My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
Browse
Search
5.2. SR 08-08-2011
ElkRiver
>
City Government
>
City Council
>
Council Agenda Packets
>
2011 - 2020
>
2011
>
08-08-2011
>
5.2. SR 08-08-2011
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
8/5/2011 9:51:07 AM
Creation date
8/5/2011 9:47:11 AM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
City Government
type
SR
date
8/8/2011
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
119
PDF
Print
Pages to print
Enter page numbers and/or page ranges separated by commas. For example, 1,3,5-12.
After downloading, print the document using a PDF reader (e.g. Adobe Reader).
View images
View plain text
' 17. Water Quality -Surface Water Runoff <br />a. Compare the quantity and quality of site runoff before and after the <br />project. Describe permanent controls to manage or treat runoff. Describe any <br />' storm water pollution prevention plans. <br />' b. Identify routes and receiving water bodies for runoff from the site; include <br />major downstream water bodies as well as the immediate receiving waters. <br />Estimate impact runoff on the quality of receiving waters. <br />Existing Conditions <br />The study area currently consists mainly of small grain straight rows, small wooded <br />and grassed areas and a few small wetlands. Existing impervious areas include TH <br />10, which runs through the middle of the study area and some small farm and <br />residential structures on the southwest corner of the study area. Approximately 15 <br />acres of the study area is within subwatershed ER02 and drains to the Rum River. <br />The remaining area is within subwatershed ER01 which drains to the Mississippi <br />River (see Figure 17-1). The portions of the Mississippi River and the Rum River <br />which are downstream of these subwatersheds are classified as Outstanding <br />Resource Value Waters (ORVW). Both rivers are listed as impaired by the Minnesota <br />Pollution Control Agency for mercury (Mississippi and Rum Rivers) and PCB's in fish <br />tissue (Mississippi River). <br />About 13 acres of the study area consists of Group B/D rated soils (mainly in the <br />wetland areas) and the remaining area contains Group A rated soils. These soils <br />ratings are based on hydrologic soils classifications with A soils having high <br />infiltration rates even when thoroughly wetted. The infiltration rates range from <br />0.8 to 1.63 inches per hour. These soils consist chiefly of deep, well drained to <br />excessively drained sands and gravel. Group A soils have a high rate of water <br />transmission, therefore resulting in a low runoff potential. Group B soils have <br />moderate infiltration rates ranging from 0.3 to 0.6 inches per hour when thoroughly <br />wetted. Group B soils consist of deep moderately well to well drained soils with <br />moderately fine to moderately coarse textures. Group D soils have very slow <br />infiltration rates ranging from 0 to 0.2 inches per hour when thoroughly wetted. <br />Group D soils are typically clay soils with high swelling potential, soils with high <br />permanent water table, soils with a clay layer at or near the surface, or shallow soils <br />over nearly impervious material. <br />Proposed Conditions <br />Due to the conceptual nature of the development scenarios, the amount of <br />impervious surfaces in each land use was assumed based on the values presented in <br />the City's Nondegradation Review (November 2007) and characteristics of existing <br />developments in the City. Scenario 1 represents the development conditions with <br />the least amount of impervious surfaces. Much of the agricultural and open space <br />land uses are preserved under this scenario with the majority of the remaining area <br />being developed to 75% impervious. Scenarios 2 and 3 largely consist of <br />commercial/retail land use with 75% impervious and 95% respectively. Scenario 3 <br />represents the most extreme development scenario with respect to impervious <br />City of Elk River <br />Draft Alternative Urban Areawide Review <br />July 2011 <br />Page 39 of 84 <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.