2025-02-25 City Council WS Agenda W ORK SESSION
RICHFIELD MUNICIPAL CENTER, BARTHOLOMEW ROOM
FEBRUARY 25, 2025
6:15 PM
Call to order
1.Assistant Utility Superintendent Chad Donnelly, along with Minnesota Department of Health (MDH) Source
Water Protection Division Staff will provide a presentation and respond to questions regarding the West Metro
Multi-Community Wellhead Protection Plan project.
Adjournment
Auxiliary aids for individuals with disabilities are available upon request. Requests must be made at least 96
hours in advance to the City Clerk at 612-861-9739.
AGENDA SECTION:Work Session Items
AGENDA ITEM #1.
WORK SESSION STAFF REPORT NO. 6
WORK SESSION
2/25/2025
REPORT PREPARED BY: Chad Donnelly, Assistant Utility Superintendent
DEPARTMENT DIRECTOR REVIEW: Kristin Asher, Public Works Director
2/14/2025
OTHER DEPARTMENT REVIEW:
CITY MANAGER REVIEW: Katie Rodriguez, City Manager
ITEM FOR WORK SESSION:
Assistant Utility Superintendent Chad Donnelly, along with Minnesota Department of Health (MDH)
Source Water Protection Division Staff will provide a presentation and respond to questions regarding
the West Metro Multi-Community Wellhead Protection Plan project.
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY:
The communities of Bloomington, Chanhassen, Eden Prairie, Edina, Hopkins, Minnetonka, Richfield, and
Saint Louis Park partnered with MDH and Metropolitan Council Environmental Services (MCES) to pilot a
multi-community approach to wellhead protection planning. This initiative is the first of its kind. It's designed
to better understand the effects that each City's well-field is having on the local groundwater resource, and
each other, as well as to more clearly define the drinking water supply management area that each City is
responsible to monitor.
DIRECTION NEEDED:
No direction needed at this time.
BACKGROUND INFORMATION:
A.HISTORICAL CONTEXT
Richfield has been working with MDH and MCES this past year on the development of Part 1 of this plan.
Part 1 involved the establishment of the (multi-city) drinking water supply management area. Part 1 was
approved by MDH on January 23, 2025.
B.EQUITABLE OR STRATEGIC CONSIDERATIONS OR IMPACTS
This effort aligns with the short-term and long-term goals of the strategic plan for sustainable infrastructure and
operational excellence. It also better informs City staff as well as our neighboring public water suppliers of the
goals and needs for source water protection.
C.POLICIES (resolutions, ordinances, regulations, statutes, exc):
None
D.CRITICAL TIMING ISSUES:
MDH is requiring City Council to adopt a resolution to accept Part 1 of the plan for the re-establishment
of the drinking water supply management area.
In addition, MDH is requiring City Council to adopt a resolution to continue to participate in the
development and implementation of the remainder of the plan.
These resolutions will be brought before City Council for adoption at the March 11, 2025 meeting which
allow the larger project to proceed on the scheduled timeline.
E.FINANCIAL IMPACT:
There is no cost to Richfield beyond staff time. MDH and MCES are fully funding this study and plan
development effort.
F.LEGAL CONSIDERATION:
None
ALTERNATIVE(S):
None
PRINCIPAL PARTIES EXPECTED AT MEETING:
Minnesota Department of Health (MDH) Source Water Protection Division Staff
ATTACHMENTS:
Description Type
Project Description Executive Summary
Part 1 - Drinking Water Supply Management Area Executive Summary
1
Safe and reliable drinking water is a public health priority for Minnesota Department of Health
(MDH). Protection of drinking water resources under the State Wellhead Protection (WHP) Program
is implemented on a city-by-city basis. As a result, each city has different implementation actions of
their plan and a focus to protect their own drinking water source. The West Metro has many areas
where one city’s drinking water supply management area (DWSMA) area extends beyond that city’s
border; meaning a city may be dependent on the protection actions taken by their neighbor to
protect their drinking water supply source.
MDH, Metropolitan Council, and Public Water Systems (PWS) are evaluating alternative drinking
water planning approaches to the current “city-by-city” approach with a pilot project. This pilot
project offers the opportunity to explore multiple benefits that a multi-community WHP plan may
provide. MDH will use the approaches and lessons learned from this pilot to evaluate new plan
development and implementation options to consider during WHP Rule revisions.
Vision
Develop a coordinated and collaborative approach to protect and safeguard regional drinking water
sources that reduces barriers and improves local drinking water protection implementation in
overlapping DWSMAs or where DWSMAs extend into a neighboring city.
Stakeholder Benefits for collaborative wellhead protection
Benefits to Communities:
• Collaboration by cities to protect shared, regional aquifers.
• Use of updated regional groundwater model, at no cost to systems.
• Reduced time required for individual city WHP planning and implementation.
• Improved consistency in WHP implementation priorities based on same regional scale
groundwater model, vulnerability assessment, and delineation work.
• Coordinated and prioritized implementation activities on a sub-regional scale yielding more
consistent and protective outcomes.
• Improved local and State coordination and communication in managing drinking water
resources.
MULTI-COMMUNITY WELLHEAD PROTECTION (WHP) PILOT PROJECT
2
• Increased amount of grant dollars available by collaboration on projects.
• Coordinated regional drinking water protection and understanding of how to protect
drinking water across multiple cities.
Benefits to Minnesota Department of Health:
• Reduced time for WHP review and reduced number of plans needing review.
• WHP implementation priorities based on same regional scale groundwater model,
vulnerability assessment, and delineation work.
• Improved local and State coordination and communication in managing drinking water
resources.
Benefits to Metropolitan Council:
• Furthers mission to help improve drinking water resources across the metropolitan area.
• Supports the work direction of the guiding committees, the Metropolitan Area Water
Supply Advisory Committee (MAWSAC) and its Technical Advisory Committee (TAC).
The proposed process will begin as:
1. MDH and Metropolitan Council, with the assistance of a consultant, update the regional
groundwater model using the latest available datasets. Communities are asked to be aware
and engaged during this phase of the project and share information for modeling, upon
request.
2. Updated model and delineations available for communities to use for future WHP planning
and implementation activities. Until regional delineation is completed, group members
implement their individual plans collaboratively.
3. Participating communities use updated model and delineation for WHP planning for their
community.
4. Communities in Pilot Group continue to work together to collaboratively manage WHP
areas and protect source water. During delineation phase, group members explore options
for governing ongoing plan development work and implementation for the regional
DWSMA.
5. MDH and Metropolitan Council agree to provide funds to hire a facilitator to assist
communities.
This approach is likely to occur in some key phases:
Subregional DWSMA delineation and assessment
Pilot Group Established
Collaborative Management Plan
Collaborative Implementation
MULTI-COMMUNITY WELLHEAD PROTECTION (WHP) PILOT PROJECT
3
Funding and technical assistance will be provided by both MDH and Metropolitan
Council to support establishing the Pilot Group including:
• Facilitation of all meetings with external facilitation support.
• Hiring a consultant to work with communities to develop goals, implementation strategies,
and activities to protect drinking water in the DWSMA.
• Technical assistance from MDH and Metropolitan Council hydrologists and planners.
• MDH extensions on existing WHP plan for participating communities.
Participating communities will benefit from shared commitments and are asked to:
• Be committed and stay engaged in the process.
• Encourage community planners, city leaders, and neighbors to participate.
• Explain project to others.
• Attend meetings regularly.
• Share project updates as requested.
• Maintain open communication with MDH and Metropolitan Council.
• Continue to implement existing Wellhead Protection Plan while regional plan is being
developed.
• Commitment to completing a regional WHP plan that can be supported and implemented
by the communities.
• Formulate a form of governing body or operating principles as a group.
• Assist each other with funding/lobbying requests as needed.
• Meet regularly and follow a group-established workplan to push for continuous
improvement and source water protection.
For more information, contact Abby Shea (abby.shea@state.mn.us) or Jen Kader
(jen.kader@metc.state.mn.us).
1
West Metro Multi-Community Wellhead Protection Plan, Part 1
EXE CUTIVE SUMMARY
The communities of Bloomington, Chanhassen, Eden Prairie, Edina, Hopkins, Minnetonka,
Richfield, and Saint Louis Park partnered with the Minnesota Department of Health and the
Metropolitan Council to pilot a multi-community approach to wellhead protection planning.
The pilot project analyzed time of travel to 88 existing community supply wells and one planned
supply well (Table 1).
The wellhead protection area (WHPA) represents the area around the wells that contributes
water to the community supply wells within a 10-year time period. The drinking water supply
management area (DWSMA) fully envelops the WHPA and is defined by features on the surface
such as roads, property lines, public land survey system (PLSS) area boundaries, etc.
A new sub-regional groundwater flow model was developed from the existing Metro Model 3
regional groundwater model for the purposes of delineating the WHPA and DWSMA. This new
model incorporated the most up-to-date geology and pumping information and was built using
MODFLOW6, the most recent version of MODFLOW supported by the United States Geological
Survey.
The DWSMA area was determined through a combination of the sub-regional groundwater
model, fracture flow calculations, and overland flow. Then the vulnerability was determined
using a combination of the 40-acre PLSS quarter-quarter sections, water chemistry data, soils
data, and geology. Much of the DWSMA is of low or moderate vulnerability with a few areas of
high vulnerability (Figure 1). DWSMA vulnerability represents the sensitivity of the aquifer to
impacts from land use and water management within the area.
2
Table 1. Municipal Water Supply Well Details
City Unique
Number Local Well Name Use/
Status1
Casing
Depth
(feet)
Well Depth
(feet)
Date
Constructed/
Reconstructed
Well
Vulnerability* Aquifer
St. Louis Park 200542 St. Louis Park #4 A/Primary 410 503 1946 Vulnerable Jordan Sandstone
St. Louis Park 203678 St. Louis Park #8 A/Primary 314 507 1955 Not Vulnerable Prairie du Chien - Jordan Sandstone
St. Louis Park 206442 St. Louis Park #10 A/Primary 316 500 1955 Vulnerable Prairie du Chien - Jordan Sandstone
St. Louis Park 206439 St. Louis Park #11 A/Primary 880 1093 1960 Not Vulnerable Mt. Simon Sandstone
St. Louis Park 206456 St. Louis Park #12 A/Primary 900 1095 1965 Not Vulnerable Mt. Simon Sandstone
St. Louis Park 206424 St. Louis Park #13 A/Primary 891 1045 1964 Not Vulnerable Mt. Simon Sandstone
St. Louis Park 227965 St. Louis Park #14 A/Primary 389 485 1965 Vulnerable Jordan Sandstone
St. Louis Park 215447 St. Louis Park #15 A/Primary 402 503 1969 Vulnerable Jordan Sandstone – St. Lawerence
St. Louis Park 203187 St. Louis Park #16 A/Primary 425 500 1973 Vulnerable Jordan Sandstone
Minnetonka 204140 Minnetonka #10 A/Primary 305 505 1969 Vulnerable Prairie du Chien - Jordan Sandstone
Minnetonka 150356 Minnetonka #10a A/Primary 302 486 1981 Vulnerable Prairie du Chien - Jordan Sandstone
Minnetonka 208014 Minnetonka #11 A/Primary 282 498 1970 Vulnerable Prairie du Chien - Jordan Sandstone
Minnetonka 439797 Minnetonka #11a A/Primary 291 492 1988 Vulnerable Prairie du Chien - Jordan Sandstone
Minnetonka 203717 Minnetonka #12 A/Primary 332 535 1971 Not Vulnerable Prairie du Chien - Jordan Sandstone
Minnetonka 191939 Minnetonka #12a A/Primary 340 506 1985 Not Vulnerable Prairie du Chien - Jordan Sandstone
Minnetonka 205165 Minnetonka #13 A/Primary 292 475 1972 Vulnerable Prairie du Chien - Jordan Sandstone
Minnetonka 132263 Minnetonka #13a A/Primary 274 464 1978 Vulnerable Prairie du Chien - Jordan Sandstone
Minnetonka 204537 Minnetonka #14 A/Primary 367 555 1972 Vulnerable Prairie du Chien - Jordan Sandstone
Minnetonka 160021 Minnetonka #14a A/Primary 395 575 1978 Vulnerable Prairie du Chien - Jordan Sandstone
Minnetonka 208016 Minnetonka #15 A/Primary 235 450 1974 Vulnerable Prairie du Chien - Jordan Sandstone
Minnetonka 150351 Minnetonka #15a A/Primary 238 444 1978 Vulnerable Prairie du Chien - Jordan Sandstone
WEST METRO MULTI-COMMUNITY WELLHEAD PROTECTION PLAN PART 1 SUMMARY
3
City Unique
Number Local Well Name Use/
Status1
Casing
Depth
(feet)
Well Depth
(feet)
Date
Constructed/
Reconstructed
Well
Vulnerability* Aquifer
Minnetonka 661401 Minnetonka #16a A/Primary 322 530 2001 Vulnerable Prairie du Chien - Jordan Sandstone
Minnetonka 661402 Minnetonka #16b A/Primary 303 519 2002 Vulnerable Prairie du Chien - Jordan Sandstone
Minnetonka 204470 Minnetonka #3 A/Primary 393 465 1963 Vulnerable Jordan Sandstone
Minnetonka 171021 Minnetonka #3a A/Primary 254 468 1981 Not Vulnerable Prairie du Chien - Jordan Sandstone
Minnetonka 204054 Minnetonka #6 A/Primary 394 488 1967 Not Vulnerable Jordan Sandstone
Minnetonka 208012 Minnetonka #6a A/Primary 397 486 1967 Not Vulnerable Jordan Sandstone
Chanhassen 737048 Chanhassen #10 A/Primary 375 482 2006 Not Vulnerable Prairie du Chien - Jordan Sandstone
Chanhassen 760936 Chanhassen #12 A/Primary 270 441 2008 Not Vulnerable Prairie du Chien - Jordan Sandstone
Chanhassen 760937 Chanhassen #13 A/Primary 290 460 2008 Not Vulnerable Prairie du Chien - Jordan Sandstone
Chanhassen 775541 Chanhassen #14 A/Primary 280 472 2010 Not Vulnerable Prairie du Chien - Jordan Sandstone
Chanhassen 810696 Chanhassen #15 A/Primary 428 530 2015 Not Vulnerable Jordan Sandstone-
Chanhassen 220976 Chanhassen #2 A/Primary 246 471 1969 Not Vulnerable Prairie du Chien - Jordan Sandstone
Chanhassen 200195 Chanhassen #3 A/Primary 317 500 1973 Not Vulnerable Prairie du Chien - Jordan Sandstone
Chanhassen 180913 Chanhassen #4 A/Primary 289 478 1981 Not Vulnerable Prairie du Chien – Tunnel City Group
Chanhassen 541545 Chanhassen #7 A/Primary 330 490 1996 Not Vulnerable Prairie du Chien - Jordan Sandstone
Chanhassen 578953 Chanhassen #8 A/Primary 378 489 1999 Not Vulnerable Prairie du Chien - Jordan Sandstone
Chanhassen 709304 Chanhassen #9 A/Seasonal 373 482 2004 Not Vulnerable Prairie du Chien - Jordan Sandstone
Bloomington 222910 Bloomington #1 A/Primary 345 440 1973 Vulnerable Jordan Sandstone
Bloomington 222911 Bloomington #2 A/Primary 315 392 1973 Vulnerable Prairie du Chien - Jordan Sandstone
Bloomington 222912 Bloomington #3 A/Primary 450 950 1974 Vulnerable Tunnel City Group - Mt. Simon Sandstone
Bloomington 133389 Bloomington #4 A/Primary 282 376 1978 Vulnerable Prairie du Chien - Jordan Sandstone
Bloomington 603079 Bloomington #5 A/Primary 307 405 2001 Vulnerable Jordan Sandstone
Bloomington 603080 Bloomington #6 A/Primary 298 399 2001 Vulnerable Jordan Sandstone
Richfield 206353 Richfield #1 A/Primary 343 437 1961 Vulnerable Jordan Sandstone
WEST METRO MULTI-COMMUNITY WELLHEAD PROTECTION PLAN PART 1 SUMMARY
4
City Unique
Number Local Well Name Use/
Status1
Casing
Depth
(feet)
Well Depth
(feet)
Date
Constructed/
Reconstructed
Well
Vulnerability* Aquifer
Richfield 206354 Richfield #2 A/Primary 343 435 1961 Vulnerable Jordan Sandstone
Richfield 206361 Richfield #3 A/Primary 226 425 1962 Vulnerable Prairie du Chien - Jordan Sandstone
Richfield 206276 Richfield #4 A/Primary 208 405 1962 Vulnerable Prairie du Chien - Jordan Sandstone
Richfield 206280 Richfield #5 A/Primary 226 408 1963 Vulnerable Prairie du Chien - Jordan Sandstone
Richfield 206279 Richfield #6 A/Primary 225 422 1963 Vulnerable Prairie du Chien - Jordan Sandstone
Richfield 133362 Richfield #7 A/Primary 631 1066 1977 Not Vulnerable Wonewoc - Mt. Simon
Edina 208399 Edina #2 A/Primary 266 448 2007 Vulnerable Prairie du Chien - Jordan Sandstone
Edina 240630 Edina #3 A/Seasonal 265 496 1949 Vulnerable Prairie du Chien - Jordan Sandstone
Edina 200561 Edina #4 A/Primary 266 500 1950 Vulnerable Prairie du Chien - Jordan Sandstone
Edina 206377 Edina #5 A/Seasonal 257 443 2002 Not Vulnerable Prairie du Chien - Jordan Sandstone
Edina 200564 Edina #6 A/Primary 316 503 1954 Vulnerable Prairie du Chien - Jordan Sandstone
Edina 206474 Edina #7 A/Primary 350 547 1955 Vulnerable Prairie du Chien - Jordan Sandstone
Edina 204884 Edina #8 A/Seasonal 232 472 1953 Vulnerable Prairie du Chien - Jordan Sandstone
Edina 206588 Edina #9 A/Seasonal 1010 1130 1957 Not Vulnerable Mt. Simon Sandstone
Edina 206184 Edina #10 A/Primary 881 1001 1963 Not Vulnerable Mt. Simon Sandstone
Edina 206183 Edina #11 A/Primary 321 403 1963 Vulnerable Jordan Sandstone
Edina 203614 Edina #12 A/Primary 955 1080 1964 Vulnerable Mt. Simon Sandstone
Edina 203613 Edina #13 A/Primary 429 495 1964 Vulnerable Jordan Sandstone
Edina 207674 Edina #15 A/Primary 275 475 2002 Vulnerable Prairie du Chien - Jordan Sandstone
Edina 203101 Edina #16 A/Seasonal 265 381 1967 Vulnerable Prairie du Chien - Jordan Sandstone
Edina 200914 Edina #17 A/Seasonal 373 461 1970 Vulnerable Jordan Sandstone
Edina 200918 Edina #18 A/Seasonal 365 446 1973 Vulnerable Jordan Sandstone
Edina 505626 Edina #19 A/Seasonal 440 521 1989 Vulnerable Jordan Sandstone
Edina 686286 Edina #20 A/Seasonal 265 467 2008 Vulnerable Prairie du Chien - Jordan Sandstone
WEST METRO MULTI-COMMUNITY WELLHEAD PROTECTION PLAN PART 1 SUMMARY
5
City Unique
Number Local Well Name Use/
Status1
Casing
Depth
(feet)
Well Depth
(feet)
Date
Constructed/
Reconstructed
Well
Vulnerability* Aquifer
Hopkins 204068 Hopkins #4 A/Primary 410 548 1954 Vulnerable Prairie du Chien - Jordan Sandstone
Hopkins 204570 Hopkins #5 A/Primary 382 495 1967 Vulnerable Prairie du Chien - Jordan Sandstone
Hopkins 112228 Hopkins #6 A/Primary 354 545 1977 Vulnerable Prairie du Chien - Jordan Sandstone
Eden Prairie 205905 Eden Prairie #2 A/Primary 210 394 1971 Vulnerable Prairie du Chien - Jordan Sandstone
Eden Prairie 112242 Eden Prairie #3 A/Primary 207 392 1978 Vulnerable Prairie du Chien - Jordan Sandstone
Eden Prairie 147454 Eden Prairie #4 A/Primary 207 381 1982 Vulnerable Prairie du Chien - Jordan Sandstone
Eden Prairie 147453 Eden Prairie #5 A/Primary 219 393 1981 Vulnerable Prairie du Chien - Jordan Sandstone
Eden Prairie 147452 Eden Prairie #6 A/Primary 230 388 1981 Vulnerable Prairie du Chien - Jordan Sandstone
Eden Prairie 424924 Eden Prairie #7 A/Primary 306 383 1987 Vulnerable Jordan Sandstone
Eden Prairie 424925 Eden Prairie #8 A/Primary 316 391 1987 Vulnerable Jordan Sandstone
Eden Prairie 424926 Eden Prairie #9 A/Primary 319 405 1987 Vulnerable Jordan Sandstone
Eden Prairie 424927 Eden Prairie #10 A/Primary 308 401 1987 Vulnerable Jordan Sandstone
Eden Prairie 541542 Eden Prairie #11 A/Primary 232 408 1994 Vulnerable Prairie du Chien - Jordan Sandstone
Eden Prairie 541541 Eden Prairie #12 A/Primary 215 385 1994 Vulnerable Prairie du Chien - Jordan Sandstone
Eden Prairie 622703 Eden Prairie #13 A/Primary 210 410 1998 Vulnerable Prairie du Chien - Jordan Sandstone
Eden Prairie 603068 Eden Prairie #14 A/Primary 241 418 2000 Vulnerable Prairie du Chien - Jordan Sandstone
Eden Prairie 686256 Eden Prairie #15 A/Primary 243 420 2005 Vulnerable Prairie du Chien - Jordan Sandstone
Eden Prairie 763769 Eden Prairie #16 A/Primary 278 405 2008 Vulnerable Prairie du Chien - Jordan Sandstone
*Well vulnerability was assessed based on a combination of 1) well construction details, especially conformance with standards required by the state well code, 2) the geologic
sensitivity of the aquifers, and 3) past monitoring results.
WEST METRO MULTI-COMMUNITY WELLHEAD PROTECTION PLAN PART 1 SUMMARY
6
Figure 1. West Metro Multi-Community Drinking Water Supply Management Area (DWSMA)
WEST METRO MULTI-COMMUNITY WELLHEAD PROTECTION PLAN PART 1 SUMMARY
7
Figure 2. West Metro Multi-Community Wellhead Protection Area (WHPA)
West Metro Multi-Community Wellhead Protection Plan
February 25, 2025, Richfield City Council Workshop
2/25/2025 1
Participating Communities
Bloomington Chanhassen Eden Prairie
Edina Hopkins
Minnetonka Richfield Saint Louis Park
Wellhead Protection 101
•Goal: Prevent contaminants from
entering wells and groundwater that
supply drinking water.
•Legislation
•Safe Drinking Water Act, as amended in 1986
•1989 Minnesota Groundwater Protection Act
•Wellhead Protection Rule (MN Rules
4720.5100 to 4720.5590), effective 1997
•Two parts to Wellhead Protection (WHP)
Plan – Part 1 and Part 2
2/25/2025 3
Delineation Basics
•Emergency Response Area (ERA):
1-year time of travel to well(s)
•Wellhead Protection Area (WHPA):
10-year time of travel to well(s)
•Drinking Water Supply
Management Area (DWSMA):
Extends the WHPA to manageable
boundaries
•The area to be managed by the public
water system (PWS) with the WHP
plan.
2/25/2025 4
Project Background
•Broad timeline:
•2019 – Agency and local interest
•2022 – Met Council obtains Clean Water Fund dollars for Part 1; Modeling kick-off
•2023 – Remaining cities invited to participate
•Challenges of individual "City-by-City"Wellhead Protection (WHP) Plans
•Overlapping DWSMAs
•Inconsistences between neighboring delineations & plans
•Barriers to implementing in neighboring community jurisdiction
2/25/2025 5
Project Background
•Benefits of multi-community WHP planning
•Coordination with neighboring PWS
•Share ideas and resources
•Work together on plan implementation
•Ability to focus on WHP implementation within jurisdiction
•Remaining challenges and considerations
•On-going commitment to the multi community project
•Accept differences in approaches,management of some land use or contaminant related issues
•Communities need to rely on one another to protect the shared groundwater resources used to their supply drinking water
2/25/2025 6
Vision
Develop a coordinated and collaborative approach to protect
and safeguard regional drinking water sources that reduces
barriers and improves local drinking water protection
implementation in overlapping DWSMAs or where DWSMAs
extend into a neighboring city.
72/25/2025
Subregional DWSMA delineation and assessment
Pilot Group Established
Collaborative Management Plan
Collaborative Implementation
Before and After
2/25/2025 8
Part 1 Overview – What’s different?
•State’s first multi-community
DWSMA
•Different modeling techniques
•Refining methods
•New and better data available
•Hennepin County Geologic Atlas
•Running all together can determine
influence on each other
2/25/2025 9
Same place, different vulnerabilities
2/25/2025 10
One place, one vulnerability
2/25/2025 11
Surface Water Contribution Areas
•Keep run-off higher up in the
watershed
•Reduce pollutants in run-off
•Multi-benefit stormwater
management
2/25/2025 12
What’s next? Part 2!
2/25/2025 13
Potential Contaminant Source Inventory
Discussion of issues, problems, and opportunities
WHP goals, objectives, and plan of action – management strategies
Alternative water supply; contingency strategy
Estimated Timeline
Step Projected Completion
Scoping 2 Meeting Held February 24, 2025
MDH Scoping 2 Decision Letter March 26, 2025
Inventory Potential Contaminant Sources Winter-Spring 2025
Prepare Management Portion of the Plan (Part 2)Winter-Summer 2025
Submit Draft Part 2 and PCSI to MDH for Review Late Summer 2025
PCSI Endorsement by MDH Late Summer 2025
Submit Draft Part 2 to LGUs (60-day review)Fall 2025
Consider Comments Received, Incorporate into Plan Fall 2025
Hold Public Hearing Winter 2025
Submit Final Part 2 Plan to MDH Winter 2025-2026
MDH Review and Approval Winter 2026
Plan Approval Notice to LGUs Winter 2026
Begin Plan Implementation Winter-Spring 2026
2/25/2025 14
What is being asked of City Councils?
•Approve/accept the Part 1 plan, including:
•The wellhead protection area and drinking water supply management area delineations.
•The vulnerability assessments of the wells and aquifer within the drinking water supply
management area.
•Adopt a resolution to continue to participate in the development and
implementation of the remainder of the plan.
•There is no cost to the city other than staff time.
2/25/2025 15
Thank You!
Questions? Comments? Concerns?
2/25/2025 16