, a rezoning request, and a Conditional Use
Permit for a new Damascus Way site have been postponed to the April 17 meeting. A Major PUD
Amendment that adjusts the current PUD boundary is being reviewed by the Planning Commission. The
proposed expansion of the Douglas Drive Redevelopment Area was sent back to the Planning Commission
for revisions due to the withdrawal of the larger Tennant project.
2040 Comprehensive Plan—Planning staff will attend the March 13 Council/Manager meeting to discuss
the proposed Implementation Plans for each chapter in the Comprehensive Plan and how these items
should be prioritized. Additional discussion will include a planned study of the Downtown in the summer of
2018 and the status of a handful of remnant and undeveloped parcels along the MnDOT system.
METRO Blue Line Extension Community Workshop—Hennepin County Bottineau Community Works will be
hosting a community workshop to discuss aspects of the Golden Valley Road station area on Wednesday,
March 28, at the Unity Minneapolis church at 4000 Golden Valley Road, from 6 to 8 pm. Attendees will be
able to inform plans to improve the Zoning Code as well as to consider bicycle, pedestrian, and shared ride
connections for the half-mile area around the LRT station.
Bicycle and Pedestrian Planning Task Force—At the conclusion of the Task Force’s work to develop a
Bicycle and Pedestrian Network for the 2040 Comprehensive Plan, the City Council approved a request for
the group to continue meeting annually to receive updates on bicycle- and pedestrian-related policies and
improvements. The 2018 meeting of the Task Force has been scheduled for April 18 at 6 pm at City Hall.